Post-travelling climate blues

I have just returned from two months of extended leave in Central America where I backpacked from Mexico City to Panama City, and everywhere in between. It was an incredible experience – eye-opening, perspective-shifting, and vastly different from my day-to-day routine. While I could go on endlessly with anecdotes and talk about the food (Mexican cuisine is, objectively, the best in the world) and the landscapes, returning to work has made me reflect on what my travels taught me

Catching up on world events, one shift stands out: the increasing inward focus of national governments. The US’s “America First” approach under a second Trump presidency is already triggering global ripple effects, with Europe – particularly the UK – placing unprecedented emphasis on defence in response to geopolitical tensions, especially in Ukraine.

Climate change, however, unlike war, often struggles for front-page attention. Yet, like global conflicts, it too is shaped by shifting policies and realignments. Traveling through Central America, I was struck by how much the region lags in climate mitigation. Public transport is outdated, electric vehicles are non-existent, and coal power remains dominant. The concept of a “just transition” – widely debated in developed nations and offices – felt largely absent on the ground. While policymakers argue over who should pay for climate action, evidence (as far as I could tell) suggests little is changing where it’s needed most.

There is a real risk that as the world fights the climate battle in developed nations, it will lose the war in developing ones – where the impact is often greatest, as well as the consequences felt hardest. As wealthier nations focus on domestic issues, the developing world faces growing environmental and economic challenges with insufficient support.

Take COP30, set to be hosted in Belem, Brazil, on the edge of the Amazon rainforest. Brazil sees this as an opportunity to spotlight its greatest natural asset, yet logistical challenges are already leading many to opt out in favour of Davos 2026, London Climate Action Week, or, to a lesser extent, Climate Week NYC. Without corporate presence and meaningful financial commitments, Belem risks becoming another well-intentioned but ineffective summit. 

Perhaps it’s just the post-travel blues talking, but if climate change is to be truly addressed, it requires a global transition – not just national efforts focused on the West. Otherwise, progress made in one part of the world risks being undone elsewhere.