Universities, Industry, and the Climate: What the Australian Accord Overlooks

Laughing Kookaburra

07-11-2025

Perching turns into meditation the moment Kingfisher relaxes into the branch, yet stays ready for any sneaky fish. He inhales the morning like it’s his favorite tea, exhales whatever worries he never bothers to pick up, and lets thoughts float off like wayward feathers. Watching him, Zhuang admits, “I might be a revered thinker, but Kingfisher lives the Dao more than I know about it.

In Kingfisherish Wandering [1]

© Wix

Australia’s new national higher education blueprint—the Australian Universities Accord—promises prosperity, equity, and environmental sustainability [2]. Yet a recent study argues the Accord risks entrenching “climate obstructionism,” where policies appear climate-friendly while delaying meaningful action [3-5]. The authors show that the Accord was shaped by actors with fossil-fuel ties, prioritizes industry-led “solutions,” and introduces governance that could further amplify corporate influence over universities [3].

First, several panel members guiding the Accord have connections to energy companies, raising concerns about conflicts of interest in a policy that claims environmental leadership. For example, the Accord Chair’s role with a state-owned energy retailer underscores how industry networks can shape education policy agendas. Second, the Accord’s text mentions “environmental sustainability” repeatedly but refers to “climate change” only five times in 408 pages—and never addresses its causes—framing climate risk as external to universities rather than as a system they help reproduce [6,7]. Third, the policy centers on economic participation: training for the “clean energy transition,” micro-credentials, and productivity rationales, positioning industry as the indispensable climate actor. Finally, a new system steward—the Australian Tertiary Education Commission—would formally convene business and industry alongside universities, potentially institutionalizing this influence over long-term priorities.

NQ—our collective ecological intelligence—depends on recognizing power relations, questioning “business-as-usual” growth narratives, and aligning education with the biophysical realities of climate disruption. When policy elevates market-first frames and sidelines the political roots of the crisis, it risks green-skilling without ecological learning, and productivity without planetary care. Strengthening NQ means universities should transparently map and reduce fossil-fuel entanglements, foster critical climate literacy, and empower students as civic agents—not just as future workers.

The Accord’s skill-building vision is important, but without confronting fossil-fuel power, it risks polishing the status quo. A higher-education system that cultivates NQ can help society choose environmental integrity over obstruction—and secure a livable future [8,9].

References

[1] Nguyen MH. (2025). Kingfisherish Wandering. https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0FVLLLXNW/

[2] Department of Education. (2024). Australian Universities Accord: Final report. https://www.education.gov.au/australian-universities-accord/resources/final-report

[3] Deuchar A, McKenzie M. (2025). Fossil fuel interests, climate obstructionism, and higher education policy: A critique of the Australian Universities Accord. The Journal of Environmental Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/00958964.2025.2542945

[4] Carroll WK, Daub S, Gunster S. (2022). Regime of obstruction: Fossil capitalism and the many facets of climate denial in Canada. In D Tindall, MCJ Stoddart, RE Dunlap (Eds.), Handbook of anti-environmentalism (pp. 216-233). Elgaronlne.

[5] Hiltner S, et al. (2024). Fossil fuel influence in higher education: A review and a research agenda. WIREs Climate Change, 15(6), 1-22. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.904

[6] Escobar A. (2022). Global higher education in 2050: An ontological design perspective. Critical Times, 5(1), 183-201. https://doi.org/10.1215/26410478-9536551

[7] Stein S. (2024). Universities confronting climate change: Beyond sustainable development and solutionism. Higher Education, 87(1), 165-183. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-023-00999-w

[8] Tran TT. (2025). Flying beyond didacticism: The creative environmental vision of ‘Wild Wise Weird’. Young Voices of Science. https://youngvoicesofscience.org/?p=1963

[9] Vuong QH, Nguyen MH, La VP. (2022). The mindsponge and BMF analytics for innovative thinking in social sciences and humanities. Walter de Gruyter GmbH.