Rhi Magnesita India 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	RHI Magnesita India Ltd discloses a basic framework that links its external engagement to its climate objectives, noting that "the Board of RHI Magnesita guides the development of our strategy and appetite towards risk" and has "oversight of other material matters such as regulatory developments or reputational and financial topics," while responsibility for climate issues is "assigned to the Corporate Sustainability Committee (‘the Committee’)." Under the question on external engagement, the company repeats that the Committee has a “standing agenda item during quarterly Committee meetings to review climate related risks, strategy and performance,” and that the Committee Chairman "reports to the Board on climate-related matters on a regular basis," indicating that these bodies are expected to oversee how engagement activities align with climate strategy. The company also affirms that it has “a public commitment or position statement to conduct your engagement activities in line with the goals of the Paris Agreement,” signalling an expressed policy to align its advocacy with Paris goals. However, the disclosure stops short of detailing concrete monitoring mechanisms or any systematic review of direct lobbying positions and trade-association memberships, and we found no evidence of actions such as assessing, correcting, or withdrawing from misaligned associations. Thus, while there is clear senior-level oversight and a stated alignment commitment, the processes for managing, auditing, or enforcing that alignment in practice are not explained in the public materials provided. View Sources	C

Overall Assessment

Analysis

Score

Moderate

RHI Magnesita India Ltd discloses a basic framework that links its external engagement to its climate objectives, noting that "the Board of RHI Magnesita guides the development of our strategy and appetite towards risk" and has "oversight of other material matters such as regulatory developments or reputational and financial topics," while responsibility for climate issues is "assigned to the Corporate Sustainability Committee (‘the Committee’)." Under the question on external engagement, the company repeats that the Committee has a “standing agenda item during quarterly Committee meetings to review climate related risks, strategy and performance,” and that the Committee Chairman "reports to the Board on climate-related matters on a regular basis," indicating that these bodies are expected to oversee how engagement activities align with climate strategy. The company also affirms that it has “a public commitment or position statement to conduct your engagement activities in line with the goals of the Paris Agreement,” signalling an expressed policy to align its advocacy with Paris goals. However, the disclosure stops short of detailing concrete monitoring mechanisms or any systematic review of direct lobbying positions and trade-association memberships, and we found no evidence of actions such as assessing, correcting, or withdrawing from misaligned associations. Thus, while there is clear senior-level oversight and a stated alignment commitment, the processes for managing, auditing, or enforcing that alignment in practice are not explained in the public materials provided.

View Sources

Lobbying Transparency

Overall Assessment	Analysis	Score
Limited	RHI Magnesita India provides only limited insight into its climate-policy lobbying. It identifies one concrete policy engagement – the “EU ETS Directive 2018/410” under the wider area of carbon pricing and emissions trading in Austria – but offers no indication that this is its sole climate lobbying focus. The company explains its method in broad terms, noting that it “participates in public events and shares its views through forums and meetings,” yet it does not name the government bodies, officials or regulatory processes it addresses. On objectives, it discloses a single sought-for outcome, “rebates for products exported outside EU,” and notes that it “supports [the Directive] with minor exceptions” while remaining “aligned with the Paris Agreement,” but it does not set out any additional, measurable policy changes it is pushing for. Taken together, the disclosure shows that the company engages on climate policy but offers only general information about how, with whom and to what detailed ends it is lobbying.	D