The oil and gas sector has a profound impact on higher education, influencing curriculum design, academic research, and even public policy. Universities benefit financially from this partnership, but there are worries that it could skew academic freedom and climate research.
This piece explores how the oil and gas business permeates higher education, the consequences for science and climate policy, and the mounting opposition from scholars and students.
Research funding and academic focus
Funding for research is one of the most direct ways that oil and gas businesses influence policy. Universities frequently receive significant financial support from fossil fuel industries, particularly those with departments of engineering and environmental science. The purpose of this funding is to create research centres, provide project money, and endowed professorships that support the goals of the industry.
For instance, studies from the fossil fuel industry-funded MIT Energy Initiative supported natural gas as a “bridge fuel” to a low-carbon future. This story strengthened the industry’s influence in academia and government by influencing research as well as being a part of the Obama administration’s US Energy Policy.
Shortly after a significant oil disaster, the Canadian energy corporation Enbridge funded a business school research centre at the University of Calgary, a move that some perceived as an attempt to improve the company’s public image.
This phenomenon is not exclusive to Canada; analogous trends are discernible in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Australia, wherein fossil fuel corporations have played a role in moulding university programmes and swaying public opinions around fossil fuel innovations such as hydraulic fracturing and carbon capture and storage (CCS). Despite the frequent presentation of these innovations as solutions to the climate emergency, their primary objective is to extend the lifespan of the fossil fuel industry.
Developing curriculum and industry-favourable education
In addition to providing funding for research, the oil and gas sector has influenced university curricula, particularly in disciplines like engineering and geosciences. Industry leaders have occasionally provided advice on course creation and design.
Companies such as BP, Shell, and Equinor have influenced engineering and geoscience programmes in the United Kingdom by collaborating with prominent universities like Oxford University and University College London. In a similar partnership, representatives of fossil fuel companies helped develop undergraduate programmes at the University of Western Australia.
This involvement significantly impacts students’ education. Industry-friendly curricula typically place more emphasis on technological solutions than on systemic reforms that would lessen reliance on fossil fuels. Examples of these technological solutions include carbon capture and storage. Not only does this alter the curriculum, but it also presents the case for climate action in a manner that benefits the fossil fuel industry.
Fossil fuel firms are able to continue participating in talks about energy policy while holding off on more radical reforms by presenting themselves as important stakeholders in the shift to a low-carbon future.
Perception and policy influence
The oil and gas sector’s influence on scholarly enquiry extends beyond academic institutions and permeates public policy. These corporations influence policy discussions to their advantage by providing financing for research that bolsters the notion that fossil fuels are an essential part of the energy transition. For example, studies supported by the industry are more likely to minimise the potential of renewable energy sources and promote natural gas.
The promotion of natural gas as a “bridge fuel” to a low-carbon future is a positive example of this. This narrative has played a major role in postponing the switch to renewable energy, as evidenced by research funded by the industry.
According to one assessment, rather than promoting a full switch to renewable energy sources, academic research supported by the fossil fuel industry typically favours technological advancements that extend the use of fossil fuels. The ramifications of this have been extensive in terms of climate policy, since governments base their choices on academic research.
Moreover, fossil fuel companies frequently use colleges as a platform to justify their involvement in climate action. These businesses become more credible and are able to portray themselves as part of the solution to the climate catastrophe rather than a contributing factor by forming partnerships with respectable academic institutions.
As a means of pushing for incremental technological fixes rather than systemic change, the sector aims to postpone significant climate action, a tactic known as “climate obstruction.”
Reactions and demands for openness
Students and academics have been demanding that universities cut their ties to the fossil fuel sector, and this opposition has been increasing in recent years. Campus activist groups have been outspoken in their demands for academic autonomy and funding transparency from industry.
They contend that public welfare ought to come first at universities and that the interests of fossil fuel companies should have no bearing on their decisions. This movement has resulted in calls to divest from fossil fuel firms, evoking memories of earlier movements against the tobacco and pharmaceutical industries.
A few colleges have begun to move in this direction. As an example, Princeton University has tightened its policies about taking donations from fossil fuel companies, and other educational institutions are facing pressure to reveal their financial ties to the sector. Yet progress has been sluggish, and despite the need for financial support for research and teaching, many colleges still take money from oil and gas firms.
The more urgent the climate situation gets, the more probable it is that the demand for accountability and openness will grow. Universities are essential to solving the climate catastrophe because they are hubs of knowledge and innovation. However, having financial ties to sectors of the economy that have a stake in maintaining the status quo hinders their ability to do so.
The impact of the oil and gas sector on higher education is extensive and includes funding for research, curriculum creation, and public relations. Despite its frequent presentation as essential for furthering scientific research and education, this financial support raises serious ethical questions regarding the independence of academic institutions and their involvement in tackling the climate catastrophe.
Universities will have to deal with the conflict between their need to contribute to a sustainable future and the financial support from the fossil fuel sector as the movement for transparency and divestment picks up steam. They can then make sure that their research and teaching initiatives complement the more general objectives of social responsibility and climate action.
Based on the growing opposition from students and professors, we expect the relationship between higher education and the fossil fuel sector to be a divisive subject in the years to come.