From Vertical Dependence to Horizontal Reciprocity: How Collaboration Shapes Educational and Research Outcomes in Japan–Indonesia Double Degree Programs

• In Event: Collaboration, Trust, and Knowledge Production in Global Higher Education

Proposal

Introduction
With the progress of globalization in recent years, higher education has expanded across borders, and the role of universities can no longer be confined within a single nation. Should universities serve national interests, or should they serve international interests? This is not a dichotomy; universities are expected to fulfill both roles—cultivating human resources for domestic labor markets and innovation, while also generating new knowledge to address global challenges such as climate change, infectious diseases, poverty, and war etc. Achieving the latter requires multiple perspectives and collaborative approaches. In 2015, the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) were formulated as universal development goals to achieve a sustainable world. SDGs highlight that both developed and developing countries must tackle shared global challenges, making it clear that knowledge transfer alone is insufficient. Instead, joint creation of new knowledge between developed and developing countries has become essential, as processes of co-creation and shared problem-solving are increasingly important in addressing complex global issues.
Theoretical Framework and Research Question
Altbach (1993), from the perspective of dependency theory and neo-colonialism, argued that in the international knowledge system, there exists a structural relationship in which the West functions as the “center” and non-Western higher education systems as the “periphery.” However, Umakoshi (2007) observed that, as Asian economies have developed, higher education in the region has expanded quantitatively and improved qualitatively, shifting from “dependence” to “autonomy.” Kuroda (2013) also pointed out that while Asian universities historically developed by modeling themselves on Western institutions and such influence remains to some extent, it is no longer appropriate to assume that Asian higher education systems continue to occupy a “peripheral” position in relation to the Western “center.” Huang (2007) further suggests that even within Asia, there exists a structure of “center” and “periphery.” He classified transnational education (TNE) in Asia into three categories: import-oriented (e.g., Indonesia, Vietnam), import-and-export (e.g., Singapore, Hong Kong), and transitional (e.g., Japan, China). Within Asia, import-oriented types could be considered the “periphery,” while exporters can be regarded as the “center.”
This study examines double-degree programs (DDPs) between Japan, often positioned as the “center” within Asia, and Indonesia, frequently perceived as the “periphery.” From a center–periphery perspective, such collaborations may appear to embody vertical relations between universities. However, DDPs are fundamentally grounded in horizontal relations, as both institutions confer degrees equally. Against this theoretical background, it becomes crucial to empirically explore how such programs are actually perceived and experienced by faculty members of both universities in terms of their educational and research implications. This dual perspective—where relationships can be seen as both vertical and horizontal—leads the following research questions.
How do faculty members involved in the programs perceive the educational and research outcomes in their own universities through the preparation and implementation process of DDP?
How does inter-university and inter-faculty collaboration shape the dynamics leading to such outcomes?
Methodology
This study adopted a multiple case study approach. Five programs with student participation from both Japanese and Indonesian universities were chosen, with attention given to including as many different institutions as possible. All five programs were at the master’s level. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 19 faculty members from five Japanese universities and 23 faculty members from four Indonesian universities. The count of Indonesian universities is four, as two of the five programs were conducted with different Faculties of the same university.　Firstly within-case analyses were conducted to examine how Japanese and Indonesian faculty perceived the outcomes of DDP throughout its preparation and implementation process on their own university’s education and research. Subsequently, cross-case analyses were carried out across the five programs to explore the relationship between inter-university and inter-faculty collaboration and the manifestation of outcomes.
Findings
Faculty members perceived two categories of outcomes. The first were outcomes that could be recognized even without collaboration, such as those also observed when hosting international students in single-degree program, for example, fostering intercultural understanding or classroom dynamism having international students at class. Japanese universities with limited experience in hosting international students tended to emphasize these outcomes more strongly, while those with greater experience highlighted collaboration-driven benefits like mutual curriculum evaluation, adoption of pedagogical practices, use of complementary research resources, and the emergence of joint research. Indonesian universities, generally less experienced in hosting international students, valued both types of outcomes. However, because the number of Japanese DDP students in Indonesian universities was small, the impact of non-collaborative outcomes was limited, and outcomes arising from collaboration were recognized as more significant. Collaboration was found to be influenced by both organizational and individual-level factors. At the organizational level, program implementation systems played a critical role, such as whether DDP students were supervised jointly by faculty from both institutions, or whether supervision was carried out separately. At the individual level, motivation determined whether faculty actively sought collaboration or minimized it. Indonesian faculty generally displayed stronger motivation, driven by goals of capacity development and the expectation that Japanese universities have superior facilities and resources. Japanese faculty showed more varied levels of motivation, which increased when they perceived complementarity points—areas where partners could provide unique contributions. The ease of identifying such complementarities depended largely on the discipline, with fields where Indonesia served as an important research site. Familiarity with the partner’s educational and research practices, as well as the academic background of faculty (e.g., Indonesian scholars who earned doctorates in Japan showing higher collaborative intent), also shaped collaboration dynamics.
Contribution
This study provides important insights into how DDPs between Japan and Indonesia can reshape center–periphery dynamics in Asian higher education. By analyzing reciprocal cases and incorporating perspectives from both Japanese and Indonesian faculty, it demonstrates how outcomes emerge not only from hosting international students but also from inter-university and inter-faculty collaboration. It also reveals how organizational structures and faculty motivation shape the degree of the collaboration. The findings highlight policy-relevant implications for designing cross-border collaborative degree program between developed and developing countries that move beyond one-sided mobility to foster co-created knowledge and human resource development.

Author

• Midori Ozawa, PADECO Co., Ltd.