What to expect in food & farm news in 2025

The story so far:

2024 has been declared by meteorologists as the hottest year on record, and between heat waves, intense droughts, wildfires and a catastrophic hurricane season, nearly everyone felt the impact. But that didn’t translate to much urgency in addressing climate change. This year saw a series of setbacks and slowdowns in the fight to curb emissions and oil consumption. COP 29, this year’s iteration of the U.N.’s annual climate conference, only managed to scrape together $300 billion to fight the impacts of climate change on developing countries — those most impacted by its effects — far less than what’s needed. 

Alongside all this was a parallel tale in one of the petroleum industry’s most ubiquitous and profitable byproducts: plastic. We saw growing concern in the general public about microplastics in our environment and in our bodies, the spread of local legislation (like plastic bag bans) to curb plastic, and conversations on a global scale about what should be done — but then The Global Plastics Treaty ended without resolution in late 2024.

Looking ahead: 

COP 29’s controversial host, the oil-dependent Azerbaijan, ended up being a fitting pick for a conference dominated by anxiety about what will happen if the incoming administration withdraws the U.S. from climate agreements and ramps up oil production, becoming what critics call a “petrostate” (a term that’s been used to describe Azerbaijan itself). President-elect Trump’s so-called energy dominance agenda and his proposed Cabinet picks signal a new era of the U.S. propping up its fossil fuel industry rather than finding ways to curb it. With energy and oil production already at historic highs, pumping even more would affirm that the U.S. government values profit for oil companies more than quality of life for people who are already suffering from the impacts of climate change. And because — without a plastics treaty limiting production — an increase in oil production means an increase in plastic production, the rise of the American petrostate also means convenience for consumers in the Global North will continue to matter more than fighting the resulting plastic pollution in the Global South. But the federal government going all-in on oil won’t be the end of climate action: With California suing Exxon for deceiving the public about recycling, and numerous state and local governments doubling down on climate action plans, the fight against oil and plastic will carry on in places where it can actually enact change. 

2. The price of food might continue to rise; it definitely won’t go down.

The story so far:

Inflation in the wider economy has cooled in the last two years, and the inflation rate for food actually dipped below the general inflation rate. But that didn’t translate into relief at the checkout line, with food prices still 28 percent higher than they were in 2019. On some level, that’s thanks to corporate greed: Once a price is up, companies are unlikely to lower it even if it no longer reflects the actual cost of getting the item to the shelf. That narrative gained a lot of attention this year, with calls to rein in corporate price gouging. Thankfully, there was one major victory in the fight against corporate greed: Both a federal and Washington State judge announced decisions that would block the proposed mega-merger between grocery giants Kroger and Albertsons, which would have been the industry’s largest-ever deal. The deal had attracted bipartisan criticism on the basis that it would eliminate competition that helped to keep prices low and wages high.

Looking ahead:

Even if talking about lowering grocery prices helped propel Trump to victory, it’s going to be hard for him — or anyone — to deliver on that campaign promise, something he admitted in a recent interview. But a few other plans from the administration could get in the way and make food even more expensive. Enacting mass deportations, one of the campaign’s central rallying cries, would make an already bad farm labor crisis even worse, something farmers across the country have voiced concern about. If those plans are realized, we can expect to see higher food prices, especially for meat, dairy and produce, all of which rely heavily on migrant labor. Then there are the tariffs: If enacted as proposed, they would end up increasing the cost of nearly everything we buy — whether imported or produced in the U.S. — thanks to higher prices on inputs and ingredients at every step of the supply chain.

3. Our unhealthy food system will be scrutinized — and may change.

The story so far:

RFK Jr.’s presidential run ended with him being brought into President-elect Trump’s fold — and taking his focus on health with him. The Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) movement has pledged to tackle the nation’s chronic disease epidemic, but the movement’s explanation for that epidemic’s causes have generated mixed feelings from experts. MAHA criticizes our food system as a primary driver of illness, and while there’s wide consensus that overconsuming processed foods is the key factor, MAHA rhetoric has largely focused on perceived contaminants and adulterants — food dyes, preservatives and seed oils — as the issue rather than the sheer volume of empty calories consumed via ultraprocessed foods. Still, experts and acolytes seem aligned on promoting diets richer in whole foods, with some notable caveats: raw milk and carnivore diets, both of which have gained new popularity. The former, which proponents claim is more nutritious than its pasteurized counterpart, represents a serious food safety concern; the latter, founded on the notion that plant-based foods are the actual culprit behind inflammation, are almost universally decried by cardiologists.

Looking ahead:

For all the hubbub about shaking up the food system, it’s unclear what portion of the MAHA agenda is actually achievable, as well as what’s plausible given the first Trump administration’s almost universally pro-agribusiness record. As head of the Department of Health and Human Services, RFK Jr. will have the opportunity to radically reshape the way the FDA works, though he’s mostly talked about dismantling it and removing regulations, something that would probably hamper its ability to regulate dyes and other additives (though a few may leave the food supply thanks to groundwork already in motion). And given the administration’s pick for Secretary of Agriculture — Brooke Rollins, a Trump loyalist with little Agriculture policy experience — it seems unlikely that the MAHA movement will have much traction when it comes to reshaping farm policy, especially the farm subsidies that dictate what makes it to our plates, or the dietary guidelines that set menus for schools and government institutions.