Environmental policy is at a crossroads in both Brazil and the United Kingdom, with recent legislative moves drawing sharp criticism from experts, activists, and political opposition. As the world gears up for the 2025 United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP30) in Belém, Brazil, the actions of these two major economies are being closely watched—raising questions about the global commitment to environmental protection in an era of mounting climate threats.
On August 20, 2025, the Brazilian government approved what critics have dubbed a "devastation bill," a sweeping piece of legislation that streamlines environmental licensing and, according to many, significantly weakens the country’s regulatory safeguards. President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva did veto 63 out of nearly 400 provisions, a move welcomed by some environmentalists. Climate Home News reported that experts supported the decision to block the most damaging clauses—especially those threatening vulnerable communities and rolling back protections for the Atlantic Forest. Still, the law that emerged has left many uneasy.
One of the most controversial aspects of the new Brazilian law is its allowance for projects with "medium" polluting potential to obtain environmental licenses online, with minimal oversight. According to The Guardian, this could pave the way for at least 2,600 fossil fuel projects to be fast-tracked. Lucas Kannoa, head of legal affairs at the Arayara International Institute, didn’t mince words, telling Climate Home News, "It is a tragedy that in the same year that Brazil is hosting COP30, Congress decides to roll back environmental norms and the president does too little to veto."
The stakes for Brazil’s ecosystems are high. The Atlantic Forest, the country’s most endangered ecosystem, has less than 16% of its original area remaining, as research in Scientific Reports has shown. The Cerrado, another vital biome, is also under threat. The consequences of weakened protections are not theoretical: a study in Cadernos de Saúde Pública found that air pollution was responsible for more than 326,000 deaths in Brazil between 2019 and 2021. The primary culprit? Seasonal wildfires, which are increasingly driven by human activity. In August 2024 alone, the Amazon rainforest experienced a historic drought, fueling upwards of 38,000 fire outbreaks in a single month.
With COP30 just months away, protests have erupted across Brazil. Demonstrators are calling attention to the risks posed by the "devastation bill" and urging world leaders to hold Brazil accountable when they arrive in Belém for the climate summit this November. The annual gathering is expected to focus on urgent action to address the warming climate—a goal many fear is undermined by the current legislative direction. As The Guardian noted, "With thousands of dirty fuel projects potentially in the works, heat-trapping pollution could increase and negatively impact surrounding communities."
Brazil is not alone in facing criticism for backtracking on environmental commitments. On August 19, 2025, analysis by The Guardian and the Institute for European Environmental Policy (IEEP) revealed that the United Kingdom is also weakening its environmental protections post-Brexit, despite Labour’s 2024 manifesto pledge not to dilute standards. Since leaving the European Union, the UK has failed to keep pace with 28 new or upgraded pieces of EU environmental legislation, and has actively regressed in four key areas: protected habitats, pesticides, fisheries, and air quality.
One of the most contentious changes is the UK’s new planning and infrastructure bill, which overrides the EU’s habitats directive. Instead of requiring developers to preserve or create new habitats nearby when natural areas are destroyed, the law allows them to pay into a general nature fund. Environmental watchdogs, including the Office for Environmental Protection (OEP), have warned that this marks a "regression" in environmental law. The OEP, established to replace EU oversight after Brexit, has voiced concerns that the government is ignoring its recommendations and failing to close newly widened loopholes.
Air and water quality are also flashpoints. The UK has removed EU air pollution laws from its statute book, while the EU pushes ahead with stricter standards. On water policy, the EU has implemented stronger rules to clean rivers of chemicals and microplastics, making polluters pay for cleanup—a standard the UK has yet to match. There are fears that the UK could become a "dumping ground" for substandard, hard-to-recycle products, as the EU enforces tougher regulations for consumer goods and the circular economy.
Yet, it’s not all bad news. The UK has banned sand eel fishing, a move that could help protect puffins and other seabirds from starvation. It has also designated more marine protected areas than the EU and is tying farming payments to nature conservation. Still, as Michael Nicholson, head of UK environmental policy at IEEP, told The Guardian, "It is one thing deciding not to keep pace with the EU in actively strengthening our environmental laws but quite another to actively go backwards and remove environmental protections that we inherited from our EU membership."
The EU itself has not been immune to criticism. In the first half of the new European Commission’s mandate, the bloc delayed a law to halt deforestation in supply chains by a year, gave carmakers more time to meet pollution targets, and downgraded protections for wolves. Meanwhile, environmental NGOs in Europe are facing a funding freeze, which they argue undermines democracy and environmental advocacy. Farmers’ protests across the continent have nearly derailed a hard-fought nature restoration law.
In the UK, some bright spots remain. Northern Ireland, under the Windsor framework, continues to implement certain EU environmental laws to maintain an open border with the Republic of Ireland. These include directives on urban wastewater treatment, chemicals regulation, and pesticides. The UK government, for its part, points to a £104 billion investment in rebuilding the water network and halving sewage spills by 2030, as well as bans on bee-killing pesticides and single-use vapes, the creation of the first National Forest in 30 years, and the release of wild beavers for the first time in centuries. A spokesperson for the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) stated, "We’re rebuilding the water network with a record £104bn investment to halve sewage spills by 2030, banning bee-killing pesticides, banning single-use vapes, creating the first National Forest in 30 years, releasing the first wild beavers in centuries, investing billions into nature friendly farming, and we will continue to deliver win-wins for the environment and development through our new Nature Restoration Fund."
Still, many environmentalists and opposition politicians remain unconvinced. Green MP Ellie Chowns lamented, "The Green party warned that Brexit could see the UK reduce regulations in a race to the bottom. Unfortunately, the election of a Labour government a year ago hasn’t prevented that happening." Richard Benwell, chief executive of Wildlife and Countryside Link, argued, "The UK shouldn’t just match the EU on environmental standards, it should lead. In many areas where the UK is falling behind – like banning toxic chemicals – aligning with the EU would save time, money and wildlife."
The challenges facing Brazil and the UK reflect a broader global trend: as political and economic pressures mount, environmental protections are increasingly at risk of being diluted or rolled back. The coming months, and especially the COP30 summit in Brazil, will be a crucial test of whether nations can reverse this trend and recommit to safeguarding the planet’s fragile ecosystems for future generations.
