The future of science and technology is always a source of curiosity and debate, especially when politics is involved. With the possible return of Donald Trump at the head of a Republican administration, questions are being asked about the direction of innovation, funding and global leadership in these critical areas. It’s not just about politics; it’s about how a new political tone will shape the priorities of research, development and technological competition in a world increasingly driven by data, AI and scientific discovery.
Let’s explore the key areas where a Trump administration could reshape the landscape, for better or worse.
R&D funding: Focus or fragmentation?
Under Trump’s first administration, science funding has seen significant shifts. While traditional areas such as climate change research faced cuts, defence–related technologies, space exploration and AI saw increased support. NASA’s Artemis programme, which aims to return humans to the moon, thrived with robust investment, showing that space exploration is a clear Republican favourite. However, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the Department of Energy’s renewable energy programmes suffered from reduced budgets.
Expect a similar pattern of selective prioritisation if Trump returns. Artificial intelligence (AI) and quantum computing are likely to gain funding, given their strategic importance in global competition. According to the National Science Foundation, US federal funding for AI research has already increased by 30% during the Trump years, while China has invested three times as much over the same period. Will the US ramp up funding to match China’s, or continue its fragmented approach?
Climate Change: Back on the Backburner?
During Trump’s presidency, climate science took a major hit, with the U.S. pulling out of the Paris Agreement and federal agencies reducing climate-related funding. This affected not just renewable energy but also scientific consensus building on environmental challenges. A Trump-led administration in 2025 would likely prioritize domestic energy independence, focusing on oil, gas, and coal, while downplaying solar and wind initiatives.
In 2022, renewable energy investments globally surpassed $500 billion, with the U.S. contributing around $114 billion. A rollback of incentives under a new Republican leadership could slow these figures, leaving Europe and China to dominate renewable technology markets. Will such decisions create short-term energy relief but long-term competitive disadvantages for the U.S.?
The Technology Industry: Deregulation vs. Oversight
Tech companies have always thrived on deregulation, a hallmark of Republican policy. Trump has previously rolled back net neutrality, giving internet service providers more control over data prioritisation. Such moves favoured large corporations, but left smaller startups and consumers questioning fairness.
However, growing bipartisan concern about big tech monopolies could complicate a second Trump term. Republicans and Democrats increasingly agree on the need for antitrust action, particularly against companies like Google, Amazon and Meta. A recent Pew Research study found that 79% of Americans believe Big Tech has too much power. Will Trump’s administration continue to deregulate, or could it surprise us with tighter controls on the tech giants?
Global Competition: Standing Alone or Falling Behind?
The geopolitical landscape for science and technology is highly competitive. In areas like 5G, quantum computing, and biotechnology, China has emerged as a formidable rival. Trump’s trade war with China disrupted supply chains and imposed tariffs on high-tech imports, but it also incentivized domestic manufacturing.
The U.S. tech industry remains dependent on global collaboration, with 35% of its semiconductor imports coming from Taiwan alone. If Trump enacts stricter trade policies again, this could foster innovation at home but also strain international relationships and make American products more expensive. Balancing nationalism with global cooperation will be a key test.
Investing in science doesn’t stop at funding; it requires a skilled workforce. The US is already struggling to fill STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) jobs, with an estimated 2.5 million unfilled positions by 2025. During Trump’s presidency, immigration policies have been tightened, reducing the flow of international talent that has historically played an important role in US tech and science innovation.
If a Republican administration further restricts H-1B visas, it risks widening the talent gap, especially as other countries such as Canada and Germany attract the world’s brightest minds. Will Trump find a way to balance immigration reform with the needs of the technology and science sectors?
The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the critical role of biotechnology in public health. Trump’s Operation Warp Speed showed how partnerships between government and the private sector can accelerate breakthroughs. But the pandemic also revealed gaps in infrastructure and coordination.
Biotech innovation may continue to grow under Trump, but with a focus on high-profile areas such as vaccine development rather than preventive healthcare. CRISPR technology, which is revolutionising genetic editing, could thrive, but ethical oversight could lag behind, creating risks of misuse or unequal access.
Conclusion: A Fork in the Road Trump Administration
As someone deeply fascinated by how science and politics intertwine, I find the prospect of a Trump-led Republican administration both intriguing and concerning. The potential for innovation in areas like AI and biotechnology is enormous, but so are the risks of neglecting critical challenges like climate change and workforce development.
America’s scientific and technological leadership depends on striking a balance: prioritizing funding where it matters, fostering international collaboration, and maintaining ethical standards. Whether Trump’s approach will catalyze progress or deepen divides remains uncertain. One thing is clear: the decisions made in the next four years will echo far into the future, shaping not just America but the world.
