Abstract The provision of equitable chances for students from all socioeconomic backgrounds to pursue higher education is a fundamental principle in Norway's egalitarian educational system. Providing free higher education to domestic and international students, has long been praised. In accordance with this, the Norwegian government has long sought to internationalize higher education, to enhance the quality of higher education. Statistics reveal a rapid increase in the number of international students enrolled during the past decade, indicating that international student mobility, both inbound and outbound, has expanded significantly in Norway. However, the Norwegian government announced the imposition of tuition fees for foreign students attending higher education outside of the European Economic Area (eea) and Switzerland from August 2023. The fundamental free principle in Norwegian higher education has been viewed as being broken by this action, along with the government's own political platform and party platforms. In relation to international higher education literature and tuition fee policies in other Nordic contexts and beyond, this article addresses the government's justifications for enacting tuition fees for foreign students in Norway. Additionally, it investigates internationalization of the Higher Education system in Norway by shedding light on the status of internationalization as well as how the Norwegian society has responded to the imposition of tuition fees for international students. By considering elements like revenue generation, academic diversity, global competitiveness, and social inclusion, the article further emphasizes the potential implications for the landscape of Norwegian higher education and its position in the worldwide arena. With this policy debate, we aim to contribute to the continuing discussion about international students’ tuition fees and offer insightful information to policymakers, practitioners, and scholars working in international higher education.
AkothA. and EnoksenE. (2022). Experiences of East African Students in Norway: Development of a Process Model. Journal of Comparative & International Higher Education. 14(4), pp. 117-131.
AltbachP. G. (2007). Tradition and transition: The international imperative in higher education. Brill.
4.
AskimJ. (2022). Student Financing for Social Equity in Norway, 1947-2020, in Successful Public Policy in the Nordic Countries; Cases, Lessons, Challenges, edited by de la PorteC., EydalG.B., KaukoJ., NohrstedtD.'tHartP. and Tranøy, B.S., Oxford University Press, Oxford UK, pp. 153–173.
5.
CaiY. and KivistöJ. (2013). Tuition Fees for International Students in Finland: Where to Go From Here?Journal of Studies in International Education, 17(1), pp. 55-78.
6.
ChristensenL. (2022). Mange studier ved nmbu er avhengig av studenter fra land utenfor eøs. Med studieavgift kan de bli færre (Many studies at nmbu are dependent on students from countries outside the eea. With tuition fees, they can be fewer). https://www.forskerforum.no/studieavgift-nmbu/ (last accessed 22.05.2023).
de GayardonA. (2019). There is no such thing as free higher education: A global perspective on the (many) realities of free systems. Higher Education Policy, 32(3), 485–505.
9.
de WitH. (1999). Changing rationales for the internationalization of higher education. International Higher Education, (15), pp. 2–3.
KnightJ. (2012). Student mobility and internationalization: Trends and tribulations. Research in Comparative and International Education, 7(1), 20–33.
17.
KoeningsF., Di MeoG., & UebelmesserS. (2020). University rankings as information source: do they play a different role for domestic and international students?Applied Economics, 52(59), 6432–6447.
LindG.E. (2022). Stans kuttene i internasjonalt kunnskapssamarbeid. (Stop the cuts in international knowledge cooperation) Forskerforum.no. https://www.forskerforum.no/stans-kuttene-i-internasjonalt-kunnskapssamarbeid/ (last accessed 19.05.2023). LiuD & KongS. (2022). Graduate Employability and Labour Market Relevance of Norwegian Higher Education: Perspectives from Students. In: BroadleyT., CaiY.,
20.
FirthM., HuntE., & J. Neugebauer (Eds.), sage Handbook of Graduate Employability. Sage, 433–451.
21.
MaassenP., MoenE., & StensakerB. (2011). Reforming higher education in the Netherlands and Norway: The role of the state and national modes of governance. Policy Studies, 32(5), 479–495.
OECD (2022). Education at a Glance 2022: oecd Indicators, oecd Publishing, Paris, France. doi: https://doi.org/10.1787/25ab4871-en (last accessed 18.05.2023).
29.
PanditK. (2013). International students and diversity: Challenges and opportunities for campus internationalization. International students and scholars in the United States: Coming from abroad, 131–141.
30.
PetersonD. M., BriggsP., DreasherL., HornerD. D., & NelsonT. (1999). Contributions of international students and programs to campus diversity. New directions for student services, 1999(86), 67–77.
31.
RinneR. and AntikainenA. (2022). The Nordic model of higher education from a comparative and historical perspective, in CoteJ.E. & PickardS. (Eds.) Routledge Handbook of the Sociology of Higher Education, Second Edition.
SahlbergP. (2021). Finnish lessons 3.0: What can the world learn from educational change in Finland?Teachers College Press.
34.
Sanchez-SerraD., & MarconiG. (2018). Increasing international students’ tuition fees: the two sides of the coin. International higher education (92), 13–14.
35.
SandsørAstrid Marie Jorde; KorsvollNils Hallvard; SterriAksel Braanen; LiuDian; DelsettLene Liebe (2022) Vi trenger mer internasjonalisering, ikke mindre (We need more internationalisation, not less). Khrono.no. 23.12.2022.https://khrono.no/vi-trenger-mer-internasjonalisering-ikke-mindre/746086 (last accessed 17.05. 2023).
36.
SerediakO. and HellandH. (2023) Family background and the likelihood of pursuing a university degree abroad: heterogeneity in educational fields, British Journal of Sociology of Education, 44:1, 123–143, doi: 10.1080/01425692.2022.21324 (De Wit, 1999)71.
37.
SolheimM.C.W. (2016). Foreign workers and international partners as channels to international partners in core, intermediate and peripheral regions, Regional Studies, Regional Science, 3(1), 491–505, https://doi.org/10.1080/21681376.2016.1258324.
SolheimM.C.W. & FitjarR.D. (2018). Foreign Workers Are Associated With Innovation, But Why?International Networks as a Mechansim, International Regional Science Review, 41(3), 311–334. https://doi.org/10.1177/01600176156262.
40.
SolheimM.C.W., Fløgstad, G. N, Ellingsen, S.Å, KorsvollN.H., SulimanS., RotsA., and DanboltB.K. (2023). Studieavgift er kortenkt kunnskapspolitikk (Tuition fees are short-sighted knowledge policy). Khrono.no, 06.01.2023. https://khrono.no/studieavgift-er-korttenkt-kunnskapspolitikk/748313 (last accessed 18.05. 2023).
StensakerB., Frølich, N., Gornitzka, Å., & MaassenP. (2008). Internationalisation of higher education: the gap between national policy?making and institutional needs. Globalisation, Societies and Education, 6(1), 1–11.
VögtleE. M., & MartensK. (2014). The Bologna Process as a template for transnational policy coordination. Policy Studies, 35(3), 246–263.
49.
Wiers-HenssenJ. (2019). Paradoxical Attraction? Why and Increasing Number of International Students Choose Norway. Journal of Studies in Higher Education, 23(2), pp. 281–298.
50.
Wiers-JenssenJ. (2022). International Students in Norway: Satisfaction, Coping and Social Networks. Journal of Studies in international Education, 10283153221082720.
