New analysis documents global environmental damage after USAID’s sudden shutdown

# What the report examined The consultancy One Earth Partners — founded in 2025 by former USAID staff Monica Bansal and Hadas Kushnir — produced a 166-page analysis of the environmental consequences of USAID's closure. The authors interviewed 150 people who worked with USAID programs in Bangladesh, Peru, Kenya, Colombia and Vietnam and paired those interviews with survey data to document what stopped, stalled, or was left vulnerable after early‑2025 contract terminations.

# What was lost when USAID contracts ended USAID had been a major funder of biodiversity, climate adaptation, clean energy and related programs. The report focuses on how the abrupt termination of roughly 5,200 contracts disrupted long-running, place-based projects that depended on sustained, risk-tolerant support and local relationships.

• Training for Colombian and Peruvian officials to use satellite data to monitor Amazon deforestation, which was halted when USAID programs ended.
• Funding for wildlife law enforcement and anti-poaching in Mozambique's Gorongosa National Park that stopped with the agency's closure.
• Plastic-waste collection programs on East African beaches that lost support after contract terminations.
• Community ecotourism revenue-sharing arrangements in Bangladesh that stalled just before final agreements were implemented, with management reverting to national authorities in some cases.

# Impacts documented by interviewees

In Kenya, the effects were acute. USAID had supported community-led conservancies that protect wildlife and movement corridors. After losing a five-year, $6.5 million grant, the Maasai Mara Wildlife Conservancies Organization cut staff and reduced its budget by 72%, halting plans to create new conservancies intended to secure corridors for elephants and other species.

# Scale and finances cited The report situates its findings against USAID's recent spending on nature-related work: in the 2024 fiscal year the agency spent hundreds of millions across biodiversity conservation, climate adaptation, clean energy and natural climate solutions programs. The One Earth Partners analysis links those funding levels to the variety of place-based projects that were affected when the agency was dismantled.

A State Department spokesperson declined to address the report directly in an emailed statement. The statement framed the administration's priorities as protecting national security and economic interests beyond U.S. borders and combating transnational threats including illegal fishing, transboundary pollution, and illegal logging and mining.

# What remains visible and where help is needed One Earth Partners published a list of 100 projects looking for new funders. The report points to gaps that are not simply financial: USAID provided long-standing relationships, willingness to fund risky environments, and coordination that many local actors say will be difficult to replace. The report's country-level examples show a mix of stalled implementation, reversion of management to national authorities, and organizations forced to scale back or pause conservation efforts.

# Bottom line The analysis documents tangible program-level losses and localized environmental harm tied to the rapid removal of a major development partner. It frames the aftermath as a patchwork of interrupted projects, increased environmental risks, and dozens of initiatives actively seeking replacement funding.