Across much of the world, environmental policy has moved from the margins of government to the center of political debate. Questions once largely left to scientists and regulators are now discussed in election campaigns, courtrooms and international summits. Governments face competing demands: sustaining economic growth, ensuring affordable energy, protecting jobs and responding to increasingly visible environmental challenges. How those priorities are balanced has become one of the defining policy questions of the decade.
Political leaders who favor reducing regulation often argue that environmental rules have become overly burdensome, slowing investment, raising costs for businesses and consumers, and limiting economic competitiveness. Environmental organizations, scientists and many international institutions counter that weakening protections can create greater long-term costs through biodiversity loss, pollution and climate-related disasters (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [IPCC], 2023).
The debate has played out differently from country to country.
In the United States, the first Trump administration rolled back dozens of environmental regulations affecting air quality, water protection, greenhouse gas emissions and endangered species.
Brazil experienced a different but equally significant debate during the presidency of Jair Bolsonaro. Environmental enforcement in parts of the Amazon was reduced while agricultural and mining interests received greater political support. According to Brazil's National Institute for Space Research (INPE), annual deforestation increased substantially during this period before declining again under subsequent policy changes (Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas Espaciais [INPE], 2024).
Much of this debate centered on the expansion of industrial animal agriculture. The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations identifies livestock production as one of the world's largest users of land, while cattle ranching remains the principal direct driver of deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations [FAO], 2022). Forests cleared for pasture are often followed by the expansion of soybean cultivation, the majority of which is ultimately processed into feed for livestock rather than consumed directly by humans (Poore & Nemecek, 2018). As forests disappear, ecosystems become fragmented, wildlife populations decline and vast stores of carbon are released into the atmosphere, intensifying both biodiversity loss and climate change (IPCC, 2023).
Europe has seen similar tensions emerge. Farmers' protests, concerns over energy prices and questions about industrial competitiveness have prompted several governments and political parties to seek revisions to elements of the European Union's Green Deal. While supporters argue that climate policies should be implemented at a pace that protects economic stability, environmental experts warn that delaying emissions reductions increases both environmental and financial risks over time (European Commission, 2024).
International organizations have also strengthened their position.
In 2026, the United Nations General Assembly adopted a resolution welcoming the International Court of Justice's advisory opinion on states' obligations regarding climate change. The resolution encouraged governments to strengthen implementation of existing climate commitments and reinforced the growing international recognition that environmental protection is closely linked to human rights and sustainable development (United Nations Environment Programme [UNEP], 2026).
Although the resolution is not legally binding, it reflects a broader scientific and political consensus that environmental protection cannot be separated from the systems that produce the world's food. UNEP estimates that food systems are responsible for approximately one-third of global anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions, while animal products account for nearly 60% of emissions generated by the global food system (UNEP, 2023). The IPCC similarly concludes that improvements in agriculture, land use and dietary patterns represent important opportunities for reducing emissions while protecting biodiversity and strengthening ecosystem resilience (IPCC, 2023).
At the same time, several European countries continue to pursue policies aimed at strengthening environmental governance.
Spain has defended maintaining dedicated European Union funding for climate adaptation, biodiversity conservation and ecosystem restoration during negotiations over the bloc's long-term budget. Spanish officials have argued that reducing environmental investment today would increase future costs associated with drought, flooding and ecosystem degradation (Euronews, 2026).
Belgium has taken another approach through its courts. In the landmark Klimaatzaak case, Belgian courts concluded that insufficient climate action violated the government's duty of care and aspects of the European Convention on Human Rights. The decision has increased pressure on successive governments to strengthen climate policy regardless of political leadership, illustrating how environmental governance is increasingly shaped not only by legislatures but also by judicial oversight (United Nations Environment Programme, 2025).
Environmental concerns also extend beyond climate and forests to the treatment of animals within intensive farming systems. Public understanding of these facilities has increasingly been shaped by undercover investigations conducted by journalists and animal welfare organizations. British investigative filmmaker Joey Carbstrong has released documentaries, including Pignorant (2024), using covertly recorded footage from commercial pig farms and slaughterhouses. His investigations, alongside those of organizations such as Animal Equality and Mercy For Animals, have documented conditions inside industrial farming operations that are rarely visible to consumers. These investigations have intensified public debate over transparency, animal welfare and regulatory oversight (Carbstrong, 2024).
Scientists caution that many environmental changes become difficult, or even impossible, to reverse once critical thresholds are crossed. Habitat fragmentation, wetland loss and declining biodiversity can take decades to recover, even after stronger protections are introduced. The IPCC similarly concludes that every increment of global warming increases risks to ecosystems, infrastructure and human health, while early mitigation generally reduces long-term costs (IPCC, 2023).
The political debate therefore extends beyond whether environmental protection is important. It increasingly centers on how quickly governments should act, how the costs should be shared and what balance should be struck between economic growth and environmental stewardship. Increasingly, those discussions also include the environmental footprint of industrial animal agriculture, whose impacts on land use, deforestation, biodiversity, water resources and greenhouse gas emissions have become impossible to ignore.
Back in Doñana, those questions are reflected in the changing landscape itself. The future of Europe's wetlands will depend not only on rainfall, but also on decisions made in national parliaments, international institutions and global markets. Those decisions will shape forests in the Amazon and the lives of animals long after today's political debates have passed.
The challenge facing policymakers is not simply choosing between economic prosperity and environmental protection. Increasingly, it is determining how economic development, food production and environmental stewardship can coexist in a rapidly changing climate. As governments consider the future of climate policy, one conclusion has become increasingly difficult to overlook: protecting ecosystems requires looking beyond energy and transportation alone and confronting the environmental consequences of the global food system itself.
References:
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. (2013). Tackling climate change through livestock: A global assessment of emissions and mitigation opportunities. https://www.fao.org/4/i3437e/i3437e00.htm
Poore, J., & Nemecek, T. (2018). Reducing food's environmental impacts through producers and consumers. Science, 360(6392), 987–992. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaq0216
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. (2022). The State of the World's Forests 2022: Forest pathways for green recovery and building inclusive, resilient and sustainable economies. https://doi.org/10.4060/cb9360en
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. (2023). Climate change 2023: Synthesis report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. IPCC. https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/syr/
United Nations Environment Programme. (2023). What's cooking? An assessment of the potential impacts of selected novel alternatives to conventional animal products. https://www.unep.org/resources/whats-cooking-assessment-potential-impacts-selected-novel-alternatives-conventional
Carbstrong, J. (Director). (2024). Pignorant [Documentary].
European Commission. (2024). The European Green Deal. https://commission.europa.eu/strategy-and-policy/priorities-2019-2024/european-green-deal_en
Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas Espaciais. (2024). PRODES: Monitoring of the Brazilian Amazon Forest by Satellite. https://www.obt.inpe.br/OBT/assuntos/programas/amazonia/prodes
Popovich, N., Albeck-Ripka, L., & Pierre-Louis, K. (2021, January 20). The Trump administration rolled back more than 100 environmental rules. Here's the full list. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/climate/trump-environment-rollbacks.html
