The Optimal Global Integration–Local Responsiveness
Tradeoff for an International Branch Campus
Nigel Martin Healey
1
Received: 23 October 2015 / Published online: 21 September 2017
Ó Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2017
Abstract The growth in the number of international branch campuses (IBCs) has been one
of the most striking developments in the internationalization of higher education in recent
years. IBCs are overwhelmingly branches of universities in the developed ‘West’. The
United States, the United Kingdom and Australia dominate provision. In contrast, IBCs are
concentrated in the Middle-East and Asia. The cultural distance between the home and host
countries of many IBCs is considerable. This distance poses a major challenge for the
successful management of an IBC. Should it localize its curriculum and pedagogy to better
meet the learning styles and educational needs of its students or should it provide an
educational experience that is comparable to that enjoyed by students on the home cam-
pus? This paper takes as its theoretical framework the global integration–local respon-
siveness (I–R) paradigm. Using an exploratory research design, it finds that the I–R
paradigm can be operationalized for IBCs, to predict how faculty, the curriculum and
research are likely to be localized in response to pressure from an IBC’s main internal and
external stakeholders.
Keywords Cross-border education Á Transnational education Á International
branch campus Á Internationalization of higher education Á Global integration Á Local
responsiveness
Introduction
The growth in the number of international branch campuses (IBCs) has been one of the
most striking developments in the internationalization of higher education since the turn of
the century. The latest study by the UK’s Observatory on Borderless Higher Education
(OBHE) estimates that there are 249 IBCs across the world, with over 30 more in
& Nigel Martin Healey
nigel.healey@fnu.ac.fj
1
Fiji National University, PO Box 7222, Suva, Fiji
123
Res High Educ (2018) 59:623–649
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-017-9480-0
@Phil_Robichaud
@deepthiw
@JoseServera