Author(s)

HaiHui Wang^*, Juan Liu

Affiliation(s)

School of Digital Economics and Management, Wuxi University, Wuxi 214105, Jiangsu, China.

Corresponding Author

HaiHui Wang

ABSTRACT

Policy barriers present major challenges to the development of educational services trade, especially amid rising global trade protectionism, which further restricts the overseas operations of educational institutions. This study examines the impact of such barriers on the international expansion of educational institutions, using educational trade data and the Services Trade Restrictiveness Index (STRI) across 55 countries from 2008 to 2017. Following the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS), we analyze effects across its four supply modes. Our results show that policy barriers under Mode 3 (commercial presence) strongly inhibit overseas expansion. Notably, the impact differs by income level: in high- and lower-middle-income countries, barriers under Mode 1 (cross-border supply) reduce Mode 3 trade, indicating complementarity between these modes; in contrast, for upper-middle-income countries, Mode 1 barriers encourage Mode 3 trade, revealing a substitutive relationship. These findings suggest that educational institutions adjust their market-entry strategies according to policy restrictiveness, either combining multiple modes or substituting one for another depending on context.

KEYWORDS

Educational services trade; Policy barriers; Cross-border education; International branch campus; Online education

CITE THIS PAPER

HaiHui Wang, Juan Liu. Policy barriers and their influence on the global expansion of educational institutions. World Journal of Educational Studies. 2025, 3(2): 60-68. DOI: https://doi.org/10.61784/wjes3045.

REFERENCES

[1] Wilkins S. Establishing international branch campuses: A framework for assessing opportunities and risks. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 2016, 38(2): 167–182. DOI: 10.1080/1360080X.2016.1150547.

[2] Knight J.T he evolution of contemporary education hubs: Fad, brand or innovation? International Journal of Educational Development, 2024, 104: 102972. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijedudev.2023.102972.

[3] Verbik L. The International Branch Campus: Models and Trends. International Higher Education, 2015, 46. DOI: 10.6017/ihe.2007.46.7943.

[4] Borgos J. Addressing Sustainable International Branch Campus Development Through an Organizational Structure Lens: A Comparative Analysis of China, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates. Chinese Education & Society, 2016, 49(4–5): 271–287. DOI: 10.1080/10611932.2016.1237849.

[5] Helpman E, Melitz M J, Yeaple S R. Export Versus FDI with Heterogeneous Firms. American Economic Review, 2004, 94(1): 300–316. DOI: 10.1257/000282804322970814.

[6] Li W, Gillies R, He M, et al. Barriers and facilitators to online medical and nursing education during the COVID-19 pandemic: Perspectives from international students from low- and middle-income countries and their teaching staff. Human Resources for Health, 2021, 19(1): 64. DOI: 10.1186/s12960-021-00609-9.

[7] Regmi K, Jones L. A systematic review of the factors – enablers and barriers – affecting e-learning in health sciences education. BMC Medical Education, 2020, 20(1): 91. DOI: 10.1186/s12909-020-02007-6.

[8] Jin X. On international trade in educational services: An interpretation of the regulations and China’s WTO commitments. Frontiers of Education in China, 2006, 1(4): 601–613. DOI: 10.1007/s11516-006-0033-0.

[9] Dee P. International Student Movements and the Effects of Barriers to Trade in Higher Education Services. In C. Findlay & W. G. Tierney, Globalisation and Tertiary Education in the Asia-Pacific. World Scientific, 2010: 39-71. DOI: 10.1142/9789814299046_0003.

[10] O’Doherty D, Dromey M, Lougheed J, et al. Barriers and solutions to online learning in medical education – an integrative review. BMC Medical Education, 2018, 18(1): 130. DOI: 10.1186/s12909-018-1240-0.

[11] Komljenovic J. The future of value in digitalised higher education: Why data privacy should not be our biggest concern. Higher Education, 2022, 83(1): 119–135. DOI: 10.1007/s10734-020-00639-7.

[12] Limba T, Sidlauskas A. Personal Data Processing In Educational Institutions: Anonymisation And Pseudonymisation. 2020: 9989–9997. DOI: 10.21125/iceri.2020.2262.

[13] Alenezi M, Wardat S, Akour M. The Need of Integrating Digital Education in Higher Education: Challenges and Opportunities. Sustainability, 2023, 15(6): 4782. DOI: 10.3390/su15064782.

[14] Kumari P, Srivastava A. Challenges and Issues of Integrating Information and Communication Technologies in Higher Education in Rural Areas- A Review. International Journal For Multidisciplinary Research, 2023, 5(6): 8195. DOI: 10.36948/ijfmr.2023.v05i06.8195.

[15] Altbach P. Why Branch Campuses May Be Unsustainable. International Higher Education, 2015, 58. DOI: 10.6017/ihe.2010.58.8467.

[16] Lane J E. Creating Embassies of Knowledge: Do International Branch Campuses Mitigate or Facilitate the Evolution of International Relations? International Studies Review, 2016, 18(2: 353–358.

[17] Wilkins S. Two decades of international branch campus development, 2000–2020: A review. International Journal of Educational Management, 2020, 35(1): 311–326. DOI: 10.1108/IJEM-08-2020-0409.

[18] Forte R, Paiva C. Barriers to FDI in the European Union Countries: The Perception of Foreign Subsidiaries. Journal of East-West Business, 2021, 27(1): 30–56. DOI: 10.1080/10669868.2020.1822487.

[19] Jungmittag A, Marschinski R. Service trade restrictiveness and foreign direct investment—Evidence from greenfield FDI in business services. The World Economy, 2023, 46(6): 1711–1758. DOI: 10.1111/twec.13334.

[20] Kinser K, Lane J E. Managing the oversight of international branch campuses in higher education. Higher Education Management and Policy, 2014, 24(3): 161–176. DOI: 10.1787/hemp-24-5jz8tqscxk25.

[21] Rajshree, GG Dwivedi. Higher Education Abroad: Current Scenario and Future Trends. Zenodo, 2020. DOI: 10.5281/ZENODO.4084046.

[22] Bunnell T, Courtois A, Donnelly M. British Elite Private Schools And Their Overseas Branches: Unexpected Actors In The Global Education Industry. British Journal of Educational Studies, 2020, 68(6): 691–712. DOI: 10.1080/00071005.2020.1728227.

[23] Tight M. Internationalisation of higher education beyond the West: Challenges and opportunities – the research evidence. Educational Research and Evaluation, 2020, 27(3–4): 239–259. DOI: 10.1080/13803611.2022.2041853.

[24] Khachaturian T, Oliver S. Intangible trade: Understanding the relationship between trade barriers and mode of supply in services sectors. The World Economy, 2023, 46(5): 1189–1234. DOI: 10.1111/twec.13346.

[25] Kox H L. Regulatory Harmonization and Trade in Services: Volumes and Choice of Mode. SSRN Electronic Journal, 2009. DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.2872076.

[26] Lennon C. Trade in services: Cross-border trade vs commercial presence. Evidence of complementarity. Working Papers, Article halshs-00586217, 2008. https://ideas.repec.org//p/hal/wpaper/halshs-00586217.html.

[27] Buch C M, Lipponer A. FDI versus exports: Evidence from German banks. Journal of Banking & Finance, 2007, 31(3): 805–826. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbankfin.2006.07.004.

[28] Benz S, Jaax A. The costs of regulatory barriers to trade in services: New estimates of ad valorem tariff equivalents. Economics Letters, 2020, 212: 110057. DOI: 10.1016/j.econlet.2021.110057.

[29] Riker D. The impact of restrictions on mode 3 international supply of services. Journal of International and Global Economic Studies, 2015, 8(1): 1–20.

[30] Barbe A, Chambers A, Khachaturian T, et al. Modeling Trade in Services: Multiple Modes, Barriers to Trade, and Data Limitations. 20th Annual Conference on Global Economic Analysis, Purdue University, 2017.

[31] Lamprecht P, Miroudot S. The value of market access and national treatment commitments in services trade agreements. The World Economy, 2020, 43(11): 2880–2904. DOI: 10.1111/twec.13037.

[32] Glewwe P, Jacoby H G. Economic growth and the demand for education: Is there a wealth effect? Journal of Development Economics, 2004, 74(1): 33–51. DOI: 10.1016/j.jdeveco.2003.12.003.

[33] Hassan E M, Mahmoud H. Healthcare and education networks interaction as an indicator of social services stability following natural disasters. Scientific Reports, 2021, 11(1): 1664. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-81130-w.