Lobbying Governance
| Overall Assessment | Analysis | Score |
|---|---|---|
| Moderate |
SL Green has established a process to align its policy engagement with its climate strategy by using scenario-based risk assessment, noting that it “quantitatively assess[s] transition risks from carbon pricing under IPCC RCP 2.6, a 1.5°C-aligned global emission scenario” and uses the results “to guide our engagement with outside organizations such as ULI, Urban Green Council, Mayor’s Office of Sustainability, REBNY, and BOMA,” demonstrating a concrete mechanism for ensuring its direct engagement aligns with its climate goals. The company also emphasizes that it “actively engages with both governmental and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and industry peers to raise awareness and address environmental issues,” indicating an active approach to policy engagement. However, the company does not disclose a named individual or committee that oversees or reviews these engagement activities, nor does it outline any formal monitoring, management, or enforcement procedures beyond the scenario analysis. We also found no evidence of policies addressing indirect lobbying through trade associations or of processes to correct or exit from associations whose positions diverge from its climate objectives.
View Sources
|
C |