Vidrala 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	Vidrala discloses a high-level process for keeping its external engagement aligned with its climate strategy, stating that "Vidrala Group only engages with those that support climate science and the Paris Agreement" and that it "identif[ies] the influence that our engagement may have and evaluate[s] whether there are any risks and opportunities that may arise as a result of the engagement." The company further notes that "We ensure that who we are engaging with has a climate change strategy consistent, or superior to our own" and promises that it "will then disclose our engagement and report any outcomes of the engagement to encourage full transparency," signalling an internal check before and after engagement activities. Oversight of sustainability-related decision-making, including these engagements, sits within an explicit governance structure in which "our board of directors, executive committee, and senior leadership" monitor progress and the Executive-level ReNEWed Energy Taskforce "develop, oversee, and implement our 4Ps strategy’s targets," indicating named bodies that could scrutinise alignment. The company has also made a public commitment that its engagement will be "in line with the goals of the Paris Agreement." However, Vidrala does not disclose a dedicated lobbying-governance policy, provides no detail on how direct lobbying positions are approved, offers no systematic review or audit of trade-association lobbying, and does not describe corrective actions (e.g., escalation or withdrawal) when misalignment is found. The absence of a published lobbying-alignment report, of explicit board sign-off on policy advocacy, and of evidence that both direct and indirect lobbying are actively managed leaves the governance framework partial rather than comprehensive. View Sources	2

Overall Assessment

Analysis

Score

Moderate

Vidrala discloses a high-level process for keeping its external engagement aligned with its climate strategy, stating that "Vidrala Group only engages with those that support climate science and the Paris Agreement" and that it "identif[ies] the influence that our engagement may have and evaluate[s] whether there are any risks and opportunities that may arise as a result of the engagement." The company further notes that "We ensure that who we are engaging with has a climate change strategy consistent, or superior to our own" and promises that it "will then disclose our engagement and report any outcomes of the engagement to encourage full transparency," signalling an internal check before and after engagement activities. Oversight of sustainability-related decision-making, including these engagements, sits within an explicit governance structure in which "our board of directors, executive committee, and senior leadership" monitor progress and the Executive-level ReNEWed Energy Taskforce "develop, oversee, and implement our 4Ps strategy’s targets," indicating named bodies that could scrutinise alignment. The company has also made a public commitment that its engagement will be "in line with the goals of the Paris Agreement." However, Vidrala does not disclose a dedicated lobbying-governance policy, provides no detail on how direct lobbying positions are approved, offers no systematic review or audit of trade-association lobbying, and does not describe corrective actions (e.g., escalation or withdrawal) when misalignment is found. The absence of a published lobbying-alignment report, of explicit board sign-off on policy advocacy, and of evidence that both direct and indirect lobbying are actively managed leaves the governance framework partial rather than comprehensive.

View Sources

Lobbying Transparency

Overall Assessment	Analysis	Score
Strong	Vidrala provides a solid level of transparency on its climate-policy lobbying. It names two identifiable measures it has tried to influence—the UK Deposit Return Scheme (DRS) for packaging and the EU “FEVE – Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation”—clearly stating the geography and regulatory context for each. The company also explains how it engages: it “responded to government consultations in the UK in relation to DRS,” supported British Glass when the association presented its position to “DEFRA… in front of MPs,” and held technical discussions with members of FEVE and Extended Producer Responsibility organisations on draft glass-recycling guidelines, thereby offering three distinct mechanisms and naming the governmental or industry targets involved. Finally, Vidrala is explicit about what it wants to achieve. Through British Glass it urged that glass be excluded from the English and Northern Irish DRS “advising against this change,” and more broadly it seeks to “increase the use of recycled glass” and secure “eco-modulation of fees” to steer packaging design, linking each outcome to lower-carbon production. Together, these disclosures give a clear picture of the specific policies addressed, the avenues used to lobby, and the concrete results the company is pursuing.	3