Jakub Porzycki/NurPhoto via Getty Images(NEW YORK) -- If there was any doubt about where outdoor clothing company Patagonia stood on environmentalism, it was quickly put to rest last week when founder Yvon Chouinard and his family donated their ownership to efforts that would protect the planet. "Earth is now our only shareholder," Chouinard wrote on Patagonia's website. But can the generous donation from a billionaire -- this one valued at more than $3 billion -- and the spoils from his successful retail company move the needle on finding solutions to mitigate global warming? Experts told ABC News that the unprecedented move itself won't be enough to make significant strides in curbing emissions and the rise in global temperatures. But the domino effect that results from inspiring future philanthropists to make similar donations could reverberate throughout the climate fight, they hypothesized. The drastic nature of the move is emblematic of the dire consequences that could result if major action is not taken, Hans Cole, head of environmental grants, campaigns and impact for Patagonia, told ABC News. "It really just acknowledges the increasing urgency around the crisis -- around climate, around biodiversity, and around how those impact people and communities around the world," Cole said. Here is what experts have to say about the monumental donation: How the Patagonia donation is different from other billionaire philanthropy Donations from the wealthiest Americans occur on a regular basis but rarely draw as much attention as the gift made by Chouinard. The donation differs from most billionaire philanthropy for two key reasons. First, the donation involves the giving away of Chouinard's company. Chouinard gave up nearly all of his shares in Patagonia and vowed to donate the company's annual profits. However, the maneuver draws on a two-tiered stock system of voting and non-voting shares, allowing Chouinard to retain control of the company. Under the arrangement, Chouinard donated 98% of his non-voting shares in the company to a nonprofit, the Holdfast Collective. However, 2% of the shares -- which make up all of the company's voting shares -- will be retained in the Patagonia Purpose Trust. "The Chouinards have total control of Patagonia through the trust, and they're giving everything else away," Daniel Hemel, a law professor at New York University, told ABC News. The move is "unusual but it's not unique," Hemel added, noting that dual-class share structures are used at companies such as Google and The New York Times. He also cited a similar model of philanthropy undertaken by Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg. "Zuckerberg has mostly control of Facebook through the shares he's retained and he's giving some of it away," Hemel said. Hemel said he lends "credence" to the rationale for continued control of Patagonia offered by Chouinard, who said the maneuver will allow him to protect the company's commitment to environment-friendly values. The second feature of the donation that distinguishes it centers on the nonprofit formed by Chouinard, which will allow him to pursue political advocacy and donate to political candidates. Most large-dollar philanthropy made by wealthy people goes to 501(c)(3) organizations, such as the Gates Foundation, Hemel said. Donations to such organizations are tax-deductible, but the groups are forbidden by law from participating in political campaigns or giving to political candidates. However, the nonprofit created by Chouinard as the recipient of this donation, the Holdfast Collective, is classified as a 501(c)(4), which means the gift forgoes an income tax deduction but the organization can participate in politics. The Collective "can advocate for causes and political candidates in addition to making grants and investments in our planet," Patagonia said on its website. Philanthropists have made giant donations to the climate fight in the past The donation from Chouinard, valued at more than $3 billion, joins a flurry of large-dollar philanthropy in recent years focused on the climate. While Chouinard's donation is smaller than that of some of his peers, the Holdfast Collective differs from other climate philanthropy because of its capacity to participate in political campaigns. In 2020, Amazon Executive Chair Jeff Bezos pledged $10 billion to address climate change with the formation of the Bezos Earth Fund, which does not support political candidates. So far, the organization has granted $1.54 billion to programs that range from restoring mangroves in Columbia and Fiji to empowering grassroots environmental justice groups and providing technology for farmers in India. Last year, Laurene Powell Jobs, the widow of late Apple founder Steve Jobs, pledged $3.5 billion to fight climate change through the Waverley Street Foundation, an organization formed by Jobs in 2016. It aims to address the problem by supporting local groups in communities worldwide that are "at work in the trenches of the battle for a livable planet," the organization said last month. As a 501(c)(3), the Waverley Street Foundation is not allowed to participate in political campaigns. Meanwhile, the ClimateWorks Foundation, which says it has granted over $1.3 billion to more than 600 grantees in over 50 countries, uses environmental expertise to channel donations for projects worldwide. As with the Bezos Earth Fund, the ClimateWorks Foundation supports a wide range of programs, including efforts to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and reverse forest loss. The ClimateWorks Foundation doesn't participate in political campaigns, either, as it's also a 501(c)(3). The approach from Chouinard -- a significant departure from most billionaire climate giving -- allows the organization to amplify its impact, Hemel said. "What the Chouinards realize is that effective action to protect the planet from climate change is going to need to be government action," he said. "Three billion dollars potentially can make a difference in elections." If they were to spend "a fraction" of the $3 billion on a U.S. Senate race, for example, that ends up changing the Senate majority, "then they could be leveraging that fraction of $3 billion into hundreds of billions in additional climate investment," Hemel added. Harvey Dale, a professor of philanthropy and law at New York University, echoed the view that the scale of private giving on climate-related issues pales in comparison with public spending. "I suppose if you took all the money in all the foundations in the country -- many hundreds of billions of dollars -- you would say, 'Wow, how about that,'" Dale told ABC News. "It's a tiny bit compared to the amount [President Joe] Biden recommended in legislation just a year or two ago." To adequately address climate change, the scale of public investment must far outweigh that of the donor community, Dale said. "The amount of money in the philanthropic sector is a drop in the bucket compared to how much the government would spend," he added. The donation follows the company's ethos of sustainability Patagonia has decades of experience in working to make its carbon footprint as small as possible in addition to tackling aspects of the environmental crisis, Cole said. The company says it uses materials with lower environmental impacts, has cleaned up parts of its supply chain and encourages practices such as a program that allows customers to sell or trade their used pieces. "It has been a 50-year journey for us, absolutely throwing everything we can, all the resources possible," Cole said. In the past few years, Patagonia has increased its environmental commitments, even changing its mission statement to saving the planet, Cole said. Customers who wear the Patagonia brand, often those committed to sports and pastimes that keep them out in nature, tend to agree with the goals. Even after the transfer of ownership, Patagonia will c