Case Study from Exodus: From a simple start to folding climate into a wider nature-positive strategy
UN Tourism´s Interview with Kasia Morgan – Head of Sustainability, Exodus Adventure Travels
Exodus describes the company’s approach that began with “reduce, rewild, remove”, evolved into a broader nature-positive plan, and is now embedded across teams and supplier relationships. Measurement was basic at first, then deepened; rewilding created a tangible story; and climate risk has moved into the company’s wider risk process.
Q: How did you create your plan? Who was involved and what support did you use?
A: We signed the Glasgow Declaration and started with measurement, like many do. We brought in a consultancy called Green Element to help us begin. We could not pull every itinerary detail at first, so we measured six representative trips and multiplied out the impact. It was basic, but it got us moving and educated the team.
From the start we were also clear the plan should cover more than measurement and reduction. At that time the sector’s approach was very much offsetting-first, so we wanted to start with reduction, then add rewilding and removal. That became our first Climate Action Plan: Reduce, Rewild, Remove.
Q: How did you choose the actions under those three headings?
A: On Reduce, the first action was measurement, and over time we worked toward a quantified reduction plan with a credible view of levers. Initially, we set an ambitious, science-aligned target to halve per-passenger emissions by 2035. It took longer than expected to detail the roadmap for how we might deliver this. In the meantime, we ran internal education, created a Low-Carbon Lab with product team members meeting monthly to tackle trip components, and launched a train offering to start reducing travel-to-trip impacts even before the hard numbers were perfect.
Rewilding gives us a compelling story for staff and customers. We partnered with Rewilding Europe in the Apennines in Italy — our highest-volume destination — and committed to rewild 100 square metres per passenger. We wanted to talk about carbon removal, nature restoration, endangered wildlife, and resilience together.
For Removal, initially we purchased carbon credits based on our early calculations, while we explored more compelling ways to support removal.
Q: You later shifted from a standalone climate plan to “nature-positive.” Why?
A: Within a year we evolved into our “Nature First” commitment, and now into our “Thriving Nature, Thriving People” plan, as driving themes. The three streams of reduce, rewild, remove continue, but folded into a wider plan with more goals. We look at climate through five drivers of biodiversity loss (changing use of sea and land, direct exploitation of organisms, climate change, pollution and invasive non-native species). We use a mitigation hierarchy (eliminate, reduce, restore), and set goals accordingly.
This framing is more tangible for customers: our research shows people prioritise what they see and feel on trips such as community impact, wildlife protection, plastics reduction, while carbon reduction and offsetting sit lower. The plan lets us connect climate to experiences in a way that resonates.
Q: How are climate risks and adaptation handled?
A: These sit outside sustainability in the company’s risk registers at Exodus and at group level with Travelopia. Senior teams assess climate risks and mitigation alongside other enterprise risks. For asset-heavy businesses in the group, this is especially material. I see value in risk ownership moving wider: it drives action like any other priority risk. Our sustainability work then focuses on how we help communities and nature mitigate those risks, rather than only the firm’s exposure. It is a form of double materiality in practice.
Q: Can you give a concrete example of that double materiality lens?
A: Our foundation’s Wild at Heart campaign supports partners in Costa Rica and Vietnam to protect key species — jaguars in Costa Rica and primates in Vietnam. In Costa Rica, for example, helping restore prey species supports jaguar recovery; in both places we work with communities on habitat protection and ecotourism so there is income to stay and steward ecosystems. We do not badge these as “climate resilience” projects, yet they clearly strengthen ecosystem resilience while creating local benefits.
Q: How do you measure and report progress across all this?
A: There is formal reporting driven by regulation such as disclosure of carbon reports in our annual accounts, and we publish an annual Impact Report as a focal point for transparency on goals, progress, shortfalls, and next steps. Each year we send an extensive supplier survey and then send benchmarking analysis back to suppliers, showing how they compare on plastics, biodiversity activity, carbon, gender ratios, and more. We compile reporting from partners like Rewilding Apennines alongside our internal data. It is less customer-facing and more an accountability tool for suppliers, partners, media, and trade. We push ourselves to set clearer KPIs, although some reporting is still story-led because that is what customers engage with.
Q: What governance and capacity enable delivery, both internally and with suppliers?
A: We embedded roles in core teams: a Product Sustainability Manager sits in our Product team and reports to the Head of Product; part of a marketing/comms role sits in our Marketing team. I act at the sponsor for sustainability on Exodus’ leadership team and report into our parent group’s COO who is responsible for ESG across the group. Being a B Corp helps with staff buy-in. With suppliers, after the survey we send benchmark reports, run training, and have convened a Destination Community Council of 10 key DMC partners and engaged tour leaders to inform goals and incentives. We also send a quarterly supplier sustainability newsletter.
When we select new DMCs, we take into account whether DMCs can help us meet carbon and plastics goals and source local hotels, although it is currently more “carrot” than “stick” as we build capability.
Q: What did joining the Glasgow Declaration change for Exodus?
A: 100% there is value. In a complex, evolving space, signing together is a shared statement and creates healthy peer pressure to advance alongside others. It sets the groundwork for open collaboration and making a mutual commitment to share progress and pitfalls so the industry accelerates together. It also signals that this is bigger than one company. We want to play our part in a collective effort, and the Glasgow Declaration makes that visible.
Q: Your advice to signatories who still have not published a plan?
A: Start simple. Our first plan was three words. Set simple goals and build the blocks beneath them. The landscape now can feel more daunting because others have moved far, but you will be met with encouragement, not criticism. For those treating it as a hassle or a low priority, regulation is coming at some point. Better to begin with basics and take the first steps.
Key takeaways
• First plan deliberately simple framed as reduce, rewild, remove. Now work is more developed climate action sits inside of a wider nature positive strategy
• Rewilding partnership rewilds 100 square metres per passenger
• Accountability driven through annual Impact Report, supplier survey + benchmarking, and partner reporting
• Glasgow Declaration offers shared purpose, peer momentum, and a frame for collaboration and collective progress.
