Recent coverage across the New York Times, E&E News, and Inside Climate News examines the Trump administration’s decision to withdraw the United States from cornerstone international climate agreements and institutions, including the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Together, these moves represent a significant retreat from global climate cooperation and scientific consensus at a moment when climate-driven risks—such as extreme heat, flooding, sea-level rise, and ecosystem loss—are accelerating worldwide. The withdrawals not only limit U.S. participation in international negotiations but also weaken the country’s ability to shape how climate science informs global and domestic policy.
Press accounts included observations from RCEI affiliates Robert Kopp and Pamela McElwee. Kopp who has served as a lead author on assessments published by the IPCC from which the United States is withdrawing, noted “It sends the message that the U.S. is not interested in having evidence-based policy,” underscoring concerns among researchers that withdrawing from the IPCC damages American scientific credibility. Kopp is quoted as saying,
“The fact that the U.S. is not, then, signing onto a broadly accepted assessment of the science is just an indication that it’s removing itself from the evidence base that all of the nations of the world agree to,”
Fellow scientist at Rutgers University and chair of the U.S. Academic Alliance for the IPCC’s steering committee, RCEI affiliate Pamela McElwee, highlighted both the anticipated nature of the withdrawal and its practical consequences. “I was disappointed by the announcement, but not surprised,” McElwee said, noting that scientists had seen the move coming and had begun preparing for it. She explained that academic institutions [including Rutgers] and scientific organizations have worked to ensure U.S. researchers can continue contributing to international climate science even without federal backing. However, McElwee stressed the palpable absence of official U.S. delegations matters, particularly during negotiations over IPCC summaries for policymakers, which are crafted line by line with government representatives to make science accessible and actionable. “It’s not serving the U.S. interest to not have the U.S. delegation there,” she said, pointing to the loss of influence that comes with disengagement.
Robert Kopp (left) and Pamela McElwee (right).
Scientists argue that while the administration can pull out from treaties and institutions, it cannot halt climate science itself. Researchers remain committed to advancing knowledge and collaborating internationally, but they warn that abandoning global climate frameworks undermines trust in science, weakens U.S. leadership, and deprives policymakers of the best available information for responding to a rapidly warming world.
Read the full articles here: The New York Times, Inside Climate News, and E&E News.
Related posts:
United Nations Panel Selects Three Rutgers Researchers as Lead Authors on Next Global Climate Report
Scientists Form Academic Alliance to Support U.S. Climate Researchers
Report Urges Global Leaders to Address Environmental, Social and Economic Crises Comprehensively
Climate Experts’ Review U.S. DOE Climate Working Group Report