When the top 100 companies account for 71% of global emissions since 1988, going vegetarian or biking to work may seem a little bit pointless. Individual actions have limited positive effects, compared to corporation’s huge negative effects on the environment. How could any single person hope to accomplish real change within a system that has enabled those 100 companies for decades? The answer may be counter-intuitive: working through rather than against corporations.

Working through corporations means buying carbon offsets, engaging in impact investing, or participating in corporate governance. It’s difficult to ascertain whether any activism coming from within the establishment can be effective. Sometimes, tearing down an exploitative system is the best way of creating a more just social norm. But as the climate crisis grows more urgent, options are needed now.

Look at shareholder activism. Investors have always used their leverage to pressure companies into changing policies. Recently, investors have weaponized that leverage to advance environmental objectives. Large savings management companies, companies that invest your savings for you or handle your retirement accounts, have been pressed to divest from fossil fuel investments. This is a good idea both financially by increasing the long-term stability of people’s savings, and environmentally by decreasing the scale of funds funneled into extractive practices.

This strategy is yielding surprising dividends. More and more firms include a sustainability statement or aspect to their business, and young people in particular have pushed for this kind of recognition. Investments in sustainable funds have increased tenfold from 2016 to 2020 due to investor preferences – investors like you and me. Companies are shifting their portfolios and mission statements to appease a more environmentally conscious clientele.

But are these practices leading to meaningful change?  Greenwashing, a misleading marketing tactic, is a concern. Many companies falsely advertise environmentally friendly behavior, tricking consumers into thinking their participation is benefiting the environment. For example, Barclays and Deutsche Bank joined the Net Zero Banking Alliance in 2021 which was supposed to reduce their carbon emissions, but instead, in the same year, they both spent collectively over $10 billion on fossil fuel investments. Clearly, there are some issues with divestment. Key to equipping people with the ability to be the change is finding legitimately effective methods of action. So, what are they?

These developments, questions, and issues all require further consideration. In order to address the climate crisis, activists need to be aware of which options can make the most meaningful changes, like ways to influence those firms who are the emitters. Finding a solution is not the goal, but empowering the populace to enact their own change and enforce their own will is a more feasible objective. For my beat I will be exploring the possibilities of environmental activism within and by corporations.