Changing Winds

Leaders of international education organizations in major destination countries are not usually prone to hyperbole, but some are now struggling to adequately describe how much has changed in their countries over the past few years.

“It’s been a fairly intense period,” says Larissa Bezo, president and CEO of the Canadian Bureau for International Education. “A hell of a year,” is how Universities UK Chief Executive Vivienne Stern characterizes the climate before a new government took power in July. “Our social license to operate has not been given much credence in the wider community,” adds Phil Honeywood, CEO of the International Education Association of Australia.

We’re all walking these tightropes trying to have those discussions. —Larissa Bezo

Following dramatic postpandemic rebounds in global student mobility, three of the “Big Four” receiving countries—Australia, Canada, and the United Kingdom—have recently enacted policies tightening the flow of international students. (The United States is the fourth country.) While the specifics vary by country, factors including concerns about abuse of visa systems, high housing costs, perceived competition for jobs, and the overall climate in the lead-up to elections are among the drivers for the global shift, which has long-term implications for institutions and the students who aspire to attend them. These implications extend to the host nations as well, potentially impacting their ability to address skilled labor shortages, foster innovation, and maintain global competitiveness.

“[Students] don’t want to feel a material risk [to their] ability to do four years in college or two years in graduate school,” says Wendy Alexander, international vice principal and professor of international education at the University of Dundee in Scotland. “The [sense of stability] the parents felt was there has disappeared in two of the four major nations.”

The U.S. government hasn’t implemented the same type of restrictive policies. However, the issues top receiving nations are grappling with and the consequences of recent changes point to how quickly policy discussions can shift.

“We’re all walking these tightropes trying to have those discussions,” Bezo says.

The Drivers

Many of the issues driving restrictive international education policies mirror broader—and familiar—debates about immigration but have become more charged in recent years. “When we see government making decisions about net growth, [it’s] driven in large part by changing winds in Canada and concerns about capacity within our communities,” says Bezo. “In all the years I’ve worked in international education, it has never featured so prominently in discussions and media coverage. It’s a daily occurrence.”

In both Australia and Canada, skyrocketing housing costs have been a primary driver of education policy shifts. Australia also faced an influx of international students seeking employment after the previous government uncapped work limits in response to COVID-19 workforce shortages, according to Honeywood.

In the United Kingdom, the previous government initiated in 2023 a review of its “graduate route,” which allows students to stay in the country after graduation for two to three years. While the review has not yet led to changes to the graduate route itself, the government announced in May 2023 that international master’s students would be banned from bringing family members to the country with them as dependents.

While these policies have had an impact on visa applications, broader factors are also at play regarding decreased interest in study in these countries. Alexander points to this summer’s anti-immigration protests and riots across the United Kingdom. “We underestimate safety as a potential driver,” she says.

Caps, No Gowns

While familiar immigration policy debates and the broader political climates in the Big Four countries represent part of what’s driving more restrictive policies, leaders of international education organizations also point to concerns about the sustainability of enrollment trends in the field, spurred by dramatic postpandemic growth.

In Canada, there were more than 1 million international students by the end of 2023—a 29 percent increase over the previous year’s numbers and only 16,000 fewer international students than were enrolled at U.S. institutions. But in a country of 40 million people—roughly one-eighth of the U.S. population—the dramatic increases have exacerbated the rapid growth of Canada’s overall temporary resident population, an issue the country is currently grappling with.

As a result, in January, the government capped new international student study permits for certain categories of learners. The cap was first introduced as a temporary measure, but in mid-September, the Canadian government announced that it will be extended through 2025 and 2026 and now include graduate students. And despite an anticipated drop in international student numbers in 2024, the cap will also be lowered from 2024 levels—only 437,000 student permits will be issued in 2025.

Honeywood argues that Australian lawmakers saw in Canada’s caps a way to look tough ahead of federal elections in 2025. “International students are an easy target—they can’t vote,” he says.

As a result, changes to visa processing and a dramatic increase in the student visa application fee were followed in August by a proposed cap of 270,000 on new international students in 2025. While the cap is not yet signed into law, the Australian government released international student profiles (ISPs) spelling out the expected limits for individual institutions to give colleges and universities time to prepare.

Honeywood says that the sector has had some success in negotiating carve outs for research students, participants in short-term nondegree and study abroad programs, and recipients of overseas scholarships, as well as participants in programs that are hosted in part on transnational campuses.

While Australia’s proposed caps were initially seen as a one-time measure, stakeholders now expect caps to be announced for 2026 as well. “It’s going to be two years of pain at least,” Honeywood says.

International students are an easy target—they can’t vote. —Phil Honeywood

While the postpandemic rebound has been dramatic in many countries, it’s important for policymakers to keep a longer-term perspective, argues Meti Basiri, cofounder and CEO of ApplyBoard. “When you skip a year, the students will show up over the next three to four years,” he says. “[These countries] were closed for 12–18 months, then opened the borders and got too many students—but when you look at averages, you don’t see as much growth.”

Varying Impacts

While the driving forces behind policy changes in Australia, Canada, and the United Kingdom are similar, the impact has been different—not just from country to country, but from institution to institution.

In Australia, for example, the ISPs projecting the impact of caps spell out different limits for individual institutions. As a result, some have preemptively frozen all international student applications, according to Honeywood.

In Canada, the dynamics are regional. Provincial governments, not the federal government, oversee higher education, and the caps have given them a greater role in managing international student populations based on capacity issues in their jurisdictions. The impact has been uneven, with some institutions in Ontario facing decreases of 30–50 percent, while others in more rural provinces actually stand to gain capacity, according to Bezo.

In the United Kingdom, declining visa issuances have exacerbated the ongoing trend of students from different parts of the world attending specific institutional types, according to Alexander. “Different cohorts of international students select different parts of the sector,” she says. “The challenge is preserving diversity at the aggregate level amid greater concentration at the institutional level.”

The financial challenge, however, is shared by all institutions, particularly since governments in Canada and the United Kingdom have limited increases in tuition and fees for domestic students. Alexander speculates that the precarious financial situation of higher education in the United Kingdom is one reason why a cap like those implemented in Canada and Australia has not been proposed there.

Layoffs and program cuts were reported in all three countries by spring 2024, and the dwindling numbers of domestic college-age students point to continuing challenges ahead. “A lot of institutions are going to cut programs,” Basiri says. “Domestic students are going to have fewer options.”

In Australia, international students are now subsidizing domestic students in new ways. The additional $900 AUD added to the nation’s nonrefundable student visa fee—already among the world’s most expensive—is earmarked to increase college attainment among underserved domestic students, including disabled students and those from First Nations and rural areas. “International students are paying for Australia to lift its domestic students’ participation rate in higher education,” Honeywood says. “It’s a public good, but there’s no evidence of taxpayer money going to advance that policy goal.”

Bright Spots

Not all the new policies have been opposed by colleges and universities. Many have applauded changes tightening visa loopholes, addressing bad agent behavior, and increasing financial requirements, officials say.

The United Kingdom’s new government has announced a “package of measures we can live with,” Stern says. More importantly, “the incoming government from day one has set a different tone,” she adds. For example, Secretary of State for Education Bridget Phillipson discussed the benefits international students bring to the United Kingdom in her first speech.

“We feel we have a government that is supportive and gets that this is a key part of what we do,” Stern says. “We’re not looking for massive liberalization, but we want to position ourselves so if you’re thinking of studying here in two years, you feel you will be welcome.”

Alexander points to the United Kingdom’s relatively lower visa rejection rates—when compared with those in Canada and the United States—as a sign of continuing strength and argues that addressing loopholes “has taken some of the volatility out of the system.”

We’re not looking for massive liberalization, but we want to position ourselves so if you’re thinking of studying here in two years, you feel you will be welcome. —Vivienne Stern

Institutions also are signaling willingness to work with governments on capacity issues. For example, in Canada, dramatic growth has led to conversations with the government about institutional capacity to support large cadres of international students, more of whom are struggling financially and emotionally.

“With over 1 million students, we’re seeing the more visible challenges of our most vulnerable students,” Bezo said.

In response, the Canadian government announced last year its intention to create an institutions framework that recognizes colleges and universities “that set a higher standard for services, support, and outcomes for international students,” including evidence of successful postgraduate outcomes.

“The long-term impact of this will be quite positive because it’s forced institutions to become even more intentional and focused, but it comes with some significant transitional pains,” Bezo says.

In the long run, policy changes could give institutions time to recalibrate their international strategies. “Our [intention] is to try to create stability in visa policy and get out of this wretched boom-and-bust cycle, which isn’t good for students,” Stern says.

Shifting Mobility

Between the rhetoric around immigration issues and the reality of more stringent regulations, mobility patterns have been—and will continue to be—affected, experts say. But rather than a dramatic shift, international educators should expect a continuation of ongoing trends driven by larger forces.

For the United Kingdom, the growth of lower-cost English-taught programs in non-English-speaking European nations such as Germany, Italy, and the Netherlands is a sign of ongoing shifts among students, for whom “price is increasingly a consideration,” Alexander says. But those countries are not immune to the broader political shifts affecting the Big Four—in the Netherlands, for example, institutions and lawmakers have recently taken steps to curb international student flows and promote proficiency in Dutch.

Shifts are also accelerating the growing trend toward intraregional mobility, particularly as high-quality options continue to proliferate in Asia and other regions. “We’re going to see more internationally mobile learners make regionally focused choices,” Bezo says. “Our institutions are beginning to wake up to that reality and how it impacts their thinking.”

According to Basiri, 70 percent of international students currently come to the six largest English-speaking nations. “That’s changing,” he says, but he adds that overall mobility will continue to grow worldwide.

By 2030, more than 10 million students, largely from growing middle classes in developing nations, will seek international education opportunities, according to Basiri. As populations continue to age in Europe and elsewhere, supply and demand could ultimately balance in ways beneficial to all, he predicts.

“[In the] short term, there will be significant challenges,” Basiri says. “[The] long term will bring far more opportunities for students, which is great.”

Turning the Tide

The volatility of political climates in major destination countries and the short- and long-term implications of the raft of recent policy shifts all point to the need for an intentional, cohesive, and strategic approach to national international education policymaking.

This tells you a lot. We need to [look at] student mobility through a different lens—more of a macroeconomic, long-term positive impact. We need more economies working together instead of against each other. —Meti Basiri 

In the United States, which doesn’t have a national international education strategy, increasingly charged public discussion on immigration policy and recent issues with disparities in visa approval rates highlight the importance of continued advocacy at the federal level.

Even in countries with explicit national international education strategies, advocates are pushing for a more comprehensive approach to coordinating student flows and support and a broader and more robust public conversation about mobilizing international talent, as opposed to what Bezo calls “a de facto recruitment strategy.”

“A lot of countries are in a global competition for [skilled workers],” Honeywood says, noting that his organization dedicated significant funds to a postpandemic public relations campaign highlighting the benefits of international students. “France and Germany decided they wanted to try and attract bright young people to bring those skills to their economies. This is a skills competition as much as a public good competition.”

Higher education leaders stress the importance of raising awareness of the positive impact of students—both when they return to their countries of origin and when they stay in their host country. Basiri points to a simple statistic: One out of four of the so-called “unicorns”—companies that are valued at $1 billion or more—in the United States were founded by former international students.

“This tells you a lot. We need to [look at] student mobility through a different lens—more of a macroeconomic, long-term positive impact,” he says. “We need more economies working together instead of against each other.”

In Canada, stakeholders are conveying that “the international education sector has a strategic role to play and can address many objectives—soft diplomacy, people-to-people ties, attracting the best and brightest minds,” Bezo says. “We’re working very intentionally as a sector to make sure that conversation is core to these discussions.”

In the United Kingdom, institutions are focused on determining how to balance undergraduate, graduate, and research cohorts and provide better opportunities for “employability,” including internships and job placements. “That’s top of mind as we think about how we strengthen our value proposition,” Alexander says.

But as has been the case in the past, international education can also be promoted as a good in itself. Noting his own experience as a Rotary exchange student in Japan before starting college, Honeywood stressed the importance of continuing to argue for greater opportunities for all students.

“The more we can inculcate global citizenship via physical or virtual student mobility, the better off we’ll be as a global community,” he says. •