Moving Ecosocial Work Forward

Trump administration’s actions make uphill battle even steeper

By Sue Coyle, MSW

As the understanding of human impact on the environment has grown, so too has the understanding of the environment’s impact on humans. Everything about the climate—from the day-to-day conditions of the air, water and soil to the frequency of extreme weather events—has short and long-term effects on individuals’ and communities’ physical and mental health.

It is no surprise then that many professionals—not just conservationists and ecologists—have begun to focus more on the intersection of humanity and the environment, and how it correlates to their work. Social work is no exception.

Ecosocial work is an aspect of social work that both clinical and macro social workers are a part of. “I think it is theory and practice,” says Amy Krings, PhD, MSW, associate professor at the College of Social Work at The Ohio State University and network co-lead for the Grand Challenges for Social Work’s “Create Social Responses to a Changing Environment.”

“To me, the easiest way to explain it is that social workers are working, and their work engages with environmental issues and topics. So probably for most social workers, they don’t think of themselves as an ecosocial worker, but if you pause and think about if and how environmental topics touch the communities and clients we work with, you start realizing, OK, my work does involve ecosocial work. So for instance, you might work with clients or communities that have been hit by a natural disaster of extreme flooding or extreme heat—all these issues that have impact on people’s health and well-being,” she says.

“The other way to think about it is more of a specialization where people are more intentionally seeing themselves as working on environmental topics,” she says. “In that case, that could range from anything from doing more policy work to community organizing or working to promote healthy food access and independence.”

Whether a social worker is focusing directly on the environment or recognizing the ways in which it is impacting their clients, the work is challenging and ongoing, as environmental injustices and concerns become increasingly evident. The rising global temperatures, for example, have led to more heat waves, floods, droughts and wildfires. These events in turn require more resources, research and support—directly within the communities and from the governments and systems surrounding them.

Unfortunately, it appears that support, at least from the federal government, may be hard won if not nonexistent in the coming years, as the Trump administration has either taken or proposed numerous actions that weaken environmental safeguards.

For social workers to continue working with an eco-lens, they must take the time to understand the progress as well as the challenges that existed before the second Trump administration, and the ways in which the administration may further exacerbate the already present and persistent issues.

Where We Were

The environmental injustices that exist today did so before the Trump administration, impacting individuals and communities in a wide range of ways.

It is difficult to point to the most hard-felt or prevalent injustices, particularly given the environmental diversity throughout the country and the world, as well as different types of measurement in regard to impact. However, Shanondora Billiot, PhD, MSW (a United Houma Nation citizen), notes that “the most frequently occurring injustices are caused by climate change because of anthropogenic manipulations of the environment to maximize profit.”

“Some examples include the ongoing loss of fresh water, lack of regulation on corporate toxic waste, and the impacts of disasters on communities that are not prepared,” said Billiot,assistant professor at the School of Social Work at Arizona State University and network co-lead for the grand challenge to “Create Social Responses to a Changing Environment.”

While environmental issues impact everyone, environmental injustices affect vulnerable populations the most. “Environmental injustice occurs when vulnerable communities face disproportionate exposure to environmental hazards, lack access to environmental resources, or are excluded from decisions about environmental policies and protections,” says Karen Magruder, DSW, LCSW-S, associate professor of practice at the University of Texas at Arlington School of Social Work. “It reflects inequities in accessing clean air, water, green spaces, and safe living conditions, and unequal power in shaping the environments where people live and work.”

A well-known example of this is the Flint, Mich., water crisis, which began in 2014 when city officials switched the water supply source to the Flint River. This led to distribution pipes corroding and contaminants, including lead, leaking into the drinking water. The contaminated water affected health and limited access to water resources, disproportionately impacting children, low-income families, and individuals of color.

Similar inequities are evident throughout more recent events and crises. For instance, KFF, (formerly known as the Kaiser Family Foundation), reports that evacuation efforts are often stymied by a lack of resources. “About half of immigrants have limited English proficiency (LEP) and many face language barriers accessing evacuation and preparation resources. When Hurricane Beryl tore through Houston in 2024, significant portions of the city’s community with LEP felt unprepared as most emergency resources were written in Spanish and English but not other languages spoken by a large number of residents.”

Additionally, KFF notes that low-income families may face financial hardships when attempting to evacuate before an emergency.“A survey of Hurricane Harvey evacuees finds that people who evacuated spent on average between $1,200 to $2,300, accounting for lodging, transportation, food, and lost income.” With an estimated 40% of Americans unable to cover an unexpected $1,000 expense, it is unlikely that the financial burden of evacuation is possible for many to overcome.

Low-income communities and other vulnerable populations also are more likely to be impacted by environmental concerns that unfold over time—like extreme heat, droughts and flooding—not only by acute crises.

Addressing these problems is and has been challenging, but in the years prior to the second Trump administration, there was a growing focus on environmental justice that offered hope.

“Prior to 2025, I would personally say I was cautiously optimistic about the landscape of environmental justice in the U.S., as environmental justice had become much more mainstream than in previous years, with momentum in linking environmental justice with broader issues like climate justice and clean energy through national initiatives,” explains Felicia M. Mitchell, PhD, MSW, BSW, associate professor at the School of Social Work at Arizona State University and a network co-lead for the grand challenge to “Create Social Responses to a Changing Environment.”

However, she continues, “there was still considerable fragmentation with different states having different laws or policies, and inconsistent enforcement. Climate data and tools were improving, but there was still room for refinement.”

Krings agrees that challenges already existed. “We don’t want to pretend that it was all roses before (2025), and it’s bad now. It’s not like it was super easy to get rapid proactive monitoring and intervention before. It’s just harder now,” she says. “These issues existed for decades, but I think ultimately there’s a question about how preventive we want to be or how reactive we want to be, and I think that some of the more preventive programs—federal programs—are gone, and sources of good information are harder to come across.”

Where We Are

The difference felt today is not about the existence of environmental injustices or the challenges that have persisted in addressing them. Instead, it is about the steps backward that the federal government appears to be taking in regard to the environment.

The Trump administration’s actions since resuming power will make ecosocial work—and all environmental work—more challenging, adding to the red tape, obstacles and limited resources already present, while also eliminating safeguards that were intended to mitigate the effects of climate change.

For example, in the first days of his second term, President Trump removed the United States from the Paris Agreement, an international treaty that commits the participating countries to actively work to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees. This is the second time he has withdrawn the U.S. from the agreement, and it signals that the administration’s priorities lie outside of climate protection.

Trump also has withdrawn funding and ceased progress on clean-energy projects, such as wind farms, while reopening federal waters for drilling and instructing review of the Environmental Protection Agency’s restrictions on carbon emissions.

“The biggest one I’m really worried about, when I read the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, is the rollbacks on clean energy and the efforts to reduce air pollution,” says Christina L. Erickson, PhD, LMSW, associate dean of the University of North Dakota College of Nursing and Professional Disciplines. “I think so much about our kids with asthma. The American Lung Association has such a good program for creating asthma-friendly schools. Kids lose a ton of school days because of asthma attacks.” The American Lung Association estimates that 13.8 million school days are missed each year. “It’s an enormous number. My fear is we’re going to be stepping back now in any progress we’ve made in clean air,” she says.

All of these actions could intensify climate change, which in turns leads to concerns like more polluted air, rising temperatures, shifts in precipitation patterns, and more extreme weather events. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) normally would monitor these events, and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) would respond as needed. However, NOAA has faced significant cuts from the Trump administration, and Trump has been vocal about his plans to shift responsibility for emergency disaster response from FEMA to states.

In terms of prevention and education, the administration has reduced or eliminated funding for numerous climate research programs/projects and has threatened to cut even more. Without access to ongoing and updated data, it will be more difficult to obtain accurate information about the environment and its impact on communities throughout the U.S. —in the short term and the long term.

“I actively avoid the thought experiment of a five-year scenario in which the following regulations are legally dismissed, because it is too sad: the repeal of the Clean Power Plan, the Affordable Clean Energy Rule, vehicle fuel-economy, and GHG (greenhouse gas) standard rollbacks, and methane and other air toxins from the oil and gas industry. Not only will we not know the extent of the damage since research funding and quality accountability has been eliminated, but I fear these combined actions will cause a drastic reduction in our access to clean, fresh water,” says Billiot.

Mitchell notes that there are already examples of the impact playing out throughout the U.S.

“It is the stories coming out of communities—like the Alaskan village of Kipnuk, where ecological disasters, in this case flooding caused by Typhoon Halong—(that) trouble me the most. We know our physical environment is changing, and communities across the nation are dealing with unprecedented weather events, climate extremes, and related environmental disasters. Yet, the canceling of a $20 million flood protection grant for Kipnuk by the EPA under the Trump administration in May 2025 highlights how our nation’s priorities have changed and how communities, like Kipnuk, may not receive the support and resources they need to adapt to their changing landscapes.”

Eco-Grief

It can feel overwhelming to just think about these things, let alone continue to work through. Krings warns of the paralysis that can stem from eco-grief and eco-anxiety, as social workers, including those working in clinical positions, face the mounting challenges of supporting clients who are impacted directly and indirectly by environmental factors.

Magruder adds: “Eco-anxiety has become a growing mental health challenge over the last several years, so if you’re feeling worried about environmental issues, you’re not alone. I recommend practicing self-compassion and self-care, cultivating mindful awareness, connecting with a supportive community, and channeling anxiety to fuel action. A key feature of eco-paralysis is feeling helpless, so taking part in solution-focused actions can restore a sense of control while also contributing to real change.”

Such advice is crucial, as real change and real work is still needed.

Continuing the Work

Despite the obstacles, ecosocial workers need to keep advocating for the resources, research and support that communities require to continue surviving in a changing world. That advocacy should happen at the federal level throughout Trump’s second term, even when it feels fruitless.

Social workers should also look to the other levels of government, where progress can and is still occurring. “I think that some social workers, depending on their social and political contexts can continue pressing for proactive policies at state or international levels,” says Krings. “For example, some of us can do mutual aid work that helps communities to disinvest from harmful and toxic industries while building sustainable systems that invest in local people. We can also remember that climate issues are linked with other struggles, including questions of immigration rights, racial justice and economic justice.”

Local governments in cities and towns are also opportunities for change. “It feels hard to create change for the natural environment on a national level right now, but if we get really local, we can find a lot of agreement about saving natural spaces,” says Erickson. “I just went to a small meeting about saving wild spaces for hunters. I don’t hunt, but hunters and I have a lot in common because we want to save natural spaces. We love and respect natural beauty. So we want to hit up those local, close-to-home communities to nature as much as possible and talk about it as part of our community’s wellness.”

During those conversations, both Krings and Erickson urge social workers to think about the words they use and the impact they could have.

“Sometimes, there are people that have been working on these sorts of issues, but they can’t call it climate change, you know? It’s better to say something like extreme weather. There are people that don’t want to buy into debates around climate change but are worried about flooding and the expense that comes with that,” says Krings.

Erickson adds that “we really have to work hard on using ‘both and’ language. We’re in a time where coal drilling and oil drilling and gas drilling is being pushed by the administration, and so we have to continue our conversations about clean energy without creating a bigger divide than the one we already have.”

In the past year, ecosocial work has gotten harder and it likely will continue to do so, if additional regulations are weakened and more actions are taken that exacerbate climate change and related events. But social workers need to continue pushing for a better understanding of the way communities are impacted, and for more support.

Sue Coyle, MSW, is a freelance writer and social worker in the Philadelphia suburbs.