It’s Halloween—the time of year when we lean into the spooky, the shadows, and the unknown. But nothing conjured from fiction quite measures up to the real-world frights haunting today’s headlines. From political ghosts re-emerging in the U.S. to escalating conflict in the Middle East, and the high-stakes negotiations nearing conclusion at COP16 in Cali, Colombia, there’s plenty to keep us on edge. With promises emerging for nature restoration and food security, the world is looking at a critical opportunity for action. But without real implementation, these pledges may haunt us as empty promises.
The potential return of Donald Trump to the White House is a frightening specter for those committed to environmental progress. His previous administration saw critical environmental rollbacks, from weakening the EPA to withdrawing from the Paris Agreement. Another term could further isolate the U.S. from global climate efforts, disrupting the flow of crucial support for climate finance and innovation. And it’s not just about one leader or one country: the implications for international cooperation are vast. When the U.S. stalls or regresses on climate action, it sends tremors through global alliances, undermining ambitious goals in favor of short-term politics. This serves as a chilling reminder that progress in sustainability cannot depend on any single government’s stance—it requires resilience and a commitment to the future that withstands even the most dramatic political shifts.
Meanwhile, the escalating crisis in the Middle East adds an unpredictable layer of instability to the already fragile global order. The human cost is heart-wrenching, and it also diverts essential resources and attention away from long-term sustainability goals. Countries in the region are key players in energy production and innovation, and conflict here delays green initiatives that the world is counting on. The Green Middle East initiative, a promising step toward regional climate resilience, is now in jeopardy. This brings to light the fact that climate funding and cooperation must be designed to withstand geopolitical turmoil, or we risk losing ground every time a crisis emerges. It’s a daunting challenge but also an opportunity: investment in sustainability that is built to last can offer not just environmental benefits but pathways toward stability in the regions that need it most.
The ongoing COP16 in Cali offers a critical moment to address biodiversity loss and its far-reaching impacts on our food systems and ecosystems. Food security and nature restoration have emerged as focal points, underscoring the need to balance biodiversity conservation with immediate human needs. However, while promising language has taken shape, the true test will be in the follow-through. Declarations alone won’t keep the promises made in Cali from slipping into the realm of wishful thinking. Countries must leave COP16 with more than just agreements—they need commitments that translate into actionable outcomes and accountability mechanisms. Anything less risks fading into vague commitments that fall short of addressing the systemic challenges we face.
The EU’s Green Deal, which includes initiatives like the Farm to Fork strategy and the Nature Restoration Law, offers a roadmap that is ambitious yet fraught with its own challenges. Farm to Fork emphasizes sustainable agriculture and biodiversity-friendly practices, setting an example for how environmental goals can be aligned with food security. However, pushback from within the EU has made implementation a rocky journey. What’s truly spooky is that the nations best positioned to lead by example may struggle to meet even their own benchmarks. If this happens, it would be a missed opportunity with implications far beyond Europe.
The EU’s Nature Restoration Law, aiming to restore 20% of degraded ecosystems by 2030, illustrates the ambition of the Green Deal but also exposes the difficulty of translating these policies into action. Securing global buy-in for such commitments remains an uphill battle, as too many national policies lack the enforceability necessary to achieve these targets. Wealthier countries have pledged financial support to biodiversity efforts, but these pledges often come with conditions and caveats, and we’ve seen before how promises can be retracted or diluted. To make restoration a reality, there must be accountability mechanisms that reach beyond borders and election cycles, ensuring that momentum isn’t lost as soon as the headlines fade.
Looking ahead, the upcoming UNFCCC COP in Baku brings its own set of challenges and opportunities. As nations gather, the focus will be on ensuring that climate targets align with the urgent realities of biodiversity loss and the pressing need for adaptation. The looming specter of climate-induced disasters reminds us that delays in climate action can have dire consequences. This COP must not only reaffirm commitments but also establish concrete pathways for financing adaptation and mitigation efforts in the Global South, where the impacts of climate change are most severe. As we approach 2025, the stakes could not be higher. It will be crucial for all participating countries to push for binding commitments that extend beyond mere declarations, ensuring that we do not allow the specter of climate inaction to haunt future generations.
As we look toward the outcomes of COP16 and the imminent discussions at the UNFCCC, the real chills don’t come from haunted houses or ghost stories but from the ever-present risks that global leaders may fall short of their pledges. Food security, nature restoration, and sustainable agriculture need more than polite applause—they need solid investment, coordinated international action, and policies that can endure even in turbulent times.
What’s at stake is nothing less than a livable future. And that’s one ghost story we can all agree we’d rather avoid.