In 2018, Uwe coined the term IHES — Internationalisation in Higher Education for Society. In 2019, together with Hans de Wit, Elsbeth Jones and Betty Leask, he then developed IHES as a special concept of internationalisation. Since then it has moved from a niche idea to one of the central conversations in our field. This page is where I collect what it means, why it matters right now, and what I’m writing about it.

What IHES is

IHES is the next stage of what internationalisation in higher education should be doing. For decades, internationalisation has been measured by flows and participation — how many students went abroad, how many partnerships exist on paper, how many courses are taught in English. That counts activity. It rarely counts impact.

IHES says: internationalisation is a powerful instrument, but it only matters to the degree it contributes to society. The purpose is not more mobility for its own sake. The purpose is democratic resilience, sustainable development, and global problem-solving.

The three stages of internationalisation

Internationalisation 1.0, until around 2013, was mobility-focused — measured by flows and participation, with impact largely assumed rather than evidenced. Internationalisation 2.0, from roughly 2014 to now, is impact-aware but inward-looking: outcomes are discussed and partially measured, but mainly within higher education, with societal impact still mostly rhetorical. Internationalisation 3.0, which is emerging, is impact by design — intentional internationalisation designed to contribute to democratic resilience, sustainability, and global problem-solving beyond higher education. The move from 2.0 to 3.0 is what IHES is about.

Why IHES matters now: the four storms

We face four global megatrends simultaneously — ageing societies, democracy under attack, artificial superintelligence arriving faster than institutions can cope with, and climate change. Each is a strain on its own. Together they compound one another. Ageing societies reduce adaptability just as AI accelerates change. Climate adds recurring shocks that centralise power. Democracy, which depends on trust and shared reality, weakens under the pressure.

Higher education cannot solve any of these alone. But higher education shapes how a society thinks, whom it trains, what questions it asks, and whose problems it takes seriously. That is not nothing. And internationalisation — done intentionally — is one of the most powerful instruments higher education has.

Five roles of internationalisation in this moment

Building a global mind. These challenges are complex, interdisciplinary, value-laden, and long-term. They need systems thinking, perspective-taking, epistemic humility, ethical reasoning across contexts. Internationalisation is not a goal in itself — it is about mental internationalisation.

A shock absorber for systemic risk. Internationalised higher education systems diversify knowledge sources, reduce intellectual monocultures, and build redundancy in research capacity. Resilience through diversity.

Demographic compensation and talent circulation. Ageing societies face shrinking cohorts, skill shortages, reduced innovation. Internationalisation — done right — enables talent circulation instead of zero-sum brain drain, and builds long-term transnational professional communities.

Bridging technology and ethics. AI and superintelligence are not value-neutral. Internationalisation exposes AI development to different legal cultures and ethical priorities, preventing purely national or corporate value capture.

Coordination infrastructure for climate action. Climate is cross-border by definition. Internationalisation integrates global science with local knowledge, and enables shared standards for data, methods, and risk assessment.

Measuring what matters

Where IHES parts company with most of the conversation about internationalisation is measurement. Counting inputs and outputs is easy. Measuring impact — actual change in mindset, attitudes, behaviour, values — is hard. Hard is not impossible. The Global Impact Institute has developed methodologies that have produced evidence of real, measurable impact across multiple EU projects (SENSEI, DITE, IHES, SUCTI, SUCTIA): pre-to-post surveys, paired samples, significance testing with effect size. Results correlate to activities. Internationalisation can be designed for impact, and the impact can be measured.

Commentary

New posts will be added here as they are published.