Fossil Fuel Influence and Political Pressure Erode Academic Freedom

The Trump administration froze billions of dollars in federal research funding in 2025 and launched investigations into 75 institutions. It pushed colleges to sign agreements supporting administration policies in exchange for funding and accused scientists of fueling 'climate anxiety'.

Scientists self-censor to survive funding cuts

Since 2025, researchers have been removing terms like 'climate change' from grant applications to avoid rejection. Noel Healy of Salem State University, lead author of a study on fossil fuel influence published in Energy Research & Social Science, documented this trend. "Since 2025, scientists have been deleting words like ‘climate change’ from their grant applications because those words can get an application rejected," Healy said. The federal government canceled $4 million in climate research grants at Princeton University alone. Researchers report deleting terms like 'climate change' or 'environmental justice' from federal grant applications to avoid rejection.

Universities preemptively shut down climate programs

Some universities have quietly shut down contentious environmental programs before government mandates, hoping to avoid becoming a target. State-level legislatures in conservative states introduced bills to defund university diversity, equity, and inclusion offices alongside environmental sustainability programs. From 2021 to 2023, more than 150 state bills were introduced targeting tenure, faculty governance, and diversity, equity and inclusion.

Historical pattern of industry influence on academia

For decades, fossil fuel companies and libertarian donors have funded university research to build credibility, shape curricula, and downplay climate risks. In the 1920s, electric utilities worked with academics to defend their monopoly positions and oppose regulations. Fossil fuel companies followed suit in the 1950s, funding research to sow doubt about the public health impacts of their products.

Internal industry documents have shown that companies viewed academic research as a way to build credibility and influence public debate. Between 2010 and 2020, six fossil fuel companies alone gave more than $700 million to US universities. This funding helped legitimize industry solutions to the climate crisis and undermine regulatory approaches. Industry-funded centers promoted economic models that downplay the social cost of carbon and cast doubt on the feasibility of rapid renewable energy transitions.

Some of this funding came with donor agreements that gave outside actors control over decisions traditionally made by faculty, such as in hiring and curricula. Billionaire industrialist David Koch, whose wealth came from Koch Industries, gave more than $185 million to the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and served as a lifetime member to MIT’s highest governing body. The MIT Energy Initiative has said that funders have no control over the content or findings of its research reports. MIT has previously said it would not divest its endowment from fossil-fuel companies, arguing that working with industry could help develop climate solutions.

In 2016, the Arizona state legislature created the first publicly funded libertarian academic center. The study traces how corporate philanthropy and political pressure reshaped university governance.

Academic freedom erodes to historic lows

The Academic Freedom Index documents a collapse in US institutional autonomy. The index, which uses a scale of 0 to 4, found the US score fell from 3.3 in 2019 to 1.7 in 2025. This decline aligns its academic environment with nations experiencing democratic backsliding. US universities train the next generation of engineers, policymakers, and scientists.

The national UnKoch My Campus campaign has published a model gift-acceptance policy to give faculty control over conditional donations and increase transparency. The model policy gives faculty a say before gifts with conditions are accepted, makes donor agreements public, and sets clear grounds for rejecting gifts that give donors influence over hiring or teaching.