Last Word: Trump and the Politics of Climate
| DOI | 10.1177/2041905817726908 |
| Published date | 01 September 2017 |
| Author | Brendan Moore |
| Date | 01 September 2017 |
44 POLITICAL INSIGHT • SEPTEMBER 2017
Last Word
On 1 June 2017, US President Donald
Trump began the process of
withdrawing the United States from
the Paris Agreement on climate
change. What are the potential consequences
of the Trump administration’s actions for climate
change politics in the US and around the world?
What already seems clear is that uncertainty will
increase over the direction of climate policy at
international, national, and local levels.
The US withdrawal will directly impact
international climate negotiations under the
United Nations Framework Convention on
Climate Change (UNFCCC), the forum where
the Paris Agreement was negotiated. One of the
Agreement’s most important provisions was
a goal to limit the increase in global average
temperature to ‘well below 2°C’ and to pursue
eorts to limit the increase to 1.5°C. Even before
the US withdraw from the Agreement, the
Climate Action Tracker website estimated that
existing emission reduction pledges would only
limit warming to 2.8°C.
According to the World Resources Institute, in
2013 the US was responsible for approximately
15 per cent of global greenhouse gas emissions.
Without US pledges, the international
community will nd itself even farther from the
1.5°C/2°C goals. Despite this, at their July 2017
summit, all other members of the G20 group
of major economies besides the US, reiterated
their support for the Paris Agreement. However,
in the longer term, US disengagement from the
process may lessen pressure on other countries
to reduce emissions more rapidly. Another key
area will be climate-related funding. The Trump
administration has announced that it will no
longer contribute to the Green Climate Fund,
which supports climate-related projects in
developing countries. Some of these developing
countries, such as Chile and the Philippines,
made some reduction commitments conditional
on funding from developed countries. A lack of
US funding, if it cannot be replaced, may directly
lead to less reductions in those countries.
How will the Paris withdrawal aect US
domestic climate policy? Unlike the Kyoto
Protocol, where developed countries agreed
to binding reduction targets in international
Trump and the Politics of Climate
Brendan Moore examines the politics of climate change in the wake of
President Trump’s withdrawal from the Paris Agreement
negotiations, the Paris Agreement operates
under a bottom-up ‘pledge and review’ process,
where each nation pledges reductions which are
then reviewed internationally. This approach was
created in the context of, and is likely to reinforce, a
rapid expansion in the amount of national climate
legislation (see graphic). Therefore, whether the US
will meet its reduction targets is largely a question
of national policy, not international agreement.
In March 2017, the Trump administration
rescinded the US Climate Action Plan (which
included targets for renewable energy and
energy eciency) and ordered a review of climate
regulations, including the Clean Power Plan,
aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions
from electricity generation. However, many
climate-related regulations, such as the Clean
Power Plan, must be replaced using time-
consuming, complicated regulatory processes
which are then subject to legal challenges. In
addition, President Trump has nominated only
one of 13 key appointees to the EPA, according
to the Partnership for Public Service, meaning
that his administration will nd it harder to push
his priorities in that department. Even if national
policies are removed, state and local level policy
will continue in many locations.
Finally, how will US withdrawal aect climate
politics in other regions of the world? As an
example, in the European Union, recent climate
policy discussions have witnessed extensive
debate focused on aligning EU climate targets
with the Paris Agreement. …crucial to building
support for proposed changes to the EU Emissions
Trading System (EU ETS) that would increase its
stringency. US withdrawal could weaken this
eect, because actors who support a less stringent
mitigation policy will argue that policymakers
should wait until equivalent measures are in
place in other countries, to ensure that European
businesses are not competitively disadvantaged.
On the other hand, withdrawal could have the
opposite eect, similar to how a ‘Save Kyoto
campaign’ became a rallying cry for EU climate
policy after the Bush administration withdrew
from the Kyoto Protocol.
In conclusion, the US withdrawal from the
Paris Agreement has created uncertainty in the
international climate regime, which aects climate
policy at all levels. However, this is an issue that
is not limited to President Trump. Within the
Republican Party there is strong opposition to
multilateral climate agreements and domestic
climate policy. This suggests that the issue of
US commitment to climate-related emission
reductions and involvement in international
climate agreements – regardless of their form –
will be a recurring issue for decades to come. In
that sense, the shockwaves caused by the Trump
administration’s Paris decision, and the response
by other nations, may provide valuable lessons for
climate policy in the future.
Brendan Moore is a PhD Researcher in the
Tyndall Centre at the University of East Anglia.
1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2003
2002
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
Yea r
Number of climate change laws
Amount of Climate Legislation in 164 Countries (1997-2016)
Data Source: Climate Change Laws of the World database, Grantham Research Institute on
Climate Change and the Environment and Sabin Center for Climate Change Law
Political Insight Sept2017.indd 44 21/07/2017 11:58
To continue reading
Request your trial