I found an interesting (though not objective) post from a member of the Walt Disney World Moms Panel. According to what she says (and the information company officials gave her upon request), Walt Disney World is making good efforts to be a green company. But does that make it a restoration company?

For my purposes, the most intriguing part of the email was Disney’s contribution of more than 8,000 acres for a preserve managed by the Nature Conservancy. The blog doesn’t say specifically, but I think that Disney contributed or bought that land in exchange for being able to build out Walt Disney World as it wished.

The Nature Conservancy’s Disney Wilderness Preserve is a lasting testament to the company’s commitment to develop responsibly. Disney purchased 8,500 acres in Osceola County to allow for build-out of the resort and created a model partnership between government, non-profit and business. Working with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Florida water management districts and groups like Audubon of Florida and the Nature Conservancy, the $45 million investment is a living laboratory for land restoration. The Preserve has now grown to 12,000 acres as other companies have followed the model to expand the original tract. A “green” welcome center is a centerpiece and is open to the public.

To my mind, a restoration company makes its revenues mainly from restoration. In this case, Disney’s desire to expand its resort created a restoration benefit. And, of course, that process created business for other companies. But I think that Disney probably wouldn’t have donated that land without some kind of government regulation.

Disney’s efforts to be green sound laudable. But without more information, I can’t tell if Disney has the kind of sustainability plan developed by Interface.