This scorecard provides a detailed breakdown of InfluenceMap's assessment of Mitsubishi Heavy 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 Mitsubishi Heavy 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 Mitsubishi Heavy Industries's company profile - is accessible via the buttons on the right hand side of the page.
A summary of Mitsubishi Heavy 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 Mitsubishi Heavy 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 |
---|---|
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 Mitsubishi Heavy 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)?
Mitsubishi Heavy Industries has not published an account of its climate-related positions and engagement activities. As a result, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries appears to have excluded key instances of engagement with specific climate-related policies.
For example, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries signed a joint letter to the US Senate and House of Representatives in February 2025, advocating for Congress to defend the Inflation Reduction Act's clean hydrogen tax credit, which allows a variety of feedstocks under specific conditions, however, emphasizing a prominent role for fossil gas as a feedstock for eligible hydrogen production. In addition, in January 2025, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries appeared to oppose the rollback of Inflation Reduction Act (IRA)'s 45Q tax credit that incentivizes CO2 storage through CCUS in a different joint letter to members of the House Ways and Means Committee and the Senate Finance Committee.
It also recognized the need to reduce environmental impact in aircraft engine maintenance, repair and overhaul, although unclear if aligned with IPCC timelines, in a March 2024 committee meeting with a METI Aircraft Industry Subcommittee.
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)?
Mitsubishi Heavy Industries has disclosed its membership to the Japan Business Federation (Keidanren), but excludes industry associations which are actively engaged on climate policy, including the Japan Atomic Industrial Forum (JAIF), Japan Electrical Manufacturers' Association (JEMA), Japan Carbon Frontier Organization (JCOAL), Japan Electronics And Information Technology Industries Association (JEITA), and Central Japan Economic Federation (CJEF). The company's disclosure on its activities in Keidanren does not include any positions or references to climate policies.
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 Mitsubishi Heavy 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.