There’s no sign that methane emissions are declining globally.
That’s according to the International Energy Agency’s latest report on methane, which revealed a worrying implementation gap in current policies. The UN has warned repeatedly that getting methane emissions under control is critical to address the climate crisis. Methane emissions have a powerful greenhouse effect, with 1 tonne of methane causing 80 times more warming than 1 tonne of carbon dioxide over 20 years. That is why reducing methane emissions has been described as an emergency brake for addressing climate change.
With scientists warning of dangerous feedback loops, where global warming triggers large stores of methane to be released from underneath melting ice sheets, stabilising emissions is becoming increasingly urgent.
Our team’s analysis at Oxford University’s Climate Policy Monitor aligns with the International Energy Agency’s finding about an implementation gap in this area. The Climate Policy Monitor is an online database powered by a pro bono network of more than 60 law firms which assesses how policies and regulations are aligned – or not – with global climate goals. The analysis spans 37 jurisdictions, including 36 countries and one large sub-national economy (California).
We recently identified over 100 methane policies across 32 jurisdictions. However, fewer than one-third of these policies are mandatory. Four countries – India, Indonesia, Thailand and Tanzania – had no identifiable methane policies at all. This is concerning as India and Indonesia together account for more than 12% of global methane emissions.
The recent analysis indicates continued interest in methane regulation – with around 20% of policies issued in 2024 and 2025. Yet implementation and enforcement remains weak. Over two-thirds of methane policies showed little sign of implementation, such as evidence of sanctions for non-compliance.
Signs of progress
On methane policies related to fossil fuels, most policies targeted oil and gas: methane is burned off (or flared) during oil extraction, and as the main component of natural gas it can leak from faulty pipes. However, even in this comparatively well-regulated sector, few policies required public disclosure, third-party verification or standardised methods for measuring emissions.
Japan stands out as a leader on robust policymaking on fossil methane. Japan’s Act on Promotion of Global Warming Countermeasures (1998) mandates public disclosure of facility-level emissions and third-party verification of emission inventories. Japan successfully reduced methane emissions by roughly 40% between 1990 and 2022.
In the current context of high energy prices, cutting methane emissions can also help improve energy security and reduce wastage of natural resources.
Coal methane – the methane that either escapes during coal mining or builds up in disused mines – remains a global policy gap. Less than half of the jurisdictions analysed (15 out of 37) had policies covering coal methane. Coal methane remains a problem in countries like Poland which are phasing out coal, since methane venting can continue long after mines are closed. This highlights the urgent need for action in this area.
Read more:
MethaneSat: the climate spy satellite that went quiet
A global blindspot
Agriculture makes up largest human source of methane emissions, accounting for around 40% of methane emissions, mainly from cow burps (with the remainder coming from fossil methane and food waste). Yet the management of agricultural methane remains a global blindspot.
Oxford Climate Policy Monitor
Fewer than half of the 100 methane policies we identified targeted agriculture specifically. Thirteen jurisdictions – including the EU, France and Poland – did not have any agricultural methane policies. Together, these jurisdictions account for more than 20% of global methane emissions.
Agricultural policies were also less likely to be mandatory – only 20% (13 out of 66) policies were found to be mandatory compared to 44% for the electricity sector. This imbalance suggests governments continue to prioritise tackling energy-sector methane while overlooking agricultural emissions.
The lack of ambition in methane regulation extends to the agri-food sector. The campaign organisation Changing Markets Foundation recently found that only three of the largest dairy and coffee companies have a target to reduce methane emissions by 2030.
As the monitor’s annual review noted, the focus on energy neglects other mitigation pathways, such as dietary changes in developed countries, primarily through cutting beef and dairy consumption. This could be transformative in putting an emergency brake on climate change. Shifts toward more sustainable diets would also have additional co-benefits for the environment and public health.
Backsliding amid global growth
The Climate Policy Monitor report found a trend of backsliding by one country in particular – the US. In 2025, amid other announcements, the US Environmental Protection Agency delayed methane regulations for oil and gas facilities that were issued in 2024. More recently, the EU has been lobbied by the US to delay penalties for oil and gas importers on methane, although investors urged the EU to resist pressure from US politicians to water down the regulation.
However, there are signs of hope at the global level. More than half of recent methane policies emerged in African and Latin American jurisdictions. This highlights how developing and emerging economies are prioritising climate action through rule-making based on their distinct contexts.
Despite backsliding in some jurisdictions, the overall global trend is moving towards stronger climate policies. With strong policy and enforcement, there is still a chance for the world to get to grips with methane emissions.
