Donald Trump’s Presidency will, no doubt, have a significant impact on the progress achieved with respect to collective action on the climate change front. The US President-elect has promised to rip apart any semblance that climate change is real. It is said that, at a conference in Morocco, the incumbent US climate negotiating team, who had taken their cue from the constructive attitude of Barack Obama’s administration, were in tears when they heard that Trump had won the Presidency.

The whole world was in shock.

Trump has infamously declared that climate change is a hoax and a Chinese conspiracy. He has also given us a good example of the Oxford dictionary’s word of the year – post-truth – which the dictionary defines thus: “. . . relating to or denoting circumstances in which objective facts are less influential in shaping public opinion than appeals to emotion and personal belief”.

So, it does not matter what science or the available evidence indicates; all that matters is what one believes to be true and whether there are enough supporters rallying behind the post-truths that reinforce Trumps and his supporters’ false beliefs. Given the power of social media, post-truths can gain a momentum of their own. The consequence for policy is that the good low-carbon policies introduced by Obama will most likely be reversed.

The reality is that a new administration with a new policy doctrine for climate change and international relations is going to be ushered in. There is a lot of guessing about what exactly Trump’s administration will do. But what we are sure of is that, without the largest emitter on board, global climate change efforts will be affected and the matter will not be treated with urgency. This is quite worrying, as the levels of bottom-up commitments under nationally determined contributions (NDCs) are inadequate and will result in us hurtling towards a “3 °C world”.

NDCs are voluntary commitments by all signatory countries to invest in programmes aimed at bringing down emissions. Assessments will be undertaken in 2018 to ascertain whether these commitments are adequate to keep warming below 2 °C.

Can Trump nullify the Paris Agreement? No single country can invalidate a United Nations agreement. Technically, he cannot even immediately withdraw the US from the agreement, as a country can only formally withdraw four years after ratifying the agreement. Obama was shrewd enough to insert the four-year clause. However, Trump could stonewall global climate change efforts by sending a limited delegation, not agreeing on anything or withdrawing funding. Domestically, he could throw out Obama’s Climate Action Plan. The plan seeks a comprehensive approach within the US – starting at federal level and working its way down to state level – for the Environmental Protection Agency to set carbon pollution standards across the US. The aim is to discourage federal funding for coal plants, limit private investment, incentivise the upscaling of renewables and work closely with China to enhance global climate action.

China has decided to keep to its global action plan commitments and is working on reaching peak emissions before 2030 by reducing the use of coal. For the third year in a row, China’s emissions have stabilised. There are several reasons for this promising outcome, one being the slowdown in Chinese coal consumption and China shifting its energy policy towards increasing the share of nonfossil-based generation capacity, which largely comprises solar and wind plants. China is also looking to rebalance its economy by increasing investment in the services economy, as it wants to boost domestic consumption because exports are expected to decline in the future.

Obama’s climate strategy must be seen in the context of a broader foreign policy stance of multilateralism and burden sharing among the dominant economies and largest carbon emitters in the world. Trump’s foreign policy is unlikely to be internationalist, but rather more focused on domestic interests, as indicated by his campaign slogan: Make America Great Again. He wants to revive the coal industry.

Perhaps, there is a lesson in all this. Any transition out of coal has to take into account coal-industry-related job losses. Towns and counties that are feeling the loss of coal and the resultant joblessness and poverty were disgruntled enough to vote for a candidate who was willing to reverse anticoal policies.

Trump’s reversals may encourage other countries to go the same route and not to be morally persuaded by an international climate deal. Countries such as India and Turkey may be emboldened by the US’s stance, as these countries have very nationalistic views when it comes to energy security and policy.

In the meantime, as far as the Paris Agreement is concerned, on October 5, the required threshold of ratifications was reached, ensuring that the agreement could come into force by November 4. So far, 109 countries, including South Africa, have signed and ratified the agreement.

At the most recent meetings, in Morocco, during the twenty-second Conference of the Parties, or COP 22, several more steps towards driving the transition to a low-carbon economy were taken when countries agreed on concrete steps to put in place the necessary international rules and frameworks.

However, even if there is a review in 2018, commitments are still not adequate to help the world meet the 1.5 °C goal. We have a long way to go. Both domestic and international pressure has to continue in order to fast-track carbon emission reductions.