Global student recruitment: Don’t expect any sudden shifts

Over the past eight months, in a range of leading host countries, in particular Australia, Canada, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom, the planning of international student mobility has been rather chaotic and confusing, even including cutbacks in recruitment.

Caps on international student numbers, increasing costs of visas and reductions in the number of courses taught in English are some of the measures taken to reduce the number of international students in countries that until recently were actively recruiting them, mainly for reasons of revenue generation and-or skilled immigration.

Arguments in favour of these restricting measures go from practical concerns, such as lack of student housing to worries about national security and immigration. But there are also numerous arguments against these plans: the need for human capital, their negative economic impact on universities and regions, the value of international classroom environments and the importance of soft power and knowledge diplomacy.

No easy answers

Among the opponents of more international students are those criticising such policies as neoliberalist and centred on marketising higher education; those fearing too much dependence on the income from international students, in particular from the two main sending countries, China and India; as well as nationalists who perceive international students as unwelcome immigrants.

Among those who support increasing the numbers of international students are big industries, who consider them as valuable human capital; governors of regions who fear closure of their higher education institutions and industries as a result of local demographic decline; universities which see them as an important source of revenue and-or a resource enriching the classroom environment; and those involved in degree programmes that risk being cancelled, including their faculty.

As always, there are no easy answers or directions. While international students are indeed a welcome contribution to society, the economy and academia and can bring a positive contribution to knowledge diplomacy, the risks and negative implications are also clear: increased economic dependence; lack of quality education and services; brain drain; and over-representation of students from one or two countries in the classroom, making it actually less international.

A way out has to be found in comprehensive strategies involving all stakeholders and allowing for diverse and flexible solutions for different programmes and institutional and regional contexts.

The picture in the Global North

The Netherlands is a good example of the complexity in developing such a plan. At the start of 2024, the former minister of education, Robbert Dijkgraaf, proposed a new law, after intensive debates, to address the many issues at stake and keep the various stakeholders happy.

And although most were not very happy with it, the law aimed to find a middle way. But the newly formed nationalist government this summer, with members from a majority of anti-immigration parties opposing teaching in English and recruiting international students, will likely take a more negative direction.

In that respect, recent elections in France and the United Kingdom provide hope for a more positive perspective. Plans by the French government to introduce higher tuition fees for international students were cancelled before the last elections in June and are likely to remain so. The new Labour government in the United Kingdom might seek to reduce the perception of international students and-or their families as unwelcome immigrants.

In Australia and Canada, compromises are likely to be reached on caps on international student numbers that are milder than initially planned. Other leading countries, such as Germany, Spain and Italy, seem to be more stable in their policies and, as such, remain attractive options.

The United States, in absolute numbers still the leading host country for international students, is an interesting case. In the short term, it might benefit from the impact of the negative policies applied in the other Anglophone countries.

Even if Donald Trump, with his notorious anti-immigration and nationalist stance, were to be elected, there are signs that international students will continue to be welcome, although most likely only from so-called ‘friendly nations’, and that those in STEM fields will even be allowed to stay after graduation.

A more competitive and globalised market

So, are we witnessing more stability in international student recruitment by the main host countries in the Global North after a period of chaos and negativity? Apparently, yes, although much is still unclear and some damage has been done.

These developments are taking place in an increasingly competitive globalised market in which the share of leading countries keeps decreasing.

The main sending countries in Asia such as China, Japan, Malaysia, Singapore, South Korea, Taiwan and, more recently, India are gradually shifting towards welcoming international students.

Their competitive strengths are clear: lower costs, scholarships, and an improving reputation and performance in international rankings. They are also an alternative to unwelcoming and xenophobic trends in the Global North.

In a changing geopolitical environment, these countries have become more attractive to students from their own regions and from Africa. Other countries moving in the same direction are Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates in the Middle East, and Central Asian countries like Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan.

And we also see signs of increasing regional recruitment in some countries and institutions in Africa and Latin America. Transnational education (branch campuses, franchise operations and various forms of articulation programmes) is part of this new global order.

No sudden shifts

This does not imply, though, that a major shift in international student mobility from the Global North to the rest of the world will happen any time soon.

Also, these new markets face some serious challenges regarding the quality of their education (most international students go to poor quality, private institutions), xenophobia (see recent attacks on international students in Kyrgyzstan), lack of academic freedom and critical thinking (in China, but also elsewhere), and wars and political instability (Ukraine, Bangladesh and South Sudan).

The global international recruitment order may be shifting, but, for international students, this raises grave issues of stability, quality, equity and inclusiveness.

Hans de Wit is professor emeritus and distinguished fellow at the Center for International Higher Education, Boston College, United States, and senior fellow at the International Association of Universities. E-mail: dewitj@bc.edu.

This article is a commentary. Commentary articles are the opinion of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of University World News.