Background

What if nature had a seat at the boardroom table? This provocative question was at the heart of a recent gathering exploring "Nature as Shareholder: Who Speaks for the Trees?"

Against the backdrop of Lily Duval's striking watercolor illustration of New Zealand's towering Kahikatea tree, we delved into the groundbreaking concept of nature owning equity stakes in companies.

Steven Moe highlighted the practical challenges that emerge when translating this visionary idea into reality—where Alimentary had the opportunity to share insights from the complexities of implementation to the urgent need for greater clarity around purpose-driven ventures.

Who Speaks for the Trees: Whitepaper

Who Speaks for the Trees: Audio

Introduction to our way of thinking

Alimentary: Unconventional Gold is an emissions reduction business focused on methane reduction, clean water energy, and waste diversion, we recognised that our environmental integrity was fundamental to avoiding greenwashing.

This led us to explore how nature could have a formal voice in our governance structure, working with Stephen Moe to investigate nature as a shareholder through a trust mechanism.

1. Received funding from Akina - leveraging the purpose venture whitepaper Steven’s Work based on our commitment to titiriti  inspired by Edmund Hillary Fellowship

2. Including from Reggie Luedtke + I Am The River, The River Is Me about the Whanganui river granted legal personhood - Huia Lambie and EHF Hine Poipoi - Connector

3. Grounded in Matthew's background in process philosophy

4. The question evolved - From "how does a company kōrero with nature" to "how do we ensure authentic indigenous representation in environmental decisions"

Our aim: Adding the Voice of Water, Energy, Soil to governance, aligned with the SBTI

What We Tested and Learnt

Cultural authenticity is essential - Only Mana Whenua can truly have kōrero with the mountain for place-based decision making - an iwi has a single value system, it make sense, yet ASL is not an iwi, and works with five value systems - SBTI and Iwi don’t always align - the key is truth

Market validation exists - Overwhelming positive feedback from testing with stakeholders, workshops, and impact community

For example Academic and cultural endorsement - Invited to lecture at Stanford on regenerative economics; Dr. Teina Bosa-Dean confirmed the model enhances mauri (Māori life spirit) Validated with Earth Law Center Grant Wilson

Investment interest from aligned capital - Some investors specifically engaged because they understood share-gifting to nature

Traditional investment structures create barriers - Even impact investors found the structure "too complex" and questioned control mechanisms

For example - who are the trustees, and what voices do they represent and who are the kaitiaki in the rohe - can they play that role?

Respect for Titiriti, translation, we can’t take the name papatuanuku - and the definition of tikianaga varies in the rohi and across the whenua

Pros and Cons

Our Assumptions

1. Authentic environmental governance - Moves beyond tokenistic consultation to genuine stakeholder representation

2. Market differentiation - Strong positive response from purpose-driven stakeholders and customers

3. Cultural alignment - Enhances mauri and respects indigenous worldviews

4. Integrity for science-based targets - Prevents greenwashing through embedded environmental accountability

5. Innovation leadership - Pioneering approach attracts mission-aligned investment

6. Help us identify aligned capital - Focus on investors who understand regenerative business models

Cons

1. Investor complexity concerns - Traditional capital markets struggle with unclear control structures

2. Legal and operational uncertainty - Untested framework creates due diligence challenges

3. Scale limitations - May restrict access to broader global investment our deployment

4. Implementation questions - Unclear operational translation of "voice of nature"

5. Investment fear of Guardianship, not Ownership

What we did based on what we learnt

Current Approach: Constitutional Integration

1. Simplified structure - All shareholders must uphold the voice of nature (embedded in constitution)

2. Maintained principle - Directors remain responsible for environmental stakeholder representation

3. Awaiting market test - No significant investor due diligence on constitutional approach yet

Next Steps

1. Prepare documentation - Clear operational definitions of "upholding voice of nature"

2. Develop decision-making frameworks - Specific processes for environmental consideration

3. Build evidence base - Demonstrate how environmental governance enhances business value in partnership with Planetary Accounting Network, Auditors for emissions with Ngati Koata Trust and Ngāti Rārua

Key Takeaways

1. Legal personhood for nature faces significant structural barriers in traditional investment frameworks

2. Cultural authenticity and indigenous representation are fundamental to genuine environmental governance

3. Market appetite exists but requires finding the right investment partners willing to take risks into new regenerative economic models

4. Constitutional embedding may provide a pathway that preserves principles while addressing practical concerns

Our founders can remain commuted to the path despite initial barriers. The journey continues - testing whether simplified approach maintains effectiveness while improving accessibility

Our ASK: we are seeking investment from aligned stakeholders and offer compelling ROI.

As we stand at the intersection of environmental crisis and corporate responsibility, the question isn't whether nature deserves representation in business decisions, but rather how we can create the frameworks to make this revolutionary approach both legally viable and commercially successful.