51ÂÒÂ×

When it comes to the environment and climate change, the UK government remains committed to its ambitious targets for cutting emissions and restoring biodiversity. It also continues to make concerted efforts to attract private capital to invest in natural capital.

However, across the Atlantic, President Donald Trump has already withdrawn from the Paris Agreement on climate change for the second time, scaled back the role of the country’s Environmental Protection Agency and cut or reviewed funding for any projects focused on climate change or other elements of ESG and DEI.

This has already led to a successful legal challenge from some farmers who demanded the reinstatement of helpful content on the impact of climate change on agriculture, which had been removed from government websites.

Advocates of regenerative farming in the US may now choose to focus on its health benefits, rather than climate change, as these align with the aspirations of Health Secretary Robert Kennedy to improve the nation’s diet.

Another key difference between the UK and the US is the approach to voluntary carbon markets.

Although there have been big carbon-credit deals in America, the country has never offered anything comparable to the UK’s government-backed Woodland and Peatland Carbon Codes, which helps instil confidence to market participants, not least buyers and investors.

Although some have suggested that Trump’s eco-scepticism could be bad news for the UK’s nascent natural capital markets and even affect land values, I think the opposite could actually be true.

We may well see capital and environmental expertise diverted to countries like the UK that offer enthusiastic, transparent and regulated natural capital opportunities.

The evidence that nature is inextricably linked to long-term economic growth at both the corporate and national levels is too compelling to ignore.

Read more sector insights in the latest edition of The Rural Report: