1) Several mega-trends are impacting higher education globally, including population aging, economic integration, inequality, skills mismatches, and new technologies.
2) Higher education is becoming more globalized and internationalized, with growing student mobility, cross-border research collaborations, and expansion of universities and online courses.
3) However, globalization and new technologies also risk exacerbating inequalities and social exclusion if access to opportunities remains unequal.
2. 2
Ageing Populations
Global Economic Integration
International
inequality
Intergenerational Transmission of Disadvantage
Changing balance of global power
More satisfied with life?
Lower voter turnout
Skills mismatch
Women in the labour market
and childbirth
More diverse families, generally
smaller and with older parents
Almost ubiquitous access and use of computing and the Internet
A digital society
Knowledge-intensive Economies
Migration and
mobility
Urban life
Obesity epidemic
Mega-trends…
8. Sources: H&M (2015), H&M Worldwide website; Inditex (2015), Our History, Inditex website; Tarzian, JoanMarie (2015),
Santander Corporate Communication – International Media Relations; Starbucks (2015), Company Information, Starbucks
website; Hoover, Joan (2015), Apple Investor Relations; Spencer, Graham (2015), Contributor, Macstories. 8
Global expansion of multinational companies
The global reach of five companies in food services, garments, banking, and
technology, 1988-2015
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
NumberofCountries
Starbucks
Inditex
H&M
Apple
12. 12
Over 50% of scientific papers written in collaboration;
almost 20% in international networks
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
%
Multiple authors, international collab. only Multiple authors, international and domestic collab.
Multiple authors, domestic collab. only Single author, multiple affiliations (dom. or international.)
Multiple authors, no institutional collaboration Single author, single institution
No institutional
collaboration
Institutional
collaboration
15. Global integration of qualifications?
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Japan
Finland
Netherlands
Sweden
Australia
Norway
Flanders(Belgium)
England(UK)
England/N.…
UnitedStates
CzechRepublic
OECDaverage
Poland
Canada
NorthernIreland…
Austria
Germany
Ireland
France
Denmark
Estonia
SlovakRepublic
Korea
RussianFederation
Spain
Italy
Below upper secondary education Upper secondary or post-secondary non-tertiary education Tertiary education
15
Proportion of 25-64 year-olds scoring at PIAAC numeracy level 4 and 5, by educational
attainment of the population (2012)
17. 17
Countries differ in their integration in
international student flows
New Zealand
Australia
United Kingdom
Switzerland
Austria
BelgiumCanada
Netherlands
Denmark Czech Republic
France
Finland
GermanyHungary Ireland
Sweden
Slovak Republic
Latvia
ItalyUnited States
Portugal
Estonia
Japan Norway LithuaniaRussian Federation Slovenia
Poland KoreaTurkey
Chile China
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
26
28
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Studentinflow
Student outflow
Tertiary
Luxembourg
20. Post-truth, alternative facts
“What, then, are we, the leaders of our institutions of higher education, to
do when faced with a president who denies facts, who denies science?”
20
23. 23
Public versus private funding of higher education
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Finland
Norway
Luxembourg
Denmark
Austria
Iceland
Sweden
Belgium
Argentina
Slovenia
Germany
Estonia
Poland
France
Latvia
EU22average
SlovakRepublic
Lithuania
CzechRepublic
Indonesia
Turkey
Ireland
Mexico
OECDaverage
Netherlands
Hungary
Spain
RussianFederation
Italy
Portugal
Israel
NewZealand
Canada
Colombia
Australia
Chile
UnitedStates
Korea
Japan
UnitedKingdom
%
Public expenditure on educational institutions Household expenditure
Expenditure of other private entities All private sources
30. Gini coefficients of income inequality, mid-1980s and
2013, or latest date available
0.15
0.20
0.25
0.30
0.35
0.40
0.45
0.50
1985 2013 or latest
Increase Little change Decrease
30
31. Trends in real household incomes at the bottom, the
middle and the top, OECD average, 1985 = 1
1.00
1.10
1.20
1.30
1.40
1.50
1.60
1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010
Bottom 10% Bottom 40% middle 50-90% Top 10%
31
32. Amount of money spent by US households on child
development
32
33. Average numeracy score by parent educational
background (PEB) and inequality
240
250
260
270
280
290
300
0.18 0.23 0.28 0.33 0.38
Numeracyscore
Inequality (Gini coefficient)
Low PEB Medium PEB High PEB
33
34. 34
Social background impacts on opportunities
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Italy
SlovakRepublic
Poland
Turkey
France
Singapore
CzechRepublic
Greece
Spain
NorthernIreland
England
Israel
UnitedStates
Chile
Ireland
Australia
Lithuania
Average
RussianFederation
Netherlands
Canada
Korea
Norway
Slovenia
FlemishCom.
Germany
NewZealand
Estonia
Japan
Finland
Sweden
Denmark
Austria
% At least one parent has attained tertiary education Both parents have less than tertiary educational attainment
Share of 30-44 year-olds who completed tertiary-type A or an advanced research programme, by parents' educational
attainment (2012 or 2015)
35. The engine of social mobility falters
Australia
Austria
CanadaDenmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Ireland
Italy
Japan
Netherlands
Norway
Poland
Spain
Sweden
United States
Flanders (Belgium)
England/N. Ireland
(United Kingdom)
Russian Federation*
Average
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
12345678910
Upwardmobility
Odds ratio
inequality of opportunity
low educational mobility
inequality of opportunity
high educational mobility
equality of opportunity
high educational mobility
equality of opportunity
low educational mobility
35
40. Is the delivery of education changing?
Number of MOOCS, 2012-16
41. 41
What will the future be?
globalisation
internationalization
cost-sharing
trade liberalization
accountability
openness
local eco-system
OECD (2008) scenario’s on the future of higher education
