World Wildlife Fund Sustainability Works

It is no secret that the planet needs our help. Worldwide, species and their habitats are in jeopardy due to the effects of climate change. WWF’s Living Planet Report indicates that if we don’t address rising temperatures, climate change is likely to become the dominant cause of biodiversity loss in the coming decades. Thankfully, WWF, with the help of communities, governments, and companies, is working to better understand the link between climate change and biodiversity – to implement critical conservation programs.

Since 2015, WWF has partnered with Humble Bundle, a digital content marketplace that sells bundles of video games, ebooks, and software, with an added feature of donating a portion of proceeds to charity. Since Humble launched, they have raised over $258 million for thousands of charities, and over the course of our partnership, they’ve raised over $1 million for WWF.

In 2023, the Humble community raised over $75,000 to support WWF’s Shellbank project, a new database of turtle DNA that helps us trace, track and protect marine turtles from the illegal wildlife trade.

Many of the innovations we now take for granted daily consist of single-use plastics, meaning products that can be conveniently disposed of the minute they no longer hold value to the consumer. However, the popularity and ease of the ‘take-make-waste’ economy is not without dire consequences for our planet. In the US alone, it is estimated that the annual volume of plastic waste produced is over 42 million metric tons—only 8.7% of which is recycled. At the current rate, these numbers are set to triple by 2040, since our current waste management system and recycling infrastructure cannot properly manage the volume of virgin plastic produced.

With plastic use ever growing, we need to fix the broken system that has gotten us to this point and prioritize new business models that provide the same functionality and accessibility as single-use plastics without polluting the air, water and soil that both people and wildlife depend on.

As all eyes turn to Paris this week to watch the world’s top conditioned athletes strive to break world records in the pool, on the track and on the mat, climate change may not be top of mind, but it should be.

Just last year, our planet went for gold, and sadly pulled off an incredible feat: the hottest year on record. And earlier this week, another record fell: Earth’s hottest day ever. Here at World Wildlife Fund headquarters in Washington, DC, 15 of the last 25 days have seen temperatures soaring above 90 degrees and maxing out at 104 (and that’s before accounting for the heat index). And it’s not just the extreme heat – raging wildfires, catastrophic early in the season hurricanes, and floods are devastating the lives, economies and ecosystems, as countless national and world temperature and extreme weather records continue to be shattered.

But how did we get here? Back in Paris in 2015, world leaders came together and agreed to set and meet global climate targets, and while some progress has been made, the climate crisis is unfortunately moving faster than we are. As we sprint full speed ahead toward planetary tipping points it may seem inevitable that the world will continue to break too many climate records. But together, we can change the game.

Everyone has a role to play in identifying and implementing solutions, from governments, philanthropists and businesses through to local communities and Indigenous Peoples. If we’re going to stop runaway climate change, conservation efforts must be grounded in places and communities, supporting local leadership and rights. Corporate sustainability efforts must go beyond the status quo, delivering meaningful impact. And both must ensure real transparency and accountability. Here are just a few of the urgent actions needed:

• Scaling up renewable energy, energy efficiency, and energy access in a way that phases out fossil fuels while minimizing harm to nature and communities.

• Encouraging subnational entities–including cities, states, companies, and institutions–to promote, adopt and meet science based net zero targets and reinvent the ways we create, consume, transport and dispose of material in our economy.

• Meeting climate finance commitments that spur innovation and action in developing countries that respond to and build resilience to growing climate impacts.

Let’s seize this moment. World records should be reserved for athletes; it’s time to stop playing games with the future of our planet.

Learn more

Take Action

Tune in to WWF's Nature Breaking Podcast

Climate risk is making it into the headlines more frequently, signaling its growing importance across the economy and society. But what does climate risk mean for banks and the financial system? At its core, climate risk refers to the potential financial losses and instability caused by climate change, encompassing both physical risks (storms, floods, and wildfires) from extreme weather events and transition risk (regulatory changes, market shifts leading to stranded assets, and technological advancements) from the shift towards a low-carbon economy. As climate change accelerates, the integration of climate risk into financial decision-making is not just a necessity but a critical step towards ensuring long-term economic resilience.

The Federal Reserve Board (Fed) released its climate scenario analysis for the six largest banks in the United States in May of this year. If you missed it, you weren’t the only one, as the Fed released it quietly almost a year and a half after putting out the original participant instructions. The questions posed to these banks centered on determining if the banks manage climate risk well and if they collect enough of the right information. The answer is largely: hard to say. Each institution has its own way of figuring out its climate risk exposure, deciding which hazards to model, and what governance structures to use but they all struggle to access consistent and relevant data.

There are several reasons why data is difficult to obtain, including the complexity of compiling it and of determining what data is relevant, as well as the fact that not all corporations are required to collect it. If financial institutions start to require their clients to report data and the Fed calls for consistent climate risk monitoring – including beyond the largest banks - these issues can be overcome. Both need to occur. The Security and Exchange Commission (SEC’s) climate disclosure rule remains in litigation limbo but should provide some clarity for some climate reporting, though as the SEC does not require scope 3 reporting, imperfect data and reporting will continue.

It is important that the Fed ask questions about climate risk and that the banks are prepared – or at least that they are more aware of whether they are – to answer them. Banks were asked to model extreme hazard events (e.g., hurricane, wildfire and/or flooding) in a geographic region to which the bank has significant exposure with and without an insurance market to manage the risk. These scenario analyses should be common practice by now because these extreme weather events are becoming more commonplace. The bigger question is – are they?

The Fed’s summary was a kind of tepid book report of the banks’ scenario analysis. It invites more questions than concrete answers and actions. What comes next? What changes need to happen? Should there be a standardized process for determining and reporting these risks? In fact, Fed staff have listed data the largest banks produce in their own attempt to see how banks are assessing climate risk in a white paper, but won’t go so far as to say that these data are sufficient to assess climate risk. European banks have assessed transition risk more often than U.S. banks, in large part because their Central Banks are conducting more climate stress tests. As the Fed has an economy-wide view of these kinds of risks, what actions should the Fed take to minimize climate shocks to the economy? Certainly there’s more it can do to shore up the financial system, account for climate risk, and benefit the economy.

Let’s be clear: larger banks are more diversified than smaller, regional institutions and are therefore more able to manage climate-related risk. They were also the only ones subject to the Fed’s scenario analysis pilot. But the financial system is comprised of more than big, multinational banks. Medium-sized and regional banks also have significant exposure to climate risk. The FDIC shows that community banks held 30 percent of commercial real estate loans in 2019 and small banks in the Midwest hold a larger concentration of agricultural loans than multinational banks. These smaller financial institutions play an important role in regional economies and if they fail, communities will suffer. If a regional bank has significant exposure to mortgages in flood-prone areas, how is it mitigating that risk? Or if a commercial bank has significant transition risk because it lends primarily to the oil and gas sector, how can that be effectively mitigated? The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) recommends providing oversight to these risks, and I tend to agree.

Banks play a crucial role in the economy by providing loans, managing investments, and supporting businesses. Climate risks can threaten their stability and ability to function effectively. By understanding and managing these risks, banks can: ensure they remain financially viable, protect their clients and investments, and contribute to the global effort to combat climate change by supporting sustainable practices and projects. These sustainable practices and projects are profit-making investments and would avoid stranded assets, so this is just good financial practice – far from charity. By managing these risks effectively, banks can ensure smoother sailing through uncertain waters, protecting not only their assets but also the broader economy and society. It’s time that the Fed step up and take a stronger leadership role in helping the economy – and consequentially people and nature too – weather increasingly expensive and catastrophic climate risks.

In season three of Brooklyn Nine Nine, the fictional police precinct at the center of this comedy series receives a new commanding officer, Captain Seth Dozerman. Glaring at his new team, Dozerman snarls, “My motto is simple: efficiency, efficiency, efficiency”—to which Sergeant Jake Peralta replies: “You could probably just say that once.”

This silly interaction evokes an important reality about how we manage water: while efficiency is important, excessive emphasis on it can be, well, not all that efficient.

Given all that you’ve heard about the world running out of fresh water, water-use efficiency must seem like the obvious answer to ensuring enough water for all. After all, growing food and manufacturing products must use some water…thus, doing so efficiently must be the key.

But faith that efficiency leads to sustainable water management is a myth that needs to be examined and revised into a much broader understanding of water – particularly when and where it’s used, alongside where it comes from and where it goes.

Let’s examine the myths swirling around efficiency.

Did you know that the average roof collects 600 gallons of water for every inch of rain? Capturing some of that stormwater could play an important role in protecting our freshwater resources. Rain barrels are one simple first step that can set small business owners, schools, homeowners, and corporations down the path of freshwater conservation.

Due to reasons such as environmental degradation, prolonged drought, and the rising price of municipal water, rain barrels have grown in popularity over the past several years as one of the simplest and most effective methods of helping our planet. Rain barrels can not only help save money on municipal water bills but they can also reduce erosion and flooding caused by turbulent stormwater runoff.

Healthy diets are essential, yet only a small percentage of Americans consume the daily recommended servings of vegetables. Part of the problem is access. Millions of Americans, both in predominantly minority, urban communities, and in poorer, rural areas without major grocery chains, lack access to nutritious foods.

The problem isn’t a shortage of food. We grow plenty. But up to 40% of fresh produce grown in the US is wasted. Another real difficulty is that connections between local farmers and consumers, already broken, have split even further in recent years due to supply chain disruptions and market shifts. As a result, consumers struggle nutritionally, while small farmers struggle financially and are often forced to take off-farm jobs.

To bridge this gap, the Markets Institute at World Wildlife Fund (WWF) began to explore ways of establishing a direct connection — known as Farmers Post — between consumers and nearby farmers. We’re working with the United States Postal Service (USPS) to explore allowing consumers to have fresh produce delivered to their door. This would offer a new, and welcome, revenue stream for the USPS, which has struggled with tightening budgets in recent years, making use of its distribution expertise and its unique access to all households in the US.

Conservation efforts often face complex challenges that a single organization can't tackle alone. When a group of several major hotel chains wanted to drive measurable reduction of food waste in the hospitality sector in the U.S., for example, several companies created a pre-competitive pilot, called Hotel Kitchen, focused on food waste prevention, donation, and diversion from landfills. These types of groups, highlighted in a new WWF report, bring together diverse players in supply or value chains, from companies to NGOs and producers to researchers, to work on shared goals, which often include environmental impacts or, more directly, conservation objectives.

WWF's experience in launching and participating in such platforms suggests that no one-size-fits-all model dictates success of a precompetitive or multistakeholder group. But successful ones share some key characteristics. And there are lessons to be learned as well from initiatives that have run into roadblocks. Here are some characteristics that make them successful, illustrate pitfalls to avoid, and demonstrate how to maximize their impact.