Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

By clicking “Accept”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information or to customize your cookie preferences.

The climate crisis is coming for 'the CEO of the family's health'

News Feed
Thursday, May 30, 2024

The increasing incidence of climate change-induced heat spikes, wildfires and life-threatening flash floods is engulfing pregnant and postpartum individuals in a wave of eco-anxiety and depression. "The mom is kind of guiding the ship," Jennifer Barkin, an expert on maternal mental health, told The Hill. "You're already worried about — are your kids eating enough vegetables? Are kids getting school on time? How are their grades? And now you've got this additional worry." Barkin, a professor of community medicine and obstetrics and gynecology at the Mercer University School of Medicine in Georgia, characterized the influence of climate change on maternal mental health as “a global issue,” while noting that “it hits the disadvantaged in a more dramatic way — and quicker.” The issue appears to be going largely unnoticed, however. Although the concept of climate despair has attracted some media attention, there has been little coverage of the unique mental health impacts that occur during the perinatal period, Barkin and colleagues found in a December 2022 study. The perinatal period spans from pregnancy to a year following childbirth. That stage in a mother’s life "is a time of increased vulnerability to negative mood symptoms due to various changes within the mother and her environment," the authors noted in the study, published in the Journal of the American Psychiatric Nurses Association. Extreme weather events, which often result in disruptions of support networks as well as health care, jobs and education, can all become “possible downstream effects that exact a significant toll on mental health,” the authors noted. In a July 2022 editorial for Frontiers in Psychiatry, Barkin argued that more pregnant and postpartum women will be shouldering such outcomes, noting that “there is a looming threat (risk factor) on the horizon and its name is the climate crisis.” The physiological effects of heat risk, which are intertwined with its mental health impacts, are amplified in pregnancy — when symptoms like dehydration can take a particular toll on all organ systems, Barkin told The Hill. A November 2023 advocacy brief from the World Health Organization stressed that "climate hazards, including extreme heat, are associated with increased risks of developing complications that lead to adverse maternal and perinatal outcomes." Such effects, the brief said, could "affect mental health and contribute to intergenerational trauma," while causing an increase of "stress, anxiety and depression — known risk factors for adverse perinatal outcomes." When families either choose or are forced to migrate due to climate change, the mental health effects on pregnant individuals are especially severe, as they have a fetus to consider, Barkin stressed. "If you're pregnant, and you're in an evacuation center, two other kids and no obstetric care what if you have an emergency?" Barkin asked. "Or if you have your prenatal care, and you've got your child's pediatrician lined up, and you need to move suddenly? I mean, it's a major stressor, and it's a disruption in care." "Depression and anxiety are related to the severity of the exposure," she continued. "Were you wading through floodwaters, were you directly breathing in the wildfire smoke? All of that is linked to the severity of the mental health consequences." In an evacuation center, Barkin continued, there's also the question of cleanliness, infectious diseases or the inability to find dry clothing. A January 2023 literature review likewise found that "climate change-related environmental exposures, including extreme temperatures, air pollution and natural disasters, are significantly associated with adverse perinatal and maternal health outcomes across the United States." These effects included mental health issues, such as the development of maternal depression following a natural disaster event like Hurricane Katrina, per the review, published in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. Laura Geer, the senior author of that review, explained that “a post-climate related event can go in two different directions.” In the first, she explained, a mother can be thrown into a position of social isolation in which she finds herself managing a family without appropriate access to care, while also facing a potential “intimate partner violence increase during this stressful period.” “Or you're highly resilient, you've got a lot of social support, you can kind of manage and weather, and it actually kind of makes you stronger,” added Geer, chair of the department of environmental and occupational health sciences at SUNY Downstate Health Sciences University. But in so many cases, severe climate disruptions can influence food and housing security, while sometimes leading to unhealthy coping mechanisms like illicit drug use, according to Geer. "Somebody's ability to be resilient is so directly tied to their mental health," she said. Even for those families not likely to face imminent displacement or natural disaster, the mental gymnastics connected to keeping kids protected from escalating heat can be exhausting. "I can think from a mother's perspective: Do I want to send my kids to a summer camp?" Barkin asked, noting that it's difficult to gauge whether individual camp counselors are "aware how to handle heat risk." Detailing her own internal debate as a mother, Barkin said that she discouraged her son from playing football — which requires wearing heavy equipment — in the Georgia weather, while adding that her daughter once fell ill from the heat at tennis camp. Mothers, she added, also often grapple with the fact that their kids are "going to inherit something they didn't create." More and more women, she has found, are raising questions like, "Do I want to bring kids up necessarily? Is it even ethical to get pregnant?" Geer echoed these sentiments, thinking back to the 2016 Rio de Janeiro Summer Olympics and the coinciding surge in the Zika virus — a mosquito-borne pathogen known to cause birth defects. The virus’s spread in the region prompted many athletes of childbearing age to reconsider their attendance, she explained. "I definitely think it led to anxiety around decisions about family planning, even in our country," Geer said, noting the increased concern that this vector of Zika could move up to the Southeast U.S. as well. Another quandary Barkin has found mothers facing is that while green spaces are supposed to be good for mental health, there is now increased uncertainty as to whether certain green spaces have become "inhospitable or inhabitable." Barkin cited several repeat complaints on the subject: "We're trapped inside. I've got these kids running around going crazy. I want to get them outside, but I can't breathe, or it's so hot, or I'm worried about breastfeeding the baby." In addition to those of childbearing age, much older women may be suffering similar mental health impacts from climate change.  Earlier this month, the European Court of Human Rights sided with a group of more than 2,000 older women, who had filed a complaint against the Swiss government demanding health protections from the effects of climate change. Members of the Swiss association, Verein KlimaSeniorinnen, or Climate Seniors, argued that they are uniquely vulnerable to the effects of surging heat waves — citing significant, climate-related health impacts on their daily routines. Among the effects they named were various heat-related physical symptoms, as well as social consequences— due to their inability to leave their homes. While these women may be from a different generation, the mental tumult they have been enduring bares similarities to the struggle that many young mothers experience during the perinatal period. Asked what clinicians can do to ensure that maternal eco-anxiety doesn’t fly under the radar, Barkin said "the good news is a lot of the infrastructure for screening for depression is already in place." Within that infrastructure is her own Barkin Index of Maternal Functioning, a patient-centered measure of postpartum functional status. In the July 2022 editorial, Barkin advised organizations that assist new mothers to "strongly consider incorporation of climate change effects into their programming," adding that health care providers should include environmental factors into mental and physical health assessments. She acknowledged that most OB-GYNs and pediatricians working with perinatal women do conduct depression screenings — which Barkin said is “going to work to everyone’s advantage.”  "But the bottleneck is, do they have somewhere to send them? And can they afford it?" she asked. "If you just had your home wiped out or you're injured, or your whole family's on the run, can you afford to stop and address your mental health?" Stressing that natural disasters are considered traumatic events, Barkin noted that such occurrences are poised to happen more frequently in the future. "That's going to impact mothers," she said, noting that they are often primary caregivers, regardless of whether they also work full time outside the home. "They're often kind of like the CEO of the family's health.” 

The increasing incidence of climate change-induced heat spikes, wildfires and life-threatening flash floods is engulfing pregnant and postpartum individuals in a wave of eco-anxiety and depression. "The mom is kind of guiding the ship," Jennifer Barkin, an expert on maternal mental health, told The Hill. "You're already worried about — are your kids eating enough...

The increasing incidence of climate change-induced heat spikes, wildfires and life-threatening flash floods is engulfing pregnant and postpartum individuals in a wave of eco-anxiety and depression.

"The mom is kind of guiding the ship," Jennifer Barkin, an expert on maternal mental health, told The Hill. "You're already worried about — are your kids eating enough vegetables? Are kids getting school on time? How are their grades? And now you've got this additional worry."

Barkin, a professor of community medicine and obstetrics and gynecology at the Mercer University School of Medicine in Georgia, characterized the influence of climate change on maternal mental health as “a global issue,” while noting that “it hits the disadvantaged in a more dramatic way — and quicker.”

The issue appears to be going largely unnoticed, however.

Although the concept of climate despair has attracted some media attention, there has been little coverage of the unique mental health impacts that occur during the perinatal period, Barkin and colleagues found in a December 2022 study. The perinatal period spans from pregnancy to a year following childbirth.

That stage in a mother’s life "is a time of increased vulnerability to negative mood symptoms due to various changes within the mother and her environment," the authors noted in the study, published in the Journal of the American Psychiatric Nurses Association.

Extreme weather events, which often result in disruptions of support networks as well as health care, jobs and education, can all become “possible downstream effects that exact a significant toll on mental health,” the authors noted.

In a July 2022 editorial for Frontiers in Psychiatry, Barkin argued that more pregnant and postpartum women will be shouldering such outcomes, noting that “there is a looming threat (risk factor) on the horizon and its name is the climate crisis.”

The physiological effects of heat risk, which are intertwined with its mental health impacts, are amplified in pregnancy — when symptoms like dehydration can take a particular toll on all organ systems, Barkin told The Hill.

A November 2023 advocacy brief from the World Health Organization stressed that "climate hazards, including extreme heat, are associated with increased risks of developing complications that lead to adverse maternal and perinatal outcomes."

Such effects, the brief said, could "affect mental health and contribute to intergenerational trauma," while causing an increase of "stress, anxiety and depression — known risk factors for adverse perinatal outcomes."

When families either choose or are forced to migrate due to climate change, the mental health effects on pregnant individuals are especially severe, as they have a fetus to consider, Barkin stressed.

"If you're pregnant, and you're in an evacuation center, two other kids and no obstetric care what if you have an emergency?" Barkin asked. "Or if you have your prenatal care, and you've got your child's pediatrician lined up, and you need to move suddenly? I mean, it's a major stressor, and it's a disruption in care."

"Depression and anxiety are related to the severity of the exposure," she continued. "Were you wading through floodwaters, were you directly breathing in the wildfire smoke? All of that is linked to the severity of the mental health consequences."

In an evacuation center, Barkin continued, there's also the question of cleanliness, infectious diseases or the inability to find dry clothing.

A January 2023 literature review likewise found that "climate change-related environmental exposures, including extreme temperatures, air pollution and natural disasters, are significantly associated with adverse perinatal and maternal health outcomes across the United States."

These effects included mental health issues, such as the development of maternal depression following a natural disaster event like Hurricane Katrina, per the review, published in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health.

Laura Geer, the senior author of that review, explained that “a post-climate related event can go in two different directions.”

In the first, she explained, a mother can be thrown into a position of social isolation in which she finds herself managing a family without appropriate access to care, while also facing a potential “intimate partner violence increase during this stressful period.”

“Or you're highly resilient, you've got a lot of social support, you can kind of manage and weather, and it actually kind of makes you stronger,” added Geer, chair of the department of environmental and occupational health sciences at SUNY Downstate Health Sciences University.

But in so many cases, severe climate disruptions can influence food and housing security, while sometimes leading to unhealthy coping mechanisms like illicit drug use, according to Geer.

"Somebody's ability to be resilient is so directly tied to their mental health," she said.

Even for those families not likely to face imminent displacement or natural disaster, the mental gymnastics connected to keeping kids protected from escalating heat can be exhausting.

"I can think from a mother's perspective: Do I want to send my kids to a summer camp?" Barkin asked, noting that it's difficult to gauge whether individual camp counselors are "aware how to handle heat risk."

Detailing her own internal debate as a mother, Barkin said that she discouraged her son from playing football — which requires wearing heavy equipment — in the Georgia weather, while adding that her daughter once fell ill from the heat at tennis camp.

Mothers, she added, also often grapple with the fact that their kids are "going to inherit something they didn't create."

More and more women, she has found, are raising questions like, "Do I want to bring kids up necessarily? Is it even ethical to get pregnant?"

Geer echoed these sentiments, thinking back to the 2016 Rio de Janeiro Summer Olympics and the coinciding surge in the Zika virus — a mosquito-borne pathogen known to cause birth defects. The virus’s spread in the region prompted many athletes of childbearing age to reconsider their attendance, she explained.

"I definitely think it led to anxiety around decisions about family planning, even in our country," Geer said, noting the increased concern that this vector of Zika could move up to the Southeast U.S. as well.

Another quandary Barkin has found mothers facing is that while green spaces are supposed to be good for mental health, there is now increased uncertainty as to whether certain green spaces have become "inhospitable or inhabitable."

Barkin cited several repeat complaints on the subject: "We're trapped inside. I've got these kids running around going crazy. I want to get them outside, but I can't breathe, or it's so hot, or I'm worried about breastfeeding the baby."

In addition to those of childbearing age, much older women may be suffering similar mental health impacts from climate change. 

Earlier this month, the European Court of Human Rights sided with a group of more than 2,000 older women, who had filed a complaint against the Swiss government demanding health protections from the effects of climate change.

Members of the Swiss association, Verein KlimaSeniorinnen, or Climate Seniors, argued that they are uniquely vulnerable to the effects of surging heat waves — citing significant, climate-related health impacts on their daily routines. Among the effects they named were various heat-related physical symptoms, as well as social consequences— due to their inability to leave their homes.

While these women may be from a different generation, the mental tumult they have been enduring bares similarities to the struggle that many young mothers experience during the perinatal period.

Asked what clinicians can do to ensure that maternal eco-anxiety doesn’t fly under the radar, Barkin said "the good news is a lot of the infrastructure for screening for depression is already in place."

Within that infrastructure is her own Barkin Index of Maternal Functioning, a patient-centered measure of postpartum functional status.

In the July 2022 editorial, Barkin advised organizations that assist new mothers to "strongly consider incorporation of climate change effects into their programming," adding that health care providers should include environmental factors into mental and physical health assessments.

She acknowledged that most OB-GYNs and pediatricians working with perinatal women do conduct depression screenings — which Barkin said is “going to work to everyone’s advantage.” 

"But the bottleneck is, do they have somewhere to send them? And can they afford it?" she asked. "If you just had your home wiped out or you're injured, or your whole family's on the run, can you afford to stop and address your mental health?"

Stressing that natural disasters are considered traumatic events, Barkin noted that such occurrences are poised to happen more frequently in the future.

"That's going to impact mothers," she said, noting that they are often primary caregivers, regardless of whether they also work full time outside the home. "They're often kind of like the CEO of the family's health.” 

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

Flatwater Free Press and Grist hire Anila Yoganathan to cover climate change in Nebraska

Yoganathan will report local stories, which will be available to republish for free.

The Flatwater Free Press and Grist are pleased to announce the hire of reporter Anila Yoganathan to cover how climate change is impacting Nebraska communities, from worsening extreme weather to shifting energy systems and economies.  Yoganathan will be an employee of Flatwater and based in Omaha, with the two newsrooms splitting the costs of her salary as part of their new collaboration. Anila Yoganathan was born and raised in Georgia and graduated from the University of Georgia. She previously worked at the Atlanta Business Chronicle, covering everything from energy and manufacturing to infrastructure and economic development, and as an investigative reporter for the Knoxville News Sentinel in Tennessee. Her work has also appeared in the Associated Press and Atlanta Journal-Constitution, among other publications.  “We’re thrilled to welcome Anila and to partner with Grist on this important work,” said Matt Wynn, executive director of the Nebraska Journalism Trust. “Her reporting will help ensure Nebraska’s environmental and agricultural stories are told with the depth they deserve — and that they reach an audience that needs to hear them.” “I am so excited to learn more about the environment and energy landscape in Nebraska,” said Yoganathan. “My favorite part of the job is getting to know a community and telling their stories.” The hire marks the continued expansion of Grist’s Local News Initiative, which aims to bolster coverage of climate change in communities across the United States through partnerships with local newsrooms. Grist already has reporters embedded with WABE in Georgia, IPR in Michigan, WBEZ in Illinois, BPR in North Carolina, Verite News in Louisiana, and The Salt Lake Tribune in Utah. Yoganathan will be the seventh such reporter. Yoganathan will report local stories for Flatwater, which will be shared with the newsroom’s statewide and regional network of syndication partners. Grist will also adapt Yoganathan’s stories and bring them to its nationwide audience and publishing partners. “At a time when trust in journalism is eroding, Flatwater Free Press has managed to buck the trend and develop a deep connection with its Nebraska readers,” said Katherine Bagley, Grist’s editor-in-chief. “Combined with Anila’s investigative reporting skills and sharp eye for compelling environmental stories, we’re excited to bolster climate reporting in a state on the frontlines of a warming planet.”  This story was originally published by Grist with the headline Flatwater Free Press and Grist hire Anila Yoganathan to cover climate change in Nebraska on Nov 10, 2025.

UN General Assembly Chief Says Curbing Climate Change Would Make World More Peaceful and Safer

The president of the United Nations General Assembly says climate change is the biggest threat to world peace

BELEM, Brazil (AP) — Harms from climate change are the biggest threat to world peace, the president of the United Nations General Assembly says.“To those who are arguing that in these times we have to focus more on peace and security, one can only say the climate crisis is the biggest security threat of our century,” General Assembly President Annalena Baerbock told The Associated Press in an interview at the U.N. climate talks at the edge of the Amazon.“We can only ensure long-lasting peace and security over the world if we fight the climate crisis altogether and if we join hands in delivering on sustainable development because they are heavily interconnected,” said Baerbock, a former German foreign minister.Baerbock pointed to droughts and other damage from climate extremes in places such as Chad, Syria and Iraq. When crops die, people go hungry and then migrate elsewhere or fight over scarce water, she said.“This is a vicious circle,” Baerbock said. “If we do not stop the climate crisis it will fuel hunger and poverty which will fuel again displacement and by that will challenge regions in a different way, leading again to instability, crisis and most often also conflict. So, fighting the climate crisis is also the best security insurance.”But at the same time, dealing with climate change's problems can make the world more peaceful, Baerbock said, pointing to conflicts over water in Central Asia. There, an agreement on water became “a booster for peaceful cooperation and peaceful settlement.” Drought can take a long time to make an impact, but storms made worse by Earth's warming atmosphere can strike in a flash. Baerbock pointed to last month's Hurricane Melissa decimating Jamaica and two typhoons smacking the Philippines.“Achievements of sustainable development can be diminished in just hours,'' Baerbock said. That's why foreign aid from rich nations to poor to help deal with climate disasters and adapt to future ones "are also investments in stable societies and regions," she said.Baerbock, a veteran of climate conferences, said people scoffed at the young people of small island nations who filed a suit in the International Court of Justice about climate change, damage and their future. But the court's ruling in July that action must be taken to limit warming “shows the power of the world if it works together,” she said.Small island nations have said they will take the court's decision to the U.N. General Assembly, where votes are decided by majority unlike the veto power of the U.N. security council or the consensus unanimity of U.N. climate talks.“Now it’s up to the majority of the member states if they want to bring a resolution forward underlining the importance of this case,” said Baerbock, adding that she has to follow the desires of the majority of the 193 U.N. member states.“The vast majority of member states has called not only at the last climate conferences but also here in Belem for transitioning away from our fossil world, not because of the climate crisis, but because they underline that this is the best security investment for all of us,” Baerbock said.The Associated Press’ climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP’s standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Photos You Should See – Nov. 2025

The meat industry’s climate accountability moment is here

Some of the world’s biggest meat companies are finally facing a degree of accountability for allegedly deceiving the public about their pollution. On Monday, America’s largest meat producer, Tyson Foods, agreed to stop marketing a line of its so-called climate-friendly beef and to drop its claim that it could reach “net-zero” emissions by 2050. The […]

Cattle at a large feedlot in Texas. Some of the world’s biggest meat companies are finally facing a degree of accountability for allegedly deceiving the public about their pollution. On Monday, America’s largest meat producer, Tyson Foods, agreed to stop marketing a line of its so-called climate-friendly beef and to drop its claim that it could reach “net-zero” emissions by 2050. The changes are the result of a lawsuit settlement with the Environmental Working Group, a nonprofit that sued Tyson for allegedly misleading consumers. Meat and dairy production are two of the highest polluting industries, accounting for 14.5 to 19 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions, with much of it stemming from beef. As part of the settlement, Tyson must refrain from making these environmental claims for five years and can’t make new ones unless they’re verified by experts.  “This settlement reinforces the principle that consumers deserve honesty and accountability from the corporations shaping our food system,” Caroline Leary, general counsel and chief operating officer at EWG, said in a press release.    This story was first featured in the Future Perfect newsletter. Sign up here to explore the big, complicated problems the world faces and the most efficient ways to solve them. Sent twice a week. Tyson Foods declined an interview request for this story. In a statement to Vox, a Tyson spokesperson said the decision to settle “was made solely to avoid the expense and distraction of ongoing litigation and does not represent any admission of wrongdoing by Tyson Foods.”   (If you’re wondering how Tyson was ever allowed to make these claims in the first place, it’s because the US Department of Agriculture lets meat companies say pretty much whatever they want on their packaging.)   Less than two weeks ago, the US subsidiary of Brazil-based JBS — the world’s largest meat company — paid $1.1 million to settle a similar lawsuit brought by New York Attorney General Letitia James over the company’s claim that it could reach net-zero emissions by 2040. “Bacon, chicken wings and steak with net-zero emissions,” the company stated in a 2021 full-page New York Times ad. “It’s possible.” (It’s not.)  The terms of the settlement will require JBS to discuss net zero as a goal or ambition, as opposed to a pledge or commitment. JBS didn’t respond to an interview request for this story. It all amounts to what two environmental researchers have called a form of “epistemic pollution” that shapes “what we know, understand and believe” about meat’s climate footprint. This pollution of public discourse has worked: Polls show people significantly underrate animal agriculture’s environmental impact.   The two settlements represent an antidote to that pollution, and a rare shred of justice for an industry that has otherwise evaded climate accountability. But if the events of the last 10 days at the world’s largest climate change conference are any indication, the meat giants aren’t deterred and are as emboldened as ever to mislead the public on their pollution and obstruct efforts to regulate it.  Calling the meat industry’s bluff  This month, over 50,000 people descended on Belém, Brazil, to attend the United Nations’ annual COP (conference of the parties) climate summit, where world leaders meet to assess the state of climate change and pledge to cut emissions.  The conference largely focuses on fossil fuels, but in recent years, it’s begun to put more attention on food and agriculture, which account for around one-third of global climate-warming emissions. In response, meat and dairy companies have ramped up their presence at COP events to influence negotiations. This year was no different. In fact, JBS led the food industry’s officially recognized effort to develop environmental policy recommendations for governments to consider.  Unsurprisingly, JBS and its peers didn’t recommend stringent environmental regulations or policies to shift countries away from meat-heavy diets, which environmental scientists say we must do to meet global climate targets. Instead, it’s promoting voluntary sustainability programs, like paying farmers to adopt more sustainable practices. In other words: “Don’t regulate our pollution, we’ll volunteer to clean it up — but only if governments give us money.”  This voluntary approach has been the meat industry’s playbook for decades. It’s been highly effective at shutting down the prospect of significant reforms to how we farm and what we eat, both in the international arena, like at COP, and here at home (most US environmental laws wholly or partially exempt animal factory farms).  The industry is able to sway policy in its favor because it invests a lot in doing so. It donates millions to politicians and aggressively lobbies them; it plays dirty by attacking scientists and pushing an alternative set of facts; and it portrays itself as a network of small, humble farmers and ranchers stewarding the land when, in reality, a handful of major polluters control much of the meat aisle.  The lawsuit settlements, however, are a small crack in this armor, and illustrate how when the industry is forced to defend some of its more outlandish claims, it can’t. We might eventually be able to have an honest public conversation about meat’s environmental and ethical harms, but only if more of civil society is willing to call its bluff.

‘Climate smart’ beef? After a lawsuit, Tyson agrees to drop the label.

Advocates say a recent settlement is a ‘win’ in the fight to hold industrial ag giants accountable.

Shoppers have long sought ways to make more sustainable choices at the supermarket — and for good reason: Our food system is responsible for a third of global greenhouse gas emissions. The vast majority of emissions from agriculture come from raising cows on industrial farms in order to sell burgers, steak, and other beef products. Beef production results in two and a half times as many greenhouse gases as lamb, and almost nine times as many as chicken or fish; its carbon footprint relative to other sources of protein, like cheese, eggs, and tofu, is even higher.  If you want to have a lighter impact on the planet, you could try eating less beef. (Just try it!) Otherwise, a series of recent lawsuits intends make it easier for consumers to discern what’s sustainable and what’s greenwashing — by challenging the world’s largest meat processors on their climate messaging. Tyson, which produces 20 percent of beef, chicken, and pork in the United States, has agreed to drop claims that the company has a plan to achieve “net zero” emissions by 2050 and to stop referring to beef products as “climate smart” unless verified by an independent expert.  Tyson was sued in 2024 by the Environmental Working Group, or EWG, a nonprofit dedicated to public health and environmental issues. The group alleged that Tyson’s claims were false and misleading to consumers. (Nonprofit environmental law firm Earthjustice represented EWG in the case.) Tyson denied the allegations and agreed to settle the suit.  “We landed in a place that feels satisfying in terms of what we were able to get from the settlement,” said Carrie Apfel, deputy managing attorney of Earthjustice’s Sustainable Food and Farming program. Apfel was the lead attorney on the case. According to the settlement provided by Earthjustice, over the next five years, Tyson cannot repeat previous claims that the company has a plan to achieve net zero emissions by 2050 or make new ones unless they are verified by a third-party source. Similarly, Tyson also cannot market or sell any beef products labeled as “climate smart” or “climate friendly” in the United States. “We think that this provides the consumer protections we were seeking from the lawsuit,” said Apfel.  The settlement is “a critical win for the fight against climate greenwashing by industrial agriculture,” according to Leila Yow, climate program associate at the Institute for Agricultural and Trade Policy, a nonprofit research group focused on sustainable food systems.  In the original complaint, filed in D.C. Superior Court, EWG alleged that Tyson had never even defined “climate smart beef,” despite using the term in various marketing materials. Now Tyson and EWG must meet to agree on a third-party expert that would independently verify any of the meat processor’s future “net zero” or “climate smart” claims.  Following the settlement, Apfel went a step further in a conversation with Grist, arguing that the term “climate smart” has no business describing beef that comes from an industrial food system.  “In the context of industrial beef production, it’s an oxymoron,” said the attorney. “You just can’t have climate-smart beef. Beef is the highest-emitting major food type that there is. Even if you were to reduce its emissions by 10 percent or even 30 percent, it’s still not gonna be a climate-smart choice.” A Tyson spokesperson said the company “has a long-held core value to serve as stewards of the land, animals and resources entrusted to our care” and identifies “opportunities to reduce greenhouse gas emissions across the supply chain.” The spokesperson added: “The decision to settle was made solely to avoid the expense and distraction of ongoing litigation and does not represent any admission of wrongdoing by Tyson Foods.”  The Tyson settlement follows another recent greenwashing complaint — this one against JBS Foods, the world’s largest meat processor. In 2024, New York Attorney General Letitia James sued JBS, alleging the company was misleading consumers with claims it would achieve net zero emissions by 2040.  James reached a $1.1 million settlement with the beef behemoth earlier this month. As a result of the settlement, JBS is required to update its messaging to describe reaching net zero emissions by 2040 as more of an idea or a goal than a concrete plan or commitment from the company. The two settlements underscore just how difficult it is to hold meat and dairy companies accountable for their climate and environmental impacts.  “Historically, meat and dairy companies have largely been able to fly under the radar of reporting requirements of any kind,” said Yow, of the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy. When these agrifood companies do share their emissions, these disclosures are often voluntary and the processes for measuring and reporting impact are not standardized.  That leads to emissions data that is often “incomplete or incorrect,” said Yow. She recently authored a report ranking 14 of the world’s largest meat and dairy companies in terms of their sustainability commitments — including efforts to report methane and other greenhouse gas emissions. Tyson and JBS tied for the lowest score out of all 14 companies. Industrial animal agriculture “has built its business model on secrecy,” said Valerie Baron, a national policy director and senior attorney at the Natural Resources Defense Council, in response to the Tyson settlement. Baron emphasized that increased transparency from meat and dairy companies is a critical first step to holding them accountable.  Yow agreed. She argued upcoming climate disclosure rules in California and the European Union have the potential to lead the way on policy efforts to measure and rein in emissions in the food system. More and better data can lead to “better collective decision making with policymakers,” she said.  But, she added: “We need to actually know what we’re talking about before we can tackle some of those things.” Editor’s note: Earthjustice and the Natural Resources Defense Council are advertisers with Grist. Advertisers have no role in Grist’s editorial decisions. This story was originally published by Grist with the headline ‘Climate smart’ beef? After a lawsuit, Tyson agrees to drop the label. on Nov 21, 2025.

Suggested Viewing

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

Our team is always growing.
Become a partner, volunteer, sponsor, or intern today.
Let us know how you would like to get involved!

CONTACT US

sign up for our mailing list to stay informed on the latest films and environmental headlines.

Subscribers receive a free day pass for streaming Cinema Verde.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.