Twenty months after the dismantling of the U.S. Agency for International Development, a fresh analysis shows how the loss of nearly one billion dollars in conservation and environment funding has left projects across several nations without support. Wildlife patrols, forest monitoring efforts, community tourism initiatives and policy work have slowed or stopped in places including Kenya and Bangladesh. The study, based on interviews and surveys with 150 people familiar with the agency’s programs, was prepared by One Earth Partners, a consultancy started by two former senior USAID officials. ([1])
Funding Losses Hit Multiple Regions
The agency had directed substantial resources toward biodiversity and climate work in its final full fiscal year. Those allocations supported satellite monitoring of deforestation in the Amazon, anti-poaching operations at major parks, and long-running community programs in protected areas. When the funding ended, roughly 100 conservation projects began searching for replacement support to continue their activities.
Countries that relied heavily on the assistance now face gaps in daily operations. Kenya experienced some of the sharpest cuts, while Bangladesh saw nearly two decades of community-based work disrupted. Similar effects appeared in Colombia, Peru and Vietnam, where monitoring and enforcement activities lost steady backing.
Concrete Effects on the Ground
In Kenya, the Maasai Mara Wildlife Conservancies Association lost a planned five-year grant worth 6.5 million dollars. The organization reduced its staff by ten people and trimmed its overall budget to stay afloat. Daniel Sopia, who leads the group, described the sudden shortfall and the steps taken to adjust.
Bangladesh had built revenue-sharing models and nature-based tourism around protected areas over many years. Those arrangements now lack the technical and financial support that had helped communities manage them. In the Amazon basin, training for officials in Colombia and Peru on satellite-based deforestation tracking also ended, leaving gaps in real-time oversight.
Broader Context of the Agency’s Role
USAID had been a major contributor to global conservation beyond its core biodiversity and climate adaptation lines. Additional spending covered clean energy projects, natural climate solutions, ocean plastics reduction and pollution control. The combined withdrawal removed a significant share of steady international support for these areas.
The analysis highlights how the agency’s disappearance affected both enforcement and community-level work. Patrols in places such as Mozambique’s Gorongosa National Park lost backing for anti-poaching and wildlife law enforcement. Forest monitoring programs that relied on consistent data collection and training faced similar interruptions.
Looking Ahead for Replacement Support
Project leaders and former agency staff are now focused on identifying new sources of financing. Some organizations have begun outreach to private foundations, other governments and multilateral funds to keep core activities running. The scale of the shortfall means many efforts will require coordinated replacement funding to avoid further setbacks.
The report underscores the practical challenges that arise when long-running programs lose their primary backer. Continued monitoring of how these projects adapt will show whether alternative resources can fill the gaps left by the agency’s closure.
