In conversation with
Jamil Salmi
Reading time: 4–5 min
Jamil Salmi, a Moroccan higher education policy expert now residing in Colombia, is a globally recognised authority on higher education reform, with decades of experience advising governments and institutions across the Global South. Formerly the World Bank’s Tertiary Education Coordinator, and currently emeritus professor of higher education policy at Diego Portales University in Chile, his work spans internationalisation, equity, governance, and financing. In this interview, he reflects on what responsible internationalisation means in an era of geopolitical tension and growing inequality.
The notion of responsible internationalisation is interpreted in many ways today. In your view, what are the core principles that make internationalisation genuinely responsible, and where do you see the main risks of the concept being diluted or instrumentalised?
JS: While the concept of responsible internationalisation has gained prominence more recently, in my work, I have reflected extensively on responsibility in higher education more broadly. In that context, I helped develop what we called the Shanghai Principles, initially intended as a way of rethinking what it means to be a “world‑class” institution beyond rankings and prestige.
These principles are highly relevant to internationalisation. The first is inclusion: institutions should not limit their international partnerships to highly ranked or wealthy peers, but work with partners that share common values, even if they have fewer resources. A second principle is truth. Higher education institutions are guardians of scientific evidence and critical thinking, especially important in a so‑called “post‑truth” context where facts and scientific evidence are increasingly challenged on ideological bases. Ethics is another core element – in teaching, research, and institutional conduct – and closely linked is social responsibility, meaning institutions cannot operate as ivory towers disconnected from their societies.
Finally, and perhaps most importantly for internationalisation, there is global solidarity. Responsible internationalisation should encourage North-South-South tripartite cooperation, South–South and regional collaboration, particularly with less connected or less recognised institutions.
How can higher education institutions balance global engagement with their responsibilities to regional and local development? How can international activities create benefits for those who do not participate directly in mobility?
JS: One important lesson came during the pandemic, when physical mobility was impossible. Institutions were forced to experiment with virtual internationalisation, and this showed that meaningful international engagement does not always require travel. Digital collaboration can reach far more students and staff if institutions are truly committed, and it allows internationalisation to benefit people who would never have the opportunity to move physically.
Regionalisation is also key. In many parts of the world, internationalisation is still understood mainly as working with institutions in Europe, North America, or Australia. In Latin America, Africa, and parts of Asia, there is often much less cooperation within regions, even though regional collaboration can be enormously valuable. Europe’s experience with Erasmus and the Bologna Process shows how powerful regional mobility and cooperation can be.
Institutions should therefore think not only about internationalisation, but also about regionalisation. Facilitating mobility and cooperation within countries and regions can enrich educational experiences, support local development and strengthen institutions that are often very different even within the same national system. International engagement should reinforce local and regional missions, not distract from them.
Governments are increasingly introducing security‑driven measures that affect international partnerships and mobility. How can higher education systems balance legitimate national concerns with openness and academic collaboration?
JS: There are, of course, specific areas, particularly related to defence or sensitive technologies, where security concerns are legitimate. But these concerns are very often exaggerated or instrumentalised in ways that threaten openness and academic freedom.
I have worked extensively with scholars in countries with very different political systems. That does not mean endorsing those systems, but recognising that academics operate within them and deserve solidarity. Cutting ties indiscriminately undermines the very essence of higher education.
At the same time, institutions have shown that they can resist political pressure. When restrictions increase in one context, others can respond with acts of solidarity, such as offering positions for displaced scholars or supporting international research collaboration. Aix-Marseille University was the first European university showing the way, when it announced in March 2025, its intention to welcome “scientific refugees” leaving US universities. Responsible internationalisation in this sense is about maintaining trust, protecting academic freedom and preserving the space for collaboration, even when governments adopt more restrictive approaches.
Internationalisation can create uneven benefits and burdens across institutions, countries and individuals. Based on your experience, what unintended consequences arise most often? Who should bear the costs and risks of international higher education, and are there more equitable or sustainable models?
JS: One of the most obvious risks is that internationalisation benefits primarily those who already have resources. Without careful design, mobility opportunities may be available only to a few relatively wealthy students, reinforcing rather than reducing inequality. Financing mobility equitably is therefore essential, particularly for students from lower‑income backgrounds or from less-resourced systems.
Another major issue is brain drain. When students or researchers go abroad for longer periods, there is always a risk that they will not return, often for reasons that go far beyond salary, including academic freedom, professional opportunities and quality of life. This can weaken already fragile systems in many countries.
Some models work better than others. Sandwich or joint doctoral programmes, for example, can help reduce brain drain by maintaining strong institutional ties and ensuring that research capacity is built in the home institution. Donor‑funded programmes are most effective when they support institutions, not just individuals, for example by investing in equipment, infrastructure and long‑term collaboration.
Internationalisation should not be financed solely by individuals. A more sustainable approach involves shared responsibility among governments, institutions and, in some cases, employers. If internationalisation is treated as a public good that contributes to institutional and societal development, then its costs and risks must be shared accordingly.
In a context of geopolitical fragmentation, rising nationalism and constrained resources, what should higher education leaders and policymakers prioritise over the next decade to keep internationalisation responsible and sustainable?
JS: In an increasingly divided and competitive world, collaboration is not a luxury but a necessity. Higher education institutions should resist the temptation to retreat into narrow national or institutional interests and instead reaffirm cooperation as part of their core mission.
Responsible internationalisation requires moving away from volume‑driven strategies and focusing more on quality, equity, and impact. Institutions should embed responsibility in their governance, funding models and partnerships, rather than treating it as an add‑on.
Despite the many challenges we face, higher education still offers reasons for hope. Collaboration, solidarity, and openness are deeply embedded in its DNA. If institutions remain faithful to these values, internationalisation can continue to contribute positively to societies, even in times of uncertainty.
- By Cecilia Albè
Interested in building more responsible and sustainable international partnerships? The EAIE’s Introduction to partnerships course explores partnership types, partner selection and long‑term collaboration strategies for international education professionals.
Discover the course
