Toward a fossil free research norm in Dutch higher education

In April 2023, the Vrije Universiteit (VU) Amsterdam became the second university in the world, the first in Europe, to ‘no longer enter into research partnerships with companies in the fossil fuel industry’. VU took on the mantle of ‘norm champion’ and led a national dialogue with the Dutch academic community, industry and civil society organizations, in view of rethinking their ties with the fossil fuel industry. This Perspective explores the dynamics of what we call a ‘fossil free research’ (FFR) norm, part of a wider population of emerging, yet heavily contested, international ‘anti-fossil fuel norms’. Adapting the ‘discourses of climate delay’ framework, we explore how the FFR norm has been contested at VU and other Dutch higher education institutions. The dynamics of the FFR norm show that a more nuanced understanding–beyond the overly simplistic binary engagement/disengagement–is needed to fully grasp the tools at the disposal of societal stakeholders to rethink their ties with the fossil fuel industry. Moreover, in the current shifting political climate in the Netherlands and other ‘Western’ countries, anti-fossil fuel norms should not be taken for granted as they continue to be subjected to contestation, change, and backsliding. Key policy insights Climate campaigners have successfully influenced Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) in the Netherlands in rethinking their research ties with the fossil fuel industry. Unique to discussions on cutting ties with specific industries in an academic setting are strongly embedded norms on the role of universities as ‘neutral’ knowledge institutions and ‘academic freedom’. Campaigners must design discursive strategies to engage with these norms and address these concerns. Campaigners further need to overcome material arguments on the financial repercussions of cutting ties, particularly in a context of budgetary cuts to Dutch higher education. Grassroots, ‘bottom-up’ campaigns can become more successful if common ground is actively forged with HEI leadership. VU’s approach to the national dialogue was one of ‘peer learning’. As a tactic of socialization where (best) practices, knowledge and experiences are exchanged, it is considered less ‘aggressive’ than direct persuasion and can be a more effective tool in the norm diffusion process.