Kia Corp – 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	Kia Corp’s disclosures reveal a structured process for overseeing financial contributions to trade associations with climate-related agendas but do not extend this governance to the company’s own direct advocacy activities. The company affirms a “public commitment” to align engagement with the Paris Agreement, responding “Yes” when asked if it conducts engagement activities in line with those goals. It describes that “when financial contributions are made on associations, Kia manages nature of the organization, details/purpose of expenditure, and activities that meet the purpose of the expenditure with the Finance and accounting division for association expenses that the company spends,” and that these “expenditures are thoroughly reviewed and managed through the department that executes the contribution > general management department > management level > board of directors,” indicating multi-tiered approval and board oversight. It also monitors “the status of ESG agendas of associations, including activities related to climate change” and can “ask [an] association to conduct corrective actions” if its positions diverge, showing an active alignment mechanism for indirect lobbying. However, the Sustainability Management Committee’s detailed reporting to the Board of Directors (“management performance, including climate change and carbon neutrality, as well as related plans, are reported to our board”) focuses on risk and transition planning rather than on political advocacy oversight, and the company does not disclose any governance process for its direct lobbying efforts or any dedicated individual responsible for reviewing its lobbying alignment beyond board-level involvement. View Sources	C

Overall Assessment

Analysis

Score

Moderate

Kia Corp’s disclosures reveal a structured process for overseeing financial contributions to trade associations with climate-related agendas but do not extend this governance to the company’s own direct advocacy activities. The company affirms a “public commitment” to align engagement with the Paris Agreement, responding “Yes” when asked if it conducts engagement activities in line with those goals. It describes that “when financial contributions are made on associations, Kia manages nature of the organization, details/purpose of expenditure, and activities that meet the purpose of the expenditure with the Finance and accounting division for association expenses that the company spends,” and that these “expenditures are thoroughly reviewed and managed through the department that executes the contribution > general management department > management level > board of directors,” indicating multi-tiered approval and board oversight. It also monitors “the status of ESG agendas of associations, including activities related to climate change” and can “ask [an] association to conduct corrective actions” if its positions diverge, showing an active alignment mechanism for indirect lobbying. However, the Sustainability Management Committee’s detailed reporting to the Board of Directors (“management performance, including climate change and carbon neutrality, as well as related plans, are reported to our board”) focuses on risk and transition planning rather than on political advocacy oversight, and the company does not disclose any governance process for its direct lobbying efforts or any dedicated individual responsible for reviewing its lobbying alignment beyond board-level involvement.

View Sources

Lobbying Transparency

Overall Assessment	Analysis	Score
Moderate	Kia provides a moderate level of transparency on its climate-related lobbying. It clearly identifies one concrete policy arena—the Republic of Korea greenhouse-gas emissions trading system—stating that, as a covered entity, it is "actively presenting opinions by participating in public hearings, meetings, and consultative councils." Beyond this, references to a "Blue Carbon" collaboration with the Ministry of Oceans and Fisheries signal engagement on coastal-wetland restoration, but no specific law or regulation is named. The company is much more explicit about how it lobbies: it lists several direct mechanisms, including discussions with the Ministry of Oceans and Fisheries and participation in public hearings, meetings and consultative councils with the Ministry of Environment, thereby specifying both the methods and the governmental targets of its outreach. By contrast, the outcomes it seeks remain largely aspirational; it cites goals such as restoring wetlands and addressing emission-permit shortages—e.g., planning to "respond by purchasing emission permits"—without detailing any legislative amendments, regulatory thresholds, or other measurable policy changes it is advocating. Altogether, Kia’s disclosures offer detailed insight into its lobbying channels but leave limited clarity on the specific policies addressed and the precise changes it is seeking.	C