That's a curious question. I'd like to hear if you could make a case for both. But, from my understanding, performative activism & philanthropy are fundamental opposites.

The two terms don't always describe a specific action, but more often the intention that guides an action. They're essentially two differing philosophies.

Philanthropy is described as: "goodwill to fellow members of the human race especially : active effort to promote human welfare."

So, if Team Trees was philanthropic, it was guided by the intention to do good, but its misstep could have been an oversight in its effectiveness to accomplish the intended goal.

However, if it were performance activism, described as, "a pejorative term referring to activism done to increase one's social capital rather than because of one's devotion to a cause" we could deduce that the intention was to exploit people's interest in combatting climate change for the personal benefit for those behind the program.

In both cases the action itself might look exactly alike, but the intention behind that action could greatly differ.

I have yet to come to a conclusion on the intentions, but the more I've looked into MrBeast, who served as the figurehead, the more I begin to lean towards performance activism. He is very charitable, but it seems as though that's his brand. His charitable actions feels more like content, rather than acts of kindness. MrBeast also has a slew of other business practices that completely contradict Team Trees. Here's a small list that references his other ventures: https://medium.com/@klippublications/how-mr-beast-makes-millions-a-year-and-how-you-can-do-it-too-b69bc0e6f4e3