The role of moderating forces in international higher education and international relations

• In Event: Highlighted Session: Speech, Power, and Governance in Global Higher Education

Proposal

Over the past several decades, international higher education (IHE) and international relations (IR) have evolved through dynamic interactions shaped by shifting paradigms, global shocks, and developments in social, political, and environmental spheres. Increasingly, these shifts cannot be understood solely through traditional theories of state power, market rationality, or institutional strategy. Instead, the interplay of IHE and IR is deeply conditioned by “moderating forces”—structural, environmental and cultural influences that mediate the relationship between theory and practice, between normative goals and realized outcomes, and between actors across levels of governance. This paper situates moderating forces as a conceptual lens for advancing both scholarly inquiry and applied strategy, exemplifying their impact.

Moderating forces can be understood as contextual pressures that recalibrate the direction and outcomes of IHE and IR interactions. They emerge from social movements, geopolitical transformations, environmental considerations, theoretical developments in the social sciences, etc. These forces are not static variables but mediators that influence how theories are operationalized and how practices unfold. For example, liberal institutionalism might predict cooperative educational exchange, but the moderating influence of nationalist movements or environmental crises can reframe such cooperation. Similarly, equity-focused social movements have pushed higher education actors to reconsider the exploitative potential of traditional “soft power” rationales, replacing them with more reciprocal notions of cultural and knowledge diplomacy (Knight, 2022; Nye, 2004). In this sense, moderating forces are neither entirely exogenous shocks nor endogenous strategies. They operate in the interstitial space where external pressures and institutional agency converge, challenging binary explanations of success or failure in IHE/IR linkages and focusing attention on how broader societal currents mediate outcomes.

One of the clearest examples of moderating forces at work in IHE and IR is the recalibration of power and equity (Author, 2023). Historically, IR theory has been grounded in assumptions of competition and hierarchy, particularly in realist paradigms emphasizing state power and coercion (Mearsheimer, 2001). Within higher education, this translated into internationalization practices designed to advance state competitiveness—whether through talent acquisition, reputation building, or cultivation of soft power (Altbach & Knight, 2007; Nye, 2004). Over time, however, moderating forces such as postcolonial scholarship, social justice movements, and debates about inequality have reshaped conceptions of power and equity. These notions in social science research and societal norms have prompted leaders and policymakers to examine how international education may reinforce imbalances rather than mitigate them (de Wit & Jones, 2022). For example, scholarship programs often serve primarily as instruments of political influence (Lally, 2024), while patterns of student mobility disproportionately benefit the Global North (Marginson, 2018). Foregrounding power and equity as moderating forces has led practitioners to rethink internationalization strategies in more reciprocal and inclusive terms. Concepts such as cultural diplomacy and knowledge diplomacy illustrate this shift (Knight & de Wit, 2018; Higgott, 2014). Rather than treating education as a zero-sum game of influence, these approaches stress co-creation, mutual benefit, and equitable exchange. Here, moderating forces have not merely influenced outcomes but reshaped the theoretical premises underlying IHE and IR interactions.

Understanding moderating forces also requires attention to overlapping actor constellations and institutional logics. Both IHE and IR involve a mix of national, supranational, and institutional actors guided by academic, political, economic, and socio-cultural rationales (de Wit et al., 2015). Ministries of education and foreign affairs, higher education associations, institutional leaders, and NGOs operate within a dense web of interdependencies. Forces such as climate change, geopolitical realignments, and social movements profoundly shape these interactions. For instance, climate change as a moderating force has elevated sustainability as a rationale for internationalization, leading universities to develop partnerships that foreground environmental responsibility (Leal Filho et al., 2015). Geopolitical rivalries have reframed international education as a contested terrain in which academic freedom, technological transfer, and security concerns are paramount (Scott, 2015). Social movements advocating for racial justice and decolonization have moderated institutional strategies by compelling universities to reflect on inequities embedded in partnerships (Stein, 2017). In all these cases, moderating forces operate as the “invisible hand” guiding the balance between opportunity and constraint.

Placing moderating forces at the center of analysis contributes to both theoretical refinement and practical strategy. Theoretically, it allows for a more nuanced understanding of why IHE and IR do not always align with predictions of dominant paradigms. Realism, liberalism, and soft power provide important starting points but fail to fully account for the mediating role of societal forces (Mearsheimer, 2001; Nye, 2004). By incorporating moderating forces, we achieve a framework better equipped to explain variation across contexts and identify spaces where actors can exercise agency. Practically, recognizing moderating forces enables stakeholders in international higher education to recalibrate missions, strategies, and programs in pursuit of equitable and sustainable outcomes. Universities expanding partnerships in the Global South must consider postcolonial critiques to ensure collaborations are not extractive (Stein, 2017). Policymakers designing scholarships must weigh the moderating forces of public opinion and social equity concerns to ensure initiatives are legitimate and mutually beneficial (Lally, 2024; Lomer, 2017). In essence, moderating forces provide a diagnostic tool for identifying risks, opportunities, and blind spots in international engagement.

This paper proposes moderating forces as a critical conceptual lens for understanding the evolving relationship between international higher education and international relations. Far from being peripheral influences, moderating forces such as social movements, geopolitics, environmental challenges, and theoretical innovations mediate how power and equity are understood, how rationales are prioritized, and how strategies are implemented. By foregrounding these forces, scholars and practitioners can better explain historical failures, anticipate emerging dynamics, and design more equitable and sustainable forms of international engagement. Ultimately, the study of moderating forces underscores the importance of situating international higher education within its broader societal and geopolitical context, highlighting the potential for recalibrating strategies to pursue mutual benefit in an interdependent world.

Author

• Jonah Michael Otto, University of Augsburg