Scholarlink

<p>This paper examines the securitization of UK–China academic exchange in the context of intensifying geopolitical tensions and higher education marketization. It argues that UK universities are caught in a dilemma: compelled to navigate growing state-imposed security imperatives while remaining financially dependent on international students from China. Drawing on securitization theory and interpretive analysis of policy documents, media narratives, and ethnographic insights, the paper conceptualizes universities as active sites of controlled interdependence—negotiating risks, compliance demands, and academic freedom. The analysis highlights how securitization processes, framed as safeguarding national security, can lead to racialized suspicion and epistemic exclusion. This dynamic is compounded by austerity-driven budget cuts that disproportionately affect language and area studies, further shrinking the space for open, critical inquiry. The paper concludes with reflections on policy and scholarly implications, calling for renewed investment in China expertise and more balanced, evidence-based governance of international academic partnerships.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Market–security tensions in UK–China academic engagement: perspectives from UK higher education

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年8月29日

查看全文
  • Chi Zhang

摘要

This paper examines the securitization of UK–China academic exchange in the context of intensifying geopolitical tensions and higher education marketization. It argues that UK universities are caught in a dilemma: compelled to navigate growing state-imposed security imperatives while remaining financially dependent on international students from China. Drawing on securitization theory and interpretive analysis of policy documents, media narratives, and ethnographic insights, the paper conceptualizes universities as active sites of controlled interdependence—negotiating risks, compliance demands, and academic freedom. The analysis highlights how securitization processes, framed as safeguarding national security, can lead to racialized suspicion and epistemic exclusion. This dynamic is compounded by austerity-driven budget cuts that disproportionately affect language and area studies, further shrinking the space for open, critical inquiry. The paper concludes with reflections on policy and scholarly implications, calling for renewed investment in China expertise and more balanced, evidence-based governance of international academic partnerships.