After years of advocacy by students and environmental groups, the majority of U.K. universities have pledged to divest from fossil fuels, marking a significant step toward sustainability in higher education. However, a recent report highlights the lingering influence of fossil fuel funding in academia, particularly in elite U.S. institutions, raising concerns over transparency and scientific integrity.
U.K. Universities Embrace Divestment
According to People & Planet, a student-led campaign group, 115 of 149 U.K. universities have committed to removing fossil fuel investments from their portfolios, representing approximately $22.4 billion in funding. This milestone reflects a decade of sustained activism, spearheaded by the group’s Fossil Free Universities campaign launched in 2013.
Laura Clayson of People & Planet emphasized the broader implications of this achievement, stating, “This victory is thanks to generations of students and staff who fought for justice alongside impacted communities. The era of U.K. universities profiting from the fossil fuel industry is ending.”
Among the latest institutions to join the pledge are Birmingham City University, the Glasgow School of Art, the Royal Northern College of Music, and the University of Bradford. People & Planet aims to leverage this momentum to persuade the remaining 34 universities to follow suit.
Transparency Issues in Academic Funding
Despite these advancements, a September study published in WIREs Climate Change exposed a troubling lack of transparency in academic funding from fossil fuel companies in the U.S., U.K., Canada, and Australia. The study analyzed 14,000 peer-reviewed articles on funding bias and conflicts of interest from 2003 to 2023. Shockingly, only 14 references were found regarding fossil fuel funding, highlighting the industry’s covert influence on climate and energy research.
The study also revealed that between 2012 and 2017, BP contributed $2.1–$2.6 million to Princeton University’s Carbon Mitigation Initiative. Geoffrey Supran, a co-author of the study, warned, “Our aim is to protect scientific integrity. Universities and scholars must recognize they can be used as instruments in propaganda schemes.”
U.S. Universities Under the Spotlight
Unlike their U.K. counterparts, many prominent U.S. universities continue to accept significant funding from the fossil fuel industry. Analyses published by the Campus Climate Network in September showed that six elite institutions, including Princeton and Columbia, received over $100 million in fossil fuel funding since 2003.
This figure is likely underestimated due to insufficient public disclosure. The funding influenced at least 1,507 academic articles across the institutions, raising concerns about the industry’s sway over research outputs. Furthermore, Princeton University has faced additional scrutiny for owning shares in a fossil fuel company, Petrotiger, which reportedly generated nearly $140 million over the past decade.
Alex Norbrook, a researcher involved in the study, criticized Princeton’s dual stance, stating, “Princeton’s claim of climate leadership is disingenuous while it continues to profit from and promote the fossil fuel industry.”
The Global Divide in Academic Climate Commitments
While U.K. universities are progressing toward a green transition, their counterparts in other countries remain entangled with fossil fuel interests. This ongoing relationship, coupled with a lack of funding transparency, raises questions about the influence of the fossil fuel industry on academic independence and climate research.
The contrast underscores the urgency for global higher education institutions to adopt transparent funding practices and divest from industries that conflict with climate action goals.
Related topic:
What Are Fossil Fuels? [Revealed]
