Prologis Inc – 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
Strong	Prologis has implemented a structured governance process to align its lobbying activities with its climate strategy, overseen by its Board Governance and Nomination Committee, which reviews company political lobbying activity and spending, and its Ethics Committeecomprising the Chief Legal Officer, Global Compliance Officer, Chief Financial Officer, and Chief Human Resources Officerwhose role is to approve public policy positions that are reviewed annually by the Board Governance and Nomination Committee. The company develops public policy positions that guide our advocacy efforts worldwide, collaborating with internal and external experts, and its government affairs team actively lobbies for priorities such as green energy and sustainable development and the transition to zero emissions vehicles and electric charging infrastructure, demonstrating direct lobbying alignment. Indirect lobbying is addressed through membership in associations like NAREIT, ULI, RER and NAIOP, through which we seek to advance collaborative and constructive approaches to industry engagement, and Prologis notes that these trade organizations have also promoted climate actions which we support and collaborate on. The company has also publicly affirmed its commitment to conduct engagement in line with the goals of the Paris Agreement. However, Prologis does not disclose a dedicated climate-lobbying audit or a publicly available review specifically evaluating the alignment of its direct and indirect lobbying activities with its climate goals. View Sources	3

Overall Assessment

Analysis

Score

Strong

Prologis has implemented a structured governance process to align its lobbying activities with its climate strategy, overseen by its Board Governance and Nomination Committee, which reviews company political lobbying activity and spending, and its Ethics Committeecomprising the Chief Legal Officer, Global Compliance Officer, Chief Financial Officer, and Chief Human Resources Officerwhose role is to approve public policy positions that are reviewed annually by the Board Governance and Nomination Committee. The company develops public policy positions that guide our advocacy efforts worldwide, collaborating with internal and external experts, and its government affairs team actively lobbies for priorities such as green energy and sustainable development and the transition to zero emissions vehicles and electric charging infrastructure, demonstrating direct lobbying alignment. Indirect lobbying is addressed through membership in associations like NAREIT, ULI, RER and NAIOP, through which we seek to advance collaborative and constructive approaches to industry engagement, and Prologis notes that these trade organizations have also promoted climate actions which we support and collaborate on. The company has also publicly affirmed its commitment to conduct engagement in line with the goals of the Paris Agreement. However, Prologis does not disclose a dedicated climate-lobbying audit or a publicly available review specifically evaluating the alignment of its direct and indirect lobbying activities with its climate goals.

View Sources

Lobbying Transparency

Overall Assessment	Analysis	Score
Strong	Prologis provides a detailed and specific account of its climate-policy lobbying. It identifies multiple concrete policies it has worked on, including city-level energy benchmarking and carbon-reduction ordinances, the Denver Green Roof Ordinance, and the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s proposed climate-disclosure rule. It also sets out the ways it engages and who it engages: it “drafted a response informing the SEC,” held “meetings with members of The White House Office of Domestic Climate Policy,” met officials in the DOE’s Vehicle Technologies Office, and worked with local policymakers on city ordinances, demonstrating clarity about both mechanism and target. Finally, the company states the outcomes it is pursuing, such as securing “flexibility in the [Denver] rule that will allow for equally beneficial results, such as partial rooftop solar, local xeriscaping, and/or cool roofs,” and supporting standardized federal climate disclosures “to help influence the SEC’s decisions.” Together, these disclosures show a strong level of transparency, though the company articulates specific desired changes for two, rather than all, of the policies it names.	3