Arkema SA – 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	Arkema has established a moderate governance approach to ensure its lobbying aligns with its climate strategy, primarily through a public alignment pledge and structured participation in industry bodies rather than a detailed internal advocacy review. The Group maintains a “public commitment or position statement to conduct your engagement activities in line with the goals of the Paris Agreement,” and for indirect lobbying it “is represented in the ‘Climate / Energy / Environment’ commissions or working groups of France Chimie and CEFIC by the VP Sustainable Development or the VP Safety / Environment, and of WBCSD and AFEP by the VP Public Affairs or the climate project manager,” which ensures that “the position of these professional associations is consistent with the Group’s overall climate change strategy.” While “employees in charge of institutional relations are responsible for monitoring public initiatives at the local, national or international level that may impact the Group and are tasked with defending or promoting the interests of the Group in this context,” the company does not disclose a formal review process or specific board-level sign-off for its direct climate lobbying activities. This indicates solid mechanisms for indirect engagement and named roles but leaves gaps in the oversight and management of direct advocacy alignment with its climate commitments. View Sources	C

Overall Assessment

Analysis

Score

Moderate

Arkema has established a moderate governance approach to ensure its lobbying aligns with its climate strategy, primarily through a public alignment pledge and structured participation in industry bodies rather than a detailed internal advocacy review. The Group maintains a “public commitment or position statement to conduct your engagement activities in line with the goals of the Paris Agreement,” and for indirect lobbying it “is represented in the ‘Climate / Energy / Environment’ commissions or working groups of France Chimie and CEFIC by the VP Sustainable Development or the VP Safety / Environment, and of WBCSD and AFEP by the VP Public Affairs or the climate project manager,” which ensures that “the position of these professional associations is consistent with the Group’s overall climate change strategy.” While “employees in charge of institutional relations are responsible for monitoring public initiatives at the local, national or international level that may impact the Group and are tasked with defending or promoting the interests of the Group in this context,” the company does not disclose a formal review process or specific board-level sign-off for its direct climate lobbying activities. This indicates solid mechanisms for indirect engagement and named roles but leaves gaps in the oversight and management of direct advocacy alignment with its climate commitments.

View Sources

Lobbying Transparency

Overall Assessment	Analysis	Score
Strong	Arkema discloses a solid list of climate-related policies it seeks to influence, naming the European F-gas Regulation, the U.S. American Innovation and Manufacturing Act, and the European Energy Efficiency Directive, as well as acknowledging the broader REACH process on PFAS. By identifying these measures and describing the substance of each, the company shows a high degree of transparency about what it is lobbying on. The description of how it lobbies is far less detailed: Arkema notes participation in the Responsible Care committee of France Chimie, involvement in the European Fluorocarbons Technical Committee, and general engagement with EU and U.S. EPA processes, but it does not spell out whether this takes the form of meetings, submissions, or other direct contacts, nor does it name specific governmental decision-makers. The company is explicit about the outcomes it is pursuing—preventing illegal imports of HFCs into the EU, supporting an 85 % phasedown of HFCs in the United States, and aligning its global energy-management system with ISO 50001 to help deliver the EU Energy Efficiency Directive—clearly linking each engagement to a concrete regulatory objective. Together, this provides strong visibility into the policies and desired results of Arkema’s climate lobbying, although the exact channels and targets of influence remain only partly illuminated.	B