One of the big inspirations behind Nature on the Board was the story of New Zealand’s river Whanganui being granted legal personhood. When I first heard that story I remember thinking it was so out there, but also so brilliant. What did it even mean for a river to become a legal ‘person’? Where did the river begin and end? How could something always in motion be defined as a single entity? And what happened to that river — and its rights — when it eventually met the sea?

The easiest way to understand the guardianship model is to think about a child needing to go to court. Children are not legally able to represent themselves, and so a responsible adult (a guardian) is legally bound to speak on behalf of, and in the interest of, that child. It’s poignant that the same applies for the natural world. Nature is that vulnerable child without a voice and so friends of the natural world must likewise step in and speak not as themselves, but for Nature.

“Everything that happens once can never happen again. But everything that happens twice will surely happen a third time.” — Paulo Coelho, The Alchemist

When we launched Nature on the Board out into the world, we had no idea where it would land. We open sourced it precisely because we wanted it to spread as far, and as freely, as possible. But I was overjoyed when I heard that one of the first places it landed was 8,000 miles away in Cave Creek Canyon, Arizona — a place I’ve never visited, but heard so much about over the last few years. I got chills the first time I saw the journey the idea had taken between Faith In Nature’s base in Manchester, England and the Arizonan desert. The speed at which ideas can travel is breathtaking. That the same idea can resonate in places so different speaks volumes about how, beneath all apparent differences, we’re all facing the same challenge to live in harmony with the natural world. So, first, a little context…

As many of you will have noticed, Apple launched an ad last week in which Mother Nature attended their board meeting.

Sound familiar? Judging by my swollen inbox, it must sound very familiar to anyone who’s been following the Nature on the Board story. And in some ways, perhaps, it’s a useful tool I can use to describe what Nature on the Board is, and in many more ways, what Nature on the Board is not. Because one of the challenges we face with the idea is how it is understood by everyone outside of Faith In Nature’s own boardroom.

Alongside “But what about the profits?”, the other question I always get asked about Nature on the Board is “So what’s actually changed?” And that depends on how you want to define change. The story goes that in 1934, Lettie Pate Whitehead became the first woman to serve on the board of a major corporation (Coca Cola). In all likelihood the same question was asked then. ‘So what’s changed?’ Of course I have no idea how she voted or what she voted on, but the biggest change must be that she voted at all.

From a ‘what about the profits?’ perspective, the move is easily defensible. But even when I give this relatively straight-bat answer, I sense that it still doesn’t really satisfy. We live with such a deeply ingrained belief that it’s profits vs Nature, that the follow on assumption is that introducing Nature to the boardroom will cause irreparable conflict and damage, In reality, nothing could be further from the truth. What we actually see is that Nature’s introduction creates space for a more compassionate dialogue than before, acknowledging all perspectives as valid and needing to be heard.

I don’t need to be an environmental lawyer or an academic to understand what the Rights of Nature should mean. I only need to be a human willing to be guided by my own heart. Or, as is more often the case, be guided by my* dog, Sonic.

Making Nature a director of Faith In Nature is a serious move. It’s a structural overhaul that legally enshrines the Rights of Nature into the company’s governance process — made possible by the brilliant Lawyers For Nature, Earth Law Center and the assistance of a pro bono team at corporate law heavyweights, Shearman and Sterling. But there’s a much softer shift that’s happened at Faith In Nature too — which although not as legally significant, carries a power all of its own. It is simply the presence of a question that is asked time and again: What would Nature say?

When I first called Earth Law Center and Lawyers For Nature – asking whether Nature could be the CEO of Faith In Nature – I had a hunch it might lead to an interesting answer, but no real understanding of the mechanics necessary to make it real.

Peter Sellers’ character, Chance the gardner, is a simple man who has never read a book and draws only from what he knows: TV and gardening. His advice is mistaken for mysticism. It isn’t. It’s obvious: “In the garden, growth has its seasons. First comes spring and summer, but then we have fall and winter. And then we get spring and summer again.” Through this stating of the obvious, he rises through society until, as in this scene, he is within the President’s inner sanctum. He gets there because he doesn’t realise he can’t. He walks on water for the same reason. To me, it is the most profoundly beautiful film.

In early 2021, my partner, Anne, and I started to wonder: ‘Could Nature run the company?’ The company in question was Faith In Nature– a UK soap company (of which we’re both directors). In August 2022, Faith In Nature became the first company in the world to make Nature a director — giving Nature a voice and a vote on all matters that impact upon it. Which, let’s face it, are all matters.