As global higher education shifts toward a multipolar framework, Hong Kong's appeal to international scholars is growing. However, the evolving factors influencing the increasing presence of African doctoral students remain underexplored. This study investigates the drivers behind this trend, contributing theoretically to the literature on academic mobility by offering a nuanced understanding of migration dynamics within emerging education hubs. The findings provide insights for policymakers and institutions seeking to enhance internationalisation strategies and support diverse student populations. The implications of this research extend to shaping inclusive policies and fostering equitable participation in global academic networks.
The study employed qualitative interviews with 24 African doctoral students from Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) countries enrolled in UGC-funded institutions in Hong Kong.
Hong Kong’s strategic initiatives to build an international education hub have successfully integrated African doctoral students into cross-border education, research, and innovation. The findings highlight how Hong Kong’s academic offerings and African higher education challenges jointly influence doctoral student choices, aspirations, and academic agency. These dynamics contribute to students’ academic success and shape their global mobility decisions.
This study offers fresh insights into educational diplomacy and soft power, illustrating how emerging Asian academic centres like Hong Kong are reshaping global doctoral student mobility. It challenges Western dominance in higher education and contributes to a more diverse and inclusive academic landscape.
Introduction
International student mobility (ISM) has been a central aspect of higher education internationalisation, growing from under a million students in the late 1970 to approximately 6.9 million by 2022 (UNESCO Institute for Statistics, 2024). This expansion is partly driven by the emergence of transnational education zones shaped by urban political economies (Kleibert et al., 2023), reflecting the rise of a multipolar academic landscape (Hazelkorn, 2012). Traditionally, ISM has been concentrated in the “Big Five” English-speaking destinations—the United States, United Kingdom, Australia, Canada, and New Zealand—while China, India, and South Korea account for a quarter of outbound flows (Glass and Cruz, 2023).
Historically, African students have predominantly pursued higher education in the United States, United Kingdom, France, Canada, Australia, Germany, Malaysia, Italy and New Zealand (Woldegiorgis and Doevenspeck, 2015) driven by neocolonial legacies (Nkansah et al., 2024) neoliberalism (Woldegiorgis, 2024) perceived academic prestige, and scholarship opportunities (Eskandarpour, 2024). In the last decade, the percentage of African students who travelled to some of the “Big Five” countries was stated as France (29.2%) the UK (10%), USA (9.7%), Germany (4%), Malaysia (3.9%), Italy, and Australia (ICEF Monitor, 2013). The top 6 African countries that send most students abroad in the same period were Morocco 42,800 (11.3%), Nigeria 38,851 (10.2%), Algeria 22,465 (5.9%), Zimbabwe 19,658 (5.2%), Cameroon 19, 506 (5.3%) and Tunisia 19,506 (5.1%) (Marshall, 2013).
In an era marked by multipolarity, ISM trends among African students are changing, as Global higher education is undergoing a significant transformation due to geopolitical shifts, economic changes, and the rise of digital learning (Moscovitz and Sabzalieva, 2023), with emerging academic hubs challenging the dominance of traditional Western institutions (Buzan and Lawson, 2015; Marginson, 2016a, b, c). Recent trends reveal a gradual diversification of mobility patterns, with emerging hubs in Asia, such as Hong Kong, attracting African doctoral students. —a trend that remains underexplored in scholarly discourse. This shift signals a transition from the traditional south-to-north model toward south-to-south mobility, underscoring the need to examine the drivers behind this evolving phenomenon thereby contributing to the evolving literature on south-to-south academic migration.
More importantly, Governments have increasingly pursued strategic initiatives to develop education hubs that integrate local and international actors in cross-border education, research, and innovation (Knight, 2011). These hubs are attracting more diverse student populations, often from emerging economies, and offering more affordable international education opportunities (Cantwell et al., 2018, Marginson, 2016a, b, c). Countries with growing higher education capacity, infrastructure, or regional and cultural proximity, such as South Korea, Spain, Morocco, and BRICS nations (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa) are becoming prominent destinations (Hou and Du, 2022; Kondakci et al., 2018). Students choosing these emerging or planned hubs often differ from traditional long-term degree seekers in terms of goals, circumstances, and characteristics (Kondakci, 2011; Wilkins, 2010). While historical, political, and cultural proximity serve as major pull factors, push factors from home countries remains a factor (Kondakci et al., 2018). Additionally, cultural, ethnic, and linguistic ties as well as colonial legacies play an increasing role in shaping mobility patterns (Wen and Hu, 2019; Perkins and Neumayer, 2014). As a result, the long-standing core-periphery dynamic in ISM continues to evolve (Waters, 2012).
This study draws on world-systems theory to conceptualise Hong Kong’s role in global higher education as the world is becoming multipolar. In this framework, the periphery refers to regions that are marginalised in global knowledge production and academic influence, often characterised by limited resources and dependency on core nations. The semi-periphery denotes regions that occupy an intermediate position—exerting some influence while also being influenced by core powers. World-systems theory however has been criticised for its Eurocentric perspective and for presenting an inaccurate depiction of the world as divided into rigid, static categories. Therefore, Robinson (2020) proposes moving beyond the categorisation and labelling of cities as periphery or semi-periphery, advocating instead for the conceptualisation of a world, each functioning as a dynamic and diverse arena for social and economic development. Moreover, Olds’s theory of the Global Assemblage of Universities conceptualises universities in Pacific Asia as elements within a global assemblage, embedded in fluid, networked, and relational structures rather than fixed hierarchies (Olds, 2007). This perspective highlights the transnational mobility of knowledge, individuals, and capital. This framework rejects rigid core–periphery models and instead focuses on contingent, evolving assemblages shaped by diverse actors and acknowledges the fluid positioning of semi-peripheral regions, such as Hong Kong, within global knowledge production.
Hong Kong presents a unique case for this study because recent data support the increasing enrollment of African doctoral students in Hong Kong universities. The Hong Kong PhD Fellowship Scheme (HKPFS), established by the Research Grants Council (RGC), serves as a primary mechanism for attracting outstanding international candidates to pursue full-time doctoral studies at Hong Kong universities (Research Grants Council, 2025). In addition, initiatives such as China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) Scholarship offer comprehensive funding, including tuition, accommodation, and living expenses, to students from BRI-participating regions who pursue education in Hong Kong (Times Higher Education, 2025). The effectiveness of these policies is reflected in enrollment statistics. As of February 2025, the University Grants Committee (UGC) reported 26,589 research postgraduate students enrolled for the 2024/2025 academic year, indicating sustained growth in international recruitment (University Grants Committee UGC, 2022), with African doctoral students comprising a significant proportion. This upward trajectory highlights the importance of examining the factors that influence the selection of Hong Kong as a study destination, which holds implications for global higher education policy and institutional internationalisation strategies. The following section describes Hong Kong's position as a semi-periphery in the increasingly multipolar global higher education landscape and its strategic role in ISM in recent times.
Hong Kong: the context
Asia, particularly China, is gaining prominence in ISM through strategic soft power initiatives (Gao et al., 2024). Programs under the Forum on China-Africa Cooperation (FOCAC) and the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) have positioned China as a key destination for African students (Mulvey, 2020). Hong Kong, as a Special Administrative Region (SAR) of China, occupies a unique semi-peripheral role—economically advanced and globally integrated, yet geopolitically situated between core Western and peripheral Global South systems (Leong, 2013; Suekinci, 2024). This duality not only enables Hong Kong to act as a bridge between Eastern and Western academic traditions but also highlights its significant cultural influence in the academic world. Additionally, Hong Kong’s position within the BRICS-related (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa) economic and academic networks underscores its strategic role in global higher education.
The higher education system in Hong Kong has been shaped by 150 years of British colonial rule and Britain's efforts to counteract the educational influence of other Great Powers in Mainland China with the concept of internationalisation entered Hong Kong's educational policy discourse after 1997 (Pan, 2021). Internationalisation legitimises reforms across all educational levels and seeks to reposition Hong Kong within global, national, and local contexts. Government strategic planning identifies the development of Hong Kong as a regional education hub as a key policy instrument to enhance market competitiveness, achieve world-class status, and cultivate the soft power required to sustain Hong Kong's leadership in Asia (Mok and Cheung, 2011). Universities in Hong Kong have implemented a model of (inter)nationalisation that combines Western-oriented higher education norms with academic engagement with Mainland China (Pan, 2021). Hong Kong’s higher education system synthesises elements from Chinese, North American, and European models (Postiglione and Jung, 2017). This hybrid system and strategic location make it a bridge between core and peripheral regions.
Doctoral programs in Hong Kong admit a significant proportion of students from mainland China as well as from developing countries in Asia, Africa, and the Middle East, many of which are currently expanding their mass higher education systems. Funding opportunities and scholarships (e.g. HKPFS) and visa and residency policies facilitate ISM.
Furthermore, Hong Kong universities maintain substantial international faculty representation, fostering a pluralistic academic environment marked by diversity among both instructors and doctoral students (Jung et al., 2021; Postiglione and Jung, 2017). Hong Kong’s globally ranked universities, advanced research infrastructure, and hybrid academic culture serve as key soft power assets (Nye (2011), attracting African doctoral students seeking academic and professional advancement. However, soft power alone does not explain mobility; structural challenges in African higher education, such as limited funding and weak supervision, are critical push factors.
Despite Hong Kong’s growing role in South–South exchange, the area of African student mobility to the SAR remains significantly underexplored (Dervin et al., 2018; Tian et al., 2020). This study addresses this gap by examining African doctoral students’ decisions and experiences within shifting global power dynamics. By analyzing this underrepresented flow of student mobility, the study contributes to a nuanced understanding of international education in a multipolar world. It expands South–South mobility literature by challenging the traditional Global South-to-North paradigm and positioning Hong Kong as a semi-peripheral academic hub with Western-influenced cultural diplomacy (Yip, 2015). The study offers insights for policymakers in Africa and Hong Kong, highlighting how institutional strategies can respond to evolving mobility patterns. It also underscores education’s role in cultural diplomacy, especially within China’s broader engagement with Africa. Specifically, it addresses the research question:
What factors motivate African doctoral students to choose Hong Kong as their destination for postgraduate studies in recent times?
International student mobility through a multipolar theoretical lens
The global higher education landscape is increasingly shaped by a multiplex structure marked by cultural diversity and persistent economic interconnectivity (Acharya and Creamer, 2024). While much discourse on multipolarity focuses on major powers (Acharya et al., 2023), this overlooks emerging regional dynamics reshaping ISM. Historically, ISM followed a Global South–North trajectory, reinforcing core-periphery divides (Glass and Cruz, 2023). Moreover, the rise of hubs in South Korea, Malaysia, India, the Gulf States, and China signals a shift toward a multipolar geography (Glass and Cruz, 2023). However, scholarship still prioritises conventional destinations (Brooks and Waters, 2022). To address this gap, scholars advocate for a multipolar structure lens that accounts for shifting geopolitical and economic contexts, intensified institutional competition, and increasingly diverse student aspirations (Glass and Cruz, 2023). This lens promotes a more equitable and heterogeneous understanding of international education and calls for a geographic turn—a deliberate focus on underexplored regions beyond the East–West binary.
A multipolar lens accounts for shifting geopolitical contexts, institutional competition, and diverse student aspirations, promoting a more equitable understanding of ISM. Studies on South–South mobility, such as African students in China (Xu, 2023) and Malaysia’s education hub strategy (Abdullah et al., 2022), exemplify this shift. However, ISM research must move beyond push-pull models and core-periphery frameworks to embrace ecological and agentic perspectives, as this will provide a more comprehensive understanding of the factors influencing student mobility (Glass and Cruz, 2023).
This study posits that Hong Kong’s advanced research ecosystem, global rankings, and futuristic curriculum position it as a competitive player in the multipolar higher education landscape, attracting students who seek alternatives to traditional Western destinations. This aligns with Marginson (2016a, b, c) argument that the rise of Asian universities is reshaping the global higher education landscape, creating new opportunities for students from developing regions. Its advanced research ecosystem and hybrid academic culture attract African students seeking alternatives to Western institutions. While multipolarity explains structural shifts, it is important to note that cultural and personal motivations such as the desire for diverse academic experiences also drive mobility (De Wit, 2010). Hong Kong’s East-West blend offers a compelling destination, highlighting the richness and diversity of the global higher education landscape, aligning with de Wit (2002) view of cultural exchange as a key motivator in international education.
Literature review
ISM has historically reflected global inequalities, following an East–West axis that reinforces core-periphery dynamics favouring dominant economic powers (Altbach, 2004; Kondakci et al., 2018; Waters, 2012). These flows benefit traditional host countries economically, often rooted in colonial legacies and systemic hierarchies (Cantwell et al., 2018; Quijano, 2007). While international students are valued for their tuition and talent, they also face restrictive migration policies and securitisation, embodying a paradox of being both “desired” and “unwanted” (Yao, 2021). For instance, in the U.S., a 1% increase in international student enrollment during COVID-19 correlated with an 18% higher likelihood of in-person reopening (Whatley and Castiello-Gutiérrez, 2022). Despite this reliance, the focus on traditional destinations obscures the rise of emerging education hubs (Glass and Cruz, 2023).
Countries such as the UAE, Turkey, South Korea, Qatar, and Bahrain have strategically invested in higher education infrastructure and transnational partnerships to establish regional hubs (Kondakci et al., 2018; Glass and Cruz, 2023). Initiatives like Qatar’s Education City and South Korea’s Incheon Global Campus are clear reflections of state-led development agendas (Knight, 2013; Kleibert et al., 2021). These hubs, while less dominant than English-speaking destinations (Hou and Du, 2022), benefit from regional, cultural, economic, and linguistic ties that influence student decisions (Perkins and Neumayer, 2014; Glass and Cruz, 2023). However, regionalisation often reproduces global hierarchies, with wealthier countries maintaining dominance (Macrander, 2017). Developing nations host more students but still send more abroad, highlighting persistent imbalances (Yin and Yeakey, 2019).
African student mobility to China has gained attention, yet it must be contextualised within broader South–South mobility trends. Scholars note increasing flows within the Global South, driven by affordability, regional cooperation, and cultural proximity (Amutuhaire, 2024; França and Padilla, 2022; Nyamunda et al., 2024; Shkoler and Rabenu, 2023). These patterns challenge North–South paradigms and frame African mobility to Hong Kong within a broader ISM context.
Motivations for African students include academic quality, personal growth, and employability (Mpingganjira, 2009; Magbondé, 2021). Limited resources in African universities—except in Egypt and South Africa—drive outbound mobility (Teferra and Altbach, 2004). While China attracts African students through scholarships, research on African students in Hong Kong remains limited (Bodomo, 2012). The existing literature focuses on mainland China, with few empirical studies on African students in the Hong Kong SAR (see Liu et al., 2023; Mok et al., 2022). Hong Kong’s policies encourage non-local student enrollment, yet African students’ motivations remain underexplored, particularly in relation to soft power and multipolarity (Dai et al., 2023). Current research is fragmented, often emphasising intercultural experiences (Tian et al., 2020; Yang, 2018). Africa-China mobility is frequently analysed through China’s geopolitical strategy, including its access to resources and its influence on global governance (Hauge, 2013; Mulvey, 2020). Understanding African student mobility to Hong Kong within this context is crucial, especially given the Belt and Road Initiative and FOCAC.
Methodology
Research design
This study adopts a qualitative approach with phenomenological design to investigate the drivers behind African doctoral students’ mobility to Hong Kong. This approach is appropriate for examining underexplored phenomena and generating in-depth insights (Creswell and Cresswell, 2018). Through in-depth interviews, the research seeks to understand the motivations and contextual factors influencing their decision to pursue postgraduate education in Hong Kong. This approach is appropriate for capturing the nuanced and subjective dimensions (Christensen and Jansson, 2015) of ISM within a South–South context. The phenomenological qualitative approach facilitated an in-depth understanding (Tisdell et al., 2025) of African doctoral students' mobility experiences.
Participant recruitment
A purposive sampling technique was employed, with Hong Kong selected for its status as the most internationalised city within the Chinese region. Hong Kong universities are comparable to other world-class institutions, offering international exposure and networks beneficial for graduates' careers. Participants were recruited from a pool of international PhD students who had received the HKPFS. Potential participants were identified through mailing lists. Invitations were sent via university mailing lists and student networks, and participation was voluntary. The study involved twenty-four postgraduate students pursuing PhDs across various academic institutions, disciplines, and departments (see Table 1 in the appendix) who responded to the email invitation. The distribution of participants across universities varied due to differences in program offerings and criteria used to select participants. The list of participants focused on cohorts admitted between 2020 and 2024 to reflect recent mobility trends.
Participants were selected based on specific inclusion criteria: current enrollment as postgraduate students, receipt of a Hong Kong Government Fellowship or studentship, full-time doctoral students from African countries enrolled in UGC-funded universities, and willingness to provide insights on their mobility experiences. Both male and female students from eight public universities in Hong Kong were included.
Data collection
Semi-structured interview guides were used flexibly, allowing participants to share experiences beyond predefined questions while ensuring thematic coherence. These interviews aimed to capture the gradual changes in participants' experiences and life histories at different stages of their journeys (Miles and Huberman, 1994). The interview guide was tailored to the study's context, facilitating open discussions on doctoral students’ mobility experiences. Interview questions included what factors influenced their decision to pursue doctoral studies outside of Africa, why they choose Hong Kong specifically over other international destinations, how their academic environment or limitations in their home country shape their decision, how they describe their experience with the academic culture in Hong Kong, what ways they think Hong Kong’s academic environment differs from that of their home country, what were their personal or professional goals in pursuing a PhD in Hong Kong, how they think the rise of Asia as a global academic hub influenced their decisions and how they perceive Hong Kong's role in global higher education compared to Western institutions.
Data collection process
Interviews were conducted both face-to-face and online, in environments that fostered open discussion of personal experiences. Each interview lasted approximately 60 min and was conducted between December 2023 and February 2025. Open-ended questions allowed participants to elaborate on their reasons for choosing Hong Kong for doctoral studies. A reflexive approach was employed by the researcher during interviews to minimise power dynamics and enhance participant comfort. Data saturation was reached after 21 interviews, with the final three interviews confirming thematic consistency. No monetary incentives were offered and participation was voluntary. Although interviews constituted the sole data collection method, reliability and validity were supported through member checking, peer debriefing, and systematic coding procedures. Detailed descriptions of participants’ narratives further enhance the study’s credibility and transferability.
Data analysis
An inductive analytical approach using NVivo 12 software was employed to facilitate systematic coding and organisation, allowing themes to emerge directly from the raw data. This method encouraged the identification of nuanced and original themes, enhancing the depth and richness of the findings. The researcher examined potential themes, identified inconsistencies, and assessed theme overlap. Themes were then delineated and labeled. Coding process followed Braun and Clarke's (2021) six-step process. In achieving this, initial codes were generated from participants’ narratives without imposing pre-existing categories. Related codes were grouped into categories, enabling identification of patterns and relationships. Core themes were refined and integrated to construct a coherent analytical framework. Member checking was employed to validate interpretations, enhancing credibility and trustworthiness.
Ethical considerations
Written informed consent was obtained from all participants, along with permission to record the interviews. The data collection process adhered to ethical guidelines, allowing participants to withdraw at any time. Ethical approval was provided by a large public university in Hong Kong (Blinded for review). Participants received an information sheet via email outlining the study’s purpose, procedures, and their rights. Written consent was collected electronically, and verbal confirmation was obtained prior to each interview. To ensure confidentiality and anonymity, all audio recordings were stored on encrypted drives, and transcripts were anonymised using pseudonyms. Only the researcher had access to these files. Strategies to ensure trustworthiness included member checking, where participants reviewed summaries of their responses, and peer debriefing to validate interpretations. An audit trail documenting coding decisions and theme development was maintained to enhance transparency and reliability.
Findings
Demography of participants
A total of 24 participants took part in the interviews, comprising both male and female doctoral students, to capture their unique experiences. The cohort included five females and nineteen males, aged between 28 and 42 years. All participants were enrolled in PhD programs at UGC-funded institutions in Hong Kong, supported by either a Hong Kong Government fellowship or studentship. The participants hailed from six African countries: Ghana, Nigeria, Zambia, Ethiopia, Kenya, Cameroon, and Uganda. Detailed participant information is provided in Table 1 (see appendix).
The findings are organised around two broad themes, each with sub-themes: (1) Hong Kong’s positional advantage within Global Knowledge Networks, and (2) Africa’s Structural Disadvantages in Global Knowledge Networks. These themes provide an in-depth analysis of how dynamic factors influence African doctoral students' mobility and decision to choose Hong Kong as their study destination, highlighting the complexities of contemporary multipolarity.
Hong Kong’s positional advantage within global knowledge networks
The theme reflects a nuanced shift in understanding how knowledge flows and innovation ecosystems in Hong Kong function within a globalised context. It emphasises Hong Kong’s strategic role in global knowledge networks and the rise of multipolarity in global innovation. Rather than simply receiving or exporting talent and ideas, the theme explains how Hong Kong serves as a knowledge intermediary, leveraging its connectivity, institutional strengths, and geopolitical location to enable multidirectional collaboration and expertise exchange. The sub-themes are explained as follows:
Hong Kong as a tech-driven hub in global knowledge networks
Participants explained how Hong Kong's global reputation in research and advanced technological development influences their decisions to choose Hong Kong as their study destination, given the nascent stages of higher education in Africa. The participants explained that advanced technological and academic resources support Hong Kong's research ecosystem and higher education. This acts as a significant pull factor, attracting talent seeking top-tier research environments. One of the participants explained this by saying:
The academic environment and educational practices in Hong Kong are more rigorous than those we have back home. So you get the full benefits of undertaking a course here. The facilities are top-notch, the laboratories are fully functional. One thing I have noticed is that they do not spare any resources for education. P1
This statement illustrates how institutional investment in research infrastructure shapes students’ decisions, particularly when contrasted with resource constraints higher education systems.
The majority of them explained that world-class infrastructure and technology positions Hong Kong to be on par with other countries in the West in conducting high-quality research and achieving academic excellence. This made one of them say:
Having completed my master's education in the UK, I can really compare and testify. The presence of cutting-edge research projects and technological advancement is not negotiable, unlike in most European countries. P2
These insights suggest that Hong Kong’s technological advantage not only competes with Western destinations but also signals a shift in global academic hierarchies, aligning with the study’s focus on emerging south-to-south mobility.
Other participants mentioned the adequate funding, grants, and streamlined procedures in Hong Kong's higher education and research space. Most explained that funding and its simplified application processes reduce financial and bureaucratic barriers and facilitate smoother transitions, making Hong Kong an attractive destination. One participant explained that:
The government provides many grants to professors and academics to enable them to conduct quality research. So, when you tap into it, you will be able to make a good career for yourself here. The application procedures are not as complex as those in other European countries P3.
Participants’ emphasis on Hong Kong’s advanced research infrastructure, funding and technological sophistication reflects its strategic integration into global knowledge networks. The views of the participants reflect a move beyond a simple push-pull analysis by situating Hong Kong within the global redistribution of academic influence. As a semi-peripheral region, Hong Kong leverages its hybrid academic identity to attract international talent, positioning itself as a competitive node in a multipolar higher education landscape (Marginson, 2016a, b, c).
Soft power and educational diplomacy
Some mentioned that some higher education institutions in Hong Kong emerged in the top global rankings and continually improved their positions in the top list of schools and programs. Some participants had this to say:
Hong Kong is an emerging force in global rankings, and the standard is very high. Tapping into it can lead to a successful career. There is a sense of fulfillment that some of us have because the universities here in Hong Kong are top-ranked universities. P11
These insights suggest that global rankings serve not only as indicators of academic quality but also as aspirational benchmarks for students seeking international recognition and professional advancement.
The participants further explained that the sustainable nature of the curriculum in Hong Kong attracts researchers and talents who are eager to contribute to advancements in their fields. One participant had this to say:
They are more futuristic and also cautious about the things they teach. I am a TA for a master's class. Moreover, for the past 17 years, the name of the master's class has changed three times. It is not because they want to change the name, but because they keep reviewing the course to make it very applicable and futuristic. P10
The findings from the participants imply that the sustainable nature of the curriculum, high global standards and globally ranked institutions in Hong Kong are not merely pull factors—they are manifestations of educational soft power. These elements reflect and explain Hauge's (2013) and Mulvey's (2020) position that China’s strategic use of higher education enhances its global influence, with Hong Kong serving as a culturally distinct yet politically aligned platform for engaging African scholars.
Hong Kong’s appeal to soft power and multipolarity
Some participants who completed their master's programs in the UK, China, and other European countries expressed a desire to engage more with Asian culture and immerse themselves in Hong Kong's diverse academic environments. They continued collaborating and exchanging ideas on a global scale rather than returning to Africa, where support is scarce. One said:
Actually, I had my master's in Germany and am familiar with the German education system, but I wanted to immerse myself more in Chinese culture and continue exchanging ideas rather than return home. P19
These findings imply that as part of China's broader educational diplomacy, Hong Kong offers a culturally distinct yet politically aligned platform for engaging African scholars, reinforcing its role in a multipolar academic landscape where influence is increasingly dispersed beyond traditional Western centers (Hauge, 2013; Buzan and Lawson, 2015).
Africa’s positional and Structural Disadvantages in Global Knowledge Networks
This theme emphasises how Africa higher education faces both positional disadvantages and structural barriers in ISM discourse. Rather than being a simple source retaining talent, the theme explains Africa’s marginalisation in global knowledge networks, reflecting deeper systemic issues that influence students' decisions to opt for Hong Kong. The sub-themes are explained as follows:
Unequal access to research infrastructure and academic culture
Participants explained how Government commitment to research in African push African scholars to seek further studies in Hong Kong. They believed that inadequate support to research opportunities in African research ecosystem limit their ability to contribute to their fields and gain recognition. This drives them to seek institutions with established research cultures that offer more opportunities for academic growth and innovation, hence choosing Hong Kong. One of the themes explained this as follows:
The commitment to research and innovation is very low both at the government and institutional levels in Africa. P22
The absence of modern research equipment was another critical concern, restricting the scope and quality of postgraduate research. One participant contrasted this with Hong Kong’s resource-rich environment:
In my program, we frequently use the instruments to take measurements. In Ghana, due to a lack of funds, we have limited instruments. So, it is about 20 students around one instrument. However, in Hong Kong, it is like two is to one. So the students really get to explore, understand, and get the soft skills that they need to go out. P6
Others also mentioned that their colleagues who chose to pursue postgraduate studies in African higher education face delays and bitter experiences with supervision. One of them had this to say:
It is tedious to do your PhD back home because supervisors do not have time for you. I know colleagues who are struggling with their research back home due to poor supervision and supervisors' unwillingness to help. I did not want to go through such bitter experiences. P22
The majority of them commented that a limited research culture often results in a lack of experienced mentors and supportive supervisors to guide scholars through their research projects. Others also explained that although some African supervisors may be willing and committed to offering support, the lack of research infrastructure and remuneration hinder their willingness. This often impedes the development of essential research skills and reduces the quality of academic output. One of them explained this by saying:
Some supervisors may be helpful back home, but the lack of resources and better remuneration demotivates them, making them unwilling to offer proper supervision and mentorship for PhD candidates. But you hardly see this in Hong Kong. P16
These accounts underscore how systemic limitations in African research ecosystems position scholars at the margins of global knowledge production, prompting mobility toward regions like Hong Kong that offer robust research cultures and infrastructure.
Limited integration into global research hubs and collaboration
The majority of the participants mentioned their inclination to seek global exposure and collaboration due to limited integration and collaboration opportunities in Africa. These participants, most of whom had their master's degree in Africa, explained that they were motivated to study abroad to collaborate with international peers and gain exposure to different research methodologies and perspectives, opportunities that are rare in the African local context. Some of the participants had this to say:
Personally, I think that because of exposure, I also wanted to be able to approach people from other backgrounds easily. Indeed, it really helps that when you interact with people from the international community, many collaborations can happen. P21
The emphasis on international collaboration and exposure reflects African scholars’ aspirations to participate in global knowledge production. Hong Kong’s cosmopolitan academic environment facilitates transnational research partnerships, positioning it as a strategic node in the global academic network and reinforcing its semi-peripheral role in mediating between core and peripheral regions.
Other participants also mentioned because they want to advance their careers in specific disciplines and boost their prospects, they were incentivised to choose Hong Kong, an opportunity not prevalent in their countries. Although some of these participants wish to return to Africa after school, they further explained that the experience and credentials gained from studying in renowned Hong Kong institutions are more highly valued in the global academic and industrial landscape than those gained from studying in universities back home and other Western countries. One of them had this to say:
In my research area, building a career in Uganda is difficult due to the lack of job prospects, although I wish to return. Also, getting a certificate abroad in my area of study is highly valued. P14
Participants’ comparisons between Hong Kong and Western institutions underscore its semi-peripheral status, possessing a core-like academic infrastructure while maintaining regional and cultural ties to Asia. This dual positioning enables Hong Kong to act as a conduit for African scholars seeking global exposure and collaboration, while also offering proximity to Asian academic networks.
Discussion
This study examines the drivers behind African doctoral students’ mobility to Hong Kong and interprets this trend within the broader context of global academic migration and global knowledge networks. This study builds on current ideas about global academic migration and that the world is witnessing dynamics of power shifts evidenced by the surging attention to the value of non-Western and indigenous academia, and the rise of China and non-Western systems in global sciences (Marginson and Xu, 2023) by showing that Hong Kong is a strong player in a world where academic influence is spreading beyond the traditional Western centers. The findings question the belief that most African doctoral students move only to the Big Five English-speaking countries and instead point to a rise in south-to-south movement. By focusing on factors such as advanced technology and how well institution’s function, this study updates older ideas about why scholars move, which often focused on colonial history and language.
The findings indicate that resources, reputations and academic culture are now central factors influencing South-to-South academic migration. These results support the study by Kaushal et al. (2023), which demonstrates that a university’s reputation is crucial to students and influences scholars’ destination choices. Additionally, the emergence of new academic centers such as Hong Kong is challenging the dominance of the Big Five English-speaking countries. This research contributes to the understanding of evolving patterns in global academic migration and aligns with Olds’s theory of the Global Assemblage of Universities. Hong Kong like Singapore is identified as a component within a global assemblage, situated in fluid, networked, and relational structures (Olds, 2007). This perspective emphasises the transnational mobility of knowledge, individuals, and capital, and rejects rigid core–periphery models in favor of contingent, evolving assemblages shaped by diverse actors.
These findings reveal Hong Kong’s deliberate and strategic use of educational soft power in attracting African doctoral students. Its globally ranked universities, streamlined application processes, and advanced research infrastructure serve not merely as conveniences but as deliberate instruments of academic influence (Nye, 2011; Hauge, 2013). As Nye (2011) argues, soft power operates through attraction, and Hong Kong exemplifies this by leveraging institutional prestige and reputational capital to draw international talent. Participants emphasised the appeal of Hong Kong’s research facilities such as “The facilities are top-notch … the laboratories are fully functional” (P1), aligning with Yang (2020a, b) and Gao et al. (2024), who underscore the role of infrastructure in student mobility especially when contrasted with the limitations in African universities (Pon and Schendel, 2020).
Hong Kong’s semi-peripheral status allows it to bridge core and peripheral academic systems, offering African scholars access to global networks without the cultural and bureaucratic barriers (Marginson, 2016a, b, c) often found in Western institutions. Its top-ranked institutions (Quacquarelli Symonds QS, 2022) play a significant role in influencing doctoral-level decision-making, contributing to reputational capital (Preston, 2004) and challenging assumptions that rankings primarily affect undergraduate choices (Gibbons et al., 2015). These findings affirm the views that institutional reputation and research excellence are key drivers of ISM (Oleksiyenko et al., 2021; Kaushal et al., 2023).
The concept of multipolarity is central to understanding these dynamics. As Marginson (2016a, b, c) notes, the rise of Asian academic hubs reflects a redistribution of global academic power. As Buzan and Lawson (2015) and Marginson (2016a, b, c) argue, the traditional dominance of Western academic centers is being challenged by emerging hubs in Asia. Participants' recognition of Hong Kong as “fast leading with international practices and technological advancements” (P8) illustrates this shift. This shift in the global higher education landscape offers African students new opportunities to access high-quality education and research environments outside the traditional Western centers. For African scholars, Hong Kong represents not just an alternative to the West but a strategic site of academic opportunity within a diversifying global order, contributing to a more diversified and inclusive global higher education system. Marginson (2016a, b, c) argues that the rise of multipolarity in higher education reflects the increasing diversification of global academic power, with Asian institutions playing a more prominent role in shaping the future of higher education.
Moreover, the study reveals that African scholars are motivated not only by institutional resources but also by the opportunity to participate in global knowledge production. Hong Kong’s cosmopolitan academic environment facilitates international collaboration, allowing African students to engage with diverse research methodologies and global peers. This resonates with Kim (2017), who emphasises the importance of global knowledge networks in fostering research dissemination and collaborative opportunities, particularly for scholars from regions with limited academic infrastructure.
These findings also challenge simplified narratives about brain drain from Africa. While participants clearly identified significant limitations in African higher education systems, many expressed interests in global collaboration and knowledge exchange (P21). These networks, as conceptualised by Marginson (2006) and Kim (2017), facilitate the flow of ideas, talent, and resources across borders, enabling scholars from structurally disadvantaged regions to contribute to global research dialogues. This suggests potential for what Albach and Knight, 2007 term “brain circulation” rather than simple brain drain, where mobile academics maintain connections with their home countries while building global networks. Hong Kong's cosmopolitan academic environment supports this engagement, offering African students opportunities to collaborate with international peers, access diverse methodologies, and build global careers.
Moreover, the study reveals that the decision to study in Hong Kong is shaped by more than academic considerations. Personal aspirations, cultural curiosity, and career ambitions play a significant role, reflecting the multifaceted nature of academic mobility. For many participants, Hong Kong represents not only a site of academic opportunity but also a gateway to global professional networks and cultural enrichment. This aligns with De Wit (2002) and Albach and Knight, 2007 arguments that holistic motivations, including employability, global citizenship, and intercultural competence, increasingly drive international education.
Push factors identified by participants, such as inadequate research infrastructure, limited supervisory support, and weak institutional capacity in African higher education, reflect deeper systemic exclusions from global knowledge production (Pon and Schendel, 2020). As Marginson (2006) notes, institutions lacking robust research ecosystems struggle to retain talent and risk being sidelined in global academic discourse. These structural disadvantages push African scholars to seek opportunities in regions like Hong Kong, where they can access advanced laboratories, mentorship, and collaborative networks. As Yang (2020a, b) and Gao et al. (2024) argue, material resources and institutional capacity are central to attracting international talent, and Hong Kong's investment in these areas enhances its global academic standing. Notably, the findings reveal that these push factors are not isolated but interact dynamically with Hong Kong's pull factors. For instance, while African institutions suffer from poor student-to-equipment ratios, Hong Kong offers access to cutting-edge laboratories and individualised research support (Gao et al., 2024). This dynamic interface creates what might be termed a “cushioning effect,” where Hong Kong absorbs and redirects academic talent from structurally disadvantaged regions, reinforcing its semi-peripheral role in the global knowledge economy.
Conclusion
This study highlights Hong Kong’s strategic role as a semi-peripheral hub that leverages soft power and educational diplomacy to reshape international education and challenge Western dominance. The study contributes to South–South mobility discourse by showcasing how emerging academic centers diversify global knowledge production and foster new opportunities for collaboration.
The study demonstrates that African doctoral student mobility to Hong Kong is shaped by a dynamic interface of factors, embedded within broader global structures. By moving away from a Eurocentric perspective, the study underscores Hong Kong's strategic position as a semi-peripheral nation and a viable alternative to Western institutions. This student flow is framed as a semi-peripheral nation reproducing its own self-peripheralization through international student recruitment (Mulvey, 2021).
Hong Kong’s strategic deployment of soft power and its semi-peripheral positioning in a multipolar academic landscape collectively make it a compelling site for understanding the reconfiguration of ISM in the 21st century. This reconfiguration of academic power underscores the diversification of international education and the emergence of new centers of excellence.
The article advocates for reciprocal academic partnerships between African and Hong Kong institutions. Such collaborations would allow African scholars to maintain ties with their home institutions while contributing to global academic networks. The increased enrollment of African students in Hong Kong's higher education institutions strengthens Hong Kong's global academic standing not only through diversification but also by fostering international research collaborations. Many African students engage in postgraduate research, particularly in STEM and social sciences, which enhances Hong Kong's R&D output. Upon returning to their home countries or through transnational networks, these students could facilitate knowledge transfer and capacity building, thereby contributing to the development of research ecosystems in Africa.
While Hong Kong’s academic prestige and infrastructure are significant pull factors, it is important to acknowledge that soft power alone may not fully explain African doctoral student mobility. Institutional reputation and global rankings could disproportionately benefit elite institutions and may obscure deeper structural inequalities in access and inclusion. Additionally, Hong Kong’s semi-peripheral status, while strategically advantageous, may also present limitations in terms of long-term career integration and post-study opportunities compared to traditional Western destinations. These concerns suggest that while Hong Kong offers compelling academic advantages, its attractiveness must be evaluated alongside broader systemic challenges and individual student circumstances. Therefore, future research should explore how institutional policies and regional dynamics shape not only student attraction but also retention, inclusion, and long-term academic outcomes. By addressing these areas, Hong Kong can continue to strengthen its role in the global higher education landscape and contribute to reducing global inequalities.
Study limitations and recommendations for future research
Several limitations affect this study. The exclusive focus on African doctoral students in Hong Kong excludes other international cohorts, limiting opportunities for comparative analysis. Additionally, the data do not capture longitudinal changes in mobility patterns. Future research should address these gaps by conducting comparative studies with diverse international student groups, employing longitudinal designs to track career trajectories, and integrating mixed-methods approaches to strengthen analytical robustness. Furthermore, examining policy frameworks and institutional strategies across multiple emerging academic hubs would contribute to a more comprehensive understanding of global academic migration.
I extend sincere gratitude to the African doctoral students in Hong Kong who generously contributed their time, insights, and lived experiences, thereby enabling this study. Their openness and thoughtful reflections offered essential perspectives that significantly informed this research.
The supplementary material for this article can be found online.
