Samsung Heavy Industries Co Ltd – 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	Samsung Heavy Industries Co Ltd has established an external engagement process aimed at ensuring its policy advocacy is consistent with its climate-change strategy, yet it does not disclose any internal oversight or review bodies to manage or monitor its direct and indirect lobbying. The company reports that “We participate in the ‘Shipbuilding Industry Carbon Neutral Committee’ sponsored by the Ministry of Industry / Ministry of the Environment of the Korean government,” where it “provides advice and support on the direction of future policy making by sharing the opinions and current situation of the shipbuilding industry” and “presents various opinions on the role and methodology of industry for various low-carbon green growth” so that these inputs “will be reflected in the actual policy.” It also affirms a public commitment to align its engagement activities with the Paris Agreement, responding simply “Yes.” However, Samsung Heavy Industries Co Ltd does not identify any specific individual or internal formal body responsible for evaluating or approving lobbying positions, nor does it describe any internal monitoring, sign-off or review procedures for its climate-related advocacy, indicating a moderate level of governance with limited internal accountability and transparency. View Sources	C

Overall Assessment

Analysis

Score

Moderate

Samsung Heavy Industries Co Ltd has established an external engagement process aimed at ensuring its policy advocacy is consistent with its climate-change strategy, yet it does not disclose any internal oversight or review bodies to manage or monitor its direct and indirect lobbying. The company reports that “We participate in the ‘Shipbuilding Industry Carbon Neutral Committee’ sponsored by the Ministry of Industry / Ministry of the Environment of the Korean government,” where it “provides advice and support on the direction of future policy making by sharing the opinions and current situation of the shipbuilding industry” and “presents various opinions on the role and methodology of industry for various low-carbon green growth” so that these inputs “will be reflected in the actual policy.” It also affirms a public commitment to align its engagement activities with the Paris Agreement, responding simply “Yes.” However, Samsung Heavy Industries Co Ltd does not identify any specific individual or internal formal body responsible for evaluating or approving lobbying positions, nor does it describe any internal monitoring, sign-off or review procedures for its climate-related advocacy, indicating a moderate level of governance with limited internal accountability and transparency.

View Sources

Lobbying Transparency

Overall Assessment	Analysis	Score
Limited	Samsung Heavy Industries provides a basic level of transparency on its climate-policy lobbying. It names one specific piece of legislation it has engaged on—the “Carbon Neutrality Framework Act” in the Republic of Korea—and says this work was undertaken through “consultation for enactment of the Carbon Neutrality Framework Act and setting of industrial targets related to the 2030 Nationally Determined Contributions (NDC).” This description reveals a single, clearly identified mechanism (policy consultations) and an identifiable target audience (law-makers responsible for the Act), but it does not set out any additional forms of engagement or other jurisdictions involved. The company indicates that the purpose of its engagement is to help establish “industrial targets related to the 2030 NDC,” yet it does not spell out the specific changes, numerical targets, or amendments it is advocating. Overall, the disclosure shows that the company is willing to acknowledge one legislative focus, one method of influence, and a broad objective, but it offers little detail beyond these points and therefore only a limited picture of its lobbying activities and intentions.	D