It’s nearly impossible to ignore the toll that our consumerist lives take on the planet: from the waste generated from single-use plastics to the pollution from our daily commutes. But now, a new study reveals the disproportionate environmental impact caused by the world’s biggest consumers. 

A new study published today in Communications Sustainability, examines the top 10% of consumers worldwide, and estimates that the total cost of the environmental damage incurred per person is around $2,300 to $7,500 per year. Collectively, the top 10% of global consumers are responsible for $1.7–$5.7 trillion in environmental damages per year. 

The study looked at six countries: Brazil, China, Egypt, Germany, India, and the U.S. These represent each continent’s and the world’s largest economies. Within these, the top 10% of consumers are those people who spend over $27,000 a year post-tax, excluding investments like mortgages or savings. (The consumption data is from 2017, the most recent year for which globally comparable footprints are available.)

The researchers used a framework that calculates the per capita consumption-based carbon, phosphorus, nitrogen, freshwater use, and terrestrial biodiversity loss footprints. They then used environmental prices from the Environmental Prices Handbook of 2024 to monetize the environmental footprints, calculating the impact of a metric ton of carbon dioxide added to the environment, or a hectare (2.5 acres) of vanished habitat, and then used those per capita figures to estimate a country’s total impact.

The researchers found big discrepancies between countries. More than 60% of the global top 10% of consumers live in the U.S. and E.U. In the E.U., 40-45% of the population falls within this highest consuming group, compared to just over half of the U.S. population. 

Yet the U.S. is responsible for the highest share of damage by far. The top 10% of American earners, those who make about $250,000 a year or more, now account for nearly half of all U.S. consumer spending. In the U.S., the top 10% of consumers face an annual environmental damage bill of $19,000–$63,000 per person, equal to 6–20% of a person’s individual annual income. India, in contrast, has a bill of $410–$1,4000 per individual—equivalent to 0.8–2.8% of their income. 

The researchers put a price on the impact this group inflicts across four planetary boundaries: climate change, biodiversity loss, nutrient pollution, and freshwater use. However, they say the figures are likely a conservative estimate of the damage: they cover only four of nine planetary boundaries and exclude investment-linked emissions.

The study highlights a key tension when it comes to the question of who is responsible for cleaning up the planet. International agreements say that high-emitting, developed nations should bear the cost in helping developing countries adapt to climate impacts. The cost attributed to the world's top consumers in this study adds to the argument that wealthy nations should be held accountable.

“If the polluter pays and that money goes to solutions, it would make a huge difference,” Inge Schrijver, lead author of the study and PhD researcher at the Institute of Environmental Sciences, Leiden University, Netherlands, said in a press release. “But it is not just about money. Most importantly, damage must be prevented. Apart from financial measures, stricter rules and regulations are crucial.”

Wealthier nations are facing growing calls to take responsibility for their role in the climate crisis. In 2022, nations agreed to the Loss and Damages Fund, which would dedicate financial assistance to developing nations that are disproportionately affected by climate change. However, the U.N.-backed fund is already strapped for cash—and could run out of money by the end of next year. (The U.S., which previously pledged $17.5 million towards the fund, announced its intention to withdraw in 2025.)

Charging the world’s highest consumers could prove a new model for meeting climate finance gaps while reducing wealth inequality, the researchers argue, especially as research continues to show the outsized climate impact of the world’s ultra-rich—including the world’s first trillionaire. “The top 10% are important not only because they cause the most damage but also because they hold the most leverage to reduce it,” Paul Behrens, British Academy global professor at the Oxford Martin School of University of Oxford, and co-author of the study, said in a press release. “The capital they invest, from pensions to infrastructure, decides which industries expand, the firms they run set the choices for everyone else, and the lifestyles they pursue shape what people consider as normal. They often have out-sized agency, not only individually as consumers, but also as investors, employers, trend makers, and market shapers. Their power to cut emissions is even larger than their share of them."