This scorecard provides a detailed breakdown of InfluenceMap's assessment of Daikin Industries's disclosures on climate policy engagement. This does not include an assessment of the company's real-world climate policy engagement, which can be found on InfluenceMap's online profile of Daikin Industries, accessible via the buttons on the right hand side of the page.
The disclosure assessments are directly integrated into the CA100+ Net Zero Company Benchmark as part of InfluenceMap's Climate Policy Engagement Alignment’ assessment, under two distinct indicators:
In 2023, InfluenceMap’s methodology to assess corporate disclosures on climate policy engagement was formally updated in line with the Global Standard on Responsible Climate Lobbying and stakeholder input. The detailed methodology - as well as additional resources including best practice guidance and Daikin Industries's company profile - is accessible via the buttons on the right hand side of the page.
A summary of Daikin Industries's performance under this assessment is shown below, using the traffic-light assessment framework shown in the key. A more detailed breakdown is available below.
| Indicator | Score |
|---|---|
| Accuracy of Climate Policy Engagement Disclosure | No, does not meet criteria |
| Sub-Indicator | Score |
|---|---|
| Accuracy of Direct Climate Policy Engagement Disclosure | No, does not meet criteria |
| Accuracy of Indirect Climate Policy Engagement Disclosure | No, does not meet criteria |
A summary of Daikin Industries's performance under this assessment is shown below, using the traffic-light assessment framework shown in the key. A more detailed breakdown is available below.
The Review Score (0-100) assesses corporate performance against seven indicators, using the same traffic-light framework. A ‘Green’ scores 2 points, a ‘Yellow’ scores 1 point, and a ‘Red’ scores 0 points. This total is converted into a percentage from 0 to 100, calculated using the total number of points available (14). As such, only certain scores within the 0 to 100 range are possible under this methodology. A Review Score of 100 would indicate that a company has met all of the assessment criteria related to the review process.
| Date of Review | Score |
|---|---|
| N/A | No Review Published |
This is an assessment of the accuracy of a company's reporting on its direct and indirect (via industry associations) climate policy engagement activities.
InfluenceMap utilizes its proprietary database to assess how corporate disclosures on climate policy positions and engagement activities compare to InfluenceMap's independent assessment of the companies' and industry associations' real-world climate policy engagement. In short, it assesses the extent to which the company has disclosed on all climate policy engagement identified by InfluenceMap's database.
The tables below provide: (1) a breakdown of Daikin Industries's performance under each sub-indicator, using the traffic-light assessment framework shown in the key; and (2) examples of leading practice by companies.
Has the company published an accurate account of its corporate climate policy positions and engagement activities (as compared to InfluenceMap’s database)?
Daikin has published a partial account of its positions and engagement activities on specific climate-related policies, but excludes more than 3 material evidence of direct climate policy engagement identified by InfluenceMap's database. According to InfluenceMap's methodology, a further point is subtracted as more than one year has passed since the last disclosure.
In its 2024 Sustainability Report, Daikin disclosed its engagement in support of heat pumps with U.S. federal officials in 2023 and Belgium's Federal Minister of Energy in 2023. Daikin also disclosed its meetings with officials from California and Alabama, but its positions were unclear from the disclosure. Daikin did not disclose its comments submitted to the US EPA in August 2023 on New Source Performance Standards and in January 2023 on setting a cap on Global Warming Potential (GWP) for refrigerants.
It also did not disclose its engagements with the Japanese Ministry of Economy Trade and Industry (METI) in April 2023, where it advocated for greater efficiency of energy consuming equipment, and in February 2024, where it appeared to support the regulation and standardization of refrigerants and heat pumps.
Daikin has also not disclosed its meeting with the Executive Vice-President of the European Commission for Prosperity and Industrial Strategy regarding the EU CBAM and heat pumps and fossil fuel phaseout in February 2025. The company, through its UK Managing Director, issued an open letter to UK political party leaders in 2024, advocating for a Future Homes Standard.
Enel has published a complete and accurate account of its positions and engagement activities on specific climate-related policies, and this is aligned with InfluenceMap's assessment of the company using its LobbyMap database. Enel included its climate advocacy activities, positions, and links to the company’s government consultation responses to specific climate-related policies from 2022-2024 in its 2023 Climate Policy Advocacy report, published April 2024. It also covered a range of regions in its disclosure, including Global, Europe, North & South America, Africa, and the Asia Pacific.
BP partially met the assessment criteria under this indicator, as it excluded material evidence of climate policy engagement. However, BP’s ‘Advocacy Activities’ webpage provides a clear and detailed disclosure of the company’s climate policy engagement, with filters for jurisdiction; date; and topic, including links to relevant consultation responses. It also contains sorting options for most recent, and most relevant.
Has the company published an accurate account of the climate policy positions and engagement activities of the industry associations of which it is a member (as compared to InfluenceMap’s database)?
Daikin has disclosed a partial list of its industry association memberships, but excludes 9 industry associations which are actively engaged on climate policy, including European Chemical Industry Council (Cefic), American Chemistry Council (ACC), Japan Electrical Manufacturers' Association (JEMA), German Chemical Industry Association (VCI), Kansai Economic Federation, Japan Chemical Industry Association (JCIA), and PlasticsEurope.
The company's disclosure on its industry associations does not include the role the company has within the association or references to positions taken on climate policies.
For example, Daikin's disclosure of the Japan Business Federation (Keidanren) is limited to top-line climate positions, and the company has not disclosed Keidanren's advocacy on various strands of climate policy, including its February 2025 proposal on the 7th Strategic Energy Plan which advocating for increased trade and upstream investment into LNG and government incentives for coal-fired power, including opposition to rapid phase out of coal, but seemed to advocate against public spending on renewables.
See Appendix A below for details of the company's industry association memberships.
Unilever has published a complete and accurate account of its industry associations' positions and engagement activities on specific climate-related policies. In its March 2024 industry association review, the company attached LobbyMap profile links to each association’s assessment. Iberdrola published a largely complete and accurate of its industry associations' positions and engagement activities on specific climate-related policies.
Iberdrola and its North American subsidiary Avangrid both disclosed the climate policy engagement activities of their industry associations in their respective industry association climate lobbying reviews.
Yes, meets criteria
Partial, meets some criteria
No, does not meet criteria
The table below provides a ranking of Daikin Industries's industry associations currently covered by InfluenceMap’s database by Performance Band, i.e. a full measure of a company’s climate policy engagement, accounting for both its own engagement and that of its industry associations. Detailed profiles for all industry associations can be explored via the links in the table.
Industry associations are categorized by InfluenceMap as having climate policy engagement that is aligned, partially misaligned or misaligned with delivering the 1.5°C goal of the Paris Agreement by Performance Band:
The ranking table below is updated automatically on a continual basis as: (1) new evidence is collected for the industry associations; (2) new industry associations are added to the company profile; (3) industry associations are removed from the company profile, e.g. if the company leaves the association.
As such, the industry associations and/or scores in the ranking table below may differ from the findings in Identify & Assess (Indirect) above, which was written on the date of assessment. See the top of this page for the date of assessment.
| Industry Association | InfluenceMap Performance Band | InfluenceMap Assessment |
|---|---|---|
| Efficient Buildings Europe | B | Aligned |
| Japan Association of Corporate Executives (Keizai Doyukai) | C+ | Partially Aligned |
| Japan Electrical Manufacturers' Association (JEMA) | C | Partially Aligned |
| Japan Business Federation (Keidanren) | C- | Partially Aligned |
| European Chemical Industry Council (Cefic) | C- | Partially Aligned |
| Japan Society of Industrial Machinery Manufacturers (JSIM) | C- | Partially Aligned |
| Japan Chemical Industry Association (JCIA) | C- | Partially Aligned |
| PlasticsEurope | D+ | Partially Aligned |
| American Chemistry Council (ACC) | D | Misaligned |
| Kansai Economic Federation | D | Misaligned |
| German Chemical Industry Association (VCI) | D | Misaligned |
