Eva L枚vbrand, senior lecturer, was at the meeting in Marrakech when it became clear that Trump had won. This time she hasn鈥檛 followed the negotiations; she has studied the activists who are present. She says that many participants at the Marrakech conference are concerned about Donald Trump鈥檚 alliances with the fossil-fuel industry and that the implementation of the Paris Agreement could be at risk.
鈥淏ut there is also talk that the US will fall behind other countries, in terms of environmental policy. Some meeting participants hope that China will shoulder the role of leader in international听environmental policy, while others believe the EU will pull together in the light of a weakened United States,鈥� she says.
听
In Marrakech, Eva L枚vbrand passed the baton to Professor Bj枚rn-Ola Linn茅r. He will continue to work on the research project dubbed 鈥淭he Global Potluck鈥�, which will study the commitments proposed by various countries.
How can Donald Trump鈥檚 election affect the climate change agreement?
Bj枚rn-Ola Linn茅r:
鈥淚 see three scenarios. The first is that he pulls out of the Paris Agreement, which he has said he will do. But that will take an entire presidential term, so in practice he won鈥檛 have time.鈥�
鈥淭he second is that the US pulls out of the entire climate change convention. That would be a very drastic move, and he hasn鈥檛 said he plans to do this. But it鈥檚 certainly possible 鈥� and it could be done in a year.鈥�
鈥淭he most likely scenario is that he concentrates on domestic aspects. This would include softening American climate change and energy legislation. As a result, they wouldn鈥檛 be able to meet their commitments under the climate change convention, but since there are no sanctions in place, in practice there would be no consequences for the US. In my view this would be the easiest solution for Trump.鈥�
On several occasions, Donald Trump has called environmental science a bluff. As an environmental scientist, what are your thoughts on this?
鈥淚n a debate, Hillary Clinton said that he had called environmental science a bluff. 鈥淲rong!鈥� he responded. But it鈥檚 easy to see that he has said that. It鈥檚 hard to tell whether he actually believes it鈥檚 a bluff, or if he鈥檚 just saying that. But even saying it is very serious, because he鈥檚 spreading that perception.鈥�
鈥淎s a researcher, Donald Trump鈥檚 anti-intellectual, anti-science attitudes are also a great concern to me. Several of my colleagues are genuinely worried about how this could play out, in the years to come. He could cut funding to research, and this would affect energy and environmental research, but this could also apply to research in other fields.鈥�
Does his election raise any other concerns?
In terms of green issues, one problem is the advisers he surrounds himself with. Several are hard-core climate change deniers, including recent appointment Myron Ebell, who has been assigned to review the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
鈥淎t the same time, we mustn鈥檛 forget that Donald Trump is a fickle man. In conjunction with the Copenhagen Climate Change Summit, he and several other industry leaders signed an open letter to President Obama, urging swift action on climate change. It鈥檚 important to remember that he has changed his mind before. He doesn鈥檛 have ideological convictions, he鈥檚 a businessman. He spots where there is a market share in the political sphere, and capitalises on it. Regrettably, with considerable success.鈥�
How can Donald Trump鈥檚 election affect the climate change agreement?
Bj枚rn-Ola Linn茅r:
鈥淚 see three scenarios. The first is that he pulls out of the Paris Agreement, which he has said he will do. But that will take an entire presidential term, so in practice he won鈥檛 have time.鈥�
鈥淭he second is that the US pulls out of the entire climate change convention. That would be a very drastic move, and he hasn鈥檛 said he plans to do this. But it鈥檚 certainly possible 鈥� and it could be done in a year.鈥�
鈥淭he most likely scenario is that he concentrates on domestic aspects. This would include softening American climate change and energy legislation. As a result, they wouldn鈥檛 be able to meet their commitments under the climate change convention, but since there are no sanctions in place, in practice there would be no consequences for the US. In my view this would be the easiest solution for Trump.鈥�
On several occasions, Donald Trump has called environmental science a bluff. As an environmental scientist, what are your thoughts on this?
鈥淚n a debate, Hillary Clinton said that he had called environmental science a bluff. 鈥淲rong!鈥� he responded. But it鈥檚 easy to see that he has said that. It鈥檚 hard to tell whether he actually believes it鈥檚 a bluff, or if he鈥檚 just saying that. But even saying it is very serious, because he鈥檚 spreading that perception.鈥�
鈥淎s a researcher, Donald Trump鈥檚 anti-intellectual, anti-science attitudes are also a great concern to me. Several of my colleagues are genuinely worried about how this could play out, in the years to come. He could cut funding to research, and this would affect energy and environmental research, but this could also apply to research in other fields.鈥�
Does his election raise any other concerns?
In terms of green issues, one problem is the advisers he surrounds himself with. Several are hard-core climate change deniers, including recent appointment Myron Ebell, who has been assigned to review the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
鈥淎t the same time, we mustn鈥檛 forget that Donald Trump is a fickle man. In conjunction with the Copenhagen Climate Change Summit, he and several other industry leaders signed an open letter to President Obama, urging swift action on climate change. It鈥檚 important to remember that he has changed his mind before. He doesn鈥檛 have ideological convictions, he鈥檚 a businessman. He spots where there is a market share in the political sphere, and capitalises on it. Regrettably, with considerable success.鈥�
