​On 8th November, 2016, Donald Trump won the U.S. presidential election. He promised to destroy Obama-era environmental sanctions, claiming that they stifle economic growth. After campaigning on climate change skepticism and support for the U.S. fossil fuel industry, he nominated Scott Pruitt, an opponent of active environmental regulation, to head the EPA. Almost immediately, the term ‘climate change’ disappeared from the EPA website. Pruitt began work dismantling clean air and water rules, sometimes resulting in high-profile battles with environmental groups. He weakened prosecution of environmental criminals, deeply slashed EPA budgets in favour of military spending, and effectively ignored the years-long water crisis in Flint, Michigan. Under Trump’s executive order, Pruitt attempted to repeal Obama’s Clean Power Plan in March 2017, but was eventually blocked by the Supreme Court. With much thanks to Pruitt’s influence as a presidential advisor, Trump pulled out of the Paris Agreement in June 2017. In a televised interview, Pruitt called the agreement ‘a bad deal for America’.

​Our two distinguished guests for the night were Karen Brandon, the Community Officer of Oxford’s Stockholm Environment Institute (SEI), and Tara Clarke, Training and Consultancy Coordinator at Climate Outreach. With both a panel and interactive audience exercises, this event was very insightful.

Nearly a year ago now, Euan wrote a great post discussing Michael Gove’s first six months as Environment Secretary (read it here). At the time Gove had backed a few small but encouraging changes to legislation, addressing plastics, urban air pollution and a few other hot topics. Euan concluded – correctly, I think – that there was reason for cautious optimism, small signs that this might be a government that is serious about making positive change. Now, sixteen months after the general election that put him back into the cabinet, Gove has just overseen his department’s most significant act yet. Last month parliament passed a new agricultural bill into law, the first of its kind in 70 years, setting out the Conservative vision for the post-Brexit future of farming subsidies.
 
Gove’s appointment in 2017 was met with a mixture of scepticism and fear from most environmentalists. However, this bill, like his earlier projects, has been met with widespread support. The key change it makes is to phase out the current system of agricultural subsidies in which the government pays landowners by the square foot, in favour of new ‘green subsidies.’ These will reward responsible farmers who make efforts to support high biodiversity, improve air and water quality, combat climate change or maximise the health of the natural world in general. Such incentives should help to scale back the use of damaging agrochemicals and reduce the carbon footprint of agricultural practices. This is a long-term plan, and will take a decade to implement, but it represents a clear attempt to modernise an industry that has a defining impact on the environment.
 
Of course, the new legislation is not without its critics. Catherine Broomfield, writing in the Guardian, highlights its failure to recognise and disrupt the stranglehold of retailers and big corporations on producers, which prevents the spread of sustainable and more diverse farming practices. The move away from area-based rewards will, however, help to challenge the dominance of a small number of individuals and companies that own a majority of British farmland, drawing the largest taxpayer funded subsidies for years. But the consequence of this may not be to encourage better land management practices, as the bill intends, but rather to force these parties into pushing for greater productivity in order to maintain their profit margins. Elise Walch, Coventry University, worries that the law will accelerate the rise of ‘megafarms’, hyper-productive farms using minimal land area with heavy environmental costs. Without proper access to training and direct incentives to learn high-diversity high-yield methods like polycropping and agroforestry, farmers may move naturally towards more damaging practices, despite the new green subsidies.
 
All of the discussion on the consequences of Gove’s landmark bill is only speculation at the moment. The relationships between land-use, the environment and business are complex. This leaves me in much the same position as Euan last year. While my head remains unsure about the future of the shifting landscape of UK environmental politics, my heart leaps to learn that the more tangible landscapes of the British countryside could be greener and more diverse in years to come.
 
Read more at the links below:

• Catherine Broomfield, Gove’s farming bill is more chaff than wheat. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/sep/12/gove-farming-shakeup-health-agriculture-sustainable.
• Fiona Harvey, Big farmers to see funding cut post-Brexit after Gove shake-up. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/sep/12/gove-hails-plans-to-reward-uk-farmers-for-adopting-green-policies
• Elise Walch, Rise of the megafarms: how UK agriculture is being sold off and consolidated. https://theconversation.com/rise-of-the-megafarms-how-uk-agriculture-is-being-sold-off-and-consolidated-104019

​In addition to being part of the summer break (well-deserved for all!), September is also a celebration of organic food through the Soil Association’s Organic September campaign! As a leader in campaigning for healthy, humane and sustainable food, farming and land use, the Soil Association invites us to understand more about what organic food is, where to find it, and how to identify credible sources. This is also a great opportunity to explore how organic food and organic farming can be relevant to farming practices!

​Like a Frankenstein’s monster of history, we seem to have awoken to a planet fixated by space travel and the possibilities it holds for humanity. But this is no 20th Century fever dream, increasing amounts of time and money are being spent on space projects, and there are real implications for environmental movements.

​Is the Church of England, like my own University endowment fund, avoiding the financial headache of divesting from fossil fuels by ducking the main point? This may seem an uncharitable question, in the week that the Archbishop of Canterbury opened the Stock Exchange, and the Synod will be debating a motion welcoming the Transition Pathway Initiative (TPI), tracking the alignment of corporate business plans with the Paris Climate Agreement.

​Recognised as an international leader and world authority on global climate change, Christiana Figueres, born in Costa Rica, is one of the most influential and prominent women in global climate change. 

​It is easy to forget just how many aspects of our existence are infiltrated by the effects of climate change, how closely climate is interwoven with and can impact social constellations. This Trinity Term’s last panel event on Monday, 14th May 2018 aimed to shed light on an area that is often overlooked: how climate change affects women – how women and climate may influence each other. Judy Ling Wong, painter, poet and environmentalist best known as the Honorary President of Black Environment Network (BEN) and Lisa Shipper, Environmental Social Science Research Fellow at the University of Oxford’s Environmental Change Institute, spoke about their views on this matter.