The politics of higher education: the European Higher Education Area through the eyes of its stakeholders in France and Italy

The article responds to calls for systematic research on the politics of higher education (HE) by examining the European Higher Education Area (EHEA), the largest international cooperation platform in HE. It seeks to answer: What are the perspectives of Bologna Process (BP) stakeholders in France and Italy on the politics of the EHEA and their involvement in it? Stakeholders are defined as policy-making organisations listed by the EHEA as key in supporting the BP. Empirically, the study uses expert interviews with representatives from these organisations in France and Italy, and recent EHEA official communications, analysed thematically. The analysis indicates the EHEA functions as a political platform for cross-country relations and crisis response, and that France’s and Italy’s continued involvement carries a political undertone shaped by domestic politics and evolving EHEA politics. The paper frames the study around the political nature of HE, reviews literature on France’s and Italy’s EHEA engagement and Europeanisation trends, and then presents findings on: (1) the inseparability of EHEA cooperation from broader politics; and (2) how wider politics in France and Italy influences stakeholders’ EHEA-related decisions.

The paper situates HE as inherently political (Apple, 2003), noting research across governance, quality assurance, micropolitics, leadership and power, and theoretical frames including principal–agent theory, new institutionalism, advocacy coalitions, and policy diffusion. Governance structures influence HE policy outcomes, and non-binding instruments like those under the Open Method of Coordination (OMC) can translate into divergent national policies, sometimes becoming more binding when incorporated domestically (Ravinet, 2008). Micropolitics highlights power relations and stakeholder agency within institutions; leadership studies show how managerialism and ‘stealth power’ shape decisions. The review shows how wider politics is mirrored in HE globally: repression of protesting students in Belarus and Russia; gender apartheid in Afghanistan under the Taliban; and the disruption and resilience of Ukrainian HE during Russia’s full-scale invasion. Initiatives advocating university autonomy (Magna Charta, EUA) aim to safeguard HE from political interference, though autonomy itself carries political weight. HE is also instrumentalised to advance societal and geopolitical agendas, from social integration and inclusion to economic development and soft power (e.g., China–Pakistan). In Europe, HE has moved to the center of governance, with the European Education Area and EHEA used to deepen integration and forge European citizenship. International HE fora like the EHEA (largely soft, voluntary cooperation via the OMC) share values and enable policy learning while signaling politically strategic membership. Prior literature notes political motivations in joining such fora, including Europeanisation and socio-economic goals, and the EU’s own political motives in creating education initiatives. Country-specific prior research: - Italy: Extensive work on BP adoption and EHEA reforms documents initial reluctance and subsequent reform dynamics; mixed implementation outcomes include critiques of lifelong learning and QA, but evidence of gains in enrolment and teaching efficiency. Recent themes include fee–internationalisation trade-offs, universities’ third mission and entrepreneurial roles, and digitalisation governance. Europeanisation literature charts the rise of populism (League, M5S), Euroscepticism, and institutional malaise influencing politics. - France: Studies cover BP implementation (e.g., LMD), competitiveness, QA, and university autonomy. Challenges included path dependency and domestic actor caution. EHEA/BP are analysed as Europeanisation processes, with Commission experts acting as policy brokers. Teacher education reforms and university autonomy strengthened alignment with European trends. Europeanisation debates emphasise the Franco–German engine, evolving French leadership, episodes of Euroscepticism (e.g., 2005 referendum), and elite narratives shaping France’s EU role.

The study reports a two-case extract (France and Italy) from a larger four-case project on EHEA founders (UK, Germany, France, Italy). Ethical procedures followed BERA (2018) guidelines and an approved protocol from Nottingham Trent University (BLSS REC). Data collection comprised in-depth semi-structured elite interviews using opportunistic/snowball sampling: France n=4, Italy n=7, conducted in 2022. Supplementary documentary data included four official EHEA communications (2020–2022). A thematic analysis was performed on interview transcripts and documents, guided by Rubin and Rubin’s (2012) open and axial coding. Open coding, informed by the conceptual framework, identified around 25 codes (e.g., politics, cooperate, collaborate, exchange, forum). Codes were grouped to detect patterns related to HE politics, then refined in axial coding to derive superordinate themes. Two final themes emerged: (1) EHEA cooperation cannot be separated from broader politics; and (2) wider politics in France and Italy influences stakeholders’ EHEA-related decisions.

- EHEA as political platform: Stakeholders view the EHEA not only as a HE cooperation forum but as a politically laden platform for knowledge exchange, cross-country relations, and crisis responses. The EHEA’s stated aims of being “inclusive, innovative and interconnected” inherently carry political undertones. Despite being non-binding and OMC-based, shared values and decision-making sustain strategic choices and shape policy coherence. - Linkages to EU politics: Although EHEA extends beyond the EU, developments at EU level overlap with EHEA agendas. European integration challenges (Euro crisis, migration, Brexit, COVID-19, democratic backsliding) create fragility and ideational tensions within the EHEA. - Values and democracy: Stakeholders highlight the EHEA’s commitment to democracy, rule of law, academic freedom, institutional autonomy, and mobility, positioning HE’s civic role as a counterweight to illiberal trends. The ousting of CEU from Hungary exemplifies risks of value clashes. - France: Interviewees emphasise France’s leadership role alongside Germany in supporting European integration, linking strong EU–EHEA functionality and democratic values. French actors leverage HE events to maintain visibility and dialogue even amid political tensions (e.g., conference in Hungary with EU and Hungarian officials present). - Italy: Initial caution in publicly condemning Russia’s invasion of Ukraine reflected domestic political currents (rise of right-wing populism/Euroscepticism) and geopolitical/economic ties (e.g., dependence on Russian gas). Some Italian stakeholders initially preferred to keep EHEA ‘technical, not political,’ but acknowledged that non-response is itself political. Ultimately, France, Italy, and other EHEA members issued a joint statement on 22 April 2022 condemning the invasion and underscoring EHEA values, signaling that EHEA membership entails greater commitment under crisis conditions. Overall, membership in EHEA is political; wider national politics shape stakeholders’ EHEA stances, and EHEA serves as a platform to reaffirm and enact shared European values during crises.

The findings affirm the research proposition that HE and politics are inseparable and extend this to the EHEA context: a nominally non-binding HE forum operates as a political platform. Stakeholder perspectives from France and Italy show that domestic political dynamics (e.g., Euroscepticism, populism, energy geopolitics) influence positions taken within EHEA processes. Conversely, the EHEA’s shared values and cooperative mechanisms provide a channel for reinforcing democratic norms, academic freedom, and mobility across heterogeneous political environments. The French case underscores the perceived leadership role (often in tandem with Germany) in keeping European cooperation viable; the Italian case illustrates how domestic constraints can initially temper international positioning, yet shared EHEA commitments can catalyze convergence, as seen in the joint 22 April 2022 statement on Ukraine. These insights build on and update prior literature that documented political motives for joining the EHEA, by demonstrating how current crises (Brexit, war in Ukraine, democratic backsliding) shape ongoing EHEA politics and policy signaling. The EHEA’s function as a site of value assertion and crisis response has implications for policy outcomes, including the degree of coherence in implementing Bologna tools, the resilience of academic freedoms, and the role of HE in sustaining democratic societies.

The study shows that the EHEA functions beyond a technical HE cooperation forum as a political platform for cross-country relations and coordinated responses to crises and threats. France’s and Italy’s continued memberships exhibit political undertones shaped by domestic politics and evolving EHEA dynamics. By documenting stakeholder perspectives and linking them to recent events (e.g., the joint EHEA statement on Russia’s invasion of Ukraine), the paper contributes updated evidence that HE cannot be separated from broader politics. It also updates earlier accounts of politically motivated EHEA participation by focusing on founders (France and Italy) and on contemporary challenges. Future research should examine the politics of growing interconnections between the EHEA and other European education and research initiatives, such as the expansion of the European Universities Initiative and the UK’s rejoining of Horizon Europe.

No explicit limitations section is provided in the paper.