Peripheral Centers: Are Education Hubs (Re)Shaping the Global Higher Education Market? The Example of Qatar

• In Event: Marriott Roundtable Session 69
  In Roundtable Session: Higher Education Branding as a “Sea of Sameness” Demands Actions by Institutional Leadership and Management

Abstract

Objectives

By discussing Qatar’s “Education City” hub, the paper’s objective is to contribute to a broader academic debate about global competition in higher education (HE) and the contribution of hubs’ to marketization policy goals, which can make systems more competitive globally. More specifically:

- How do education hubs affect existing balances in the global HE market?
- How do hubs impact global patterns of inequality between foreign and national providers?
- How do hubs, which are justified as means to compete in the global market, affect in-country inequalities in educational opportunities?
- Do hubs influence, and how, core values of HE (such as academic freedom)?

Theoretical framework

The talk will be framed in theories of academic capitalism, the global core-periphery discourse, and neo-institutionalism. According to theories of academic capitalism (e.g. Slaughter & Leslie, 1997), HE institutions seek to generate revenue from their core educational, research and service functions. Countries establish education hubs to create critical mass and strengthen their tertiary education sector and economy (see e.g. Knight 2011; 2014). Integral to this policy choice are assumptions that (a) global competition in HE is shaped by center-periphery relationships, as suggested by world-systems theories, and (b) that patterns of management and knowledge production are increasingly similar and founded on a common understanding of what is appropriate and meaningful, as argued by neo-institutionalists (see e.g. Cremonini & Antonowicz, 2009; Drori et al., 2003; Friedman, 2005; Jakobi, 2007; Kolster 2010, 2014; McMahon, 1992; Meyer et al., 2006; Rogers, 2003; Stiglitz, 2007; Zucker, 1983).

Methods and data sources

The author used the case of Qatar to propose a framework to understand how and if attracting foreign excellence in concentrated hubs benefits national HE systems and makes them more attractive globally. Data for this paper came from publicly available websites, policy documents, press releases, as well as academic literature on hubs (with a stronger focus on the case at hand), and discussions with local experts.

Warrants for arguments

The paper presented proposes a useful framework to position different types of hubs and assess their contribution to making national HE systems globally attractive and marketable. It also contributes to a debate about where global HE “centers of attraction” lie. It argues that the choice to concentrate primarily “western” excellence in a hub is rooted in a neo-institutional approach to internationalization and that it does not reshape significantly the global HE market or shift the balances of power between countries.

Note: it will be interesting to keep following the role of Qatar’s education hub in maintaining the country’s global position as it currently is facing diplomatic isolation in the region.

Implications

This paper contributes to the literature by extending the academic capitalism, the global core-periphery discourse, and neo-institutionalism and to Education hubs. Using the data gathered the study proposed a model which enables us to raise key issues:

- Why and how do hubs develop (“motivation”)? Are there effects on access, national system performance?
- What are the (intended/unintended) consequences of hubs and for whom (“implementation issues”)?

Author

• Leon Cremonini