Who gains from saving nature
Ledger 1 : 33 — For each dollar financing nature-based solutions in 2023, about $33 financed activities harmful to nature. (UNEP)
Cases / Protected area / relocation · International · 2019–2020

WWF independent review (Pillay panel) and US funding suspension

Nature's voice · report
No measurement of the harm done to me here is on record.
Did nature suffer? Not measured.
What the record lacks: 1 none on record · 2 insufficient · 1 not measured · 4 disputed · 3 unclear See the gaps

In November 2020 an independent panel appointed by WWF reported that it saw no evidence that WWF staff directed alleged ranger abuses in six countries, and that WWF's human rights commitments had been implemented inconsistently. In 2019 and 2020 the US government suspended and then conditioned funds to conservation grantees including WWF and WCS.

US$12.3 millionCARPE funds suspended by the US Fish and Wildlife Service, autumn 2019
USAID money routed through the US Fish and Wildlife Service.

Status As of the latest record (November 2020): the panel report was published on 24 November 2020, WWF said it embraces its recommendations, and the US Interior memo of 18 September 2020 is the latest recorded set of funding conditions.

What?
An independent panel appointed by WWF reported on alleged ranger abuses in six countries, and the US government suspended and then conditioned funds to conservation grantees including WWF and WCS. Independent panel (Navi Pillay, John Knox, Kathy MacKinnon)
Where?
Cameroon, Central African Republic, DR Congo, Republic of Congo, Nepal and India; the funding decisions were taken in the United States. Independent panel (Navi Pillay, John Knox, Kathy MacKinnon)
When?
BuzzFeed News series from 4 March 2019; panel appointed April 2019; US review from June 2019; Interior memo 18 September 2020; panel report 24 November 2020. Independent panel (Navi Pillay, John Knox, Kathy MacKinnon)
Who?
Gained
  • WWF — More than US$150 million from the US government since 2004 for this work (network-wide figure).
  • WCS — More than US$19 million from the US government since 2010.
Lost
None on record
Harmed
  • A farmer — Held in the Chitwan park jail in June 2006 on suspicion of helping his son hide a rhino horn; died about nine days later (a secondary account gives a different timing).
  • A Chepang youth — Beaten and died in July 2020 in Chitwan; WWF Nepal then suspended funding for ranger training and field equipment. Independent panel (Navi Pillay, John Knox, Kathy MacKinnon)
Why?
The panel stated that no agreements with state partners contained human rights provisions and that implementation of WWF's commitments was inconsistent. Independent panel (Navi Pillay, John Knox, Kathy MacKinnon)
How?
The panel, chaired by Navi Pillay with John Knox and Kathy MacKinnon, reviewed WWF's work in six countries; the US Fish and Wildlife Service reviewed international grants and suspended CARPE funds. Independent panel (Navi Pillay, John Knox, Kathy MacKinnon)
6 of 6 questions answered from the record

What happened

The record, in order.

From 4 March 2019 BuzzFeed News published an investigation reporting that rangers funded or equipped by WWF in six countries had beaten, sexually assaulted and killed villagers. WWF appointed an independent panel in April 2019: Navi Pillay (chair), John Knox and Kathy MacKinnon. It covered Cameroon, the Central African Republic, DR Congo, the Republic of Congo, Nepal and India.

The panel's report, "Embedding Human Rights in Nature Conservation: From Intent to Action", was published on 24 November 2020. It stated that there were "no allegations that WWF staff directed or participated in any of these alleged abuses, and the Panel saw no evidence". It also stated that implementation of WWF's human rights commitments was "inconsistent. and especially weak in the Congo Basin countries", that no agreements or memoranda of understanding with state partners contained human rights provisions, and that no donor project agreements before 2019 required human rights due diligence.

On individual countries the panel stated that WWF had heard allegations about Cameroon "as early as 2008"; that WWF DRC's March 2017 decision to investigate Salonga "was never implemented"; that the consent process at Messok Dja "did not comply with international human rights norms or WWF's own commitments"; and that it "found no evidence that WWF CAR provided or procured arms" in Dzanga-Sangha. On Nepal it stated that WWF Nepal was not aware of most alleged abuses from 2006 to 2016 and treated them as a government matter.

The US Fish and Wildlife Service opened a review of its international grants in June 2019 and in autumn 2019 suspended US$12.3 million of CARPE funds. In a leaked memo of 18 September 2020, Deputy Interior Secretary Kate MacGregor wrote that responses from grantees including WWF and WCS were "not uniformly thorough or responsible" and set new conditions: no federal funds without free, prior and informed consent, and no funding for ecoguards, law enforcement, or "activities related to relocating communities".

WWF said it "embraces" the panel's recommendations: codes of conduct for ecoguards as a condition of WWF support, complaint mechanisms, monitoring of patrols, and suspension and prosecution of accused ecoguards.

  1. 201610 February: Survival International files an OECD complaint against WWF with the Swiss National Contact Point (228 pages); talks break down and OECD Watch lists the case as withdrawn
  2. 20194 March: BuzzFeed News series begins; April: panel appointed; June: US Fish and Wildlife Service opens review of international grants; July: Germany freezes funding to WWF for Salonga; autumn: US$12.3m of CARPE funds suspended
  3. 2020April/May: EU suspends part of its funding (about €1m) for Messok Dja; July: WWF Nepal suspends funding for Chitwan ranger training and equipment; 18 September: Interior memo; 13 October: REDD-Monitor reports the US funding stop; 24 November: panel report published

What was said

Claims, in the words of those who made them.

“no allegations that WWF staff directed or participated in any of these alleged abuses, and the Panel saw no evidence”

“as early as 2008”

“Until recent years, WWF had not taken adequate steps to fulfil that responsibility.”

“was never implemented, apparently out of concern that doing so would meet with resistance from ICCN.”

“did not comply with international human rights norms or WWF's own commitments.”

“Indian law should not be construed as authorising a `shoot on sight' policy”

“not uniformly thorough or responsible”

Kate MacGregor, Deputy Interior Secretary, in a leaked memo on grantees' responses including those of WWF and WCS · 18 September 2020 · REDD-Monitor

“overly burdensome”

WCS, on the US request for information · 2020 · REDD-Monitor

Where accounts differ

Each party's account, side by side, with its source. The record does not settle these points; it shows them.

Did WWF direct, take part in, or fail to act on ranger abuses?
Researchers
Independent panel appointed by WWF

Stated there were no allegations that WWF staff directed or participated in the alleged abuses and that it saw no evidence; stated that implementation of commitments was inconsistent and especially weak in the Congo Basin countries.

Independent panel (Navi Pillay, John Knox, Kathy MacKinnon)
Press and investigations
BuzzFeed News

Reported that rangers funded or equipped by WWF in six countries beat, sexually assaulted and killed villagers.

Communities and civil society
WWF

Said it embraces the panel's recommendations.

WWF (via WWF Belgium)
Chitwan, Nepal: did WWF Nepal know of the abuses and act on them?
Press and investigations
BuzzFeed News

Reported that WWF Nepal lobbied for the charges over a 2006 death in park custody to be dropped; the case was withdrawn in 2007 and an accused ranger was later hired by WWF Nepal.

Researchers
Independent panel appointed by WWF

Stated that WWF Nepal was not aware of most alleged abuses from 2006 to 2016 and treated them as a government matter.

Independent panel (Navi Pillay, John Knox, Kathy MacKinnon)
Dzanga-Sangha, Central African Republic: did WWF help ecoguards obtain weapons?
Communities and civil society
Allegation as summarised in the record (source not named)

Alleged that WWF helped ecoguards buy army weapons and hired Maisha Consulting to deal with the Seleka.

Researchers
Independent panel appointed by WWF

"found no evidence that WWF CAR provided or procured arms"; judged the hiring of Maisha Consulting "necessary in the circumstances".

Independent panel (Navi Pillay, John Knox, Kathy MacKinnon)
Did grantees respond adequately to the US review of international grants?
Government and regulators
Kate MacGregor, Deputy Interior Secretary

Wrote that grantees' responses, including those of WWF and WCS, were "not uniformly thorough or responsible".

REDD-Monitor
Communities and civil society
WCS

Called the request "overly burdensome".

REDD-Monitor
Communities and civil society
Virunga Foundation

Said it would close its operations rather than provide documents.

REDD-Monitor

How it looked

What was shown, beside what was recorded.

Shown

Recorded

  • The panel stated that no agreements or memoranda of understanding with state partners contained human rights provisions, and that no donor project agreements before 2019 required human rights due diligence.
    Independent panel (Navi Pillay, John Knox, Kathy MacKinnon)
  • In Dzanga-Sangha the panel found no evidence that WWF CAR provided or procured arms, and judged the hiring of Maisha Consulting "necessary in the circumstances".
    Independent panel (Navi Pillay, John Knox, Kathy MacKinnon)
  • WWF Nepal suspended funding for Chitwan ranger training and field equipment after a Chepang youth was beaten and died, and Chepang families were removed, in July 2020.
    Independent panel (Navi Pillay, John Knox, Kathy MacKinnon)
  • The US Fish and Wildlife Service suspended US$12.3 million of CARPE funds in autumn 2019.
    REDD-Monitor
  • A secondary account of the report states that the panel wrote that WWF staff had received credible reports since 2008, that serious allegations reached senior management in 2014–2018, that consultants' reports were softened before reaching the board, and that WWF put its relationship with governments ahead of community safety.

Who gained

Money that reached nature, beside money that stayed elsewhere.

Reached nature or the ground

Not published
No figure published.

Gained elsewhere

Not totalled
Currency: USD · Window: 2019–2020. All figures cover the same period. * Estimate built from cited figures.

Responses on record

  • wwf (November 2020): Said it "embraces" the panel's recommendations. · WWF (via WWF Belgium)
  • wcs (2020): Called the US request for information "overly burdensome". · REDD-Monitor
  • virunga-foundation (2020): Said it would close its operations rather than provide documents to the US review. · REDD-Monitor

In court and with insurers

Every proceeding and every insurer decision on record.

Lawsuits and rulings

  1. June 2019–18 September 2020 (memo)Outcome not on record$12.3m CARPE funds suspended in autumn 2019 (US$ million)
    US Fish and Wildlife Service review of international grants and CARPE suspension
    US Fish and Wildlife Service (Department of the Interior) · Administrative · US Fish and Wildlife Service → International conservation grantees including WWF and WCS

    The Service opened a review of its international grants in June 2019 and suspended US$12.3 million of CARPE funds in autumn 2019. The leaked Interior memo of 18 September 2020 set new conditions: no federal funds without free, prior and informed consent and no funding for ecoguards, law enforcement or activities related to relocating communities. REDD-Monitor

  2. 10 February 2016–Outcome not on record
    Survival International complaint against WWF (OECD, Swiss National Contact Point)
    Swiss National Contact Point (OECD) · International court · Survival International → WWF

    The complaint ran to 228 pages. Talks broke down and OECD Watch lists the case as "withdrawn". OECD Watch

Insurers

No insurer decision on record.

What nature saw

Outcomes measured on the ground, and nature's note.

Nature's report opens this page. Below: further outcomes measured on the ground.

US funds suspended (CARPE)
US$12.3m
Autumn 2019, US Fish and Wildlife Service
Agreements with state partners containing human rights provisions
None
Panel, 24 November 2020
Evidence that WWF staff directed abuses
None found
Panel, 24 November 2020

What we don't know

Undisclosed, unproven, untried: recorded as data.
Deaths reported

Nature

  • Not measured Harm to nature: The record holds no measurement of harm to nature.

Court

  • Unclear US Fish and Wildlife Service review of international grants and CARPE suspension: outcome not on record.
  • Unclear Survival International complaint against WWF (OECD, Swiss National Contact Point): outcome not on record.

Figures

  • Insufficient Eu funding suspended: Part of EU funding for Messok Dja suspended in April/May 2020 after a check by the Congolese human rights group OCDH; the source is secondary and is not named.

Accounts

  • Disputed Did WWF direct, take part in, or fail to act on ranger abuses?
  • Disputed Chitwan, Nepal: did WWF Nepal know of the abuses and act on them?
  • Disputed Dzanga-Sangha, Central African Republic: did WWF help ecoguards obtain weapons?
  • Disputed Did grantees respond adequately to the US review of international grants?

Record

  • Unclear Whether the conditions in the 18 September 2020 memo (no funds for ecoguards, law enforcement or relocation of communities) remained in force: not recorded.
  • Insufficient Reported but not independently verified: the secondary account of the panel's findings on warnings reaching WWF's senior management and board, taken from a summary rather than the full report.
  • None on record How the panel report treated the 2006 Chitwan death in custody: not found.

Did the harm stop?

The record does not state that the reported abuses stopped. It records suspended or restricted funding: US CARPE funds (autumn 2019), part of EU funding for Messok Dja (April/May 2020) and WWF Nepal's Chitwan funding (July 2020).

Who paid?

People reported as beaten, tortured or killed by rangers in the parks the panel reviewed, including a farmer who died in park custody in Chitwan in 2006 and a Chepang youth who was beaten and died in July 2020.

Sources

Voices on record: ✓ Company or project✓ Government and regulators— Courts— Press and investigations✓ Communities and civil society✓ Researchers

Company or project

Government and regulators

Communities and civil society

Researchers

Connected cases

Related matters, and cases linked to this one through the same organisations, with the role each played in both.
Terms used on this page

Law and courts

Prior consultation
The right of indigenous peoples, under ILO Convention 169 and national laws, to be consulted before measures that affect their lands are adopted.
Trustees (natural resource)
Government agencies that act on behalf of the public to recover and spend damages for harm to natural resources.

Institutions

OECD complaint
A complaint filed with a government's National Contact Point under the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises; the process is mediation, not a court.

Carbon and conservation finance

REDD+
Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation. A UN framework under which forest projects earn carbon credits for deforestation they say they prevented, measured against a projected baseline.
Similar cases
Finance, funds and markets · Protected area / relocation · United States · 2013–2026
US syndicated conservation easement tax shelters (EcoVest, Fisher and Sinnott)
Same type: Protected area / relocationSame countryCourt: outcome not on record
Law, regulation and treaties · Protected area / relocation · United States · 2025–2026
US Endangered Species Act rollbacks 2025–2026 (God Squad Gulf exemption, critical habitat rules)
Same type: Protected area / relocationSame countryCourt: outcome not on record
Protected area / relocation · United States · 2023
After Sackett ruling, NRDC says at least 60% of individual wetlands are unprotected
Same type: Protected area / relocationSame countryCourt: outcome not on record