logo
Smaller Nations Push for Climate Progress—Without the U.S.

Smaller Nations Push for Climate Progress—Without the U.S.

Yahoo21-03-2025

Mia Mottley, Barbados's prime minister, during the annual meetings of the IMF and World Bank in Washington, D.C. Credit - Bloomberg—Getty Images
Barbados Prime Minister Mia Mottley has become a leading champion of small economies in global climate discussions. And so I took note at last year's United Nations climate conference when she said she thought countries should engage then-President elect Trump to try to explain the importance of climate work.
'I am not one of those who will come out and say immediately that with the election of President Trump all is gloom and doom,' she said at a fireside chat last November. 'We need to find mechanisms… to have the conversations.'
Mottley's position has evolved since then. Trump entered office in January with an aggressive agenda to attack clean energy and end collaboration on climate change. Last week, as delegates from around the world gathered in Barbados for a sustainable energy conference, Mottley instead insisted that small countries would need to find their own way forward. 'You don't spend time or energy praying over what could have been,' she said. 'But we deal with the world as it is.'
Across three days of talks at the SEforAll Global Forum in Barbados, Trump barely came up explicitly. It's not that anyone there underestimated the consequences of his election for global climate progress. Rather, his election has finally sunk in, and attention has turned to paving a path forward—without the U.S.
It's a telling glimpse at how climate discussions may be shifting. The gravitational pull of the U.S. should not be dismissed; some countries will inevitably follow his lead. Nonetheless, if the conversations in Barbados provide any indication, many emerging and developing economies remain eager to forge their own clean energy path.
The U.S. shadow has always loomed large over international climate collaboration. As the world's largest economy and only superpower, climate negotiators had to adjust language carefully to respond to the U.S. political context.
With the Paris Agreement in place, conversations have largely focused on finance—getting money flowing to energy transition projects, particularly in developing and emerging economies. But despite the central role the U.S. played in setting up the system, U.S. public money never came to represent the lifeblood of international climate finance—even as developing countries and climate advocates insisted that the country owed it to the rest of the world to pay up because of its historical emissions. Even in the climate-friendly Biden Administration, it took significant wrangling for the White House to commit to $11 billion in annual international climate finance. To put that in perspective, developing countries left last year's U.N. climate talks disappointed that their wealthier counterparts committed only to a total $300 billion in annual climate finance.
In other words, on the finance front, the U.S. isn't leaving that big of a gap to fill. So where will the money come from? One key area under discussion at the SEforAll forum, where I spoke with officials in the public and private sectors based everywhere from Fiji to Sierra Leone, was so-called south-south collaboration. Instead of looking to the U.S. and Europe to pony up capital, developing and emerging market countries can work together—providing the goods and finance without the help of their wealthier counterparts.
According to research from the Brookings Institution, trade between Global South countries recently surpassed trade between Global North countries. 'This is a great signal of progress,' Arancha González, a former foreign minister of Spain who is now the dean of the Paris School of International Affairs at Sciences Po, told me on a panel I moderated at the forum. 'It tells us that there is a new world out there.'
Potential sources of finance include development banks located in large emerging economies like Brazil and South Africa. Institutions like the New Development Bank, formed in 2014 by the BRICS nations of Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa, have financed billions in clean energy development. And, of course, it's impossible to talk about this financial picture without talking about China. The country's Belt and Road Initiative has been a source of more than $1 trillion in capital for infrastructure since its inception in 2013. In recent years, the country has increasingly focused its funding on green projects.
Many developing countries have also focused on raising capital locally to fund projects—pushing savings and pension fund money to invest in the local market rather than looking abroad for higher returns.
And then there are the new methods of what is often called blended finance. Traditionally, the term refers to a combination of public and private capital where the public money lowers the risk for private investors. More recently, philanthropy has entered the blended finance conversation, playing an increasingly important role providing money
'We have what we call strange bedfellows, where… institutional investors are partnering with a philanthropic organization, and together coming up with a blended finance solution that is innovative in approach,' says Ije Ikoku Okeke, who runs catalytic climate capital for the Global South at RMI, a clean energy non-profit.
A right-wing populist might not object to this new dynamic. In such a world view, American money should support Americans—leaving other countries to their own devices. But is the U.S. really better off if the rest of the world builds a coalition with Americans on the sidelines?
Putting U.S. strategic interests aside, it is a little refreshing to hear a conversation about clean energy in the Global South that doesn't get bogged down in whether the U.S. is going to live up to its moral responsibility as the world's biggest historic emitter and instead focuses on solutions.
To get this story in your inbox, subscribe to the TIME CO2 Leadership Report newsletter here.
TIME receives support for climate coverage from the Outrider Foundation. TIME is solely responsible for all content.
Write to Justin Worland at justin.worland@time.com.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Trump and Hegseth to visit Fort Bragg as they send troops to Los Angeles
Trump and Hegseth to visit Fort Bragg as they send troops to Los Angeles

CBS News

time21 minutes ago

  • CBS News

Trump and Hegseth to visit Fort Bragg as they send troops to Los Angeles

Washington — President Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth are visiting Fort Bragg, the nation's largest military installation, on Tuesday, after sending the National Guard and U.S. Marines to respond to protests in Los Angeles. Members of the Marine Corps arrived in the greater Los Angeles area Tuesday, a defense official told CBS News, after the military activated about 700 active-duty Marines Monday. The Pentagon said the Marines would "seamlessly integrate" with National Guard troops to protect "federal personnel and federal property." There are 2,100 members of the California National Guard now on location in the greater Los Angeles area, operating in Los Angeles, Paramount and Compton. The president is expected to speak at Fort Bragg in North Carolina around 4 p.m. Hegseth is heading to the military base after testifying on Capitol Hill. "Will be going to Fort Bragg today. Big speech, amazing crowd! See you later!!!" Mr. Trump wrote on Truth Social Tuesday morning. The president claimed Tuesday morning that Los Angeles would be "would be burning to the ground right now," if not for his actions to federalize the National Guard. A memorandum the president signed Saturday said the troops are authorized to protect Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials and other federal law enforcement officials. He invoked Title 10, the U.S. code governing use of the armed forces, allowing the National Guard to come into LA in a supporting role. On Monday, California Gov. Gavin Newsom sued the president and Hegseth over the decision to deploy the National Guard to the state against Newsom's wishes. Newsom argued that Title 10 "has been invoked on its own only once before and for highly unusual circumstances not presented here." He pointed to the text of the U.S. code, which states that when the president calls a state's National Guard into federal service under Title 10, "those orders 'shall be issued through the governors of the States.'" Hegseth, Newsom maintained, "unlawfully bypassed the Governor of California, issuing an order that by statute must go through him." "At no point in the past three days has there been a rebellion or an insurrection," the lawsuit reads. "Nor have these protests risen to the level of protests or riots that Los Angeles and other major cities have seen at points in the past, including in recent years."

CartCon 2025: Tariffs, turbulence and the future of resilient retail
CartCon 2025: Tariffs, turbulence and the future of resilient retail

Yahoo

time21 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

CartCon 2025: Tariffs, turbulence and the future of resilient retail

At second-annual CartCon conference in Napa Valley, CA, the tone was electric with anticipation but also laced with urgency. Billed as a summit for the company's expansive ecosystem of brands, vendors and strategists, the event served as both a product showcase and a pressure valve. Nowhere was that tension more visible than during one of the conference's hardest-hitting panels, a deep dive into the complexities of tariff policy and its ripple effects on global sourcing, consumer pricing and retail resilience. The panel consisted of three voices with rare insight into the collision of policy and commerce: Chris Smith, president of Summit Global Strategies; Tim Manning, former White House supply chain coordinator under President Joe Biden; and Nick Stachel, logistics strategy adviser at Izba Consulting. What followed was not a high-level overview, but a granular exploration of the legal, political and operational forces shaping how, and where, products are made, moved and sold. From globalization to geo-economics Smith opened the discussion by tracing the historical arc of U.S. trade policy. For decades following World War II, American trade strategy revolved around multilateralism. The U.S. saw global trade not just as an economic imperative but as a geopolitical tool, creating allies, raising standards of living and preventing conflict. But in 2016, that long-standing consensus fractured. The bipartisan abandonment of the Trans-Pacific Partnership signaled a sharp pivot. As Smith explained, the political center collapsed under the weight of the 'China Shock,' a term describing the decimation of American manufacturing towns due to offshoring. Smith described President Donald Trump's tariff policy as a psychological reset. Before Trump, U.S. tariffs averaged around 2%. Within months, they jumped to 18% in key categories. This wasn't just an economic strategy, it was anchoring. 'It's like burger sizes,' Smith said, relating back to Wendy's psychological marketing strategies. 'Before Trump, we had singles and doubles. Now the triple is on the menu, and everything else looks small by comparison.' Tariffs, he added, have become Trump's 'cat toy' — a provocative distraction wielded without consistent strategy. Even if future administrations soften tariff policy, Smith warned, the structure of global trade has already shifted. Retailers and manufacturers alike are building permanent workarounds. Inflation, particularly in consumer goods, is the slow-burning consequence. While Smith provided the philosophical backdrop, Manning broke down the legal tools underpinning today's tariff landscape. The real disruption, Manning emphasized, has come through the use, and misuse, of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). Originally designed as a tool for national security sanctions, IEEPA has been repurposed by the Trump administration to enact sweeping tariffs with little congressional oversight. Manning described the legal and logistical chaos for businesses from these tactics. In just six weeks, the Trump administration issued 17 executive orders using IEEPA authority, stripping trade policy of its usual predictability and process. For businesses, this has been catastrophic. Sourcing strategies built over years have unraveled in days. 'We're in a volatile environment,' Manning said. The cost of doing business now includes factoring in the potential for abrupt, unexplained swings in tariff exposure. Long-term investments have become high-risk bets, and in many cases, they're simply not being made. On-the-ground retail strategy Bringing the policy talk down to the warehouse floor, Stachel outlined how brands are actually coping with this new reality. In the short term, some are fast-tracking inventory from China before new tariffs hit, relying on expedited ocean freight and cross-docking at West Coast ports to minimize delays and avoid customs bottlenecks. Others are making subtler moves — like holding prices steady on high-visibility products – say, a gaming console – while raising prices on accessories and add-ons to recoup margin. Stachel noted that many brands have moved beyond the now-familiar 'China Plus One' strategy, opting instead for a 'China Plus Three' approach. They are spreading risk across Vietnam, India and Mexico, often working with global manufacturing giants like Foxconn that can seamlessly shift production across borders without retooling or retraining labor. In essence, brands are outsourcing flexibility itself. For those planning beyond the current election cycle, geographic diversification is no longer enough. Brands are factoring in port access, transportation infrastructure, exposure to natural disasters and local workforce stability. Some are eyeing countries like Morocco, Colombia and Thailand as next-generation sourcing hubs. Nearshoring to Mexico has particular appeal, not just because of its proximity to U.S. consumers, but because of the downstream economic benefits. 'We're still benefiting from a cross border perspective, from a transportation trucking perspective, from a warehousing perspective, as these border towns are growing, the economies in the small border towns are growing as well,' said Stachel. These sourcing shifts are backed by hard data prepared by Stachel. According to a comparative analysis of emerging manufacturing markets, countries like Vietnam, Indonesia and the Philippines are increasingly viable alternatives to China, not only in terms of labor costs but also port infrastructure and U.S.-bound vessel frequency. Vietnam, for instance, operates nearly 50 seaports, including Ho Chi Minh City and Hai Phong, both of which have multiple sailings to the U.S. each week. Indonesia boasts over 100 ports, including Tanjung Priok in Jakarta. Even Cambodia, though limited in scale, has weekly direct sailings from both Phnom Penh and Sihanoukville. These figures underscore the importance of transportation fluidity and market access in sourcing decisions. As Stachel emphasized, brands are no longer optimizing solely for cost, they're optimizing for resilience. Both Smith and Manning cautioned that the real reckoning may be ahead. While tariff impacts are already being priced in at the retail level, the broader inflationary wave has yet to crest. Smith called inflation the 'other shoe,' likely to drop later this summer as new tariffs pass through the supply chain and collide with already fragile consumer sentiment. Uncertainty, they agreed, has become the greatest tax of all. With businesses unable to predict future policy, many are frozen. Manning advised attendees to monitor key macroeconomic signals, including treasury bond activity, consumer confidence indices and safety stock drawdowns. Executive orders posted on he added, are the best early indicators of a sudden policy shift. What retailers are saying – and doing The audience at CartCon also offered candid perspectives. Through real-time polling, attendees offered a rare window into how brands are navigating the chaos. Asked what recent policy had most affected their supply chains, 68% cited China tariffs, with an additional 24% naming de minimis enforcement, or stricter checks on duty-free, low-value imports. In a sign of just how volatile the environment has become, 64% said they revisit their sourcing strategies quarterly. And nearly half, 47%, have responded by raising prices. Twenty-nine percent have changed sourcing countries, while 18% are simply eating the cost. Looking ahead, most brands aren't betting on reshoring. Asked if they expect to source more from the U.S. in five years, 70% said their sourcing would remain about the same, and 30% expected an increase. No one expected to source less. It was a striking rebuke of the idea that domestic manufacturing is due for a renaissance, at least for the retail segment. Tariffs and uncertainty are already impacting consumer demand. Thirty percent of respondents said they expect a consumer slowdown by Q4 2025, while 45% said they're already feeling one. And yet, the vast majority, 82%, said they are not cutting marketing budgets in response. In today's environment, visibility is survival. In a forward-looking poll, 81% of respondents said online shopping will be the dominant channel in the next decade, compared to just 6% for stores. Even more striking, 75% believe direct-to-consumer models can still succeed, suggesting that agility, not abandonment, is the key to survival. The post CartCon 2025: Tariffs, turbulence and the future of resilient retail appeared first on FreightWaves. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data

‘It's a net positive for us.' For some US manufacturers, Trump tariffs pay off
‘It's a net positive for us.' For some US manufacturers, Trump tariffs pay off

Boston Globe

time21 minutes ago

  • Boston Globe

‘It's a net positive for us.' For some US manufacturers, Trump tariffs pay off

AccuRounds is exactly the kind of high-end manufacturing company that's supposed to benefit from the Trump tariffs —and right now the plan seems to be working. After a sluggish 2024, AccuRounds workers are putting in overtime as they transform steel rods into hundreds of highly specialized industrial gadgets, and the company is looking to hire. Revenues were up by 20 percent in the first quarter of 2025 and Tamasi expects the same for the current quarter. Revenues last year came to about $20 million, he said. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up AccuRounds makes precisely machined pieces of metal that mostly go inside bigger machines, ranging from commercial aircraft to industrial robots to drug manufacturing systems. For instance, one component goes into a pump that excretes the glue used to assemble iPhones. Another is a driveshaft that's found in most of the machines used worldwide to make influenza vaccines. Advertisement AccuRounds also makes surgical tools such as trephenes, the razor-sharp cookie cutters used to extract diseased corneas from human eyes during transplant procedures. AccuRounds even makes components for high-end flutes played by professional musicians. Advertisement AccuRounds is nothing like the grimy machine shops of old. It's clean and well-lit, with a multitude of computer-guided milling machines, each costing hundreds of thousands of dollars. The Plexiglass windows on each machine are splashed by a constant spray of cutting oil, which cools and lubricates the cutting tools and washes away metal debris. Twelve-foot steel rods are fed into the mill, where they're automatically shaped, drilled and cut into the proper shape, then dropped into a finished-parts bin. Lately the company's installed robotic arms at some of the milling machines. Made by Universal Robots, a Danish company owned by North Reading-based That doesn't mean fewer jobs, Tamasi said, just different ones. 'It's a commitment that we've made to our team here, that technology, The company's recent revenue surge began right after the re-election of Donald Trump, who'd campaigned on a promise to revive US manufacturing by levying high tariffs on imports. 'It was the end of November, early December,' said Tamasi. 'That's when we started to see things turn.' One customer who had been purchasing from machine shops in Singapore and China told Tamasi that the impending tariffs had cause a change of heart. 'They mentioned they spent a couple of years farming work out,' Tamasi said. 'Now they're looking at bringing that work back.' Advertisement Mark Curtin inspected a finished product at AccuRounds. Matthew J. Lee/Globe Staff It's a reminder that tariffs aren't all bad. And AccuRounds isn't the only local manufacturer to benefit. Canton-based Company president Brian Buyea said that even before Trump took office, he was hearing from customers looking to 'reshore' their supply chain with US-made circuit boards. 'Now you start to add the tariffs on top of that, it's started to give us a little more of a positive boost,' Buyea said. Because the Trump administration has so frequently raised and lowered its proposed tariff rates, Buyea couldn't predict their effect on Remtec's revenues. 'It could be anything from a 10 percent pickup for us, to, we could double our business,' he said. Even skeptics concede that import taxes can benefit domestic manufacturers by driving up the cost of products made by foreign competitors. 'These types of polices inevitably have some winners, at least in the short term,' said Scott Lincicome, economist at the To Lincicome. tariffs produce far more losers than winners, as businesses and consumers throughout the economy end up paying more for products. Either they keep buying imports, and pay the tariff, or they switch to more expensive US sources. Many domestic companies use higher tariffs as an opportunity to raise their own prices. And as domestic orders surge, some companies must invest in new plant and equipment, and their new customers will pay for it. 'Over time, you're getting slower growth and a less efficient, less productive economy,' said Lincicome. Advertisement AccuRounds derives only about 5 percent of its revenue from exports, so the company won't suffer much if foreign nations aim retaliatory tariffs at US goods. But the Trump tariffs make it more expensive for manufacturers to purchase the supplies and equipment they need. Steel tariffs are a problem, Tamasi admitted. He'd happily buy US-made steel but 'the quality and the consistency is not there,' he said. 'We've tried everyone.' So he'll keep importing the steel despite the administration's 50 percent tariff. However, AccuRounds' sales contracts stipulate that the company can pass on any increases in steel costs to the end user, shielding AccuRounds from the tariff burden. There's no way around it, said Tamasi. 'If we had to absorb all price increases,' he said, 'we wouldn't be able to compete.' An even bigger hit could come from purchasing new milling machines, priced at half a million dollars or more even before the tariffs. The only ones worth buying, Tamasi said, are made in Switzerland, Germany and Japan. No US company makes the machines he needs, Tamasi said there's no way he can pass this tariff bill directly to customers, but in the long run it could well push his prices higher. Still, if Tamasi's customers are willing to pick up the tab, AccuRounds is a likely victor of the tariff wars. AccuRounds makes specialized metal parts. Matthew J. Lee/Globe Staff Hiawatha Bray can be reached at

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store