Nan Ya Plastics 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	Nan Ya Plastics Corp demonstrates a moderate level of governance in its climate lobbying processes. The company has established mechanisms to ensure alignment between its engagement activities and its climate change strategy, as evidenced by its process where "issues and opinions are to be reviewed and approved by associated department heads prior to the representative to participate on behalf of NPC." This indicates a structured approach to managing direct lobbying activities. Furthermore, the company has disclosed that "members of the General Manager’s Office and the Sustainable Development Team" are responsible for representing NPC in climate-related engagements, leveraging their expertise in climate change issues and strategy formulation. However, while the company has a public commitment to align its engagement activities with the goals of the Paris Agreement, there is no evidence of a detailed governance framework for indirect lobbying, such as managing trade or industry association memberships. Additionally, while the "ESG Promotion Organization" and the "Sustainable Development Committee" oversee broader ESG and climate-related strategies, there is no explicit mention of their role in reviewing or managing lobbying alignment. The company does not disclose a recurring audit or review process specifically for lobbying activities, nor does it provide evidence of engaging with or exiting associations based on climate policy alignment. This indicates that while some governance mechanisms are in place, they are not comprehensive or fully detailed in relation to lobbying governance. View Sources	C

Overall Assessment

Analysis

Score

Moderate

Nan Ya Plastics Corp demonstrates a moderate level of governance in its climate lobbying processes. The company has established mechanisms to ensure alignment between its engagement activities and its climate change strategy, as evidenced by its process where "issues and opinions are to be reviewed and approved by associated department heads prior to the representative to participate on behalf of NPC." This indicates a structured approach to managing direct lobbying activities. Furthermore, the company has disclosed that "members of the General Manager’s Office and the Sustainable Development Team" are responsible for representing NPC in climate-related engagements, leveraging their expertise in climate change issues and strategy formulation. However, while the company has a public commitment to align its engagement activities with the goals of the Paris Agreement, there is no evidence of a detailed governance framework for indirect lobbying, such as managing trade or industry association memberships. Additionally, while the "ESG Promotion Organization" and the "Sustainable Development Committee" oversee broader ESG and climate-related strategies, there is no explicit mention of their role in reviewing or managing lobbying alignment. The company does not disclose a recurring audit or review process specifically for lobbying activities, nor does it provide evidence of engaging with or exiting associations based on climate policy alignment. This indicates that while some governance mechanisms are in place, they are not comprehensive or fully detailed in relation to lobbying governance.

View Sources

Lobbying Transparency

Overall Assessment	Analysis	Score
Moderate	Nan Ya Plastics Corp offers a moderate window into its climate-policy lobbying. It explains that it submits “relevant registration opinions to the Federation of Industries,” which then passes them to the “Environmental Protection Administration,” revealing one concrete, indirect mechanism and a clearly identified government target. The company is explicit about what it wants these discussions to achieve, stating that it “recommends that emissions from non-manufacturing sectors be incorporated into auditing and registration,” “proposes differentiated reduction amounts for sectors to account for international competitiveness,” and “suggests incorporating voluntary reduction performance into official assessments.” While these statements spell out three distinct policy outcomes, the company does not name the underlying bills or regulations it seeks to amend and discloses only a single lobbying pathway, leaving some aspects of its engagement opaque.	C