Trump, US climate politics, and the evolving pattern of global climate governance

MacNeil, Robert; Paterson, Matthew

doi:10.1080/14781158.2020.1675620

Cited by 12 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…With up to 1 m of sea level expected by 2100 and 2 m by 2150, there is escalating urgency to build new or supplementary international law to protect climate exiles. These conditions are serious enough, but the circumstances of political diplomacy and earth stewardship have also never been more dismal than they are at present (MacNeil & Paterson, 2020).…”

Section: A Sensible Response For Climate Exilesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cross‐border migration on a warming planet: A policy framework

Byravan¹,

Rajan

2022

WIREs Climate Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Migration is frequently driven by the need to improve social and economic opportunities or to flee conditions of political insecurity. The increased risks of environmental hazards, including climate change, have intensified the push to migrate. Nevertheless, the relation between climate change and forced displacement is not direct and is complicated by globalization, local ecological conditions, and deteriorating domestic institutions. Significantly, the muddy situation means the question “did this person migrate because of climate change?” may never be fully answered. On the basis of ethical arguments, in this Perspective article we propose a framework with both strong and mild responses to address cross‐border migration. The strong version acknowledges that it is impossible to separate out fully the climate‐induced causes of migration from others and using climate attribution studies for this purpose is potentially harmful. This implies designing an open door policy for asylum seekers as the impacts of climate change unfold, bearing in mind that host countries having the most responsibility for climate change ought to be the most welcoming to them. In the mild version, the international community designates vulnerable zones, areas where significant land area is susceptible to overwhelming loss and damage. Such countries would include most small‐island states, those that are severely drought‐prone and those with substantial low‐lying deltaic areas. In both the mild and strong versions, asylum seekers are provided rights of free passage to host countries under nonrefoulement, so that they are not forced to return to their unliveable or unviable home countries and face continuing harm. This article is categorized under: Climate, Nature, and Ethics > Climate Change and Global Justice

show abstract

Section: A Sensible Response For Climate Exilesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cross‐border migration on a warming planet: A policy framework

Byravan¹,

Rajan

2022

WIREs Climate Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…On the transnational level, although less emphasized in the literature, studies do show that the Trump administration may have led to an array of political and policy challenges for global environmental actions. For instance, the administration's climate agenda and policy changes may have undermined global emissions reduction commitments (Jotzo et al, 2018), furthered anti-climate movements around the globe (Urpelainen & Van de Graaf, 2018), diminished funding for adaptation and mitigation in developing countries (Zhang et al, 2017a), and weakened the leadership in the global environmental governance regime (MacNeil & Paterson, 2020;Natasha Geiling, 2017). Such studies are premised on the notion that the US is a major contributor and a de facto leader in the global response to climate and environmental challenges, and that the Trump administration has severely challenged these roles (see Bomberg, 2020;Jotzo et al, 2018).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The United States in Chinese environmental policy narratives: Is there a trump effect?

Schwaeble

Birkland

2022

Review of Policy Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Drawing on insights from studies of environmental politics, the policy process, and the Narrative Policy Framework (NPF), this study examines the Trump administration's influence on how the United States is characterized by Chinese environmental policy scholars. Using an NPF approach and policy narratives on the topic of global environmental governance, our empirical results suggest that the Trump administration has shifted Chinese environmental policy scholars' constructed role of the US but not China's relationship with the US in these narratives. Specifically, there was a widening polarization of the US being portrayed as hero and villain over the sampled time frame (2010–2020) yet the portrayal of the US as an ally remained stable. These portrayals of the US also do not vary across narrators' knowledge and professional backgrounds. Our findings help confirm previous arguments that the Trump Administration's influence on environmental policy and politics in China is more rhetorical than substantive, and indicate that, despite the escalating rivalry between the two countries, Chinese environmental policy scholars continue viewing the US as an ally in global environmental governance. The findings likewise provide insights for rebuilding international climate cooperation and global climate governance leadership.

show abstract

“…The Trump administration has acted unilaterally, rather than through international organizations, to pursue US energy interests. On the one hand, there is a certain degree of continuity on climate policy with previous US administrations (MacNeil and Paterson, 2020), and there were precedents, notably the failure of the 1997 Kyoto Protocol. On the other hand, the Trump administration's rollbacks on Obama-era environmental policies and the retreat from a number of international environmental treaties (Seo, 2019) is a manifestation of the erosion of the international energy regime as a global regulatory framework.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Trump’s “America first” energy policy, contingency and the reconfiguration of the global energy order

Guliyev

2020

Energy Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The global energy system is in transition to a new energy order characterized by the emergence of the United States as a net oil exporter, the shale revolution and the gradual shift towards low-carbon sources and renewables. The shale boom in the US was a game changer, as was the election of Donald Trump as US president. Trump pushed an ambitious "America first" agenda aimed at transforming the US into a global energy superpower. The purpose of this article is two-fold: first, it outlines the key pillars of the emerging global energy order. Second, it underscores the role of contingent events, a factor neglected by some previous studies because of their reliance on what A.O.Hirschman (1970) termed "paradigmatic thinking". The recent transition in the international energy order is an outcome of two paramount, yet largely unanticipated events: the shale revolution in the US and Trump's neomercantilist and unilateralist economic policies. While contingencies are an inherent feature of social reality, the scenario approach can be a useful heuristic for dealing with uncertainties. The article concludes by discussing the implications of these developments for global energy governance.

show abstract

Trump, US climate politics, and the evolving pattern of global climate governance

Cited by 12 publications

References 12 publications

Cross‐border migration on a warming planet: A policy framework

Cross‐border migration on a warming planet: A policy framework

The United States in Chinese environmental policy narratives: Is there a trump effect?

Trump’s “America first” energy policy, contingency and the reconfiguration of the global energy order

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About