India Aims to Become Global Education Hub Amid Changing International Landscape

Perhaps surprisingly, the talk about international higher education, on factors such as branch campuses, student mobility, degree franchising, and related issues has become big news in India. The country wants to be a major player. This heightened attention comes at a time when traditional destination countries are changing their approach to Indian students.

Meanwhile, the United Kingdom has emerged as the most aggressive player in establishing physical presence in India, with the largest pipeline of branch campuses in the country. Several prestigious U.K. institutions—including Queen’s University Belfast, Bristol, Liverpool, York, Aberdeen, and Lancaster—have formally committed to opening Indian campuses, and the University of Southampton just opened campus in the Delhi region. Curiously, several of the main host countries are hoping to establish footholds in India and at the same time they are turning Indian students away.

It is in this context that two influential reports have recently appeared—Internationalisation of Higher Education in India: Potential and Policy Recommendations, from NITI Aayog and the U.K.’s International Education Strategy from the British Government, which must be critically assessed. The latter gained momentum as it followed a high profile visit of Keir Starmer and a group of British vice-chancellors to India last year, moving this niche topic to a wider discussion and policy relevance. India’s ambition to establish itself as an education hub by hosting foreign campuses reflects these new dynamics and the NITI Aayog is therefore, worth examining.

Shifting Global and Regional Dynamics

There has hardly been a more unstable period for higher education globally in the past century. For much of the Anglophone world, there is a strong reaction against immigration, largely because of populism and right-wing nationalism. The U.S. has created visa bottlenecks and routinely cancels visas. Other U.S. policies are similarly negative—such as charging $100,000 for some immigration categories. These and other policies are symptomatic of the Trump administration’s xenophobia and incoherence.

The U.K., Canada, and Australia are cutting back on the number of international students in country—preferring to educate them (and collect tuition fees) in their home countries in branch campuses and franchised degrees and twinning arrangements. Canadian international student numbers have declined to 700,000 from over 1 million in 2024. In the Netherlands, Germany, and other European countries there has been a reaction against offering English-medium degrees. Online degree programs are also popular—programs are offered globally, and tuition payments do not mean student mobility.

It is no surprise that all aspects of internationalisation—branch campuses, twinning, and many others are now priorities in a variety of new players in the Global South. Transnational higher education programme delivery through branch campuses are now strategic priorities for many countries in Asia. For instance, Malaysia has become a major higher education hub in Southeast Asia. Educity Iskandar (near Johor, Malaysia) has campuses of a half-dozen British universities, thus becoming a competitor for India. Another competitor is the UAE with around forty international branch campuses, including branches of Indian institutions such as Manipal, BITS Pilani, IIT Delhi, Symbiosis International University, and IIM Ahmedabad, among others.

China is a special case—a large country with a strong higher education system, China is beginning to focus on internationalisation—providing scholarships to international students, and establishing branch campuses outside. China, for example has a large branch in Malaysia–Xiamen University Malaysia — and is exploring possibilities in the Africa, the Gulf, the U.K., and the U.S. China currently has eleven international branch campuses that operate in partnerships with Chinese host institutions. These developments make it clear that India’s branch campus strategy will face stiff competition. Education hubs in Asia and the Gulf are already well-established, offering both regulatory flexibility and strong infrastructure support—the impact of the current Gulf conflict on higher education is unclear.

Structural drivers of outbound student mobility

The sad fact is the many students who go abroad for study do not intend to return home. This traditionally has been true for many of the “best and brightest” (just look at the large number of Indians who are tech moguls in the U.S.) as well as workers in pharmacies and restaurants. Massive numbers of Chinese students have become part of the diaspora—although return rates have increased in recent years partly due to Chinese government programs but mainly because of economic challenges and xenophobia in host countries. At present, some of the largest increases in international student mobility are from Nepal and Bangladesh—due mainly to dire economic circumstances and political uncertainty in those countries. It would be unrealistic to expect the emigration motivation to disappear, including for India, although most of the destination countries have become significantly less friendly to immigrants.

What should be done immediately

The current geopolitical environment is marked by volatility that directly affect international higher education. While the influx of foreign branch campuses signals confidence in India’s market potential, policy must ensure that these institutions do not function as isolated enclaves detached from local academic and social ecosystems.

While India aims to become an education hub, addressing many existing gaps is essential to transform the sector. The large majority of Indian higher education institutions do not have basic infrastructure for international higher education. Some of this lacuna can be fixed without huge expenditures. For example, those universities that have the potential for attracting foreign collaboration and students—a small proportion of the total—need to professionalise services for the international community, provide appropriate hostels and laboratories, and in general to create an attractive atmosphere for collaboration. This takes resources but even more it requires expertise and commitment. Such an approach is essential to develop an internationalisation model that enhances quality, safeguards national interests, and engages the global academic system on balanced and mutually beneficial terms.

(Philip G. Altbach is professor and distinguished fellow emeritus, Center for International Higher Education, Boston College, United States. Eldho Mathews is programme officer (internationalisation) at the Kerala State Higher Education Council, India)

Published – March 13, 2026 08:00 am IST