Foreign Universities in India: Competition or Complement?

Over the past year, a range of foreign universities have announced India-focused programs or plans to set up campuses. The excitement has been immediate. For the first time, India is not just sending students out into the global higher education market. It is inviting the market in.

But behind the excitement sits a more serious question:

What does this moment actually mean for Indian higher education?

In the first episode of Jetri Dialogues, this question was explored through two complementary lenses: policy intent and global experience. To unpack it, Jetri brought together Dr Manju Singh, former Joint Secretary at the University Grants Commission, and Professor Philip Altbach, one of the world’s most renowned scholars of international higher education.

The conversation quickly made one thing clear:

Foreign universities in India are neither an automatic breakthrough nor an automatic threat.

They are an opening. And openings are only as meaningful as the systems that govern them.

Why India opened up now

Dr Singh’s answer located the moment squarely inside the broader vision of the National Education Policy 2020. 

“... the very first line of the policy, which is the vision of the policy, they said that the learners should be ones with a deep-rooted pride in being Indian, but at the same time, truly reflect to be global citizens.“

Internationalization, in other words, was not an add-on. It was built into the policy’s imagination of the Indian learner. That translated into a clear institutional ambition:

• India should become a global study destination
• It should provide premium education at affordable cost
• It should enable internationalization at home
• It should reduce the need for students to leave India just to access an international academic experience

And the logic went beyond Indian students alone. Dr Singh argued that if implemented well, these branch campuses could also attract students from Southeast Asia, the Middle East, Africa, and the broader Global South

This would be a form of knowledge diplomacy and soft power, strengthening India’s bilateral academic relationships and global standing.

Why India looks attractive to foreign universities

From the demand side, the policy case is clear enough. But why would foreign universities want India?

Professor Altbach’s answer was straightforward:

“I think India is attractive because it is now the largest, or maybe second largest, higher education system in the entire world. It has a big youth population. And we all see within the country and abroad that India is a growing global economic geopolitical power in the world, and everybody wants a little piece of that, and wants to understand the country better. So, that's the attraction, and it's quite significant.”

He also made an important point about India’s global visibility. In the West, and especially in the US, knowledge about India remains surprisingly limited. That creates scope not only for branch campuses but also for exchange programs, collaborations, and shorter-term academic mobility.

At the same time, he was clear that India is attractive as a market and as a geopolitical destination. But attractiveness alone does not solve the structural problems of setting up and sustaining a credible campus.

The regulations are open, flexible, and deliberately enabling

How did the UGC (University Grants Commission) think about balancing openness with safeguards? How do you make the entry process attractive without exposing students to low-quality providers, malpractice, or degree-mill behavior?

Dr Singh’s answer emphasized the amount of consultation that went into the regulations.

“While the regulation was being drafted and the policy was being decided, very large, widespread consultations were held, not only with institutions in India, but from premier universities from all over the world. We approached the embassies and through them, and even directly, and we received large number of comments and suggestions“

The framework is designed to be both clear and flexible. Some of the key features she highlighted were:

1. Clear eligibility

Institutions are eligible if they are:

• in the top 500 of global rankings, or
• in the top 500 in subject-specific rankings

There is also a flexibility clause for reputed institutions that may not neatly fall into ranking lists but have recognized expertise.

2. Single-window approval

The process is routed through a single online application to the UGC. Institutions do not need separate approvals from other ministries or embassies. The system is intended to reduce bureaucratic friction.

3. Fixed timelines

There are two stages:

• a letter of intent
• a letter of approval once the campus is operationally ready

Each stage has a fixed 60-day timeline, which is meant to avoid discretionary delays.

4. Operational autonomy

Foreign universities are allowed to preserve their own institutional models. They have autonomy over:

• admissions criteria
• fee structures
• faculty recruitment
• staffing models
• salary structures
• partnership arrangements with Indian institutions or companies

Student protection was not an afterthought

Dr Singh was equally emphatic that the regulations were designed with student protection in mind:

• No fees can be collected before full approval is granted
• Campuses must publish all key details on their website at least 60 days before admissions, including:
  
  • programs
  • seat numbers
  • fee structure
  • eligibility
  • refund policy
  • admissions process

She also addressed one of the biggest concerns students and parents often have: what happens if a campus shuts down or a program is discontinued? Under the regulations:

• campuses cannot shut down programs or close operations without UGC approval
• they must explain upfront how affected students would be reallocated, without additional financial burden
• they must have a grievance redressal system
• students can escalate unresolved issues to the UGC

One especially important point she made was around degree recognition. Degrees awarded by these branch campuses will automatically be considered equivalent for:

• further studies in India
• jobs in India
• including government jobs

The intent is strong. The structural challenges are real.

At this point, Professor Altbach stepped in with what became the central tension of the discussion.

“ The development of the new regulations, and the opening of Indian higher education to an international perspective and to the possibility of international branch campuses and joint degree programs is a very positive step. India for much too long has had a Swadeshi attitude toward too many things, higher education among them. And there's much to be learned from overseas universities.“

But he was also explicit that much of what was being imagined remained, in his words, a bit “pie in the sky.” His skepticism was about the feasibility of execution. He outlined several structural challenges.

1. Not many top universities may actually come

He doubted that a significant number of top 500 institutions would set up meaningful branch campuses in India.

Why? Because globally, serious campuses are expensive. And in most other countries where branch campuses succeed, the host country, a local university, or a business partner bears much of the cost.

2. A real campus is not just classrooms

A branch campus cannot just be a rented floor in an office building with a few business degree offerings. If it is to truly resemble the home institution, it needs the infrastructure and cultural ecosystem of a university:

• student affairs
• counseling
• broader facilities
• campus support structures
• not just academic delivery

And he questioned whether either the foreign institutions or the Indian system were fully ready for that level of commitment.

3. Faculty will be a major bottleneck

Foreign institutions often struggle globally to persuade home-campus faculty to relocate for long periods. In practice, many branch campuses hire locally, regionally, or from the broader international market

But India already has a faculty shortage. If foreign campuses enter the market paying significantly higher salaries, they could end up drawing some of the best faculty away from Indian institutions; especially public ones.

In other words, branch campuses could expand student choice while simultaneously intensifying local faculty inequality.

India may need to learn from China

Professor Altbach noted that China had built a relatively large ecosystem of foreign universities by insisting on partnerships with Chinese universities. These partnerships gave the local institution:

• visibility into operations
• some degree of authority
• influence over academic and financial standards
• oversight over what foreign institutions were actually doing

The broader lesson:

If India wants foreign campuses to contribute to national goals, it may need stronger mechanisms for alignment, oversight, and institutional embedding.

Dr Singh acknowledged that early branch campuses would not, at least initially, be able to fully match the main campus experience. Many would begin with limited programs and small cohorts.

But she also pointed out that several Indian state governments were actively trying to support them with land, infrastructure, and facilitation. In her view, the system was at the beginning of an experiment, and what mattered now was whether the model could mature over time into something more substantial.

The global moment is making this harder

Given the global turmoil in higher education, does this make India more attractive or less attractive as a destination for branch campuses?

Professor Altbach said the global environment, especially in the United States, had become “absolutely horrible” for higher education.

He cited:

• the current administration’s attacks on universities
• regulatory instability
• hostility toward immigration
• rising visa barriers
• growing political pressure on prestigious academic institutions

His argument was that university leaders in the US are currently consumed by survival.That makes it harder, not easier, for them to think seriously about complex overseas ventures like India.

He extended the point to other regions too:

• in the UK, rising populism shapes the politics around foreign engagement
• in Europe, nationalist right-wing movements are becoming stronger
• globally, the geopolitical climate is making foreign expansion more uncertain

So if India hoped that global disruption would simply push universities into its arms, that would be too simplistic.

And yet, with universities moving fast in India from the UK and Australia, Professor Altbach agreed that the weakening of the US does create relative opportunities for others.

What branch campuses may genuinely do better

Compared to Indian institutions, what advantages do foreign branch campuses actually offer in academic or employability terms?

Dr Singh pointed to several advantages:

1. Access to international qualifications at lower cost

Students who want a foreign degree but cannot move abroad, because of cost, family, or other constraints, may now be able to access that qualification in India.

2. Continued “charm” of foreign branding

She openly acknowledged that the symbolic pull of a foreign qualification remains strong in India. Branch campuses bring:

• international branding
• transcript structures aligned to the parent campus
• the possibility of global alumni and recruiter networks

3. New program types and academic nomenclatures

Foreign universities are not bound by the same degree nomenclature restrictions that Indian universities typically are. That means they can introduce niche, hybrid, or professionally packaged programs.

She gave examples like:

• creative computing, combining art, design, and computing
• financial technology, with modules on decentralized finance and tokenized assets

In Indian universities, such topics may appear only as electives. At a foreign branch campus, they could be built into the degree architecture itself.

4. Holistic admissions

She contrasted Indian institutions’ heavy reliance on entrance tests and marks with foreign universities’ more holistic processes:

• personal statements
• CVs
• references
• portfolios
• interviews
• work experience

That could change the profile of students admitted and widen the kinds of competencies rewarded.

5. More job-ready curriculum design

According to Dr Singh, foreign programs are often structured around:

• projects
• tools
• day-one contribution
• tighter alignment to industry expectations

She acknowledged that many Indian institutions also have active industry linkages. But, at scale, many Indian graduates still need more on-the-job upskilling than employers would ideally like.

6. Pedagogical transfer

Where teaching teams are mixed between foreign and Indian faculty, she expects students to benefit from exposure to different pedagogical styles and methods.

In short, foreign campuses could widen the range of models available within India.

But competition is inevitable

The conversation did not romanticize this opening.

Dr Singh was clear that foreign campuses would create competition, especially for:

• top private universities
• premier public institutions
• the best students
• the best faculty

And there is a second problem.

Even if branch campuses charge less than their home campuses abroad, their fees may still be unaffordable for most Indian students. That risks creating a two-tiered system of privilege, where the international option exists inside India – but only for those who can afford it.

Her response was equally clear:

“There is a strong need for a scholarship mechanism to be introduced. And that has been mentioned very strongly in the provision that need-based scholarships should be provided so that merit-based students are not deprived of the opportunity just because of financial reasons.“

Professor Altbach, however, injected a note of realism:

“If you think about, and there's some research on this, why foreign institutions are interested in expanding abroad, motivation for most of them is money.”

This is where the policy ideal and commercial reality may diverge.

Will foreign campuses improve Indian higher education?

What must India do to ensure that foreign institutions supplement rather than merely siphon value from the local system?

Professor Altbach’s first answer was blunt:

“India has underinvested in higher education for the last half century, and the key element is for both the central government and the states to spend more money and resources on post-secondary education. Of course, reforms need to be done and all this sort of thing, but it starts with resources.”

His second point was about state capacity.

Many countries, he said, have not been especially successful in making branch campuses serve national goals. If India wants to do better, it has to monitor these institutions closely enough to ensure they are delivering what they promise without becoming excessively bureaucratic.

His line was memorable:
“India's great on the bureaucracy, and not great on the supervision.”
That is the challenge. The goal is to ensure they maintain the standards of the home institution.

Branch campuses may teach well but not necessarily do research

An audience question raised another critical issue:

If foreign universities come to India, should they not also contribute to India-focused research?

Professor Altbach said this is precisely where many branch campuses globally fall short.

Even strong universities, when they go abroad, often do not replicate their research mission. They teach. They deliver degrees. But they do not necessarily build a serious research ecosystem.

Dr Singh agreed that this is a genuine concern. Branch campuses often receive less support from their own senior leadership for research than home campuses do. If India wants them to contribute meaningfully, they will need:

• robust support systems
• stronger faculty development opportunities
• and perhaps more structured expectations around research culture

She also pointed out – if the full cultural immersion of a foreign university cannot be recreated in India, then branch campuses should at least build semester-abroad opportunities, exchanges, or some route to broader global exposure.

Professional credentials, EdTech, and the university question

One audience member asked whether professional programs offered by companies, especially in AI and other fast-moving sectors, could become a threat to universities.

Both panelists took a balanced view.

Professor Altbach argued that the US experience suggests both can coexist:

• companies can offer certificates and practical credentials successfully
• universities can continue to matter deeply

Dr Singh took a similar view, but added that the best outcome would be integration.

Micro-credentials, especially from EdTech or professional providers, can help make students more job-ready. But rather than seeing them as competitors to the university, she suggested they should be woven into university curricula wherever possible.

The larger goal, after all, is not institutional ego. It is student interest and employability.

Professor Altbach added an important caution here.

In an AI-shaped world, students need more than narrow job skills. They need the ability to think and adapt as jobs change. So the real “sweet spot,” in his view, is a combination: broad education plus job-ready skill.

So, competition or complement?

By the end of the discussion, the answer was clear: both.

The opening of the sector is significant. The regulations are thoughtfully designed. The intent is ambitious.

But intent alone will not determine the outcome.

If these campuses become small, expensive, teaching-only outposts driven primarily by revenue, they may add some choice without fundamentally reimagining the system.

If, however, India can use this moment to:

• strengthen domestic capacity,
• learn from new models, and;
• hold foreign institutions to real standards

then this opening could do much more than create competition.

It could become a pressure test, and perhaps a catalyst, for Indian higher education itself. Because the real question is whether India can make their presence matter on Indian terms.