We have expanded the list of climate policies we assess company engagement with to incorporate land-use related policy, referring to legislative or regulatory measures to enhance and protect ecosystems and land where carbon is being stored. Assessments under this category are currently underweighted in terms of their contribution to the overall company metrics. This weighting will be progressively increased over the next 6 months.
We adjusted the terminology used to describe the queries running down the left-hand side of our scoring matrix and added additional explanatory text to the info-boxes. This has no impact on the scores and methodology. It has been done following user feedback to improve clarity.
In this section, we depict graphically the relationships the corporation has with trade associations, federations, advocacy groups and other third parties who may be acting on their behalf to influence climate change policy. Each of the columns above represents one relationship the corporation appears to have with such a third party. In these columns, the top, dark section represents the strength of the relationship the corporation has with the influencer. For example if a corporation's senior executive also held a key role in the trade association, we would deem this to be a strong relationship and it would be on the far left of the chart above, with the weaker ones to the right. Click on these grey shaded upper sections for details of these relationships. The middle section contains a link to the organization score details of the influencer concerned, so you can see the details of its climate change policy influence. Click on the middle sections for for details of the trade associations. The lower section contains the organization score of that influencer, the lower the more negatively it is influencing climate policy.
Open PDF file of Data Source
Climate Lobbying Overview: China Steel actively engages on climate policy, and takes supportive positions with some exceptions. The company has communicated a positive top-line position regarding the transition toward a net-zero economy and the energy transition. However, at a more detailed level, it appears to have lobbied the Taiwanese government directly to weaken several specific climate policies, including a carbon tax, emissions trading, and an emission's reduction target.
Top-line Messaging on Climate Policy: China Steel’s top-line communications on climate change are broadly positive. The company issued a statement through the Taiwan Alliance for Net Zero Emission in September 2021 in support of Taiwan’s target of net-zero by 2050 and the need for public policy to facilitate climate action. The company does not appear to have explicitly supported the Paris Agreement.
Engagement with Climate-Related Regulations: China Steel appears to have negatively engaged on several specific climate regulations. In its 2021 CDP disclosure, the company stated that it advocated to the Bureau of Energy in Taiwan against drafting the requirement for large energy consumers to use renewables into the sub-law of the Renewable Energy Development Act. In the same 2021 CDP climate change disclosure, China Steel stated it directly advocated to policymakers to adopt a ceiling on the carbon fee in the Climate Change Response Act and to avoid imposing carbon tax and emissions trading simultaneously. As reported by MoneyDJ in May 2022, the company appeared to emphasize the cost of carbon tax on business operations when commenting on the draft amendment of the Climate Change Response Act. In an interview reported by the Central News Agency in November 2021, China Steel suggested companies in the steel industry to collect their carbon footprint data in order to align with international practices, though it did not communicate a clear position on EU Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism. In its 2020 CDP disclosure, China Steel advocated in favor of an intensity-based approach to steel product benchmarks, instead of the total amount control strategy proposed for emissions reduction in the steel industry in Taiwan.
Positioning on Energy Transition: China Steel appears to be supportive of the energy transition. In a press release in June 2021, the company stated support for decarbonizing the steel industry in Taiwan through research and technological advancement. As reported by Tianxia Magazine in May 2021, Wong Chao-tung, the chairman of the company, called for efforts to develop green electricity and green hydrogen in Taiwan.
Industry Association Governance: In its 2021 Corporate Social Responsibility Report, China Steel disclosed a list of its industry association membership and key positions its senior staff members holds. However, the disclosure lacks detail on the climate positions of these associations and how they align with China Steel’s own positions. The company has not published a review of its alignment on climate policy with its industry associations. China Steel is a member of the World Steel Association, which has mixed engagement on climate policy.
Additional Note: China Steel is headquartered in Taiwan, where InfluenceMap’s LobbyMap platform can currently only make a provisional assessment of corporate climate policy engagement, due to limited capability to access publicly available data on this issue. As it is possible that InfluenceMap is not yet able to fully capture evidence of China Steel's climate policy engagement activities, these scores should be considered provisional at this time.
InfluenceMap collects and assesses evidence of corporate climate policy engagement on a weekly basis, depending on the availability of information from each specific data source (for more information see our methodology). While this analysis flows through to the company’s scores each week, the summary above is updated periodically. This summary was last updated in Q3 2022.