A Shift in Global Leadership Trump’s Influence on Sustainable Development
Donald Trump’s presidency marked a significant departure in the U.S.'s approach to sustainability and foreign policy. With his "America First" agenda, Trump prioritized domestic concerns over global commitments. This led to the U.S. withdrawal from key international organizations, the dismantling of foreign aid programs, and reduced funding for health and environmental initiatives. These decisions reshaped U.S. global engagement and disrupted international efforts in areas such as public health, climate change, and economic cooperation.
U.S. Withdrawal from the WHO, A Blow to Global Health Initiatives
One of the most notable actions of Trump’s presidency was the U.S. withdrawal from the World Health Organization (WHO). As one of the largest contributors, the U.S. provided nearly 18% of the WHO’s budget, supporting vital programs in disease prevention, emergency response, and vaccine distribution.
The withdrawal created a funding gap for many WHO initiatives, raising concerns about its impact on global health, particularly in low-income countries that relied heavily on international support. While the U.S. redirected some funds to alternative health initiatives, the decision disrupted global health coordination and pandemic response strategies.
Withdrawing from the Paris Agreement and Climate Policy Shifts
One of the most globally significant decisions was the U.S. withdrawal from the Paris Climate Agreement, signaling a shift away from federal commitments to reducing carbon emissions. This move also ended funding for international climate programs, such as the Green Climate Fund and reinforced an "America First" energy policy that prioritized domestic economic interests over global sustainability efforts.
The Trump administration’s climate policy took a different approach, marked by the decision to exit the Paris Agreement and roll back several environmental regulations. This shift was based on concerns that international agreements imposed economic burdens on U.S. industries. The administration’s focus on energy independence and deregulation spurred increased domestic fossil fuel production, prompting debates over balancing economic growth with environmental sustainability.
This shift altered the global climate action landscape, as the U.S., traditionally a leader in international climate negotiations, retreated from its influential role. Critics argue that this isolation weakened global climate efforts, while supporters claim it restored flexibility for U.S. industries. Furthermore, Project 2025’s perspective aligned with this approach, suggesting that U.S. energy challenges were shaped by past environmental policies and recommending future leadership focus on prioritizing national energy resources.
U.S. Engagement with International Organizations
Trump reassessed U.S. involvement in several international organizations, citing concerns over financial contributions and national sovereignty. In addition to withdrawing from the WHO, the U.S. reviewed its participation in institutions like the United Nations and the OECD. These shifts reflected a broader focus on bilateral relationships over multilateral cooperation, prioritizing direct negotiations and strategic partnerships.
USAID Reform and Strategic Realignment
The Trump administration also restructured the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) to align aid distribution with U.S. strategic interests. This restructuring involved changes to staffing, funding allocations, and program priorities. While some international aid programs were reduced, others were redirected to regions deemed critical to U.S. economic and security goals.
Encouraging Resource Development in Alaska
Alaska has long been a battleground between economic opportunity and environmental conservation. Trump’s executive orders aimed to promote the development of Alaska’s oil, gas, and mineral resources by opening protected lands like the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) and the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska (NPR-A) to extraction activities.
These actions were intended to bolster energy independence and create jobs but raised concerns about environmental degradation, the impact on Indigenous lands, and increased carbon emissions. While proponents emphasized economic benefits, environmental groups warned of the accelerated climate change and harm to fragile ecosystems.
Read more about the Trump's influence on Sustainable Development by clicking the link here.