For many people, COPs sound like endless speeches and photo ops, and sometimes they are. But they are also one of the key tools we have to tackle the climate crisis together. With COP30 set to take place in Belém, on the edge of the Amazon rainforest, here are five things you should know.

1. What is a COP?

COP stands for Conference of the Parties, the annual UN climate summit held under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), the international treaty established in 1992.

Currently, 198 countries participate in the UNFCCC, making it one of the largest multilateral bodies in the United Nations system. These countries meet at COPs to negotiate how to limit global heating, cut greenhouse gas emissions, and support communities already affected by climate impacts.

Inside a COP you will find world leaders, government negotiators, scientists, Indigenous leaders, youth activists, journalists and, yes, lobbyists. It is complicated, messy and often frustrating. But there is no other global forum where both the smallest island nations and the world’s largest economies sit down at the same table to hammer out agreements.

Think of it as a giant global group project. Not everyone does their homework, a few actively try to sabotage the assignment, but we still need everyone involved to pass the course.

2. Why COPs matter for global solutions

Climate chaos does not stop at borders. Droughts in one region can drive up global food prices. Melting glaciers in the Himalayas threaten communities thousands of kilometres downstream. Heatwaves in South Asia kill people who did little to cause the crisis.

This is why COPs exist. They are the only place where governments can, at least in theory, cooperate to solve a problem that no single country can fix alone. Multilateralism might sound like a wonky word, but it simply means countries working together. And when it comes to climate, global problems need global solutions.

Without COPs, the alternative is each country fending for itself in a planetary emergency. We have already seen how dangerous that can be.

3. What COPs have achieved so far

It is easy to feel cynical, but history shows COPs can deliver when pressure builds.

• COP21 (Paris, 2015): The Paris Agreement: governments agreed to keep global warming “well below 2°C” and aim for 1.5°C, a planetary boundary that must not be crossed. Imperfect, but a turning point.
  
• COP27 (Sharm el-Sheikh, 2022): The long-fought Loss and Damage fund was created to help vulnerable countries hit hardest by climate disasters. Campaigners had pushed for this for decades.
  
• COP28 (Dubai, 2023): For the first time, a COP decision named fossil fuels as the root of the climate crisis. We called it historic but warned: “Leaders must now commit to a full, fast, fair and funded fossil fuel phase-out.”
  
• COP29 (Baku, 2024): Climate finance dominated. Governments pledged new funding, but we criticised the outcome as woefully inadequate given the scale of climate impacts. Delay means disaster.

None of these victories happened by chance. They came from people power: Indigenous leadership, climate-vulnerable countries pushing back, campaigners refusing to give up, and millions of supporters demanding action.

4. COPs, lobbyists and people power

We’ll be real: COPs are often criticised as talk shops where corporate lobbyists outnumber climate-vulnerable countries. At COP28, fossil fuel lobbyists actually outnumbered almost every national delegation. Meat and dairy corporations also showed up to defend factory farming.

This is why civil society, Indigenous Peoples, youth and activists need to be inside the halls. They are there to hold governments accountable, to challenge greenwash, and to amplify voices that too often go unheard.

Greenpeace goes to COPs not because we believe politicians will suddenly save the day, but because without relentless pressure, progress is even less likely. It’s people power that makes change possible.

5. One COP fact that shows why they matter

Here is one striking number. According to the UN, current national climate pledges still put us on track for up to 3.1°C of global warming this century. But to achieve the 1.5°C limit, countries need to fully implement and strengthen their pledges, ensuring they cut emissions by about 43% by 2030 compared to 2019 levels and go even further by 2035.

That is the difference between widespread collapse of ecosystems and a fighting chance to stabilise the climate. It shows why COPs are still needed. The decisions made there can literally add or remove gigatonnes of carbon pollution from the atmosphere. The difference is life-changing for millions of people, for forests, for biodiversity, and for every future generation.

Why COP30 is critical

This year’s COP, the 30th meeting, will take place in Belém, Brazil, at the gateway to the Amazon rainforest. That alone makes it significant. The Amazon is home to extraordinary biodiversity and millions of people, including many Indigenous communities. It is also one of the planet’s most important carbon sinks, absorbing billions of tonnes of CO₂ every year. Scientists warn the Amazon is nearing a tipping point, where it could start releasing more carbon than it stores.

COP30 will also take place 10 years since the Paris Agreement was reached, representing a key assessment moment. Governments are expected to bring stronger climate pledges aligned with the 1.5°C limit, the dangerous threshold scientists warn must not be reached. In plain language: this is the year when leaders must step up to the challenge Paris laid down.

The stakes could not be higher. COP30 is the moment for governments to show courage rather than failure. It’s time to move from negotiation to implementation.

And while mistrust is understandable, hope is vital. Change does not come from leaders alone, it comes from people acting everywhere: marching in the streets, voting, suing polluters, protecting forests, sharing their stories, pushing for justice.

Mehdi Leman is a Content Editor for Greenpeace International, based in France.

Mining Moana, fast fashion, and suing Shell, it’s a been a busy week for Greenpeace around the world. Here are a few highlights.

Germany – Greenpeace activists demonstrate for an anti-fast fashion law with a five-metre-high clothing statue made of clothing waste in front of the Brandenburg Gate in Berlin. On a banner, the activists warn: “Fast fashion: bought cheaply, paid dearly”. The installation, based on a design by artist Emanuele Jane Morelli, consists of textiles collected by Greenpeace from the mountains of garbage at the Kantamanto market in Accra, Ghana. It is one of the largest second-hand markets in the world, where old clothes, including those from Germany, lead to ever-increasing environmental pollution.

Philippines – Survivors of Super Typhoon Odette (Rai) sent a message using fishing boats, kayaks, and a giant banner: “SHELL, WE’RE SUING YOU FOR ODETTE.” They are taking Shell to court for the great harm they suffered from the storm that claimed 405 lives and injured over 1,400 others back in 2021.

Climate scientists say the extreme weather brought by Odette was made more likely by climate change, driven by fossil fuel combustion. This landmark case is the first of its kind and scale against an oil and gas company for deaths, injuries, and property damage that have already occurred.

The case, which will be filed in London where Shell’s global headquarters is located, deals with the company’s historic carbon emissions, deception, and disinformation about climate change, which it has known about since 1965.

Cook Islands – Louisa Castledine, Cook Island Activist and spokesperson for the Ocean Ancestors collective (left) with Juressa Lee, seabed campaigner at Greenpeace Aotearoa (right), hold a banner reading ‘Don’t Mine The Moana’ in front of the Nautilus at Rarotonga port in the Cook Islands.

The Nautilus has returned from a 21-day deep sea exploration expedition visiting sites in the mineral exploration areas licensed by the Cook Islands authorities, who are consistently supporting the development of deep sea mining.

The research being conducted on the Nautilus is funded by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Ocean Exploration Cooperation Institute. and comes just six months after President Donald Trump signed an Executive Order tasking NOAA to fast track the licensing process for deep sea mining.

Czech Republic – Demonstration at Prague’s Hradčanské Square in support of the independence of the Ministry of the Environment and against the appointment of a candidate from a party that denies climate science.

USA – More than 2,500 separate “No Kings’ marches and rallies took place across the country October 18, 2025 to call attention to the US President Donald Trump’s unconstitutional attempts to expand executive power. This image is from a protest in Houston, Texas.

Greenpeace has been a pioneer of photo activism for more than 50 years, and remains committed to bearing witness and exposing environmental injustice through the images we capture.

To see more Greenpeace photos and videos, visit our Media Library.

In 2016, six youth activists, Young Friends of the Earth Norway and Greenpeace Nordic took the Norwegian government to court to stop new Arctic oil drilling. The central argument in what became known as the People vs. Arctic Oil case was simple but powerful: approving more fossil fuels in the middle of a climate crisis violates the Norwegian Constitution, international law, and people’s basic rights.

That case became the first of its kind in Norway. After years of hearings and appeals, it wound its way through every level of the national courts. While judges acknowledged that oil drilling has serious consequences for the climate, Norway’s Supreme Court ultimately refused to strike down the licences. Domestic legal options were exhausted.

But the fight didn’t stop there.

The case landed in the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) — the institution responsible for safeguarding the rights of 700 million people across 46 countries. For the first time, the Court is being asked to decide whether a government’s decision to expand its oil and gas production violates human rights: the rights to life, to health, and to a safe environment. This decision will be handed down on 28 October. 

This isn’t just about Norway. The Court has labelled it a “potential impact case”, signalling that the outcome could set a powerful precedent far beyond Scandinavia. If the judges find in favour of the activists and Greenpeace Nordic, it could reshape energy policy across Europe by establishing that governments cannot approve new fossil fuel projects without properly accounting for their climate impact.

The new chapter: Borgarting Court of Appeal

Along with Nature and Youth Norway, Greenpeace Nordic have continued to challenge the government’s decision to approve new oil and gas fields. As a result of a partial win in the Supreme Court in People vs. Arctic oil, a new climate case currently sits before the Borgarting Court of Appeal. The Court is due to decide whether Norway’s Ministry of Energy acted lawfully when granting consent for three major North Sea projects without assessing the climate impact of the projects, as required by the Supreme Court decision. In the first instance, the Oslo District Court found that the approvals were illegal. 

What makes this stage so significant is that the Court of Appeal sought clarity from the EFTA Court — the body that interprets European Economic Area law, including the rules Norway has signed up to. The question was crucial: when assessing the environmental impact of new oil projects, do governments also have to assess the impacts of the greenhouse gas emissions released when that oil and gas is eventually burned?

Two landmark advisory opinions

On 21 May 2025, the EFTA Court delivered its answer. The judges were clear: emissions from the combustion of petroleum and gas extracted as part of a project and sold to third parties are “effects” of that project under the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Directive.

This ruling knocks out the government’s central defence. Norway had argued that only the direct impacts of extraction and production needed to be assessed, not the far greater emissions released when the fuel is burned. The Court rejected that position.

Just as importantly, the EFTA Court said that national courts must, as far as possible, eliminate the unlawful consequences of failing to conduct a proper assessment. In other words, if projects were approved without fully accounting for downstream emissions, that failure cannot simply be waved away.

Another positive development came just two months later. In July 2025, the International Court of Justice (ICJ), the world’s highest court, issued its first-ever Advisory Opinion on climate change. The ICJ was unequivocal: States have binding legal obligations to prevent activities within their borders–– including through the granting of fossil fuel exploration licences and fossil fuel production– from causing climate damage, both domestically and abroad. It also confirmed that failing to act in line with climate science can breach human rights law.

This opinion matters hugely for the People vs. Arctic Oil case. Norway is one of the world’s largest exporters of oil and gas. By approving new fields, it knowingly adds to the global emissions that drive climate harm — not only within Norway, but across the world. The ICJ has now confirmed that such conduct is not just irresponsible, it can also be unlawful.

The bigger picture

From the moment the People vs Arctic Oil case was launched in 2016 through to the setback at the Supreme Court in 2020, campaigners have kept pressing the courts to recognise the obvious: expanding fossil fuels in a climate emergency undermines basic rights and breaches legal duties.

The EFTA Court has now validated what campaigners have argued all along. Climate impacts don’t stop at the drilling site. Every tonne of carbon released from burning oil and gas fuels the crisis. Pretending otherwise is unlawful.

This case also resonates with a wider wave of climate litigation. In recent years, courts in Europe and beyond have ruled that governments and companies must consider downstream emissions and protect human rights when approving projects. 

What’s at stake

The Borgarting Court of Appeal will now decide the case in light of the EFTA Court’s judgment. For Norway, the stakes could not be higher. If the Court strikes down the approvals, it would send a powerful message across Europe — that governments must reckon honestly with the full climate cost of fossil fuel expansion.

Also, before the ECtHR, the answer should be obvious. Climate change is already threatening lives, livelihoods, and homes. By putting human rights at the centre of climate decisions, the ECtHR has the chance to raise the bar — making it clear that protecting people comes before protecting fossil fuel profits. And the advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice (ICJ)  adds even greater weight to that principle: governments that expand fossil fuels risk being held liable under international law for the damage they cause.

It would establish that governments have a duty to fully assess the climate harm their decisions cause, even when emissions occur beyond their borders. That principle, once enforced, would raise the bar for environmental assessments everywhere — making it harder for governments to greenlight new fossil fuel projects while ignoring their real impact.

The road ahead

What started as a small group of young people and activists taking their government to court has now helped shape European law.

The next steps lie with the ECtHR and the Borgarting Court of Appeal and both courts should be guided by strong domestic and international legal precedent.  We’re pushing for judgments that put people and the planet ahead of fossil fuel profits.

Whatever the outcome, one thing is certain. The case against Norwegian oil and gas has already raised the standard of what the law demands from States in the climate crisis. And it shows that persistence pays off — when governments fail to act responsibly, people have the power to take them to court, and win.

Klimentina Radkova is Campaigner at Greenpeace Nordic.

Avarua, Rarotonga – Holding a banner reading “Don’t Mine the Moana” Cook Islands activists confronted an exploration vessel as it returned to Rarotonga port today, peacefully protesting the emerging threat of deep sea mining. 

Four activists in kayaks paddled alongside the Nautilus, which has spent the last three weeks on a US-funded research expedition visiting sites in the mineral exploration areas licensed by the Cook Islands authorities, who have consistently supported the development of deep sea mining.[1] Two of the three deep sea mining exploration licences in the Cook Islands’ waters are held by US companies.[2] 

This expedition comes just six months after President Donald Trump signed an Executive Order tasking the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to fast track the licensing process for deep sea mining.[3] The research being conducted on the Nautilus is funded by NOAA’s Ocean Exploration Cooperation Institute.

In August, the US and Cook Islands governments announced their official partnership on developing seabed mineral resources. A senior official at the Cook Islands Seabed Minerals Authority described this research vessel expedition as “a first step in our collaboration”.[4][5]

Campaigners against deep sea mining say this demonstrates that the political motive behind the Nautilus expedition is to advance seabed mining. 

Holding a banner reading “Don’t Mine the Moana”, Louisa Castledine, Cook Island Activist and Spokesperson, Ocean Ancestors collective said “Right now, global superpowers like the US are vying for control of deep sea minerals throughout the Pacific. We need to open our eyes to the threats imposed on us by the seabed mining industry and stop the corporate takeover of our ocean. Seabed mining will lead to the destruction of our home environments and put our Indigenous rights, cultural ways of living, and wellbeing at risk. As Indigenous Peoples and custodians of the ocean we say NO to seabed mining.”

Greenpeace Aotearoa is also campaigning to stop seabed mining before it starts.
Juressa Lee, Campaigner at Greenpeace Aotearoa said: “Greenpeace Aotearoa stands in solidarity with these Cook Islands activists, who peacefully protested today. Like many across the region, they want a Pacific blue line drawn against this destructive industry. Scientific discovery about the oceans must prioritise the wellbeing of all people, including future generations, not the interests of a few wannabe seabed miners. Pacific People will not be sidelined by corporations and powerful countries that try to impose this new form of extractive colonialism on the region.”

More than 940 leading marine science and policy experts from over 70 countries have voiced their concerns about deep sea mining and are calling for a precautionary pause on the start of deep sea mining to allow time to gather more scientific information on deep sea biodiversity and ecosystems.[6]

Resistance to deep sea mining across the Pacific is strong and growing. 40 countries have now joined the call for a pause or moratorium on deep-sea mining, including Pacific states such as Palau, Samoa, Vanuatu and Tuvalu. Antigua and Barbuda and Romania added their support today.

Seabed mining is an emerging destructive industry that has not started anywhere at commercial scale. If it goes ahead, mining within Cook Island waters could pave the way for mining throughout the Pacific.

ENDS

Photos available from the Greenpeace Media Library.

Notes:

[1] Nautilus

[2] The companies that do own licenses in the Cook Islands EEZ are: Moana Minerals (who are a subsidiary of a US company Ocean Minerals LLC (OML).), Cobalt (CIC) Limited and CIIC Seabed resources, which is a joint venture between Belgian GSR and the Cook Islands Investment Corp. 

[3] Donald Trump Executive Order

[4] Joint Statements on US-Cook Islands Cooperation on Seabed Mineral Resources:

• U.S. Department of State
• Office of the Prime Minister – Cook Islands

[5] Senior official from the Cook Islands Seabed Mineral Authority

[6] Momentum for a Moratorium

Contacts:

Sol Gosetti, Media Coordinator for the Stop Deep Sea Mining campaign, Greenpeace International, +34664029407, sol.gosetti@greenpeace.org

Greenpeace International Press Desk, +31 (0) 20 718 2470 (available 24 hours), pressdesk.int@greenpeace.org 

São Paulo, Brazil – Less than a month before COP30 in Belém, Brazil’s environmental agency, IBAMA, has granted Petrobras a licence to explore oil in the Foz do Amazonas Basin.  The region is rich in marine biodiversity and home to a massive reef system of vital ecological importance for the Atlantic Ocean and for Indigenous, quilombola, and traditional communities that depend on the coastal Amazon for survival.

Mariana Andrade, Oceans Campaign Coordinator, Greenpeace Brazil said: “On the eve of COP30, Brazil puts on a green facade on the international stage, yet stains itself with oil at home. While the world looks to the Amazon for solutions to the climate crisis, we see IBAMA granting Petrobras permission to drill for oil in the very heart of the planet.”

Beyond the contradiction between Brazil’s climate discourse and the advance of a new oil frontier in the country, opening new oil wells goes against Brazil’s own commitments to an energy transition and merely reinforces exclusionary, unsustainable, and environmentally harmful patterns.

Andrade continued: “There is no possible energy transition when its foundation is destruction. The decision to open a new exploratory frontier at the mouth of the Amazon reveals a profit-driven logic that perpetuates inequality. Petrobras has the capacity to redirect its efforts toward a truly decarbonisation-focused strategy and to contribute coherently to the climate commitments Brazil has undertaken.”

Daniela Jerez, legal counsel, Greenpeace Brazil recalled that the controversial licensing process for Block 59 dragged on for over a decade and contains serious procedural flaws and said: “The license for Block 59 has severe procedural and substantive deficiencies, violating the Constitution, international treaties, and environmental law. By law, a licence can only be granted when there is clear evidence that the company is capable of preventing and responding to the risks involved — yet the emergency plans presented during the licensing process are insufficient and fail to demonstrate such capacity. Moreover, there was no adequate assessment of the impacts on Indigenous peoples, nor free, prior, and informed consultation. These flaws render the licence invalid and subject to judicial challenge.”

Oil exploration in this area poses a high risk of contamination from spills and chemical pollution, potentially compromising fragile ecosystems, public health, and the livelihoods of coastal communities. Such operations exacerbate social and environmental vulnerabilities in affected towns and regions.

In April 2024, the Amapá Institute for Scientific and Technological Research (IEPA), with support from Greenpeace Brazil, released a study showing that an oil spill in the region could reach Pan-Amazonian countries and the coasts of Amapá and Pará, causing devastating impacts on marine life and local populations.[1]

ENDS

Notes:

[1] Full Oil Spill report: Monitoramento das correntes de superfície da bacia da foz do Amazonas com o uso de derivadores.

Contacts:

Greenpeace International Press Desk: pressdesk.int@greenpeace.org, +31 (0) 20 718 2470 (available 24 hours)

Warming up for the COP climate conference in Brazil, marching for peace and human rights in Mexico and Italy, and calling out a telecommunications company in Australia, here are a selection of images from our work around the globe in the past week.

Mexico – Greenpeace Mexico enthusiastically and joyfully joins the March for Climate, Life, and the Future in Mexico City, a call to defend life in all its forms. The placard in the image reads ‘Life is not for sale’.

Brazil – To demand stronger global forestry action from delegates gathered in Brasilia for the preparatory meetings for this year’s UN Climate Summit (COP30), Greenpeace Brazil carried out light projections from a building opposite the TV Tower, as members of the delegation attended a dinner inside the venue. The projection reads: ‘93% of Brazilians want more rainforest protection’.

Germany – Greenpeace Germany ocean campaigner Franziska Saalmann demonstrates a diving robot (ROV) used for undersea research at the Stralsund Maritime Museum.

Switzerland – Greenpeace Switzerland is touring the country with an oversized nuclear waste barrel. Visitors could write down their wishes and hang them on the barrel, learn about hydropower, solar energy, and wind power, and take part activities throughout the day.

Brazil – To demand stronger global forestry action from delegates gathered in Brasilia for the preparatory meetings for this year’s UN Climate Summit (COP30), Greenpeace Brazil projected messages onto the Congress building where delegates are meeting.

Italy – Greenpeace Italy participates in the Perugia-Assisi Peace march on Sunday, October 12, calling for an end to war and genocide and the defence of human rights and international law.

Australia – Australian telecommunications company Telstra’s climate credibility has been challenged at its AGM, as Greenpeace Australia Pacific, alongside climate and investment experts, called out the company for its silence while serving on the board of the board of the Business Council of Australia (BCA) — a vested interest group that has doubled-down on its support for new gas and lobbied against climate action.

Greenpeace has been a pioneer of photo activism for more than 50 years, and remains committed to bearing witness and exposing environmental injustice through the images we capture.

To see more Greenpeace photos and videos, visit our Media Library.

Brasilia, Brazil – Preparatory talks at the Pre-COP in Brasilia must now lead to ambitious forest and climate outcomes at the UN climate summit COP30 next month.

Ahead of COP30 in Belém, Greenpeace has proposed a forest action plan to end deforestation by 2030 and mitigation akin to a global response plan – as proposed by UN Secretary-General Guterres – to address the 1.5°C ambition gap in 2035 climate action plans.[1][2]

Carolina Pasquali, Executive Director, Greenpeace Brasil said: “Regardless of a very challenging international scenario, the Pre-COP had an important political engagement from parties and strong public demonstrations from civil society and the Indigenous movement, elevating hope and raising the bar for COP30 outcomes.” 

“We now need world leaders to listen to the voices of the people and deliver bold outcomes that will correct the path we are on. We are still waiting for a strong signal that this COP will deliver on closing the 1.5°C gap and on giving forests its due relevance in climate negotiations.”

Tracy Carty, Global Climate Politics Expert, Greenpeace International said: “2035 emissions targets are expected to fall drastically short of what’s needed and COP30 must face a hard truth: only a bold breakthrough such as a global response plan will cut it. COP30 must kick off a new phase of accelerated and transformative climate action – there is no time to waste.”

An Lambrechts, Global Biodiversity Politics Expert, Greenpeace International said: “COP30 is a critical juncture for global climate action and ending forest destruction is a crucial element of the 1.5°C solution. That’s why COP30 must deliver an action plan to end forest destruction by 2030 and there is no better moment than at a COP in the Amazon to do so.”

After the COP29 agreement on the new climate finance goal, the NCQG, one of the key issues discussed at the Pre-COP was the draft Baku to Belém Roadmap, which puts forward a plan for scaling up climate finance to US$1.3 trillion. Based on those discussions, however, it remains unclear whether COP30 will embrace the Roadmap recommendations in the COP outcome.

Rebecca Newsom, Global Political Lead, Greenpeace International Stop Drilling Start Paying campaign said: “COP30 must create an ongoing space to deliver the NCQG finance goal, in particular the scaling up of public finance by developed countries. COP30 can send a strong signal that it’s time to make polluters pay to close the climate finance gap fairly and fast.” 

“There’s no shortage of money or public support. What’s needed is political will to seize the huge opportunities of COP30 and the UN Tax Convention negotiations to unlock more finance for climate and social justice – both by making corporate polluters pay and taxing the super-rich.”

ENDS

Notes:

[1] For more details, read about the global response plan.

[2] For more details, read the COP30 forests briefing.

Contact:
Laís Modelli, Press Coordinator, Greenpeace Brasil, +55 14 98127 9058, imprensa.br@greenpeace.org 

Aaron Gray-Block, Climate Politics Communications Manager, Greenpeace International, aaron.gray-block@greenpeace.org

Greenpeace International Press Desk, +31 (0)20 718 2470 (available 24 hours), pressdesk.int@greenpeace.org

My name is Leo Morán. I’m best known as the winner of MasterChef Colombia 2016. For me, food has always meant care, creativity, and connection. But in 2025, I left the kitchen and travelled to the Brazilian Amazon to see where much of the world’s food system really begins.

What I found there shook me. Behind the meals on our plates lies a story of stolen land, burning forests, and poisoned rivers, all driven by one industry: Big Agribusiness.

The Reality Behind “Less Bad”

From January to September 2025, Brazil recorded the lowest number of fires in 25 years, according to INPE. Headlines called it progress, “the best fire season in decades.” 

Standing there, breathing the haze, it didn’t feel like progress at all. The smoke stung my eyes and burned my throat. During my stay, I saw communities struggling to breathe, forests cleared to make way for cattle, and rivers running dirty with slaughterhouse waste. What good are headlines about “less fire” when people are still choking, when Indigenous Peoples are still having their lands under threat, when the forest is still falling?

And here’s the truth that hit me hardest: even with fewer fires, the Amazon is still edging closer to collapse. The haze doesn’t stop at Brazil’s borders, it fuels a global climate crisis that threatens food, health, and life everywhere. For me, it became painfully clear: “less bad” is nowhere near good enough.

The Rotten Core of Big Ag

Everywhere I went, I could see the fingerprints of industrial agribusiness. Big Ag’s model is simple: take more land, burn more forest, squeeze more profit, no matter the cost to people or the planet.

It thrives on expansion, always pushing further into Indigenous territories, always finding ways to bend or break the rules, always leaving destruction in its wake. Even when numbers make it look like things are “improving,” the reality on the ground tells another story: the machine never stops.

Big Ag sells itself as feeding the world. But what I witnessed made it clear: it’s not feeding life,  it’s feeding collapse.

The Human Cost

The cost of this destruction isn’t just measured in hectares of forest lost. It’s measured in human lives.

While I was in the Amazon, I breathed the smoke myself. I felt how heavy and suffocating it was. And I learned that for many families, this isn’t a temporary haze, it’s the air they live with every day. Reports show that children in the region are especially vulnerable, with rising cases of respiratory illness. Fire season might make the headlines once a year, but for them, fire season never really ends. I also heard accounts of workers trapped in conditions that stripped away their dignity, people promised jobs and hope, but ended up exploited, sometimes even working just for food and a roof. For Big Ag, these workers are just another resource to be used up and discarded.

And what struck me most was the injustice faced by Indigenous Peoples. These are the original guardians of the forest, the ones who have kept it alive for generations. Yet I learned how their territories continue to be carved up, their rights ignored, their voices silenced. Imagine watching the land that carries your history, your culture, your survival, taken away piece by piece to feed a system that only values profit.

This is the true price of industrial agriculture. Not just carbon emissions or deforestation percentages, but the daily suffering of people forced to breathe poison, to live without rights, to see their futures stolen.

And all of it is hidden behind the food on our plates. What looks like an ordinary steak, a chicken fillet, or a glass of milk can carry with it a trail of exploitation, illness, and dispossession. Once you’ve seen that trail, you can’t unsee it. And yet, amid the devastation, I also found hope.

I visited a village near Lábrea that is proving that another food system is possible. Agroforestry projects that restore soils and still put food on the table. Fisheries managed with care so rivers can sustain life for generations. Indigenous stewardship that keeps the forest alive while nourishing people.

This is food as it should be: not destruction, but connection. Not collapse, but care.

What’s Next and What You Can Do

Later this year, governments will meet in Belém for COP30, in the very heart of the Amazon. They face a choice: keep backing the corporations destroying the forest, or finally invest in the people who are protecting it.

I went to the Amazon to see for myself what was happening. I came back knowing that unless we break free from Big Ag, we are all at risk.

Respect the Amazon

Ask political leaders to act on their promises to stop Amazon destruction.

Join the movement

Join the movement and sign the petition to demand respect for the Amazon and its people!

The Amazon cannot survive on “less bad.” It needs justice. It needs resilience. And it needs us to stop letting Big Ag decide the future of our food.

Leo Moran is a Chef and winner of MasterChef Colombia 2016

Guest authors work with Greenpeace to share their personal experiences and perspectives and are responsible for their own content.

Auckland, New Zealand – New Zealand’s government has confirmed it will rewrite its climate law to weaken the country’s methane emissions target – a move Greenpeace warns will violate the Paris Agreement and embolden other major meat and dairy producers and exporters, including Ireland and Uruguay, to follow suit.

Shefali Sharma, Global Agriculture Campaigner, Greenpeace Germany said: “New Zealand has signalled to the world’s biggest meat and dairy producers that it’s fine to ignore the largest human-made source of methane – and in doing so, undermine the Paris Agreement and accelerate global heating. Other major livestock exporting countries will now feel empowered to follow suit, which risks sparking a race to the bottom and threatens to derail global climate action.”

“This decision by the New Zealand government pretends that current methane emissions from agriculture aren’t fuelling the climate crisis – despite overwhelming scientific consensus that drastic methane cuts are essential to prevent us from sweeping well past 1.5°C. This is a dangerous sleight of hand, and it delays the urgent action needed.”

Amanda Larsson, Senior Campaign Manager, Greenpeace Aotearoa said: “The New Zealand Government is going full-Trump when it comes to climate change – and the rest of the Pacific region is threatened as a result.”

The move means New Zealand will adopt a “no additional warming” methane goal – a dairy  industry-backed metric that permits continued high levels of agricultural methane emissions, despite warnings from climate scientists and the country’s independent Climate Change Commission that emissions must fall sharply.[1]

ENDS

Notes:

[1] Financial Times, Scientists accuse New Zealand and Ireland of trying to cover up livestock emissions, 1 June 2025.

Greenpeace Aotearoa briefing on ‘no additional warming’ methane targets: GWP*: how the livestock lobby’s creative accounting threatens to derail climate action.

Methane is responsible for nearly 30% of current global warming and is over 80 times more powerful than CO₂ over 20 years. Cutting it is the fastest way to slow warming.

New Zealand is the world’s largest dairy exporter. Its agriculture sector accounts for nearly half of the country’s greenhouse gas emissions, with livestock methane being the major source. Trade agreements with the UK and EU include commitments to uphold the Paris Agreement.

The “no additional warming” approach has been promoted by livestock industry groups in other major exporting nations, including Ireland and Uruguay.

Contacts:

Rhiannon Mackie, Communications Specialist, Greenpeace Aotearoa (New Zealand), rmackie@greenpeace.org, +64-27-244-6729

Stephen Bateman, Communications Lead, Greenpeace International, sbateman@greenpeace.org, +44 07361 651 868

Greenpeace International Press Desk, +31 (0) 20 718 2470 (24hrs), pressdesk.int@greenpeace.org

We just got the results from a global public poll and it’s good news for the planet: A staggering 86% of people surveyed believe that protecting forests is critical in the fight against climate change. Results also show that 82% of people want their governments to take more action on forests, showing overwhelming public support to halt deforestation.

This surge of public support for forest protection comes at a crucial moment. Healthy and standing forests are vital in the fight against the climate crisis, and with  COP30 fast approaching, we must pressure country delegates to discuss and implement an action plan to halt deforestation by 2030. 

A few highlights from the public poll: 

• Poll respondents not only want to see their governments address forest destruction, they also believe that the most effective results can be achieved with global cooperation through international agreements to end deforestation (77%), and to commit to a new action plan to halt the destruction of forests and other ecosystems (75%).  

• When it comes to forest protection, respondents place the most confidence in Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities (78%), well above national governments (49%) or corporations (42%). 75% agree that Indigenous Peoples should receive funding to protect forests.
  
• Over four in five respondents think that companies which contribute to deforestation should be held accountable by governments, who should strengthen enforcement and punish environmental crimes. 

Here’s what you can do right now to help stop forest destruction! 

The stakes for the Amazon rainforest — and for global climate stability — have never been higher.  You can make a difference by taking action now: 

• Sign the petition demanding political leaders negotiate a strong action plan to protect forests at COP 30 this November. 
• Send a message to political leaders, letting them know why you want them to protect forests around the world right now. 
• Get informed: Discover more on Amazon and how we can protect it. 

Respect the Amazon

Demand global leaders to respect the Amazon!

Sign the Petition