Seiko Epson Corp – 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	Seiko Epson Corp discloses a structured approach for ensuring that its engagement activities respect its climate-change strategy, focusing on its membership of industry associations. It states that "our employees participate in the industry associations of which we are members (JEITA, etc.), monitor the initiatives/claims of each industry association, and report to our lead department" and that "if the activities of an industry association are deemed to be inconsistent with our strategy (activities in line with the Paris Agreement), we speak up to ensure that they are consistent with our strategy," while also maintaining "a system for reporting and confirming the activity policies of member organizations on an annual basis" and a "process for determining whether or not to continue membership." Epson also affirms a "public commitment or position statement to conduct [its] engagement activities in line with the goals of the Paris Agreement." These disclosures demonstrate clear mechanisms for managing its indirect advocacy through trade bodies and a recurring review of association policies. However, the company does not disclose any specific individual or formal body responsible for overseeing or approving these processes, offers no transparency on how it governs direct lobbying activities, and provides no evidence of a board sign-off or third-party audit of its climate-lobbying alignment. View Sources	C

Overall Assessment

Analysis

Score

Moderate

Seiko Epson Corp discloses a structured approach for ensuring that its engagement activities respect its climate-change strategy, focusing on its membership of industry associations. It states that "our employees participate in the industry associations of which we are members (JEITA, etc.), monitor the initiatives/claims of each industry association, and report to our lead department" and that "if the activities of an industry association are deemed to be inconsistent with our strategy (activities in line with the Paris Agreement), we speak up to ensure that they are consistent with our strategy," while also maintaining "a system for reporting and confirming the activity policies of member organizations on an annual basis" and a "process for determining whether or not to continue membership." Epson also affirms a "public commitment or position statement to conduct [its] engagement activities in line with the goals of the Paris Agreement." These disclosures demonstrate clear mechanisms for managing its indirect advocacy through trade bodies and a recurring review of association policies. However, the company does not disclose any specific individual or formal body responsible for overseeing or approving these processes, offers no transparency on how it governs direct lobbying activities, and provides no evidence of a board sign-off or third-party audit of its climate-lobbying alignment.

View Sources

Lobbying Transparency

Overall Assessment	Analysis	Score
Moderate	Seiko Epson provides a reasonable amount of detail about its climate-policy advocacy. It identifies two concrete policies it has helped shape: the “emissions trading scheme run by the Shenzhen municipal government,” in which it has taken part since 2012, and the “Matsumoto City Industrial Vision (2023 to 2027).” For the latter, the company describes a clear mechanism and target, noting that “Epson’s senior executive officers and other employees attended formulation committee meetings and led meetings as committee chair,” thereby engaging directly with officials in Matsumoto City. Although no equally specific mechanism is given for the Shenzhen scheme, this disclosure still shows at least one tangible route of influence. The company is also explicit about what it hopes to achieve through its Matsumoto City engagement: the final plan embeds “zero-carbon promotion” and broader initiatives “to grow the city’s industries,” objectives the company says it supports “without exceptions.” It does not, however, articulate comparable aims for the Shenzhen emissions trading scheme, and most details on lobbying tactics are confined to a single municipal process, so some gaps remain in its overall transparency.	C