[NAIROBI] Donald Trump’s second US presidential victory could have far-reaching consequences for global research and development, with climate response and global health the likely casualties, analysts predict.

First time around, Trump showed little appetite for international cooperation on global challenges, withdrawing from the Paris Agreement and signaling an end to America’s part in the World Health Organization.

Concerns for what a second Trump presidency could mean for global science and development were fueled last week, after it emerged Trump could appoint Robert F. Kennedy Jr. into key positions in government.

Critics in the biomedical research space in the US have branded Kennedy a “vaccine skeptic” and “science denialist” after he previously suggested some childhood vaccines could lead to autism, despite overwhelming scientific evidence to the contrary.

Kennedy, who stepped down from his own presidential ambition to support Trump’s bid, is seen as a strong contender to head the Department of Health and Human Services, including the Food and Drug Administration and the National Institutes of Health—which could have ramifications for biomedical research both in the US and globally.

According to Joachim von Braun, from the Center for Development Research at the University of Bonn, in Germany, global development will hardly be on the agenda of the incoming US administration.

“We can expect that climate resilience and poverty reduction are going to be neglected, as will be related global organisations and development finance,” said Braun, a professor of agricultural economics.

“Consequently, we may expect that related research and knowledge is not considered relevant,” he told SciDev.Net.

Tom Drake, senior policy analyst at the Center for Global Development, a research organization, says Trump’s first presidency, from 2017 to 2021, affected science cooperation globally.

“Policy actions such as withdrawing from the Paris Climate Agreement, suspending US funding to the World Health Organization, and reducing environmental regulations have had lasting impacts on international scientific collaboration.”

Beyond these actions, he says, Trump’s rhetoric has also fueled skepticism toward multilateral institutions, potentially weakening trust in the frameworks that allow global scientific partnerships to thrive.

Drake is, however, optimistic that as other parts of the world increasingly lean into multilateralism, the coming years may see renewed, broad-based support for these institutions—moving away from US dominance toward more equitable collaboration.

“South Africa’s upcoming G20 presidency, for instance, presents an opportunity to reinvigorate multilateral commitments and create a more balanced foundation for global research,” he said.

According to Drake, history demonstrates that strong partnerships—such as those behind COVID-19 vaccines or the International Space Station—are essential for addressing cross-border challenges.

“As scientific institutions work to rebuild trust, institutional support and evidence-based policymaking will be crucial for a resilient, cooperative landscape that advances science worldwide,” he added.

Nowhere is global cooperation more needed than in addressing the global challenge of climate change.

But Trump’s position on climate and his “America first” mantra during his first stint in the White House has left many fearful for what a second term will mean for the climate response.

Peggy Oti-Boateng, executive director at the African Academy of Sciences, said it was too early to say if Trump’s stand on climate change will change, but suggested: “What we need to do is to coerce him to rethink his climate change denial. Perhaps this may be the way to go.”

When it comes to research in Africa, “my guess is that this will not be a priority for his government,” she added.

Global development research will likely be impacted by shifts in global aid and multilateral engagement among many other policy changes under Trump, according to Rebecca Grais, executive director of the Pasteur Network, an international group of health research organisations.

She believes withdrawing from the Paris Accords, reducing funding to global institutions, and reinstating the so-called “global gag rule” are all possible changes in the new Trump administration. The latter prohibits foreign non-governmental organisations who receive US global health assistance from providing legal abortion services or referrals.

However, Grais says the international community must pull together, whatever Trump’s presidency holds.

“It’s important to continue to ensure all people have dignified and healthy lives—by strengthening alliances and coalition building,” she told SciDev.Net, adding: “This can be with the private sector, regional institutions, and civil society among many other possibilities.

“In essence, we need to keep going and the way to get there may change.”

This piece was produced by SciDev.Net’s Global desk.