Mitsubishi Gas Chemical Co 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	Mitsubishi Gas Chemical describes a structured process for checking that policy engagement is compatible with its climate strategy. It explains that "they collect and share information and policy proposals with the Sustainability Promotion Department…If the information and policy proposals would have any impacts on MGC’s climate change initiatives or climate related transition plan, the Sustainability Promotion Committee will share them and discuss measures." That committee then elevates proposals to the "Sustainability Promotion Council, chaired by the President and composed of the board of directors…[which] decides climate related measures," demonstrating named, board-level oversight of lobbying alignment. The company also details mechanisms for overseeing its participation in trade associations: "the Production Technology Division, and the Environmental Safety & Quality Assurance Division attend to JCIA’s general meetings, committees, and briefings, and take the lead in sharing JCIA’s strategies and in making sure there is no conflict with MGC's own strategies," while "MGC’s president is JCIA’s board member" and the firm sits "as a board member" of the Japan Hydrogen Association. These disclosures indicate that indirect lobbying through industry bodies is monitored and compared with the company’s own climate plans, and they are backed by a public pledge to conduct engagement "in line with the goals of the Paris Agreement." However, MGC does not disclose a dedicated, publicly available climate-lobbying alignment report, nor does it spell out comparable procedures for its own direct lobbying beyond trade-association forums, so the breadth and transparency of the governance remain limited compared with best practice. View Sources	C

Overall Assessment

Analysis

Score

Moderate

Mitsubishi Gas Chemical describes a structured process for checking that policy engagement is compatible with its climate strategy. It explains that "they collect and share information and policy proposals with the Sustainability Promotion Department…If the information and policy proposals would have any impacts on MGC’s climate change initiatives or climate related transition plan, the Sustainability Promotion Committee will share them and discuss measures." That committee then elevates proposals to the "Sustainability Promotion Council, chaired by the President and composed of the board of directors…[which] decides climate related measures," demonstrating named, board-level oversight of lobbying alignment. The company also details mechanisms for overseeing its participation in trade associations: "the Production Technology Division, and the Environmental Safety & Quality Assurance Division attend to JCIA’s general meetings, committees, and briefings, and take the lead in sharing JCIA’s strategies and in making sure there is no conflict with MGC's own strategies," while "MGC’s president is JCIA’s board member" and the firm sits "as a board member" of the Japan Hydrogen Association. These disclosures indicate that indirect lobbying through industry bodies is monitored and compared with the company’s own climate plans, and they are backed by a public pledge to conduct engagement "in line with the goals of the Paris Agreement." However, MGC does not disclose a dedicated, publicly available climate-lobbying alignment report, nor does it spell out comparable procedures for its own direct lobbying beyond trade-association forums, so the breadth and transparency of the governance remain limited compared with best practice.

View Sources

Lobbying Transparency

Overall Assessment	Analysis	Score
Limited	Mitsubishi Gas Chemical offers only limited insight into its climate-related lobbying. It notes that it is working with the City of Yokohama and other government agencies to expand the supply of green methanol for ships and to support Japan’s International Container Strategic Port and Harbour policies, signalling that it has engaged with public-sector bodies and a broad marine-decarbonisation policy agenda. However, it does not identify any specific piece of legislation or regulation it has tried to influence, describe the concrete methods used to convey its views, or name the individual governmental decision-makers that were approached. Likewise, the company speaks in general terms about helping to “decarbonize marine transportation” and reach “carbon neutrality at the Port of Yokohama,” but does not articulate the precise regulatory changes, targets or incentives it is asking authorities to adopt. As a result, while the disclosure acknowledges some interaction with government on climate matters, it falls short of providing clear detail on the policies involved, the lobbying channels employed and the outcomes being pursued.	D