A question to change culture: “What would Nature say?”
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?
The question is always there. It covers whole walls, it’s on every brief and it’s in every meeting. It’s also in this song that went out six months before any legal changes were made.
For those of you not inclined to watch an ad (no matter how charming!), its lyrics are:
If you’re wondering what to do
Take a walk outside, it might give you a clue
A little thought goes a long, long way
But you probably already know…Hey, what would Nature say?
Take your tea with a bumblebee
Or make animals from the clouds in the sky
Stand in the rain on a hot summer’s day
Or crochet dandelions into your tie…Hey, what would Nature say?
Rights for the rivers!
Power to the flowers!
Trust in the trees!
And dance in the showers!
Swear by the seas!
Hi-five in the forest!
Believe in the bees!
…if you’re faster than a loris.Hey, what would Nature say?
Hey, hey, what would Nature say?
But the song wasn’t just an appetiser for what came later. When I now speak to Nature’s legal guardians, they both agree that it is simply the existence of that question (in a corporate environment) that is the most significant piece of all. Because the Rights of Nature is still such a fledgling movement. It is barely understood, let alone being made law by many governments. So to carry on regardless, and impose this moral filter upon ourselves, is to play by rules we believe are fairer. Rules written by our better natures — that acknowledge the rights of all sentient beings and in so doing also acknowledge our own humanity. While it’s true that these rules need to be legally enshrined to carry the weight they deserve, it’s also true that we, as individuals, can already act in the interest of the natural world by being honest with ourselves.
That’s really the point of the song. If we ask ourselves ‘What would Nature say?’ about X, Y or Z, most of the time we really do already know the answer. We can act otherwise — for whatever reason we tell ourselves is acceptable — but, deep down, we know we’re being wilfully blind to the consequences of our choices.
And we know those answers because we are a part of Nature as much as any other plant, animal or river is. If we could only stop lying to ourselves for long enough, we would know without doubt what Nature would SAY. But perhaps the reason we don’t ask the question is because of its follow up question: So what are we going to DO about it?
And that is precisely why we must ask the question. Because, actually, we’re brilliant. We’re problem solvers. Magicians! And we can find better ways to do things if we make that our purpose. (And, Yuck. Sorry. I hate how that word has been co-opted into management textbook speak. But I use it here for its true meaning — not as yet another tool to drive profit. As Mark Ritson said ‘The purpose of purpose is purpose’.)
If the question sounds scary, perhaps it’s because we feel judged by it. We know we could be doing better so we’d rather not hear it. Why would we? But asking it is not some act of self flagellation. It’s acceptance that we’re not perfect, but that we want to be better. So today — with things the way they are — is our start point. We can ask ‘What would Nature say?’ not with the expectation that things will change overnight, but with the hope that if enough of us ask it regularly enough, a new modus operandi will emerge.
The question is powerful, but it doesn’t mean that every change it brings about is seismic, nor that it’s instant. It’s like a language slowly changing. Gradually, this way of speaking — of asking better questions — gives rise to new ideas that couldn’t have been born of the old language. And, likewise, we realise that other ideas are old language ideas. As the old language dies out, it takes its outmoded ideas with it. They cease to make sense. They cannot survive in the new language world.
This is natural selection, after all. As the environment — the language system — evolves, our understanding changes. To thrive, ideas must adapt to fit within it.
And we see this all the time, don’t we? Think of what is culturally normal now compared to what was culturally normal a few decades ago. Look at what was commissioned then compared to what is commissioned now. Tastes change as attitudes change. As we ask different questions, we fall in love with different ideas. Other ideas become offensive. Ideas like all those currently destroying the natural world.
Eventually, I hope, asking this question will become second nature. Not just at Faith In Nature, but everywhere. And by that I mean it will be ingrained. We won’t need to ask it over and over because it will have become part of our moral judgement process. When we can ride the bike, we won’t need the stabilisers anymore.
But right now, at Faith In Nature, it helps. It focuses the mind and opens the heart. It allows everyone to step into their true nature — as part of Nature — and to take it upon themselves to act as Nature’s guardians. Knowing, of course, that they can call on Nature’s legally appointed guardians to help guide them along the way.
It is perhaps fitting that I’m writing this on my return to Costa Rica — a country I last visited, and fell in love with, five years ago. And which has, without doubt, influenced so much that Anne and I have done at Faith In Nature.
Because it is the only place I’ve ever been that feels like this question is already ingrained. It shows me how companies — and whole countries — might look if everyone started asking it in everything they do. There is a love and an appreciation for the natural world here that is unprecedented. The people here aren’t fixated on climate targets and numbers, but they celebrate all they see around them. They know that to hurt their extended (non human) family hurts them too. They know that their own wealth is tied to the health of their ecosystem.
It is a privilege to spend days and nights in jungles, forests and national parks with guides here. It is a wonder to see the world through their eyes, to hear it as they hear it, to smell it as they smell it. They explain not only what things are, but how they inter-relate. They are no less excited by an ant than an anteater. They not only know each bird by its song, but can sing to each bird. They follow scents in the air as easily as tracks in the mud.
I am grateful to every guide who’s shared their heightened senses with me. Steven at Sukia Travel. Fabio, Roy and Pete at Finca Luna Nueva. Paolo at Osa Wild. I’ll never remember a fraction of all that I’ve been told, but I’ll never forget how it feels to be awake to the world around me. It’s like being able to read, instead of seeing a jumble of letters on a page.
And it’s a form of literacy shared by everyone here, not only the professionals. I’ve had a taxi driver stop midway through a journey and take me through a field ‘just’ to show me where rare poison frogs live. Barmen point out chicks in nests. When I’ve alerted people to a nearby deadly snake, they’ve rushed to see it rather than running away. People thank the world around them. ‘Pura Vida’ is a phrase uttered on repeat. ‘Pure life’.
And it translates:
- In 2020, 99.78% of Costa Rica’s entire energy output came from renewables.
- Today, 59% of the country is forested — up from 40% in the 80s. It is the only country to have stopped and reversed deforestation — partly thanks to the government subsidising private land owners to allow their land to regenerate — paid for by taxes from petrol sales.
- And now, around 5% of the world’s biodiversity can be found in Costa Rica — a country that accounts for only 0.03% of the Earth’s surface.
What would Nature say about all that?
(You probably already know…)
