Nature as Shareholder:
Reimagining Ownership

As businesses pursue sustainability to ensure their resilience, a novel approach invites us to reimagine how business and nature can achieve mutual benefit.

I recently wrote a paper, called "Nature as Shareholder: Who Speaks for the Trees?," which explores an innovative idea: giving nature legal personhood and shareholding rights in companies. This fresh take on corporate governance and environmental stewardship challenges how we think about balancing profit with the planet's wellbeing. It arose from conversations on Seeds Podcast, where I have talked with over 450 inspiring people and met some who challenged my own paradigms of thinking on this topic.

The profit vs. planet dilemma

For years, companies have focused on maximizing profits — often at the environment's expense. In the paper, I start by highlighting the clash between the predominant, shareholder-first approach and more holistic business models — using Friedmanomics and Dr. Seuss's "The Lorax", which were both first released within a year of each other, as examples.

As I explain in the paper: "These two contrasting philosophical conceptions, representing clashing paradigms of thought about the role of the company, were released like magnetic forces propelling against each other and pushing each other away."

A new approach: Nature as a legal person

Taking cues from New Zealand's laws that give legal personhood to natural features such as the Whanganui River and Te Urewera forest, I suggest bringing this idea into corporate governance and ownership of companies. I outline three practical ways to do this:

  • Government laws creating legal entities to represent nature

  • Private citizens setting up trusts for specific ecosystems or species

  • New "impact companies" with built-in purpose and reporting requirements

These aren't just ideas on paper. There are real-world examples — such as the Wairuakohu Charitable Trust, which owns half of a partnership holding intellectual property from research on Radula marginata (a species of New Zealand liverwort known for its cannabis-like compounds) and related ecosystems.

What this could mean

Thinking of, and treating, nature as a shareholder could transform the relationship between the business world and the natural world:

  • Sparking system-wide change by encouraging investments that value relationships and holistic shifts over pure financial gains

  • Changing how boards of directors make decisions by putting nature's interests at the core

  • Inspiring business owners to rethink their company's purpose and align it with sustainability goals.

As I point out in the paper: "If nature were made the shareholder, this would likely change the way directors think about how they fulfil their duties, too" — a shift that could fundamentally change how companies make decisions.

Hurdles to overcome

However, putting these ideas into practice isn't simple. Key issues include:

  • Legally defining "nature"

  • Getting investors on board with non-traditional governance models

  • Avoiding cultural appropriation when using indigenous concepts

So, the question of "How do we define nature itself?" highlights the challenge of turning abstract ideas into concrete legal frameworks. The paper ends with a call to action, urging readers to consider giving nature a voice in their organizations. Embracing the need to adapt and grow in the face of environmental challenges reminds us that it's possible to change our ways of thinking and operating over time. This has simply been an overview, so I encourage you to download and read the paper to dive into more of the nuances outlined here.

As businesses grapple with the need for sustainability to ensure their own resilience, this paper offers a novel approach worth considering — inviting us to reimagine how business and nature can work together for mutual benefit.