1. Pijushkanti SAHA
Vice-chancellor, University of North Bengal, Darjeeling, India
Introduction Speech
Working Group B:
Institutional Strategies of Education
(Objectives, Approaches and Key Actors)
IAU International Conference
Alexandria, Egypt
15-16 November 2005
Summary
Higher education in India is mostly public funded, nearly eighty percent contributed from the state
exchequer. Since 1992 the scenario had been changing, resulting in drop of public funding.
Globalization exercises a great control in cutting subsidies to many social benefit programs
including higher education. The effects of globalization are not only economic, also manifested in
social, cultural, environmental and political instruments. The four modes for trades in services
have envisaged a new vista of education – be it a transnational or international education, an
international service vendor delivering the domestic provider exported education across the
territorial jurisdiction. New types of providers, new programs, new modes of deliveries, new
financial arrangements, new partnerships are emerging. In many cases such arrangements lack
quality control and provide sub-standard education by non-accredited institutions. Even in the
developed states of Europe, new profit-monger operators have entered the field of higher
education in recent years and new cross-border delivery methods have been developed. Such
development has contravened the basic principles of Lisbon Recognition Convention. In terms of
GATT rules and regulations the developed countries are earning much foreign currency providing
education services to foreign students. The balance of trade favors the nations like U.S.A.,
Australia, U.K., France and Germany. The higher education in global context has been
increasingly transformed into transnational education. The paradigm shift in internet-based
education, branch campuses and ‘franchising’ has caused both threats and opportunities in
higher education in India. There is a substantial risk that Indian universities and their students
could end up as serious losers in the global higher education game. This situation is global,
experienced by many countries of the world, particularly the developing countries like India.
Apparently it seems that in the face of LPG and WTO regime the middle class has been placed in
a driving seat to reap highest benefit from the New Education System. Contrary, a deeper
introspection would reveal a different scenario that not the middle class but the corporate actors
have been the principal beneficiaries. There is boom in the domination of market capital in higher
education. The market force in many cases deviates from the quality assurance, particularly in
the countries, where the government play subservient roles and become an appendage to the
private actors. Many providers not recognized and accredited in their own country are entering
the market and deceive the students with hoax promises. However, no body denies the
challenging role of cross-border education imparting skill and quality through global competition,
but the system demands strict vigilance by the stakeholders, particularly by the university
associations enhancing consumer protection in cross-border education related to quality
assurance, accreditation and recognition of qualifications. It is imperative to devise models by the
associations, help the member institutions traversing the pathways for gainful knowledge pool
and skilled manpower development in a knowledge society.
IAU International Conference 1

2. Context
I. ‘Cross-Border Higher Education’ has the global context and is linked to
L.P.G.
Globalization usually means the creation of global systems where what happens
in one part of the world affects people and places everywhere on the globe. The
definition is very simple and related with one order philosophy. This may be
associated with hegemony of one single system, what was intended by the Nazis
in the thirties.
In nature such hegemony does not exist, where diversity is the rule. In any
ecosystem diversity ensures the sustenance of life. On spatial context regional
development is considered a key to growth and progress, as the distribution of
resources on earth’s surface is not uniform. The form of institutions also varies
from place to place. Even technology varies regionally. The science is
considered universal, the technology local.
The globalization is considered to be economic process aided by technological
tools. But the effects of globalization are not only economic, also manifested in
social, cultural, environmental and political instruments. Economic globalization is
the elitist agenda of wealth concentration that inherently is unable to benefit the
masses. The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), World Trade
Organization (WTO), Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC), European
Union and other so called trade agreements are not really about trade, but they
have other objectives to reap all resources of the developing countries. These
agreements are the result of concerted, well organized, well funded and largely
secret efforts to convert the rules of global commerce to strengthen and secure
the rights of corporations and financial institutions to go wherever, and do
wherever, and do whatever, is needed to quick buck at the cost of people. They
pursue a hidden agenda in collaboration with the subservient governments and
comprador classes to craft what may be the most anti-democratic, anti-people,
anti-community international agreement ever conceived by supposedly
democratic governments - ‘the Multilateral Agreement on Investment’. Such
‘Corporate Rule Treaty’ is being drafted by, and for, transnational corporations to
prohibit any national or local self-government from establishing performance or
accountability standards for foreign investors. With such deregulation and
globalization the power of the government and union decline and the rights of
global transnational corporations and financial authorities are placed above those
of people and countries in international law. They remain beyond any public
accountability. Day by day the largest corporations tend to consolidate the power
through mergers, acquisitions, and strategic alliances. The situation is really
alarming.
IAU International Conference 2

3. II. GATS defines the form of Cross Border Education
During the Uruguay Round of GATS a consensus was reached that trade in
services be covered under a multilateral agreement in view of the substantial
growth of services and the shift in the composition of GNP of major countries in
favor of the service sector. Under WTO two areas were specified for multilateral
agreement - I. Trade in goods and merchandise and II. Trade in services.
The objective of GATS is to establish a multilateral framework for services similar
to trade in goods involving reduction in tariff and non-tariff barriers to trade. The
agreement will pave the pathway for progressive liberalization of trade in services
including education sector leading to liberalization, privatization & globalization
(LPG).
WTO has recognized four modes of trade in education that receive legal
protection by GATS:
1. Cross-border Supply: This ensures the supply of services across national
borders, from the territory of one country to the territory of another. Distance
education using print media or any other study materials is being
propagated across the national border or via the Internet on line.
2. Consumption Abroad: This involves the movement of a consumer of service
to another country in getting the service. A student going abroad for higher
education is included in this category.
3. Commercial Presence: This means the presence of a service provider
(foreign) in another country (host). Many foreign institutions from the west
without any accreditation are now serving in the developing countries
including India.
4. Movement of Natural Persons: This indicates the presence of an individual
from one country to another in providing his services. This amounts to
export of skilled human resource to another country.
The four modes for trades in services have envisaged a new vista of education –
be it a transnational or international education, an international service vendor
delivering the domestic provider exported education across the territorial
jurisdiction. The movement of people for higher education had long been
recognized, where students, teachers and scholars of a country used to move
across the border to gain or deliver knowledge. But the export of projects,
programs and services were unconceivable. The role of providers was absent
and elements of commerce not included in the program. Education remained
outside the purview of commerce. New types of providers, new programs, new
modes of deliveries, new financial arrangements, new partnerships are
emerging. In many cases such arrangements lack quality control and provide
sub-standard education by non-accredited institutions.
IAU International Conference 3

4. III. The Operators play the role of profit mongers
Even in the developed states of Europe, new profit-monger operators have
entered the field of higher education in recent years and new cross-border
delivery methods have been developed. Such development has contravened the
basic principles of Lisbon Recognition Convention.
Lisbon Recognition Convention states :
1. The partners to this convention are conscious of the fact that right to
education is a human right, and that higher education is a cultural and
scientific asset for both individual and society.
2. The great diversity of education system in the European region reflects its
cultural, social, political, religious and economic diversity, an exceptional
asset that should be fully respected.
The 1995 GATS under WTO defines rules for global market that also includes
educational services. How can a European higher education space based on
international standards and conventions in higher education coexist with global
trading rules?
IV. India loses the game
In terms of GATS rules and regulations the developed countries are earning
much foreign currency providing education services to foreign students. The
balance of trade is in favor of the most favored nations like U.S.A., Australia,
U.K., France and Germany. In 1992-93 the U.S.A. earned US$6.1 billion through
enrollment of 4,38,000 students. In 2000 the earning was raised to US$10 billion
with 5,14,000 students on its educational campuses. In 2000 Australia gained
economic benefit with an income of Aus$3.2 billion. In 1995 the international
trade in higher education through consumption abroad amounted to about US$27
billion, which was raised to nearly US$41billion in the next five years. In 1996 the
export of education services ranked fifth amongst the services exported by
U.S.A. Interestingly fifty eight percent of the export was to Asian countries like,
India, Japan and Korea.
India happens to be the third largest country in higher education with nearly
7.418 million students in about 300 universities/deemed universities. India is no
less developed than many countries of the world in higher education. But the role
of India in exporting services for trade appears to be poor. India exported US$4.6
billion services in 1990 and US$11.1 in 1998. The trade in services in India may
be assessed from the following table.
Year India World India’s India India Net
IAU International Conference 4

5. Exports ($b) Exports ($b) Share (in Imports ($b) Exports ($b)
percent)
1,990 4.6 802.2 0.57 5.9 -1.3
1,993 5 959.5 0.53 6.4 -1.4
1,996 7 1,257 0.56 10 -3
1,999 13.2 1,340 0.99 17.3 -4.1
Source : EPW, September 1, 2001, p 3352
It is revealed though there had been marginal rise in export of services as trade
from 1990 to 1999 (0.57% to 0.99%), the net effect was negative (-4.1 billion).
V. Globalization poses both -‘Threat or Opportunity’
The higher education in global context has been increasingly transformed into
transnational education. The paradigm shift in internet-based education, branch
campuses, ‘franchising’ has caused both threats and opportunities in higher
education in India. In global market place the Indian universities are confronted
with uneven competition from outside. In many cases the consumer attitudes of
the students and their guardians for a foreign degree lead us to a black hole. Not
necessarily all the foreign institutions accredited, but attract students with false
promises through their franchisers. We understand our difficulties in providing
appropriate technologies, but our teaching and learning processes are not less
worthy. Certainly there has been a digital divide due to lack of capital investment
from the state sector, wherein the private enterprises are invading to take the
advantage. “There is a substantial risk that Indian universities and their students
could end up as serious losers in the global higher education game” (Arnold,
2001).
GATS may influence the national authority, intervene the regulated higher
education systems, and have unforeseen consequences on public subsidies for
higher education. It may also create a digital divide in higher education leading to
social instability. Both the European University Association (EUA) and National
Union of Students in Europe (ESIB) have taken a critical stand on trade in
education services. Even American University Organizations opposed to GATS
in many respects, particularly in degrading the quality of education. In India, All
India Federation of University & College Teachers’ Organizations (AIFUCTO) has
expressed their concern for penetration of substandard providers of higher
education in the name of globalization. Association of Indian Universities (AIU)
has called attention of the government and University Grants Commission to take
appropriate action for a check on uncontrolled service provider in higher
education in India.
Regional case studies by UNESCO have indicated the dangers posed by new
providers, operating without appropriate government supervision and providing
low quality educational services while aiming at maximum profit, undermining the
IAU International Conference 5

6. equality of access to higher education, lack of protection to students, including
the cognition of qualifications. In a country like India the dangers are probably
greater, where the instruments of control are either absent or weak.
Issues
I. Commercial presence is significant
In India and other developing countries the demand for higher education has
been ever increasing. Only 8 percent of the eligible age group students could be
enrolled for higher education in India. So the market is vast and open for the
operators in cross-border education. Moreover, the students are lured for quality
education from the foreign actors through franchise. Trans-national players take
advantage of this situation and get large part of the profit from such operation.
More than 80 foreign operators now have their presence in India offering degrees
and diplomas in professional subjects. Some of the operators have set up their
own campuses and many others go for tie-up with private Indian collaborators
like Tata Infotech, NIIT, Indian School of Business etc.
II. Access and Equity are denied
The National Policy on education, 1986 emphasized education to be -
i) A process of empowerment, which is to be promoted through the
development of knowledge, skills and values (Education for Development),
and
ii) An instrument of social change that provides means for upward economic
and social mobility (Education for Equality).
To maintain this scenario in higher education, i.e. provision of access and
promotion of equity, public funding is increasingly demanded. At present the
central government funding has been trickling and in the coming years financial
stringency is likely to be deepened. With the advent of GATS and the
liberalization of the trade in services, and consequently with the entry of private
and foreign providers education will no more be a public good, but become a
tradable commodity. The commercialization of education will enhance the
withdrawal of subsidy by the government.
This will defeat the principal objectives of education. Education has been
recognized by all as a social service and regarded as an instrument for social
change. The UNESCO World Conference on Higher Education in 1998 declared,
“education is a fundamental pillar of human rights, democracy, sustainable
development and peace”. The intricate problems confronted on the eve of the
twenty first century will be determined by the vision of the future society and the
role that is assigned to education in general and to higher education in particular.
IAU International Conference 6

7. It will be the duty of higher education to ensure that values and ideals of a culture
of peace prevail, and that that the intellectual community be motivated to that
end. The international cooperation and exchange are major pathways for
advancing higher education throughout the world. Article 14 of the UNESCO
Declaration also states that financing of higher education is a public service. The
financing for higher education demands both public and private funding. Public
funding must be strengthened to ensure the development of higher education,
increase its efficiency and maintain its quality and relevance. The public support
for higher education and research remains essential guarantee to a balanced
achievement of educational and social mission. The Action Plan of UNESCO
univocally stated, “States including their governments, parliament and other
decision makers should establish appropriate framework for the reform and
further development of higher education which establishes that higher education
shall be accessible to all on the basis of merit”.
III. Competition has both effects – positive and negative
The competition among the institution – both public and private will have dual
effect. Competitiveness help capacity building, as such public institutions, largely
funded by the governments, shall have to gear up their infrastructure to confront
the onslaught of private players in the market. On the contrary, the universities
and other higher education institutions are confronting financial crunch due to
poor revenue income from subsidized fees. Technology in other words is capital.
These institutions will fail in improving technological base for higher education
and face uneven competition from the foreign providers. Digital divide between
the institutions will be more sharpened. The students in the low income group
studying in public institutions will be worst hit in getting quality education. But it is
not intended that there will be no competition from the private players. No body
denies the challenging role of cross border education imparting skill and quality
through global competition, but the system demands strict vigilance by the
stakeholders, particularly by the university associations enhancing consumer
protection in cross-border education related to quality assurance, accreditation
and recognition of qualifications.
IV. Issues of Quality Assurance, Accreditation and Recognition of
Qualifications are vital.
The most important question has been raised how to measure the quality
education provided by many players of cross-border education in developing
countries. Many developing countries lack in quality assurance mechanisms. In
India there exists NAAC and NBA, but the mechanism is not well equipped to
cope with cross-border education. South Africa has a national agency like the
Higher Education Quality Committee to deal with foreign providers and approve
the setting up of branch campuses, but fails to monitor the distance education
IAU International Conference 7

8. programs by the foreign providers and ensure the quality assurance.
International Bodies like UNESCO shall come forward in framing the guidelines
on quality assurance of cross-border education by the service providers and
advise the governments and university associations to take appropriate actions.
A mutual recognition of degrees and credits could be the only basis of cross
border education. Hence, a mutually acceptable accreditation process needs to
be evolved. The university association in a national framework decides the
equivalence of a degree and diploma. The international association shall
undertake similar exercise.
Principles for action
The cross-border education is a new phenomenon in the context of globalization.
In a modern society aided by ICT, knowledge and capital transcend the limit of
territorial jurisdiction and know no border. Will there be the hegemony of one
order, or we have to seek a goal for unity in diversity. IAU has set forth the
following principles to guide the actions of all the stakeholders on cross-border
education:
• Cross-border higher education should strive to contribute to the broader
economic, social and cultural well-being of communities.
• While cross-border education can flow in many different directions and
takes place in a variety of contexts, it should strengthen developing
countries’ higher education capacity in order to promote global equity.
• In addition to providing disciplinary and professional expertise, cross-
border higher education should strive to instill in learners the critical
thinking that underpins responsible citizenship at the local, national and
global levels.
• Cross-border higher education should be accessible not only to students
who can afford to pay, but also to the qualified students with financial
need.
• Cross-border higher education should meet the same high standards of
academic and organizational quality no matter where it is delivered.
• Cross-border higher education should be accountable to the public,
students and governments.
• Cross-border higher education should expand the opportunities for
international mobility of faculty, researchers and students.
• Higher education institutions and other providers of cross-border higher
education should provide clear and full information to students and
external stakeholders about the education they provide.
IAU International Conference 8

9. Recommendations for Higher Education Institutions and other Providers
Based on these principles, the university associations may suggest the following
action agenda to be undertaken for adoption and implementation by higher
education institutions and other providers of cross-border education. In order to
benefit from past experience, implementation efforts should recognize and,
where appropriate, build on existing legal instruments, policy statements, forums
and initiatives that are consistent with these principles and promote further
research and policy dialogue.
• Become conversant with issues surrounding cross-border education and
trade to inform the exchange among associations and their associations’
engagement in a constructive dialogue with governments.
• Strive to ensure that higher education across borders contributes to the
broader social and economic well-being of communities in the host
country, is culturally sensitive in its approach and content, and
strengthens local higher education capacity by, for example,
cooperating, when appropriate, with local institutions.
• Obtain the proper authorization to operate as a higher education
institution from government or other competent bodies in the home and
host countries. At the same time, governments and competent bodies
should increase their collaboration, transparency, and information
sharing in order to alleviate the administrative burden on higher
education institutions.
• Build a culture of ongoing quality review, feedback, and improvement by
creating robust quality assurance processes at the institutional level,
which rely heavily on faculty expertise and incorporate the views of
students.
• Cooperate with their associations as well as with relevant governmental
and non-governmental bodies to develop effective quality assurance
principles and practices and apply them to cross-border activities.
• Cooperate with relevant governmental and non-governmental bodies to
improve the international exchange of information and cooperation on
quality assurance and recognition issues.
• Provide reliable information to the public, students and governments in a
proactive manner, particularly with respect to the institution’s legal
status, award-granting authority, course offerings, quality assurance
mechanisms, as well as other relevant facts as suggested by codes of
good practice.
IAU International Conference 9