There are currently four European countries that do not charge tuition fees
for university studies: Finland, Germany, Norway, and Iceland. Get set to strike
Finland off the list though. In the wake of a government proposal tabled in
October by Minister of Education, Science and Communications Krista Kiuru,
Finland will introduce tuition fees for non-European students as of 2016.
The proposal was unexpected. While the question of international tuition has
been
regularly
debated in the Finnish parliament in recent years, it has not received
strong support in political or academic circles. Indeed, earlier proposals to
raise fees for students from outside the European Economic Area (EEA) have been
widely panned by student groups in Finland. And
a pilot project to levy fees at 19 Finnish institutions
concluded earlier this year with no strong findings in favour of international
fees, and little apparent enthusiasm for the subject among participating
universities and polytechnics.
Minister Kiuru’s proposal would see fees apply for students from outside the
EEA – that is, the 27 European Union members (ratification is pending for a 28th
member: Croatia) as well as Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway – beginning in
2016. While institutions will have discretion in setting their own fees, the
government proposal prescribes a minimum tuition of €4,000 (US$5,000) per year,
to apply only for degree programmes taught in languages other than Finnish or
Swedish. Exchange students will not be affected by the new policy.
Inbound mobility today
Finland hosts roughly 20,000 international students today, including both
exchange students from within Europe and visiting students from beyond the EEA.
Roughly half of them stay on to work and contribute to the Finnish economy
following their studies.
A recent item in
University World News quotes, in translation, from
a preliminary report on the impact of international students in Finland prepared
by the Ministry of Education’s Centre for International Mobility, “The reported
Statistics Finland figures show that, during the last ten plus years,
the number of foreign students in Finland’s higher education
institutions has tripled, being almost 20,000 in 2013. In particular, the
numbers of students originating from Asian and African countries have increased
substantially in recent years… Of the foreigners [who] graduated in 2011, more
than two thirds were still in Finland a year after graduation, while two thirds
of the ‘stayers’ were in employment.”
The most recent figures from UNESCO indicate that
Finland hosted 17,636 foreign students in 2012, with the top
15 source countries accounting for nearly 70% of that enrolment as follows:
- China (2,129 students);
- Russian Federation (2,107);
- Nepal (976);
- Nigeria (939);
- Vietnam (904);
- Estonia (772);
- Pakistan (603);
- Bangladesh (591);
- India (557);
- Sweden (556);
- Germany (525);
- Ethiopia (454);
- Iran, Islamic Rep. (401);
- Kenya (388);
- Ghana (382).
Non-EEA countries, particularly those in Africa and Asia, account for a
surprising percentage of total international enrolment. In fact, non-EEA markets
in the top 15 source countries outlined above account for about 60% (10,431) of
all foreign students in Finland.
Reaction thus far
The Finnish government has sent its tuition proposal out for review by the
country’s higher education institutions, and, as news outlet YLE reports, “It
now appears that universities and polytechnics in the country are
agreeing to the motion, as a comment round organised by the
Ministry of Education and Culture shows that they predominately approve… A
number of higher education institutions in Finland support the implementation of
tuition fees, but wish to keep the authority to collect and determine the
tuition amount themselves.”
Samu Seitsalo, Director of the Centre for International Mobility (CIMO), adds
a broader perspective as to the potential economic impacts of the tuition
policy: “From a university and polytechnic perspective, it is a positive move,
as it would mean more money for the institutions. As long as the proportion of
people coming to study remains the same and the state continues to pay its part,
the universities can use the tuition fees as they see fit. In terms of the
national economy, however, it is a trickier issue. How that plays out will be
largely dependent on how many students come to Finland from outside the EU and
the EEA after tuition fees are implemented.”
Student groups and faculty associations, meanwhile, are firmly opposed and
question the underlying business case for introducing fees for international
students. Jarmo Kallunki is the education policy officer at the National Union
of University Students in Finland and, he, for example, has laid out a detailed
case
against the introduction of international fees in a recent
guest column for
University World News where he:
- questions the competitiveness of Finnish education relative to other
international destinations;
- outlines the current economic impacts of foreign students in Finland;
- argues that the introduction of fees for non-EEA students will “cause
international student numbers to plunge” – with a corresponding decline in the
foreign capital contributed by students for living expenses;
- and explores the longer-term
impacts of students staying on in Finland after their studies.
In part, both Mr Kallunki and Mr Seitsalo are reflecting on the same
question: to what extent could the introduction of tuition fees cause non-EEA
enrolment in Finland to drop? And in this respect Finland has a close-to-hand
example to consider in the case of Sweden.
A cautionary tale
Sweden introduced fees for non-EEA students in 2011 and non-European
enrolment in the country promptly plummeted.
The Swedish Higher Education Authority reports that
non-EEA enrolment in Sweden dropped roughly 80% from fall 2010 to
fall 2011 (the point at which international fees were introduced).
As the following table reflects,
non-European
enrolment has recovered modestly in the years since, in large part due to
the recruitment efforts of Swedish institutions (and the country’s international
education bodies) and with expanded scholarship support for visiting
students.
Please note that the term “free mover” is used in the table to indicate
students who come to Sweden outside of a formal exchange programme (including
non-EEA students which accounted for about 61% of “free movers” in Sweden in
fall 2010) and are therefore more likely to have been affected by the
introduction of foreign student fees.
Incoming higher education entrants for Sweden by
region and student category, 2010-2013. Source: Swedish Higher Education
Authority
This sharp shift in enrolment from 2010 to 2011 is shown even more
graphically in the following chart.
Incoming higher education entrants during the
academic years 2003/04-2012/13, total enrolment as well as free mover and
exchange enrolments. Source: Swedish Higher Education Authority
It doesn’t automatically follow that the impact on non-EEA enrolment would be
the same in Finland as it was in Sweden. However, the similarities between the
two countries are notable. They share a similar geography and competitive
profile in the global education market. And Finland today has a level of
international enrolment comparable to that of Sweden in autumn 2010.
One important difference, however, is that non-EEA students account for a
slightly higher proportion of Finnish enrolment today (than was the case for
non-European students in Sweden in 2010) – 60% for Finland versus 50% for Sweden
– and may therefore have somewhat greater exposure to enrolment declines
following the introduction of international student fees.
There are of course other variables that could mitigate any negative impacts
arising from the introduction of international fees in 2016, such as any steps
that the Finnish government and Finnish institutions take to expand their
marketing and recruitment efforts, and also the expansion of scholarships or
other financial supports for non-EEA students.
As
we have noted in the past, such strategies can play an important part in
countering any downward pressure on student numbers arising from tuition
increases. No doubt such measures, along with other key implementation details
such as the actual tuition rates established by Finnish institutions, will
ultimately determine the long-term impacts of Finland’s new policy.
