🔗 Share this article

A new investigation has uncovered that over three hundred industrial agriculture lobbyists took part in this year’s UN climate talks, which are being held in the Brazilian Amazon—an area where agribusiness is the primary driver of forest loss.

Significant Rise in Industry Representation

The number of lobbyists advocating for industrial cattle farming, grain commodities, and pesticides rose by 14% compared to last year’s summit in Azerbaijan. This group is bigger than the official delegation of the Canadian government, the world’s 10th largest economy, which brought 220 delegates to COP30 in the Brazilian city of Belém.

Lobbyists Embedded in Official Delegations

A quarter of the big agriculture lobbyists—numbering seventy-seven—are participating at the climate conference as members of official country delegations. A handful of six individuals gained special entry to UN negotiations, where countries are supposed to agree on strong measures to address the climate crisis.

“Over 300 lobbyists for industrial agriculture are taking up room at COP30 that rightfully belongs to Indigenous forest communities. They discuss energy transition while polluting the Amazon with oil and privatizing rivers such as the Tapajós for soybean production. To us, this isn’t progress—it’s violence,” said Vandria Borari, representing the Borari Indigenous community.

Climate Consequences of Agriculture

Agriculture is responsible for 25% to 33% of global emissions, and experts state it will be unfeasible to achieve the targets of the 2015 Paris agreement without major shifts in how we produce and consume food.

Beef production is the biggest driver of deforestation in the Amazon, followed by the large-scale farming of soy, which is mostly used for animal feed. Scientists have warned that up to 50% of the Amazon rainforest could reach a tipping point by 2050 due to drought, land clearance, and climate disruption.

Increasing Concern Over Industry Access

The findings come amid rising anger at the unfettered access given to corporations that benefit from maintaining global dependence on fossil fuels and the destruction of forests, essential for reducing climate catastrophe.

The industrialised food sector has welcomed the inaction at recent climate summits, which did not set binding targets for cutting greenhouse gases, energy consumption, or dietary change. A 2020 study found that even if fossil fuels were immediately eliminated, business as usual in the food sector would likely make it impossible to keep warming to 1.5°C—or below 2°C.

Breakdown of Delegates

• Livestock sector sent the largest number, totaling seventy-two of the over 300 representatives. This is almost double the delegation size of Jamaica, a Caribbean island nation hit hard by Hurricane Melissa.
• Pesticides and fertilizers represent 60 delegates, while biofuel interests have thirty-eight delegates—a 138% jump from the previous summit.
• The agrochemical company Bayer sent 19 lobbyists, the highest number, while the food giant Nestlé has nine.

Emissions and Influence

As per a new study from Friends of the Earth US, the greenhouse gas output of the biggest meat and dairy companies are comparable to those of Saudi Arabia, the top global oil exporter. JBS, which alone accounts for 24% of these emissions, has eight lobbyists at COP30, among them its chief executive.

The majority of chemical fertilizers are made from fossil fuels and emit nitrous oxide—that is 300 times more powerful than CO2. Agriculture is the biggest source of nitrous oxide emissions.

“These findings are proof that industrial agriculture has been allowed to co-opt the climate convention. COP will never deliver real climate action as long as industry lobbyists are allowed to influence governments and negotiators,” said an advocate of the Asian Peoples’ Movement on Debt and Development.

Key Topics and National Agendas

Food is not a focus to the current talks, but the sector could gain from several important issues under discussion, such as decisions over biofuels—which are often made from agricultural commodities like grains and soybeans that drive deforestation.

The Brazilian government is pushing for a four-fold increase in biofuel use, often promoted as a green energy—but a recent study found they can produce higher emissions than conventional fuels due to land use impacts of monoculture farming.

Climate Finance

Another critical issue is climate funding, which the world’s largest agricultural polluters, already major recipients of government support, are angling to receive large shares of.

“The events in Belém resemble a hostage situation over Earth’s future, with the powerful players—soy magnates, beef corporations, pesticide sellers—acting as if they are neutral parties,” said Raj Patel, author of Stuffed and Starved. “These food lobbyists are purchasing access and legitimacy through politicians willing to accept their checks while the planet burns,” he added.

Background and Methodology

The study is drawn from the UNFCCC’s provisional list of over fifty-six thousand attendees, and includes representatives from the biggest companies in livestock, pesticides and fertiliser, food manufacturing, agricultural trading, supermarkets, and biofuels. The data additionally count international industry associations, and national farmer unions linked to agribusiness and/or a history of lobbying aligned with industry demands.

Continued Lobbying Efforts

The Brazilian National Confederation of Agriculture and Livestock, the sector’s main lobbying arm in the Brazilian legislature, has supported multiple contentious environmentally damaging policies, such as legislation that restricts land access for Indigenous populations, and sought to end the soybean deforestation ban, a landmark voluntary agreement to block the sale of soya linked to deforestation.

A U.S. meat industry group, which represents 350 meat packing and processing companies that produce 95% of the meat supply in the United States, has two delegates. The trade group has strongly opposed government rules including efforts to force US companies to disclose their total greenhouse gases, and against changes to nutrition advice around eating less meat.

Past Trends and Spending

In the US, agribusiness corporations and trade groups spent well over half a billion dollars influencing lawmakers between 2019 and 2023 for favourable legislation. It’s unsurprising, then, to see major agribusiness at COP30, as noted by Karen Perry Stillerman, a senior official at the Union of Concerned Scientists.

“Advocates are already calling for the fossil fuel industry and its disinformation to be banned from future climate talks, and the influence of big ag is similarly toxic … we won’t have sustainable, fair, healthy, or climate-resilient food systems anywhere in the world as long as giant agribusiness and food corporations are making the rules.”

The industrial agricultural participation is up 71% than COP27, but lower than the peak at COP28, which was the biggest UN climate meeting with 86,000 delegates, compared with 56 thousand participants in Brazil.

Company Responses

A representative of the agrochemical firm said, “Our participation at COP has been open … we strongly back efforts to tackle the climate emergency. Everyone must contribute to the solution.”

A spokesperson at JBS commented, “JBS, as a food company, is concentrated on increasing farm productivity, enhancing food system efficiency, and reducing food loss and waste.”

Several other industry groups offered no comment to requests for comment. Conference organizers and the UN climate body also did not respond.