Corning Inc – Lobbying Governance & Transparency

Sign up to access all our data and the evidence and analysis underlying our overall scores. Once you've created an account, we'll get in touch with further details:

Lobbying Governance

Overall Assessment	Analysis	Score
Moderate	Corning discloses elements of a governance structure that touches on climate-related lobbying, but the description remains limited and largely procedural. The company states that “Our Global Government Affairs organization is responsible for overseeing all advocacy activities” and that “any use of Corning funds, property, resources or employee work time for U.S. political purposes … must be approved in advance by Corning’s Government Affairs office,” demonstrating an internal approval mechanism and named oversight function. Board-level involvement is also indicated: “Corning’s vice president, government affairs, reviewed Corning’s global government affairs activities with the [Board’s] Corporate Responsibility and Sustainability Committee (CRASC), including opportunities and risks of government policies related to decarbonizing the global economy,” which suggests that climate-related policy engagement is periodically scrutinised at committee level. The company further notes a commitment to Paris-aligned climate goals, saying that joining the call to remain in the Agreement and its SBTi targets “make clear to our organization and stakeholders our approach and strategy on climate change,” implying that policy engagement should be consistent with these goals. However, Corning does not disclose a dedicated procedure for testing whether its direct lobbying positions or its memberships in “trade associations, chambers of commerce, and other organizations” are actually aligned with those climate commitments, nor does it describe any corrective actions, escalation steps, or decision criteria for addressing misalignment. The disclosures focus on legal compliance, expenditure reporting and PAC governance rather than on assessing the substance of climate advocacy; as such, while there is evidence of oversight and some linkage to climate strategy, the specifics of how alignment is monitored and enforced—especially for indirect lobbying—are not provided. View Sources	C

Overall Assessment

Analysis

Score

Moderate

Corning discloses elements of a governance structure that touches on climate-related lobbying, but the description remains limited and largely procedural. The company states that “Our Global Government Affairs organization is responsible for overseeing all advocacy activities” and that “any use of Corning funds, property, resources or employee work time for U.S. political purposes … must be approved in advance by Corning’s Government Affairs office,” demonstrating an internal approval mechanism and named oversight function. Board-level involvement is also indicated: “Corning’s vice president, government affairs, reviewed Corning’s global government affairs activities with the [Board’s] Corporate Responsibility and Sustainability Committee (CRASC), including opportunities and risks of government policies related to decarbonizing the global economy,” which suggests that climate-related policy engagement is periodically scrutinised at committee level. The company further notes a commitment to Paris-aligned climate goals, saying that joining the call to remain in the Agreement and its SBTi targets “make clear to our organization and stakeholders our approach and strategy on climate change,” implying that policy engagement should be consistent with these goals. However, Corning does not disclose a dedicated procedure for testing whether its direct lobbying positions or its memberships in “trade associations, chambers of commerce, and other organizations” are actually aligned with those climate commitments, nor does it describe any corrective actions, escalation steps, or decision criteria for addressing misalignment. The disclosures focus on legal compliance, expenditure reporting and PAC governance rather than on assessing the substance of climate advocacy; as such, while there is evidence of oversight and some linkage to climate strategy, the specifics of how alignment is monitored and enforced—especially for indirect lobbying—are not provided.

View Sources

Lobbying Transparency

Overall Assessment	Analysis	Score
Limited	Corning Inc. provides only a narrow window into its climate-related lobbying. It identifies one concrete policy engagement, noting that "Corning joined 75 companies in 2019 urging continued U.S. participation in the global climate-change initiative known as the Paris Agreement," but otherwise refers only generally to “clean energy legislation in the U.S. and Europe” and the broader role of government regulation, without naming any other specific laws or regulations. The company outlines the existence of a Global Government Affairs organization, participation in trade associations such as the Business Roundtable and the National Association of Manufacturers, and collective action with other firms, yet it does not clarify the precise tools it uses (e.g., meetings, submissions, letters) or identify the specific government bodies or officials it approaches. Likewise, the objectives of its advocacy are expressed in broad terms—supporting continued U.S. participation in the Paris Agreement and backing “clean energy legislation”—without detailing the concrete policy changes, amendments, or quantitative targets it seeks. Overall, the disclosure offers only limited transparency across all three dimensions of climate-policy lobbying.	D