#11 China Scholar Insights: Global Climate Governance under the Trump Administration
To strengthen global governance, inclusive policies must now accelerate, countering divisions and ensuring fair progress for all nations.
Welcome to the 11th edition of China Scholar Insights!
China Scholar Insights is a feature aiming to provide you with the latest analysis on issues that Chinese scholars and strategic communities are focusing on. We carefully select commentary and highlight key insights. Questions and feedback can be directed to sch0625@gmail.com
I’m SUN Chenghao, a fellow with the Center for International Security and Strategy (CISS) at Tsinghua University. ChinAffairsplus is a newsletter that shares Chinese academic articles focused on topics such as China’s foreign policy, China-U.S. relations, China-Europe relations, and more. This newsletter was co-founded by my research assistant, ZHANG Xueyu, and me.
China Scholar Insights on Global Climate Governance under the Trump Administration
Background
Donald Trump was re-elected as the President of the United States. Continuing to espouse climate skepticism and “eco-nationalism”, the Trump administration has since implemented various regressive climate policies, announced its re-withdrawal from the Paris Agreement, and vigorously developed the traditional fossil energy industry. These measures follow on from Trump 1.0 policies that hindered renewable energy transitions, eroded global climate cooperation, and destabilized multilateral climate governance frameworks, critically impacting international environmental governance structures. The ideological clash between such nationalist narratives and the principles of equitable burden-sharing underscores a pivotal tension in contemporary climate politics. This tension not only shapes global efforts to cut emissions but also redefines international power structures in the race for green leadership.
Summary
The United States remains pivotal in global climate governance, yet the Trump administration's climate-skeptic policies have undermined confidence in multilateral frameworks and delayed energy transitions. By framing climate action through zero-sum geo-politicization, these measures exacerbated international frictions while impeding cooperative governance mechanisms. Nevertheless, the international community retains adaptive capacity. Major powers like the EU and China are positioned to adjust governance strategies, accelerate renewable energy diffusion, and promote climate education among global actors, thereby mitigating U.S. disengagement. Domestically, state-level alliances and bipartisan climate initiatives continue to advance carbon reduction plans despite federal resistance. If policy setbacks continue, the U.S. may lose industrial competitiveness and face rising economic losses from climate impacts—burdens that will fall most heavily on its citizens. Ultimately, global climate resilience hinges not on unilateral leadership but on pluralistic collaboration, wherein U.S. domestic actors and international partnerships jointly sustain momentum.
Insights
Wang Yuanfeng: Will Trump Undermine Global Efforts to Address Climate Change?
Global warming has become an indisputable reality, posing serious challenges to humanity’s sustainable development. The re-election of Donald Trump—a climate-skeptic leader advocating fossil fuel expansion under the slogan “Make America Great Again”—has significantly intensified pessimism about global climate governance. These pessimists argue that regressive U.S. climate policies risk accelerating global warming. However, some observers maintain cautious optimism, highlighting potential pathways for constructive engagement.
Pessimism: Challenges to COP30 and Global Cooperation
As the largest historical emitter of greenhouse gases, the second-largest current emitter, and the world’s largest economy, the U.S. absence from COP30 casts doubt on the conference’s effectiveness. Key challenges include stalled financial support for developing nations and delays in submitting updated Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs). Trump’s fossil fuel agenda may also increase carbon emissions, accelerating global temperature rise.
Optimism: Decentralized Action and the Resilience of the Paris Agreement
Despite federal inaction, subnational actors within the U.S., such as state governments and businesses, continue advancing renewable energy transitions. Globally, major economies like the EU, China, and the UK remain committed to climate goals, reinforcing the Paris Agreement’s adaptability. Market-driven shifts toward clean energy further indicate that economic trends may counterbalance political resistance.
Imperatives for Global Action in the Trump 2.0 Era
The U.S. decision to withdraw from climate commitments should not lead to undue pessimism. In the context of the ongoing global transition towards clean energy, the U.S. persistent reliance on fossil fuels risks weakening its industrial competitiveness and increasing its vulnerability to climate-related disasters. It is imperative that other countries formulate stronger emission-reduction strategies and collectively oppose such unilateral actions. Through the coordinated effort of the international community, the adverse impacts of the Trump administration’s regressive climate policies can be mitigated, addressing the climate change challenge and laying the groundwork for the U.S. to rejoin global climate governance frameworks.
TANG Wei: International Adaptation to Trump’s Climate Policies
Trump’s radical climate policies—withdrawing from the Paris Agreement, dismantling environmental agencies, and promoting fossil fuels—created global uncertainty. The international community responded through three key adaptations:
Widespread Disappointment and a Leadership Vacuum
The U.S. historically led climate governance via agenda-setting and funding. Trump’s policies have marginalized climate issues, sparking frustration at COP29, though no open condemnation emerged due to the irreplaceable role of the U.S. What is worse, major U.S. banks have withdrawn from climate finance, derailing initiatives like the Baku Conference’s $300 billion/year pledge for developing nations by 2035.
Downgraded Commitments and Shifting Priorities
The EU slowed its climate action amid energy security concerns and the Russia-Ukraine conflict, delaying fossil fuel phase-outs and carbon border measures. In the absence of U.S.-China cooperation, pressure on China to lead climate governance has increased. Emerging economies such as India and Brazil face similar pressure. U.S.-led multilateral forums on climate issues have stagnated, and allies like Canada and Japan may follow in the footsteps of the U.S., meaning that JETP nations such as Indonesia and South Africa may face hurdles in their climate transitions. Meanwhile, Trump’s framing of net-zero as a “development constraint” has triggered global reassessments of climate-economy trade-offs.
Resilience Through Bottom-Up Efforts
The Paris Agreement has retained relevance, bolstering national pledges and funding mechanisms. Bilateral and regional (e.g., China-EU, Africa-Latin America) cooperation has surged, focusing on adaptation and disaster relief. Subnational actors (U.S. states, C40 cities) have advanced emissions cuts. As clean energy production systems became integral to national security, the bottom-up path may play a more important role in emissions cuts amid U.S. policy swings.
LIU Yuanling: The Implications of Donald Trump’s Presidency for Global Climate Governance
The Trump Administration Retreats from Climate Action, Jeopardizing the Coherence and Legitimacy of Global Climate Governance
Donald Trump’s re-election has cast significant uncertainty over the future of global climate governance, signalling a potential dismantling of the post-World War II international order, particularly the frameworks that have underpinned cooperative efforts to combat climate change. He has consistently denied the scientific consensus on climate change and has vocally opposed policy measures aimed at mitigation and adaptation. During his previous term, he withdrew the United States from the Paris Agreement, rolled back numerous environmental regulations enacted under the Obama administration, and appointed climate skeptics to key positions. These actions severely hindered America’s transition to clean energy and bolstered the fossil fuel industry. Trump’s stance represents a retreat from climate action marked not only by the abandonment of prior commitments but also by a disregard for climate discourse altogether. Without U.S. engagement, global climate governance risks losing coherence and legitimacy, given the nation's substantial influence as both a major emitter and a key geopolitical actor.
Democrats’ Climate Efforts Have Been Reversed while Trump’s New Protectionist Policies Disrupt Global Clean Energy Supply Chains
The Biden administration had laid out ambitious goals to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and invested heavily in clean energy through the landmark Inflation Reduction Act. However, progress achieved, including $270 billion of private sector investment in clean energy infrastructure, now faces reversal. Moreover, Trump’s protectionist trade policies—such as imposing tariffs on solar panels, wind turbines, and battery storage components—have disrupted global clean energy supply chains and threatened international cooperation, including that over Chinese EV investments in Mexico.
Global Confidence in Combating Climate Change Has Been Weakened Owing to US Absence, yet Hope Still Remains
Trump’s withdrawal from climate diplomacy has weakened international confidence and solidarity, leading actors like the EU and Indonesia to reconsider or delay their commitments under the Paris framework. Despite these setbacks, the future of global climate governance is not entirely bleak. The United States, while influential, is not the sole driver of climate progress. Bipartisan and decentralized forces—including private enterprises, technological innovators, and environmentally conscious citizens—continue to support climate action. Furthermore, opportunities for collaboration remain across major global partnerships, including China-U.S., China-EU, and U.S.-EU alliances. Looking ahead, China reaffirms its commitment to “ecological civilization” and climate responsibility, positioning itself as a proactive leader in global climate governance. It pledges to work collaboratively with the international community to advance emission reductions, resilience strategies, and sustainable development under the vision of a shared future for humanity.
GAN Junxian: Raising Global Awareness of the Climate Crisis—China’s Public Climate Diplomacy and Its New Tools
Why Climate Awareness Still Lags
Public understanding remains limited. The U.S.—the largest historical emitter—has sent mixed signals, notably withdrawing from the Paris Agreement under Trump, stalling global momentum in managing climate change. That retreat opened up space for China, which now sees an opportunity to lead with sustained, science-based action. By tying its decarbonization progress to a global push for accountability, Beijing aims to shift the climate conversation from distant goals to collective responsibility.
The Invisible Emergency of Global Warming
Unlike wildfires or floods, global warming rarely triggers our senses—it’s measured in global averages, not daily experience. Humans trust what they see, and models and data often feel distant. This disconnect helps explain why climate talks stall while emissions rise. Until science becomes something people can feel, urgency will remain out of reach. Making the crisis visible—through images, stories, and localised evidence—may be the fastest path to real political will.
China’s Public-Diplomacy Playbook
Alongside promoting its climate governance efforts, China should strengthen public climate diplomacy by raising global awareness through science communication campaigns. Co-producing documentaries with Himalayan-region countries on glacial melt and broadcasting them at international climate events could bring greater attention to regional impacts. Collaborating with the IPCC and major media to better explain climate reports would further underscore the urgency and credibility of the crisis. Additionally, working with experts from climate-vulnerable nations to produce online interviews and video content may personalize the threat. A dedicated, government-led video platform could serve as a global hub for sharing true stories of climate disruption and inspiring broader public engagement.
YANG Yunzhen: The Challenges faced by and Responses of EU Climate Governance in the Context of “Right-Wing Resonance” between Europe and the U.S.
The Appeal of Eco-Nationalism is Strong in both the U.S. and Europe
Eco-nationalism expresses localism and emotional ties through an appreciation for indigenous species or pristine rural landscapes. Far-right groups often link environmental issues to national borders, focusing on domestic concerns like deforestation and pollution while disregarding global issues like climate change. With Trump 2.0, eco-nationalism is resurging as global politics shift rightward.
EU Climate Governance Faces 5 Key Challenges
Far-Right Movements Threaten the Progress of EU Climate Policy
European far-right parties are skeptical of the European Green Deal, seeing it as an economic burden on workers and farmers. They advocate for slowing down emission reduction targets or even scrapping some policies. Marine Le Pen, leader of the French National Rally, proposed pausing the Deal in response to Trump’s business-friendly measures in the U.S.
Shift from Climate Protection to Adaptation
At the same time, some political parties are shifting the focus of the climate policy debate, emphasizing “climate adaptation” rather than “climate protection.” For instance, the German AfD party denies human-induced climate change and opposes decarbonization efforts, rejecting scientific consensus on the issue.
Increased Politicization of Climate Issues
Like immigration, climate issues have become an achilles heel of mainstream parties, vulnerable to far-right attacks. The energy crisis following the Russia-Ukraine conflict has further fueled this dynamic, with the far-right using the opportunity to block the Green Deal.
Energy and Industrial Policy Shifts
European far-right parties tend to support reliance on traditional energy sources like natural gas and coal for energy security, which could slow the EU’s transition to renewable energy. The 2024 European farmers’ protests forced the EU to abandon some agricultural emission reduction policies, such as the goal to cut pesticide use, highlighting societal resistance to green transformation.
Right-Wing Zero-Sum Thinking
Right-wing parties emphasize a nationalist mentality, weakening the EU’s global climate leadership. Issues like the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) are escalating tensions, and the interaction between U.S. and European right-wing ideologies reduces transatlantic cooperation, leading to trade disputes.
The EU Must Take Proactive Steps in Climate Governance.
To effectively address these challenges, the EU must take action. This includes increasing its influence, adjusting policy frameworks to balance economic growth with environmental sustainability, enhancing social support to ensure a just transition, and strengthening multilateral cooperation alongside strategic autonomy.
Conclusion
Trump’s climate-skeptic policies threaten global governance, yet proactive measures enacted by the EU, China, and other major economies have the potential to offset U.S. disengagement. Renewable energy expansion and multilateral cooperation, backed by clear accountability mechanisms, remain key to reducing emissions even amid political resistance. While challenges persist, collective efforts demonstrate capacity to bridge leadership gaps, ensuring climate goals remain achievable. To strengthen global governance, inclusive policies must now accelerate, countering divisions and ensuring fair progress for all nations.
