Equity is a global concern and a national commitment. Many equity policies have succeeded in improving higher education access among underprivileged groups, but their effectiveness in enhancing learning and graduate outcomes needs empirical validation. The challenge lies in ensuring that institutional strategies extend academic support and offer initiatives to develop inclusive campuses. Recent policy reversals indicate that the fight for equity in higher education should be more resolute and steadfast.

Inequalities have become a central concern in public policy discussions in recent decades. While, in the past, discussions used to concentrate on income inequalities, the focus has gradually and steadily shifted toward social inequalities.

Empirical studies have shown an overlapping relationship between income and education. In fact, education has emerged as the single most important variable explaining wage differentials among individuals. Education has been found to have an enduring impact on earnings, intergenerational mobility, cumulative marginalization, and durable inequalities across generations. Therefore, combating education poverty has become a priority area for ensuring equity. The UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) 4 and 10, along with the global commitment to “leave no one behind,” have become the core of the transformative promise of the 2030 agenda.

Expansion, Diversification, and Equity

Expansion of higher education benefits the poor in terms of access to higher education. However, expansion unaccompanied by targeted equity policies may not favor the less-privileged. The massification of the sector has softened inequality indicators wherever equity policies are in place. Similarly, a diversification of the system benefits the less-privileged. Many high-income countries have succeeded in diversifying the system and reducing inequalities in access to higher education. The European and American higher education systems diversified in the 1960s and 1970s, benefiting the disadvantaged groups. The higher education sector in the less developed countries, however, remained less diversified and relatively elite during these periods.

Equity Policies across Countries

The most common strategies utilized to promote equity are quota-based prioritization and unequal distribution of resources in favor of the disadvantaged. Equity policies across countries can be broadly classified into three types. First, equity policies based on social criteria. Countries with wide social diversity have generally adopted admission policies favoring the disadvantaged groups. Many countries in Asia and Africa, for example, have followed social criteria as the basis for equity policies. Second, equity policies based on economic criteria. Countries with relatively low social/ethnic fractionalization indices tend to follow economic criteria as the basis for promoting equity. Third, equity policies based on regional criteria. Countries with a high degree of regional disparities often follow geographical quota as the basis for admissions, as well as the opening of new institutions.

Occasionally, countries follow a combination of these criteria. Many African countries, for example, have student sponsorship schemes. Many middle- and high-income countries and countries in transition support disadvantaged students via special grants. Some countries have established institutions specifically for ethnic minorities and disadvantaged groups.

Equity policies have succeeded in improving access to higher education for disadvantaged groups. However, whether or not they have succeeded in extending this success to learning and graduate outcomes is debatable.

Challenges to Equity Concerns in Higher Education

A number of challenges have limited the potential for equity policies to achieve these additional, yet equally important, goals.

First, elitism in higher education stands in the way of progress. The positional nature of higher education makes equity and fairness difficult to attain. Elite institutions are not keen to expand enrollment. In reality, the students compete for places in the best institutions, and elite institutions compete for the best students. Admissions is a competition between elite institutions and elite students, leaving behind those from underprivileged groups. The elite universities in the United States and the United Kingdom draw a major share of students from high social groups and top income brackets.

Second, it remains challenging to ensure equity in student outcomes. Studies have shown high dropout rates and poor learning and labor market outcomes among students from disadvantaged groups. It seems that success in equity policies aimed at improving access has not translated into enhanced learning outcomes. The challenge to evolving institutional strategies to provide academic support and to develop inclusive campuses remains an unfinished task.

Finally, equity policies have been reversed in many contexts, undermining much of the progress made thus far. The United States Supreme Court decision on affirmative action in June 2023, the new laws enacted against diversity, equity, and inclusion programs in the United States, and the curbing of subsidies and financial aid in several other countries, for example, have all harmed the equity policies that target disadvantaged groups.

Conclusion

Equity policies have succeeded in expanding higher education to disadvantaged groups and in reducing inequalities in access. However, in the absence of adequate academic support programs and inclusive institutional strategies, success in access has not yet fully translated into success in learning and labor market outcomes. Furthermore, the policy reversals witnessed in recent years may halt the progress made in equity so far. The fight to improve equity and build an inclusive higher education system should be more resolute and steadfast.

N.V. Varghese is distinguished visiting professor at the Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, and former vice-chancellor of the National Institute of Educational Planning and Administration (NIEPA), New Delhi, India. E-mail: [email protected].