Regional University Associations in the Global Higher Education Field: Comparing Asia and Europe

• In Event: Compararative approaches to higher education strategies of teaching and learning

Proposal

Abstract
Drawing on theories of meta-organizations, this study examines the activities and purposes of regional university associations (RUAs) in Asia and Europe. It finds that RUAs engage in mobility programs, conferences, policy consultation, and research cooperation. Moreover, RUAs primarily state their purposes as enhancing networking among universities members, representing university voices in regional policy, and maintaining institutional identity. In addition, comparison of Asia and Europe reveals that RUAs in Europe tend to stress policy advocacy more often than their counterparts in Asia. The findings shed light on new approaches that universities adopt in engaging in international cooperation in the context of globalization.

Introduction
Higher education institutions have re-oriented themselves to the global sphere, engaging in multiple international activities, constructing what scholars call a “global higher education regime” (Zapp & Ramirez, 2019). Under this background, international university associations have grown rapidly since the 1940s (Brankovic, 2018). A surprising number (58 or 59%) of them are regional university associations (RUAs), with their member universities coming from a certain geographic region (e.g., Europe, Asia). Despite the rising number of RUAs and their memberships, we have little understanding of what RUAs do, and why they exist in the context of the global higher education. This study seeks to examine the activities and purpose of RUAs in Asia and Europe to understand how universities engage in the global higher education field in new approaches, such as through RUAs.

Theoretical Framework
RUAs are conceptualized as meta-organizations, which are organizations with organizations, instead of individuals, as their members (Ahrne & Brunsson, 2005). Ahrne and Brunsson (2005) explain three views of meta-organizations’ emergence. They may emerge to introduce a new way of organizing in the environment for efficiency or to represent the collected voice of their members. In higher education, meta-organizations such as RUAs may serve functional purposes of promoting cooperation between universities to enhance their performance related to teaching and research, or to advocate for universities’ interests.
Moreover, meta-organizations may also emerge to establish identity and status (Ahrne & Brunsson, 2005). In higher education, RUAs may stress that their purpose is to maintain the specific identity of their members. In summary, based on theories of meta-organization, this study expects the activities and purposes of RUAs to map onto three domains: enhancing efficiency, representing the voice of members, and maintaining identity and status.

Methods and Data
The preliminary data of this study comes from the most recent reports and the most updated websites (as of June 2021) of the nine RUAs in Asia and four RUAs in Europe. These RUAs are identified by previous research (Brankovic, 2018). It is important to note that the research is still ongoing, hence European RUAs are under-represented in the current analysis. Reports are downloaded and screenshots of website information are taken for systematic coding and analysis. Using emergent and iterative coding methods (Charmaz, 2006), the qualitative coding software NVivo is used to code the documents for content analysis (Mayring, 2014).
Preliminary Findings
A preliminary analysis shows commonalities and differences in RUA activities and purpose statements in the two world regions. Conferences, research cooperation activities, and policy consultation are the three main activities for European RUAs, whereas RUAs in Asia are mainly involved in conferences, research, and mobility programs.
Specifically in Asia, the most dominant activity is promoting student, staff, and faculty mobility among member institutions. Seven of the nine associations examined mention mobility schemes as part of their activities. Second, RUAs also aim specifically at promoting research cooperation, through organizing joint research groups, and publishing books and academic journals. For example, the Asian Association of Open Universities publish peer-reviewed articles on a journal about open and distance education. Third, RUAs organize themed conferences for networking among their members and beyond. For example, the Association of Southeast Asian Institutions of Higher Learning organize conferences to discuss major issues in Asian higher education.
Besides conferences and research cooperation, another important activity of European RUAs is participating in policy consultation and advising at the European level. For example, through issuing statements, the European University Association (EUA) actively supported the association of the United Kingdom to European Union programs, being concerned about the implications of Brexit on universities. Interestingly, Asian RUAs seldom mention their work in influencing policy in the region.
In addition to functional activities and policy work mentioned above, RUAs also mention the importance of identity among their member universities. Interestingly, identity tends to be mentioned more among Asian RUAs, whereas European RUAs only explicitly mention identity once. For Asian RUAs, two types of identity are common, universities as Asian institutions, and universities with identities associated with their mandate.

Discussion and Significance
The findings of this study offer insights in the following areas. First, it pays attention to the activities and roles of RUAs, which are understudied organizations in the global higher education field (Brankovic, 2018). The findings suggests that RUAs may be a way for universities to engage in international and regional cooperation and to advocate for universities’ interests at the regional level.
Moreover, comparison between Asia and Europe reveals important distinctions in the impact of regional context on higher education. Possibly due to the strong influence of regional policies in higher education, RUAs in Europe serve important purposes in policy advocacy. In contrast, there is comparatively limited regional influence on higher education in Asia, compared to Europe. This is perhaps because regional policies in higher education are stronger in sub-regions of Asia, such as southeast Asia (see Chou & Ravinet, 2017).This suggest that the influence of higher education regionalization on universities are likely to differ across world regions, which is an important area for future research.
This study primarily focuses on RUAs in Asia and Europe and draws on a limited number of documents and websites, thus the findings are yet to be conclusive. Research in other regions is needed to further understand the emergence of RUAs in higher education as a global phenomenon, and how it affects universities.

Author

• You Zhang, OISE, University of Toronto