In the late 1980s, internationalization moved from being marginal, ad hoc, and fragmented to becoming a more integrated and strategic part of higher education. Around the turn of the century, a shift took place away from the traditional collaborative focus on internationalization toward more competitive and market-oriented approaches. Currently, geopolitical tensions and nationalism appear to challenge both the traditional and neoliberal internationalization policies. Are we undoing internationalization?

Looking at the current debate taking place in high-income countries about higher education and its international dimensions, one wonders if 50 years of internationalization in higher education have come to an end, with examples including discussions on caps on international student admissions, a sharpened focus on knowledge security, and attacks on academics and institutions collaborating with certain countries. Are we undoing internationalization?
This question was the theme of a recent webinar on November 27, 2024, by the Centre for Higher Education Studies at University College London and the Centre for Higher Education Transformations at the University of Bristol in the United Kingdom. It addressed an issue one can look at from different angles: nationalism and anti-internationalism, national security, marketization and competition, and social responsibility. A lot has happened over the past 50 years, and, in the current complex global environment, it is important to look both backward and forward at the evolution of the internationalization of higher education for possible signs of its decline and transformation.

From Optimism to Neoliberalism

In the late 1980s, internationalization moved from being a marginal, ad hoc, and fragmented list of activities to becoming a more integrated and strategic part of the higher education agenda in high-income countries.
It was a period of hope and optimism, in which collaboration, exchange, and solidarity prevailed, although marketization and competition were already present in key Anglophone countries such as Australia and the United Kingdom. The fall of the Iron Curtain, the European programs for education and research, and the need for knowledge creation and collaboration as part of the globalization process inspired higher education institutions in their efforts to become more international.

However, around the turn of the century, a shift took place away from these traditional collaborative values toward more competitive and market-oriented approaches. Neoliberalism became the driving rationale for internationalization in the Global North, with mid- and low-income countries in the Global South being primary targets.
There certainly were counter-reactions, such as the “internationalization at home” movement in Europe, the call for “internationalization of the curriculum” in Australia and the United Kingdom, the appeal for a more “comprehensive internationalization” in the United States, and the urge to decolonize higher education and its internationalization in the Global South. But the impact of these initiatives was—and still is—rather marginal; they are more rhetoric than reality. Rankings, government policies and revenue generation, and intensifying marketization and competition have become drivers of internationalization.

The COVID-19 pandemic did not provide any respite from these developments. When it subsided, education in the Global North returned to “normal” as soon as possible. In the Global South, one could see two approaches to internationalization: on the one hand, the institutional-level development of their own vision of internationalization with an emphasis on regional collaboration, a decolonized curriculum, and digitalization (collaborative online international learning and virtual exchange), and on the other, national-level policies focused on student recruitment, soft power development, and transnational education.

Internationalization Dismantled

Currently, geopolitical tensions and conflicts, anti-immigration and anti-Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) sentiments and policies, and nationalism appear to challenge the return to the “old normal” of neoliberal internationalization. There are all kinds of signals that high-income countries are now turning away from competition and marketization: curbing or freezing admission of international students, emphasizing knowledge security, and putting an end to research collaboration and exchanges with countries like China, Iran, Russia and others.

This undoing of internationalization is becoming even more critical. Election results in the United States, as well as in several European countries, signal a dismantling of internationalization in these countries. Clear examples of deconstruction include the actions by governments in Australia, Canada, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom to reduce the number of international students, as well as the policies of the European Union and of several national governments when it comes to strengthening knowledge security, or what is referred to as “responsible internationalization” (in which “responsible” no longer means “responsible for the global society”—the SDGs—but “responsible for our security”).

A Radical Undoing

This “undoing” of internationalization in the Global North, understood by some as an “undoing” of neoliberalism, does not mean a return to the traditional values of cooperation, exchange, and solidarity. It is a move toward a radical undoing of all internationalization of higher education. This is remarkable, as it goes hand in hand with budget cuts in higher education and research as well as shortages in the skilled labor market and, as such, is counterproductive. Although one can question the intentions of several governments in the Global South, the opposite seems to be happening there compared to the Global North, with the development of internationalization concepts and policies that are no longer dependent on the Global North but rather competing with it.

Internationalization cannot be seen separately from what is happening to higher education currently. Philip Altbach and I wrote in University World News: “The global higher education and research community, in particular its leadership, has to be aware of the challenges it faces from the current political shift to the right and needs to act responsibly in addressing them and finding ways to overcome them. This is in its own interest, but, more than that, it is in the interest of the global society. Burying our heads in the sand is a dangerous stance to adopt, in 2025 and in the years to come.” That is true for higher education in general, but certainly also for its internationalization.
Current developments give the higher education community an opportunity and a requirement to reassess and reimagine internationalization as being composed of socially responsible and inclusive actions, both in the Global North and the Global South. Undoing is not the solution but the problem.

Hans de Wit is professor emeritus and distinguished fellow at the Boston College Center for International Higher Education, United States, and senior fellow of the International Association of Universities (IAU). E-mail: [email protected].

This is an updated version of the author’s contribution to University World News, December 4, 2024.