Complaint to the Science Museum Group

COMPLAINT TO THE SCIENCE MUSEUM GROUP STATEMENT OF SUPPORT This formal complaint, compiled by Culture Unstained and supported by the undersigned, outlines how the Science Museum Group’s corporate partnerships with the fossil fuel companies BP, Shell and Statoil undermine its integrity as a scientific institution and are in conflict with both the museum’s own Group Ethics Policy and relevant policies governing the wider museums sector. On its website, the Science Museum Group highlights how a corporate partnership with the museum will allow companies to ‘demonstrate their commitment to addressing some of the most urgent scientific challenges of our time’. But even though these three companies have been aware of the urgent challenge of global warming for decades, they have all demonstrated through the ongoing pursuit of new sources of fossil fuels incompatible with meaningful climate change mitigation that they are unwilling to respond in a constructive way to the scientific consensus on climate change. Furthermore, these companies have often worked to undermine action in line with that scientific consensus, by supporting the spread of disinformation, lobbying against environmental regulations and opposing clean energy solutions that would threaten their ongoing interests in fossil fuels. By associating with the Science Museum Group, these companies hope to gain a ‘social license to operate’; a perception among both policy-makers and the wider public that they are responsible companies engaged in activities that respect people and the environment, and that they are in alignment with the scientific consensus on climate change and, by extension, the goals set out in the Paris Climate Agreement. When some of the biggest ongoing contributors to climate change - and supporters of disinformation and inaction - partner with museums of science, they undermine public confidence in the validity of institutions responsible for transmitting scientific knowledge. And when museums partner with companies that have been involved in corruption, violating human rights standards and disregarding the rights of Indigenous and frontline communities, this undermines the standing of the sector as a whole. Such associations create an unacceptable level of harm to the Science Museum Group’s relationships with its visitors, stakeholders and the wider public, as well as to its independence and integrity as a scientific institution. 1 Complaint to the Science Museum Group Submitted on the 5th July 2018 The evidence in this complaint outlines how: • the museum’s due diligence reports fail to take full account of the companies’ contributions to climate change, lobbying against climate legislation, ties to the spread of climate science disinformation, corruption, violating human rights standards and disregarding the rights of Indigenous and frontline communities • partnerships with BP, Shell and Statoil/Equinor harm the museum’s duty to its key stakeholders, specifically the scientific research community and young people • partnerships with these companies both legitimise the activity of these companies and increase the likelihood of undue influence and self-censorship around communicating climate science We request that the trustees of the museum take full account of this complaint and the evidence it cites and take steps to safeguard the reputation and standing of the Science Museum Group through: • evaluating the full range of evidence of these companies' activities in relation to the values and principles laid out in its Ethics Policy • given the urgency of climate change and the seriousness of climate science disinformation, to identify these issues as significant areas of concern and act accordingly • committing to end these relationships as early as is legally possible Supporters (Institutional affiliations for identification purposes only.) 1. Emeritus Professor Keith Barnham, 10. Dr Matt Folley, Senior Research Fellow, Distinguished Research Fellow, Physics Marine Renewable Energy Group, Queen’s Department, Imperial College London University Belfast 2. Nnimmo Bassey, Director, Health of Mother 11. Dr Peter C. Frumhoff, Director of Science and Earth Foundation and winner of the Right Policy, Chief Climate Scientist, Union of Livelihood Award, Nigeria Concerned Scientists 3. Dr Alice Bell, climate campaigner and writer 12. Dr Andy Fugard, Senior Lecturer in Social 4. Professor Sarah Bell, Professor of Science Research Methods, Birkbeck, Environmental Engineering, UCL University of London 5. Dr Jason Box, expert in atmosphere-ice 13. Dr James Hansen, Director of Program on interactions and physical climatology of Climate Science, Awareness and Solutions, Greenland Earth Institute, Columbia University 6. Dr Chris Brierley, Senior Lecturer in Climate 14. Professor Tim Jackson, Professor of Science, UCL Sustainable Development and Director of the 7. Dr Sarah R Davies, Associate Professor, Centre for the Understanding of Sustainable Department of Media, Cognition and Prosperity, University of Surrey Communication, University of Copenhagen 15. Professor David A. Kirby, Programme Director 8. Dr Deirdre Duff, Molecular Biologist for MSc in Science Communication, University 9. Gaute Eiterjord, Chair of Natur og of Manchester Ungdom/Nature and Youth, Norway 2 Complaint to the Science Museum Group Submitted on the 5th July 2018 16. Jeremy Leggett, author, solar entrepreneur 32. Drew Pearce, Progressive Science Institute and advocate 33. Professor Kate E Pickett, Professor of 17. Professor Stephan Lewandowsky, Chair in Epidemiology, University Champion for Cognitive Psychology, University of Bristol Research on Justice and Equality, and Deputy 18. Professor Simon Lewis, Chair in Global Change Director of the Centre for Future Health, Science, University College London University of York 19. Dr Barbara Magennis, Science Teacher 34. Sir Jonathon Porritt, environmentalist and 20. Dr Michael Mason, Associate Professor, writer Department of Geography and Environment, 35. Professor Malcolm J W Povey, Professor of LSE Food Physics at University of Leeds 21. Professor James J. McCarthy, Professor of 36. Kate Raworth, Senior Visiting Research Oceanography, Harvard University; Former Associate, Environmental Change Institute, Director, Museum of Comparative Zoology; University of Oxford Former President, American Association for 37. Dr Beth Rice, Imperial College the Advancement of Science 38. Alom Shaha, science teacher and writer 22. Dr David McCoy, Professor of Global Public 39. Andrew Simms, co-director of the New Health, Queen Mary’s University London Weather Institute 23. Professor Bill McGuire, Professor Emeritus of 40. Hannah Smith, Co-director: research and Geophysical & Climate Hazards at UCL campaigns, People & Planet 24. Dr Felicity Mellor, Senior Lecturer in Science 41. Dr Geoffrey Supran, Post Doctoral Fellow at Communication, Imperial College Harvard University & Post Doctoral Affiliate at 25. Professor Hugh Montgomery, UCL Professor Massachusetts Institute of Technology of Intensive Care Medicine; Consultant 42. Lazarus Tamana, Movement for the Survival of Intensivist, Whittington Hospital; Head, Centre the Ogoni People for Human Health and Performance; Director 43. Hugh Warwick, naturalist and author of Research, Institute for Sport, Exercise and 44. Dr Philip Webber, Chair, Scientists for Global Health Responsibility 26. Dr Frances Mortimer, Director, Centre for 45. Dr Stephen Webster, Director, Imperial Sustainable Healthcare College Science Communication Unit 27. Sophie Neuburg, Executive Director, Medact 46. Benny Wenda, West Papua independence 28. Professor Jonathan Oppenheim, Professor of leader and Chair of the United Liberation Quantum Theory, UCL Movement for West Papua 29. Professor Naomi Oreskes, Professor of the History of Science, Harvard University 30. Chris Packham, naturalist and broadcaster 31. Dr Stuart Parkinson, Executive Director of Scientists for Global Responsibility 3 Complaint to the Science Museum Group Submitted on the 5th July 2018 COMPLAINT TO THE SCIENCE MUSEUM GROUP Contents A. INTRODUCTION B. BACKGROUND (1) The oil industry and its relationships with the Science Museum Group (2) The companies’ purpose: a social license to operate (3) The Science Museum Group’s understanding of the relationships (4) The role of the companies in driving climate change (5) The companies as funders of climate science denial and obstacles to effective climate action (6) The role of the companies in lobbying against legislation to mitigate climate change (7) The companies’ operational impacts on communities, ecosystems and human rights (8) Achieving effective climate action: legal action and calls for divestment from fossil fuel companies (9) Widespread public opposition to oil sponsorship of cultural and scientific institutions C. RELEVANT POLICIES AND LEGAL FRAMEWORK (1) The Science Museum Group’s own policies and procedures (2) External legal obligations and policies D. BREACHES E. REMEDIES F. EXHIBITS 4 Complaint to the Science Museum Group Submitted on the 5th July 2018 A. INTRODUCTION 1. This is a complaint to the Science Museum Group ('the SMG') about its current corporate partnerships and/or sponsorship agreements with British Petroleum plc. ('BP'), Royal Dutch Shell ('Shell'), and Statoil/Equinor ('Statoil/Equinor'), hereafter referred to as 'the companies'. These partnerships are in breach of not only the Museum’s own internal procedures and policies, namely the Group Ethics Policy (2017), but also the policies of sector-wide bodies

Load more