International education hubs: a comparative overview

In connection with the growth of TNE over the past 20 years, dedicated education hubs have emerged, and are continuing to emerge, in different regions of the world, aimed at attracting the services of quality foreign education providers and helping to meet the growing demand for quality international education ‘closer to home’.

Education hubs can play an increasingly strategic role going forward in an international context where it is possible to see a trend toward the regionalisation or ‘de-globalisation’ of international student mobility, and where a growing number of countries is seeking to leverage in-bound TNE to train and retain talent locally.

International education hubs can have different characteristics and modes of operating. These differences depend primarily on the main purpose for their establishment, the type of ownership, the regulatory-operating framework in place, and financial arrangements. The following table sums up some key features of the hubs taken into consideration.

This will be of interest to observers of international education, TNE providers and practitioners, as well as the growing number of countries that are considering developing dedicated international education hubs as part of their internationalisation strategies.

An expanded paper is published in University World News. The research underpinning this comparative study was supported by the British Council Viet Nam as part of a broader study, commissioned by the Vietnam Ministry of Education and Training, looking at challenges and opportunities for establishing Viet Nam as the next education hub in Southeast Asia.

Hub	Rationale	Regulation	Services
Education City (first HEI 1999) - Qatar Ownership: Private (Qatar Foundation) with public funding	Support national economic growth (meeting skills needs and attracting international talent) Support transition into a knowledge-based society	Delivery models: Branch campus. Multiversity approach encouraged through credit transfer Approval: highly selective / generally by invitation  HE regulation: relying on sending country’s accreditation / national accreditation will be required once in place Broader regulation:National legislation apply	Provide all teaching facilities, pay salary of staff  Provide central student housing, shared student facilities, manage financial aid Shared teaching and learning spaces Student fees go to QF
Knowledge Park (2003) & International Academic City (2005) - Dubai, UAE Ownership: Private (TECOM Group) with public investment	Support economic diversion / transition to knowledge economy  Cater for expats and new companies coming in	Delivery models: Branch campus and teaching centre  Approval: Open to proposals, but increasingly alignment with economic priorities considered HE regulation: Free zones are exempted from national regulation. Approval and accreditation by local regulator required National accreditation required for qualification recognition  Broader regulation: As a Free Zone there are less barriers to trade	Provide infrastructures for rent or ‘build and lease’.  Provide some shared building / facilities   There are shared commercial facilities such as student housing, food halls Student fees go to providers
EduCity Iskandar (2008) - Malaysia  Ownership: Private (Iskandar Investment) with public investment	Spur the economic growth of Iskandar Puteri Support urbanisation	Delivery models: Branch campus  Approval: Open to proposals HE regulation: National accreditation required   Broader regulation:National legislation apply	Provide premises through ‘build and lease’ or rental Provide central student housing, leisure activities, student services   Provide paid-for support, such as marketing, accreditation, engagement with industry  Student fees go to providers
Ras Al Khaimah Academic Zone (2008) - RAK, UAE Ownership: Government (Economic Zone Authority)	Cater for expats and new companies coming in Support local economic growth	Delivery models:  Branch campus and teaching centre model  Approval: Open to proposals HE regulation: Free zones are exempted from national regulation. Approval and accreditation by local regulator required National accreditation required for qualification recognition  Broader regulation: As a Free Zone there are less barriers to trade	Provide infrastructures for rent or ‘build and lease’.  Rent is subsidised for initial years  Hub provides a one stop shop offering support Some minimum shared facilities, e.g. student housing  Student fees go to providers
Incheon Global Campus (2012) - South Korea Ownership: Government (Incheon Free Trade Foundation)	Support economic development Help addressing national brain drain Cater for expats and new companies coming in	Delivery models: Branch campus. One year required at the home campus Approval: Open to proposals, but selective process to ensure that national priorities are met HE regulation: Require national accreditation, although lighter touch as relying on sending country accreditation  Broader regulation: As a Free Zone there are less barriers to trade	Provide infrastructures, free rental to start with  Provide shared facilities, student housing, student services, library Student fees go to providers
Uniciti International Education Hub (2013) - Mauritius  Ownership: Private (Medine Group)	Develop a smart city  Supporting national economic growth (meeting skills needs and attracting international talent)	Delivery models: Different models allowed (branch campus, franchise, co-delivery, rental) Approval: open to proposals, strategic national/local priorities taken into account HE regulation: National accreditation required Broader regulation:National legislation apply	Provide premises through ‘build and lease’ or ‘cost-sharing’ or for rental. Provide paid-for support, such as marketing, accreditation, campus experience, student visa Provide central student housing and leisure activities Student fees go to providers, some to the hubs depending on delivery model
Hainan Li'an International Education Park (2020) - China Ownership: Government (Hainan Government)	Support local economic growth  Help addressing national brain drain	Delivery models: as in rest of china branch campus, joint institutes or joint programmes by also only area in China where fully foreign-owned branch campus model is allowed Approval: Open to proposals, but selective process to ensure local and national priorities are met HE regulation: Require national accreditation Broader regulation: As a Free Zone there are less barriers to trade, e.g. taxation lower + more supportive student and staff visa	Provide infrastructures, free rental to start with  Provide shared facilities, student housing, student services, and library. Some services are charged to institutions based on student number size Provide student funding, and research funding  Student fees go to providers

The author would like to thank Dhanjay Jhurry, Francisco Marmolejo, Nitesh Sughnani, Aizizah Khalid Merican, Taner Topcu, Eileen Luo, Pyungryun Brian Yu, Dungyeop Yeon, Kyuseok Kim, Wan Ahmad Saifuddin, and Vincenzo Raimo, for very helpful conversations about the different hubs’ models of operation. The author is also grateful to the Viet Nam MOET research team that supported the comparative hubs study, Minh Quach, Hiệp Phạm, and Lien-Huong Nguyen, and the wider research team for the British Council project on the future perspectives of Viet Nam as an education hub, including Janet Ilieva, Van Anh Hoang, Xuan Vang Nguyen.