Mutual benefit in China’s international aid to education

• In Event: Educational investigations in the Global South

Proposal

With the influence of globalization and the internationalization of education, China’s educational aid practice in the form of long-term scholarship and short-term training has attracted worldwide attention. Under the framework of South-South cooperation, mutual benefit and horizontal donor-recipient relationships are central to how China describes its educational aid practice. The term “mutual benefit” is frequently mentioned in the Southern aid philosophies. Emerging donors aim to create mutual benefit and win-win scenarios during the aid process. The emerging donors expect to reap benefits to their own trade and investment opportunities in return (Mawdsley, 2012; Zheng, 2020). Mutual respect, mutual opportunities, and mutual learning are important components of mutual benefit.

This research focuses on how the stakeholders (i.e., students, faculty, and administrators) of China’s educational aid programs understand the mutual benefit in China’s educational aid practice. To address this research question, this study adopted Mauss’s (1954/1990) gift theory and Knight’s (1997, 2004) rationales for the internationalization of higher education. In gift theory, giving is not a voluntary action but instead conveys reciprocal obligations enforced upon both sides. This constitutes the exchange cycle of “giving-receiving-reciprocating”. The rationales for the internationalization of higher education are commonly categorized as political, social-cultural, economic, or academic (Knight, 1997, 2004). This framework is regularly updated to differentiate the national (i.e., national building and strategic alliance) and institutional (i.e., branding and profile, student and staff development) rationales (Knight, 2004).

To address the research question of how the stakeholders (i.e., students, faculty, and administrators) of China’s educational aid programs perceive mutual benefit, this study adopts the qualitative case study design. In the case study, data were collected from long-term degree programs and short-term training programs across five higher education institutions in China. In recruiting participants, I employed both a purposeful sampling strategy and a snowball sampling strategy. I selected individuals who were (a) Chinese faculty who teach courses in scholarship or short-term training programs specifically; (b) Chinese administrators who are in charge of scholarships or short-term training programs specifically; or (c) international students from developing countries who are studying or have studied in China via either a scholarship or short-term training program. For this study, I recruited 25 participants for my research: eight administrators, eight faculty members, and nine students. I conducted semi-structured interviews with all participants.

In discussing research participants’ opinions of China’s educational aid practice, I found that the primary and unique theme was “teaching people how to fish, but not always giving them a fish.” This theme indicates participants’ distinction between aid to education and other forms of aid such as investment and infrastructure. Another theme frequently employed was “an international learning community for cooperation and communication.” This theme represents participants’ recognition that China downplays the function of “aid” and underlines the roles of “cooperation” and “communication” in its educational aid practice.

The primary themes describing participants’ perceptions of mutual benefit are “win-win” and “reciprocity.” These terms are also frequently seen in China’s aid discourse, which focuses on a horizontal relationship between China and the recipient countries. Participants, especially students, acknowledged that both China and their home countries are benefiting or winning because of the educational aid programs. Yet they admitted that the reciprocal relationship is not symmetrical or exactly equal. Different parties pursue different benefits, and the counter-return does not need to be the same. Thus, I further explored the specific benefits the participants perceived as accruing to their countries, their institutions, and themselves.
At the national level, research participants valued the role of educational aid in promoting bilateral trust and friendships. China benefits by having expanded cooperative opportunities in commercial trade. The cornerstone of such opportunities is the positive image of China. By contrast, the recipient countries benefit in terms of national development, no matter whether this takes the form of building capacity or reducing dependency.
The institutional benefit of China’s educational aid programs is not discussed sufficiently. The majority of data are contributed by program administrators whose work is closely related to the institutional internationalization strategy. The branding of China’s universities was the primary benefit emphasized by multiple participants. Inviting international students from developing countries to study in China is an important element of the programs that enriches the international environment and enhances the international reputation of China’s universities.

This study’s findings on the benefits of educational aid programs for students suggest that students’ experiences studying in China result in employment opportunities back in their home countries. The benefits to administrators are limited or intangible. Administrators may expand their knowledge about the world or make friends from around the world, but the programs do not have much impact on their career development. The benefits to faculty members are linked with the institutional benefit of the internationalization of higher education. That is, faculty members are able to extend their research networks and improve their teaching in an international context.

From the lens of gift theory, whether both the benefit to China and the benefit to the recipient countries can be achieved is the key to maintaining the stable relationship of “giving-receiving-reciprocating.” Although the benefits I analyzed do not conflict with each other, how to successfully balance the benefits is a challenge for most faculty and administrators of China’s educational aid programs.

Author

• Xiaoying Jiang, The Pennsylvania State University