A tale of two discourses: fossil fuel funding in UK and US university policy vs. Public debate

As the climate crisis intensifies, fossil fuel industry funding of academic research faces increasing scrutiny. This research examines the complex interplay between fossil fuel funding, corporate capture, and academic integrity in higher education, uncovering how public discourse frames industry funding as a mechanism of climate obstruction and delay. Employing a comparative approach, we analyse how fossil fuel funding is addressed in institutional policies versus public discourse across the UK and US, while investigating the emerging Fossil Free Research movement and its parallels with Fossil Fuel Divestment campaigns. Our findings reveal a significant disparity between public discourse and institutional governance approaches to fossil fuel funding, highlighting the pervasive presence of climate delay discourse and disinformation within academia. We identify country-specific differences between the UK and US shaped by their distinct higher education systems, while underscoring the need for policy reforms that protect transparency, research integrity, and academic freedom. The study concludes that these mechanisms of influence transcend fossil fuel funding, revealing how corporate interests across industries - from chemical and pharmaceutical to agriculture and technology sectors - systematically shape academic research to serve the profit-seeking interests of the private sector rather than the interests of the public, particularly in climate-related fields. Thus, we emphasise the imperative for higher education institutions to adopt stronger policies protecting the integrity of climate research and its crucial role in societal decision-making and reclaiming the public mission of higher education.