The Influence of Populism on the Dismantling of Environmental Policy

Author: Sacha Utting

The below article is one of a series of blogs based on a Policy Brief shortlisted as a finalist for the 2026 Chronos Sustainability Prizes at the LSE.

What is populism and why is it important?

Populism is generally understood as an ideology that divides society into two groups: ‘the people’ and ‘the elite’, with the latter perceived as corrupt and as working against the interests of the former. This ideology is often promoted by 'policy entrepreneurs', who strategically employ divisive language in political communication and on social media to mobilise support and advance their political objectives, with the weakening or removal of environmental policies a frequent area of focus.

Between 1990 and 2018, the number of populists in power increased fivefold, with 46 populist leaders or parties holding executive office across 33 countries. At the same time, acknowledging that other factors are also at play including energy prices and concerns around energy security, environmental policies have come under increasing pressure in many countries. 

My policy brief, ‘The Influence of Populism on Environmental Policy Dismantling’ explores how populism is affecting environmental policies, and identifies measures that can be adopted to mitigate the adverse consequences for environmental policy.

How does populism affect environmental policy?

In some contexts, such as the USA, UK and Spain, populism has contributed to an active form of dismantling, whereby environmental policies are deliberately and visibly rolled back by political leaders. Specifically, populist actors frame environmental policies as contributing to the economic hardships experienced by groups who feel ‘left behind; by the processes of globalisation and deindustrialisation, thereby generating political support for policy rollback. For example, the Trump administration in the United States has removed over 100 environmental regulations, often justified through populist rhetoric, such as portraying climate policy as a ‘war’ on fossil fuel industries and the jobs they support.

It is important to recognise that there are also less visible forms of environmental policy dismantling that are not necessarily driven by populism. For example, default dismantling occurs when policymakers fail to update, maintain, or enforce policies in response to changing external conditions. Arena shifting involves transferring responsibility for environmental policy implementation to a different level of government, weakening enforcement mechanisms. There is also symbolic dismantling, where politicians signal an intention to dismantle environmental policies, but these commitments do not translate into substantial policy change.

Ultimately, the influence of populism on environmental policy dismantling depends on a range of factors, including macroeconomic conditions, institutional constraints, situational circumstances, and the policy area under consideration. For example, membership of the European Union can limit the influence of populist actors because many environmental protections are safeguarded at the supranational level and therefore cannot be easily dismantled by individual member states.

Policy recommendations

Populism is not the only factor that shapes the adoption and implementation of environmental policy. However, it is important. There are various actions policymakers can take to reduce the risk of environmental policy dismantling:

• Design more equitable environmental policies: If fewer groups are disproportionately affected by environmental policies, it becomes harder for politicians to frame these policies as an elite agenda that harms ‘ordinary people’. Policymakers should use participatory processes, such as climate assemblies, to ensure that the concerns of ‘left-behind’ groups are formally and explicitly integrated into policymaking.

• Strengthen institutional safeguards at all levels: For example, the greater integration of policies at the EU level can help to insulate environmental policies from domestic populist influence.

• Develop a strong counter-narrative: Framing environmental policy in terms of its immediate, tangible benefits, such as cleaner air or job creation, can strengthen public support for these policies and increase their resilience to populist critique.

——
Notes

Sacha Utting’s policy brief titled ‘The Influence of Populism on Environmental Policy Dismantling’ was shortlisted for the Chronos Sustainability Postgraduate Prize 2026. The full policy brief can be found here. Sacha is currently studying towards her MSc in Environmental Policy and Regulation at the London School of Economics, following the completion of an undergraduate degree in Geography from the University of St Andrews. Her research interests include political ecology, environmental justice and sustainable transport.

·       Read more on the Chronos Sustainability Prizes at the LSE here