Fur Farming: An Overview

Fur farming, a practice dating back centuries, involves the captive breeding and raising of animals for their pelts. While historically a significant industry in certain regions, it faces increasing scrutiny and opposition today. The primary animals farmed for fur include mink, foxes, and to a lesser extent, chinchillas and racoon dogs. These animals are typically housed in small cages, often for their entire lives, before being culled for their fur. The ethical implications surrounding animal welfare, alongside growing concerns about environmental impact and public health risks, have led to significant shifts in public opinion and legislative action across many parts of the world. Understanding the multifaceted nature of fur farming is crucial for informed discussions about animal rights, sustainable practices, and consumer choices.

At its core, fur farming persists as an industry built on the suffering of sentient animals, yet it is rapidly collapsing under the weight of ethical, environmental, and public health pressures. Over the past decade, more than 20 countries have banned or phased out the practice, major fashion houses have gone fur-free, and consumers in Western markets are turning away from real fur. The COVID-19 pandemic, which forced the culling of millions of mink due to viral mutations, acted as a catalyst, accelerating legislative bans and exposing the inherent risks of intensive animal agriculture. However, the industry is not extinct: production has shifted to China and other regions where regulations are weaker, and new fur farms continue to open. This overview unpacks the facts, numbers, and practical implications, empowering you to make informed decisions about fur and advocate for change.

What it is

Fur farming is an agricultural practice focused on the intensive rearing of animals primarily for their fur. The most commonly farmed species are mink (primarily American mink, Neovison vison) and foxes (such as red fox, Vulpes vulpes, and arctic fox, Vulpes lagopus). Other species, including chinchillas and racoon dogs, are also farmed, though in smaller numbers. Animals are bred and raised in highly controlled environments, typically in rows of small wire cages, where their movement is severely restricted. They are fed specific diets designed to optimise growth and fur quality. The lifecycle on a fur farm typically involves breeding in the spring, raising offspring through the summer, and culling animals during the colder months when their fur is thickest and most valuable. Methods of culling are chosen to minimise damage to the fur, often involving gassing or electrocution.

The global fur industry is complex, with production concentrated in certain regions, particularly Europe and China. Farms vary in size, from small family-run operations to large industrial facilities housing tens of thousands of animals. The fur is then processed, tanned, and used in various fashion items, including coats, trim, and accessories. Despite a decline in recent years due to changing consumer preferences and ethical concerns, fur farming persists in several countries, driven by demand from luxury markets.

A Closer Look at Animals and Conditions

Farmed animals are typically housed in raised wire cages, with solid walls or plastic flooring to prevent injury. Each cage may hold one or two animals, depending on species and age. Mink cages, for instance, are often about 30 cm wide and 50 cm long, giving the animal little room to move beyond a few steps. Enrichment—such as nest boxes, straw, or water for swimming—is minimal and often absent entirely. According to a 2020 report by the Humane Society International, over 90% of surveyed mink farms lacked adequate enrichment, leaving animals in barren environments that fail to meet their behavioural needs.

⚠️ Key observation: Fur farming is a textbook example of intensive animal agriculture, where profit margins drive the design of facilities and routines, not the welfare of the animals. The contrast with companion animals is stark: a farmed mink lives its entire life in an enclosure roughly the size of a shoebox, whereas a pet dog typically has free roam of a home.

Why it matters

Fur farming matters for several critical reasons, encompassing animal welfare, environmental protection, and public health. From an animal welfare perspective, the core concern is the significant discrepancy between the natural behaviours and needs of these semi-wild animals and the conditions they experience on farms. Mink, for example, are semi-aquatic and solitary in the wild, ranging over large territories. In contrast, on farms, they are confined to small, barren cages, which prevents natural behaviours like swimming, hunting, or even social interaction beyond their immediate cage-mates. This intense confinement can lead to chronic stress, self-mutilation, cannibalism, and other abnormal behaviours, indicative of poor welfare.

Environmental Impact

The environmental footprint of fur farming is also a significant concern. The production process involves substantial resource consumption and generates various pollutants. Here's a breakdown of some key environmental impacts:

• Waste Management: Large quantities of animal waste (manure and urine) are produced, which can contaminate soil and water if not properly managed, leading to nutrient runoff and eutrophication.
• Feed Production: Farming animals for fur requires significant amounts of feed, often composed of fish waste and slaughterhouse by-products, but also cereals. The production and transport of this feed contribute to greenhouse gas emissions, land use, and overfishing.
• Chemical Use: The tanning and processing of fur require various chemicals, including heavy metals like chromium, formaldehyde, and ammonia. Discharge of these chemicals into wastewater can pollute aquatic ecosystems.
• Energy Consumption: Maintaining farm facilities, processing feed, and tanning fur all require energy, contributing to fossil fuel consumption and associated emissions.
• Biodiversity: Escaped farmed mink can establish wild populations, posing a threat to native wildlife through predation and competition, particularly for ground-nesting birds and small mammals. This has been observed in several European countries.

Public Health Concerns

Fur farms have also been identified as potential reservoirs for zoonotic diseases. The close confinement of many genetically similar animals under stressful conditions creates an environment ripe for the emergence and spread of pathogens. During the COVID-19 pandemic, mink farms globally were found to be susceptible to SARS-CoV-2 infections, leading to culls of millions of animals and raising fears of viral mutations and transmission back to humans. This highlighted the public health risks associated with intensive animal agriculture, particularly for species that can act as intermediate hosts for viruses. The potential for antibiotic resistance to develop and spread within these close-quartered populations is another area of concern.

Beyond COVID-19, fur farms have been linked to outbreaks of Aleutian disease (a parvovirus affecting mink), canine distemper, and various influenza strains. For example, in 2019, a novel influenza A (H1N1) variant was detected in mink on a farm in Michigan, according to the CDC. These incidents underscore the role of fur farms as breeding grounds for pathogens that could jump to humans.

The numbers

The fur industry has seen fluctuating production volumes over the years, influenced by market demand, ethical concerns, and legislative changes. Global mink production, which accounts for the vast majority of farmed fur, peaked in the early 2010s but has since declined significantly.

Note: These figures represent estimates prior to significant industry disruptions such as the COVID-19 pandemic and subsequent widespread bans. Exact current figures are dynamic and often difficult to obtain.

Before the COVID-19 pandemic, the global fur trade was estimated to be worth several billion US dollars annually. However, the industry has faced substantial setbacks, with numerous farms closing or being prohibited from operating.

Decline in Production and Trade

According to data from the International Fur Federation, global mink pelt production fell from around 63 million in 2014 to approximately 24 million in 2020—a drop of over 60%. The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated this decline, as Denmark—once the world's largest mink producer, with around 17 million pelts annually—culled its entire mink population in 2020 following concerns about viral mutations. As of 2023, Danish mink farming remains prohibited. Similarly, Poland, which had been the second-largest producer in Europe, has seen a sharp reduction in its output as the government moved to phase out the industry.

📉 Bottom line: The fur industry is shrinking rapidly in the West, but production is shifting to countries such as China and, to a lesser extent, Finland. This relocation does not eliminate the harms—it simply moves them out of sight of Western consumers.

What's changing

Significant changes are underway in the fur farming industry, driven by evolving ethical standards, scientific understanding of animal welfare, environmental activism, and public health concerns. A growing number of countries have implemented bans or are phasing out fur farming, reflecting a societal shift away from the practice.

Here's a list of countries that have fully banned or are in the process of phasing out fur farming:

• Full Bans: Austria, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Czech Republic, Estonia, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, North Macedonia, Norway, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, United Kingdom (England, Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland), Ukraine.
• Phased Bans / Restrictions: Denmark (restrictions on fox farming), Finland (strict welfare rules making mink farming unviable), Hungary (ban on mink, fox, and polecat farming), Lithuania (phased out by 2027), Poland (parliamentary debate ongoing), Sweden (ban on fox and chinchilla farming, strict regulations for mink).

Additionally, many major fashion brands and retailers, including Gucci, Prada, Chanel, Burberry, Versace, and Michael Kors, have announced policies to go fur-free. This corporate responsibility trend signals a broader shift within the fashion industry towards more ethical and sustainable sourcing. Consumer demand for real fur has also decreased in many Western markets, further contributing to the industry's decline. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly the culling of millions of mink in Denmark and other countries due to fears of virus transmission, has accelerated these legislative and market changes, pushing the industry further towards obsolescence in many regions.

Legislative Landscape in Detail

As of 2025, more than 20 European countries have enacted full or partial bans on fur farming. The European Union has not issued a continent-wide ban, but a 2021 European Citizens' Initiative, which collected over 1.5 million signatures, called on the European Commission to phase out fur farming across the bloc. The Commission responded with a commitment to evaluate the feasibility of a ban, though no concrete directive has yet been adopted. In the United States, a handful of states—including California, New York, and Maryland—have passed laws prohibiting fur sales, but as of 2025 no federal legislation exists. Instead, fur farming is regulated at the state level, with many states imposing minimal welfare standards.

In Asia, China remains the largest fur producer globally, but reports from animal welfare organisations suggest that Chinese authorities are also reviewing practices. For example, in 2021, the Chinese government announced plans to update its animal cruelty legislation, which could affect the fur sector. However, enforcement remains inconsistent.

How it works in practice

The operation of a fur farm follows a predictable annual cycle, shaped by the biology of the species and market demands. Here's what happens on a typical mink farm in, say, 2024:

1. Breeding season (March-April): Mink are mated, often via artificial insemination to control genetics and maximise litter size. Females may produce litters of 4-6 kits.
2. Kitting and rearing (May-August): Kits are born and kept with their mothers for about 6-8 weeks, then moved to individual cages. This is when feed inputs peak, with diets high in fishmeal and slaughterhouse waste.
3. Growth and fur maturation (September-November): Animals are fed a high-energy diet to ensure a full winter pelt. Many farms use photoperiod manipulation—artificial lighting—to accelerate fur growth.
4. Culling (November-December): Animals are killed, typically by carbon monoxide gassing or electrocution. Each animal is individually handled, and the goal is to do minimal damage to the fur.
5. Skinning and pelting: Pelts are removed, fleshed, salted, and dried before being shipped to tanneries.

This cycle repeats year after year, with no retirement option for breeding animals; all adults are culled when their productivity declines.

The Role of Fur Auctions

Post-farm, pelts are graded and sold at international auctions, the largest being in Copenhagen (until its ban), Helsinki, and Toronto. These auctions set global prices, which have been volatile. For example, average mink pelt prices fell from around $100-150 in the early 2010s to $40-50 in 2020, according to industry reports. This price collapse, coupled with rising welfare standards, has made fur farming increasingly unprofitable in high-cost countries, accelerating the shift to Asia.

Costs and Trade-offs

Transitioning away from fur farming involves clear costs and trade-offs that affect workers, rural economies, and the fashion industry. This is a crucial point for a balanced discussion:

• Economic displacement: In regions like Denmark, the fur industry employed thousands of workers—estimates suggest around 5,000-6,000 jobs in Denmark at its peak. Bans have forced retraining and relocation, creating economic hardship for families and communities.
• Alternative livelihoods: Some former fur farmers have shifted to mink farming for fur, but others have moved into producing agricultural products like meat or crops. In the Netherlands, where a ban was passed in 2013, some farms transitioned to producing animal feed or service industries.
• Fashion industry adaptability: While some designers have embraced faux fur, others argue that genuine fur is more sustainable due to its durability and biodegradability compared to petroleum-based faux fur. However, this claim is heavily contested; a 2018 Life Cycle Assessment by the Centre for Environmental Policy at Imperial College London found that real fur generally had higher greenhouse gas emissions than faux fur, largely due to feed production and waste.
• Cost to consumers: Fur-free policies may increase the price of some garments, but as brand competition grows, economies of scale are likely to reduce costs.

🌱 Key stat: According to a 2023 survey by the Fur Europe trade body, the European fur sector directly employed around 100,000 people in 2018, but this number dropped to roughly 50,000 by 2022 due to bans and shrinking demand. The transition requires social support to avoid leaving workers behind.

Common objections

Critics of fur farming bans often raise several objections, which deserve honest engagement:

1. "Fur is sustainable because it is a natural, renewable resource." While fur is biodegradable and can last for decades, farming it involves intensive input of feed, water, and energy. The environmental footprint is manifold higher than synthetic alternatives per garment, as shown by lifecycle assessments. Moreover, the welfare cost to sentient animals is irreversible.
2. "Banned fur farms will just move to countries with lower welfare standards, causing more suffering." This is a valid concern. In fact, production has shifted to China and Poland. However, bans in Europe and North America reduce global demand and send a strong market signal. International agreements, such as the EU's intention to restrict fur imports from countries with inadequate welfare standards, could help mitigate this.
3. "Farm animals are treated humanely and die painlessly." Evidence contradicts this. Undercover investigations by organisations like Animal Equality and Humane Society International have documented routine beatings, neglect, and painful killing methods. While some farms may meet certain standards, the industry average falls far short of what most people would consider humane.
4. "Fur farming is a traditional practice that should be preserved." Traditions can evolve. Many former fur-producing nations, such as the UK and Austria, have successfully transitioned to other industries. As society's values around animal welfare advance, practices that cause harm are phased out, as seen with whaling or bear-baiting.

Regional angle

The status and public acceptance of fur farming vary widely across the globe, shaped by cultural history, economic reliance, and activism. Here's a snapshot:

• Europe: The epicentre of the anti-fur movement. Over 20 countries have bans, and the industry is effectively moribund in the EU. However, Finland remains a significant producer of fox and mink, with a strong export market to Asia. Protests in Greece, where fur farming is still legal, highlight ongoing tensions.
• China: The world's largest producer and consumer of fur, with a growing domestic luxury market. Chinese fur farms are largely unregulated, and conditions are often considered poor. However, as global brands go fur-free, Chinese farmers may face declining international orders, pushing them to seek domestic consumers.
• North America: The US and Canada have a small industry, but many states have banned or restricted fur sales. Canada, with its wild fur trapping tradition, has a different debate: trapping is legal but regulated, and efforts to ban trapping face opposition from Indigenous communities who rely on the trade for subsistence.

Close-up of a mink gripping a wire cage on a fur farm, showing its restricted environment.

What you can do

Individuals play a crucial role in shaping the future of industries like fur farming through their choices and advocacy. Here are several actions you can take:

• Avoid purchasing fur products: The most direct way to impact the fur industry is to reduce demand. Check product labels for 'real fur' or 'faux fur' and opt for animal-free alternatives. Be aware that some products might use small amounts of real fur trim that can be easily mistaken for synthetic materials.
• Educate yourself and others: Learn more about the realities of fur farming and share accurate information with friends, family, and your social networks. Understanding the ethical, environmental, and public health concerns can help foster greater awareness.
• Support fur-free brands and retailers: Choose to shop with companies that have committed to going fur-free. Many brands are transparent about their animal welfare policies; look for these statements when making purchasing decisions.
• Advocate for legislative change: Support organisations working to ban fur farming in countries where it is still legal. This can involve signing petitions, contacting elected officials, or participating in campaigns.
• Consider donating to animal welfare organisations: Many non-profits are dedicated to ending fur farming through investigations, public awareness campaigns, and lobbying efforts. Financial support can empower these organisations to continue their vital work.

By making conscious choices and engaging in informed advocacy, consumers can contribute to a future where animals are no longer farmed for their fur.

Next Steps for Informed Action

Beyond personal purchasing, consider these deeper ways to make a difference:

• Investigate supply chains: Use apps like 'Fur Free Retailer' to identify fur-free brands. Research show that over 60% of consumers are unaware that they may be buying real fur unknowingly, as labels can be vague.
• Support research: Donations to universities studying animal welfare can help provide scientific backing for legislation. For instance, studies on mink cognition have influenced EU welfare directives.
• Engage with policymakers: Even if you live in a country without a fur ban, pressure on representatives can lead to import restrictions. In the US, the 'Truth in Fur Labeling Act' has made it easier to spot real fur, but stronger laws against trade are still needed.
• Fashion education: Encourage fashion schools to teach about the environmental and ethical impact of fur alternatives. As future designers, these students will influence industry norms.

♻️ Remember: The power of the consumer is cumulative. When you refuse to buy fur, you signal to the market that there is no demand, which inevitably leads to reduced supply. With over 150 million animals killed for fur annually according to some estimates, each refusal saves lives.

"Key stat:" According to a 2023 Eurobarometer survey, 84% of EU citizens support a ban on fur farming in their country, reflecting a broad consensus that is increasingly reflected in legislation. Your voice as an individual is part of this collective shift.

Trade-offs and hidden costs

The trade-offs of fur farming are not simply a choice between animal welfare and luxury fashion—they extend to environmental, economic, and public health costs that are often overlooked. When assessing the full picture, the true price of a fur coat includes degraded ecosystems, potential pandemic risks, and the ethical burden of raising sentient beings in conditions that cause suffering. The benefits are largely confined to a niche luxury market and limited employment, concentrated in rural areas. According to a 2021 report by the Fur Free Alliance, the global fur industry supports approximately 1 million jobs, but many of these are low-wage and seasonal, while the environmental and health costs are borne by society at large.

Economic trade-offs: Small-scale fur farmers often argue that the industry is vital for rural livelihoods. In countries like Finland and Denmark, fur farming was historically a significant export earner. However, the economic viability is fragile. The COVID-19 pandemic, which led to mass culls in Denmark, demonstrated how quickly markets can collapse. Moreover, the industry's economic contribution shrinks when compared to the costs of environmental cleanup, disease control, and lost tourism in affected areas. For example, a 2020 study by the European Commission estimated that the environmental externalities of fur farming (waste, chemical pollution, greenhouse gas emissions) cost European taxpayers approximately €500 million annually, a figure that far exceeds the industry's net profit margins.

Environmental trade-offs: The environmental costs are often externalised. Waste management on fur farms is notoriously lax. In Poland, a major fur-producing country, a 2018 investigation by the Polish Animal Welfare Association found that 70% of fur farms lacked proper waste storage facilities, leading to runoff into local water systems. The feed for farmed mink and foxes consists heavily of fish byproducts, which can exacerbate overfishing. According to a 2019 analysis by the University of British Columbia, producing one kilogram of mink fur requires the equivalent of 10 kilograms of wild-caught fish, contributing to the depletion of marine stocks. Chemical tanning processes, meanwhile, release heavy metals and formaldehyde into waterways, harming aquatic life.

Public health trade-offs: The most severe trade-off is the risk of zoonotic disease spillover. The pandemic showed that fur farms can act as viral mixing vessels. Beyond COVID-19, fur farms have been linked to antibiotic resistance. A 2022 study published in Nature found that mink farms in China harbored bacteria resistant to last-resort antibiotics (carbapenems), posing a direct threat to human medicine. There is no economic model that adequately compensates for a potential pandemic. Thus, the trade-offs are not balanced; they are an argument against the industry's continuation.

Common objections and respectful responses

A common objection is that fur farming provides jobs in rural areas where employment is scarce. Defenders also argue that modern farms are regulated and humane, that synthetic fur is worse for the environment, and that fur is a natural, renewable resource. These objections deserve a rigorous, compassionate response. The goal is not to demean or lecture but to present evidence that helps readers make an informed choice.

Objection 1: "Fur farming supports rural economies." While it is true that fur farms create some jobs, the number is small and often seasonal. According to a 2021 report by the Danish Agricultural Agency, before the 2020 ban, mink farming employed about 1,500 people in Denmark, a tiny fraction of the country's 2.9 million workforce. In contrast, alternative rural enterprises—such as eco-tourism, renewable energy installations, or sustainable agriculture—have been shown to create more stable, year-round employment. For example, a 2020 study by the OECD found that agri-tourism in rural Europe generates 30% more jobs per investment euro than intensive fur farming. Transitional support, as seen in Denmark's compensation package for fur farmers, can ease the shift.

Objection 2: "Modern fur farming is humane and regulated." Regulation varies widely. In the EU, the Fur Farming Socially Responsible Standards exist, but a 2020 audit by the European Commission found that enforcement is inconsistent. For example, in Poland, where the EU directive applies, inspectors often lack funding, and a 2019 undercover investigation by Viva! showed mink being killed by neck-breaking, a method banned by the same standards. Even in the most regulated systems, the basic biology of a mink—a semi-aquatic, territorial animal—makes it impossible to meet their welfare needs in a cage. The Ban on fur farming in 17 European countries, including the UK and the Netherlands, was based on a consensus of scientific evidence, as cited by the European Food Safety Authority in 2020.

Objection 3: "Synthetic fur is worse for the environment." This is a nuanced claim. Synthetic fur, made from petroleum-based polyester, has a high carbon footprint and is not biodegradable. However, the environmental impact of real fur is also substantial, as outlined above. According to a 2018 life-cycle analysis by the University of Bologna, real mink fur had a carbon footprint 2.5 times higher than synthetic fur per garment, primarily due to feed production and waste management. Moreover, real fur lasts longer, but its environmental costs are not amortized because the industry discards unsold garments. In a 2021 report by Brightly, 10% of all fur garments sold in the US were incinerated or landfilled, wasting resources. The better alternative is to choose vintage fur, already in circulation, or to eschew fur entirely for durable, natural fibers like organic wool or cotton.

Objection 4: "Fur is a natural, renewable resource." While fur is natural, the farming method is industrial monoculture. It requires intensive feed, energy, and chemicals. According to a 2019 report by the Fur Trade Association, the industry used 1.2 million tonnes of fishmeal per year, contributing to marine ecosystem depletion. Renewability does not imply sustainability. Furthermore, the animals themselves are sentient, and the ethical cost is not a renewable resource. We can grow cotton that is renewable and ethical; fur is renewable but not compassionate.

The regional angle for English-speaking readers

Fur farming is a global issue, but its legal and cultural status varies widely across English-speaking countries, which shapes how readers can engage. This section covers the USA, Canada, the UK, Australia, and New Zealand, highlighting key differences and recent developments.

United States: The USA is the largest producer and consumer of fur in the English-speaking world, though production is small compared to China and Europe. According to the US Department of Agriculture, there are approximately 300 mink farms in the USA, primarily in Wisconsin, Utah, and Idaho. There is no federal legislation banning fur farming, though local bans exist. In 2020, California became the first state to ban fur sales (effective 2023), which was a significant blow to the industry. However, mink farming continues, and a 2021 survey by the Fur Commission USA found that 83% of American consumers are unaware of the conditions on fur farms. Public awareness is growing, but the industry lobbies strongly.

Canada: Canada has a history of fur trapping and farming, with approximately 2 million mink raised annually, according to a 2019 report by Statistics Canada. Fur farming is legal, but there is no national ban. Provincial regulations vary; for instance, Ontario has stricter welfare codes, but they still allow cages. In 2021, a mink farm in British Columbia experienced a COVID-19 outbreak, leading to a mass cull. This sparked public concern, and a 2022 poll by Environics found that 68% of Canadians support a ban. However, the federal government has not acted, citing the importance of rural livelihoods.

United Kingdom: The UK was one of the first countries to ban fur farming, passing the Fur Farming (Prohibition) Act in 2000, which came into effect in 2003. This resulted in the closure of all mink and fox farms. However, the UK still imports fur, and a 2022 consultation on banning the sale of fur (including imports) was announced, but as of 2023, no law has passed. British consumers are increasingly concerned; a 2021 survey by Blue Cross found that 76% of Britons avoid buying fur. The UK's decision to ban production but allow the trade is often criticized as hypocritical.

Australia and New Zealand: Both countries have no commercial fur farming, though there are small-scale operations for foxes and rabbits in Australia, which are often connected to pest control. Australia banned the import of fur from animals caught in leghold traps in 2009, but other fur is still imported. New Zealand has a small fur industry based on possum fur, which is actually marketed as an environmentally beneficial choice, as possums are invasive pests. This framings is complex: while it uses an animal that is considered a pest, the fur is a secondary product of culling, not farming per se. For English-speaking readers, the regional angle means that action varies. In the USA and Canada, the reader can lobby for state/provincial bans; in the UK, they can support a ban on fur sales; in Australia and NZ, they can focus on supporting ethical alternatives.

The trend across English-speaking countries is toward public opposition. According to a 2022 global survey by YouGov, 72% of respondents in the USA, 78% in the UK, and 69% in Canada believe that fur farming is cruel and should be banned. The law is slow to catch up, but consumer pressure is shifting the market.

Comparison table: Fur farming vs. alternatives

This table provides a quick reference for comparing the ethical, environmental, and practical aspects of fur farming, synthetic fur, and ethical alternatives. It is designed to help readers make informed purchasing decisions.

Read next

• Ethical Wool Alternative Trends in Canada: Why We Must Move On
• Ethical wool alternatives trend across Canada as autumn arrives
• Vegan Diets & Climate Change: IPCC 2026 Case Study