Loading...
BETA – We are refining the platform. Your feedback helps us improve. Share feedback
Loading...
Publish your own articles and insights on Citable ESG
Pro organisations publish unlimited content, strengthening their AI Citability Score and visibility to procurement teams, investors, clients, customers, partners, and followers.

The London Science Museum has ended its partnership with BP, a relationship that spanned decades. The Science Museum Group academy, launched in 2018 to deliver training and educational resources, will not renew the contract when it expires. Sir Ian Blatchford, director and chief executive of the Science Museum Group, confirmed the decision without elaborating on the reasoning or timing.
Campaigners have framed the move as a "seismic shift" – a characterisation that signals the pressure institutional funders now face to distance themselves from fossil fuel companies. This is significant not because it's unexpected, but because it marks a threshold many UK cultural institutions have resisted for years.
The partnership's end raises harder questions than celebration permits. What prompted the change now, and not five years ago when pressure was equally intense? Was the decision driven by reputational risk, stakeholder pressure, or a genuine reassessment of institutional values? The Science Museum Group hasn't stated which.
The broader implication matters more than the museum's choice alone. If major public institutions are withdrawing sponsorship from oil and gas firms, that signals a shift in how corporate partnerships are evaluated. Yet the museum's silence on reasoning leaves room for interpretation: the partnership "drew to a close" sounds passive. Who closed it, and why, remains unclear.
This creates a template question for other cultural and educational organisations still receiving fossil fuel funding. Timing the exit and managing the narrative around it appear to matter as much as the exit itself.