A draft decree limiting the possibility of waiving differentiated tuition fees for international students is currently under consideration in France. Can you tell us more about this decree and the stance taken by the University of Bordeaux on this subject?

Dean Lewis : Differentiated tuition fees were implemented at the start of the 2019 academic year, as part of the national strategy ‘Bienvenue en France’ [‘Welcome to France’], aimed at boosting the appeal of French higher education among international students. This strategy intended to address, among other things, the gradual drop in international students attending French universities: France now holds 7th place worldwide, far behind countries like the United Kingdom or Germany, despite ranking 3rd a decade ago. The goal set by the French government is to welcome 500,000 international students by 2027, a goal recently confirmed by the French President during his visit to India last February.

In specific terms, this reform intends to implement higher tuition fees for non-EU students: €2,850 in undergraduate fees compared to €178 for EU students, and €3,879 in master’s fees as opposed to €254. Doctoral studies are not affected by this measure. The additional revenue generation by these tuition fees were intended to help institutions improve services and support provided to international students, such as French classes, grants, buddy schemes and dedicated support mechanisms.
Ever since its announcement, this reform has provoked strong criticism from the university community and among university directors. These reactions pushed the government to modify the scheme, allowing institutions to waive fees for up to 10% of students. In practice, the number of students actually paying the differentiated fees has remained very low: in 2022, only 8,000 of the 103,200 students in question paid these fees in full.

The University of Bordeaux has been carrying out a large-scale consultation effort since 2019, involving both students and staff. After the motion was adopted by the university board, the university set its own principles for the waiving of tuition fees in order to keep tuition fees at the national rate for several categories of non-EU students. This rule mainly applies to students coming from low or middle-income countries according to criteria issued by the World Bank; students from Algeria and Gabon (both highly represented communities at the university); and students whose academic excellence has been recognised by education committees. Other specific schemes have also been adopted for certain student demographics coming from conflict-affected countries, such as Lebanon and Ukraine.

Currently, the University of Bordeaux hosts around 7,200 international students, of which 5,200 are non-EU. Eighty percent of these non-EU students are from the African continent, reflecting the strong and long-standing historical, cultural and academic ties between France, our university and many French-speaking African countries. Less than 100 students at the university have paid differentiated tuition fees.

What challenges does this reform raise, in your opinion?

D.L. : The first question invited by this change is, ‘Is this a real solution for boosting attractiveness on the international level or is it mainly a measure guided by budgetary and financial constraints?’ From a political point of view, it is hard to understand how increasing tuition fees alone would improve the attractiveness of French universities. To my knowledge, the research available does not provide a consensus on any direct link between a general increase in tuition fees and an improvement in university attractiveness. The German example is interesting: Germany, which currently ranks higher than France in terms of attractiveness, applies the same tuition fees to all students, regardless of nationality.

International students are an essential resource for our country. They contribute to French research, academic diversity, the international influence of universities and, more generally speaking, to France’s economic development. Several studies by economists highlight their positive contribution to the national economy and to the renewal of scientific skills. A mass application of higher tuition fees for non-EU students may be perceived as an unfair, discriminatory and illogical measure. It could lead to the implementation of a revenue-based selection process, violating French universities’ deeply held values of openness, universality and humanism.

This direction also seems to contradict the goals openly set by France regarding international cooperation and supporting developing countries. It threatens to weaken the country’s scientific attractiveness, reduce the diversity of student profiles and limit the ability of institutions to define their own international strategy. In addition to these immediate effects, this change could sustainably alter France’s image as a nation of academic excellence and top-tier scientific partner.

We should also be cautious about arguments of “attracting talent” when it comes to this debate on differentiated tuition fees. France is indeed in need of skills, particularly in the fields of science, technology, engineering and mathematics. Our support of developing countries, however, should be based on academic cooperation: joint-degree programmes, joint thesis supervision, off-campus training programmes and sustainable partnerships. The goal is mutual development and the sharing of knowledge.
We must also keep in mind the different realities of each country. Some emerging countries, particularly in Sub-Saharan Africa, are experiencing rapid population growth while the higher education offer remains insufficient. Conversely, countries such as India, Vietnam, or Indonesia are rapidly improving their university services and scientific influence, even amidst a fast-growing demand for education.

Additionally, the countries attracting the most international students (the US, the UK, Canada, and Australia) are now developing “transnational education” strategies, directly establishing courses or campuses abroad in order to consolidate their revenue and reduce their dependence on migration policy and visa constraints. France continues to distance itself from these highly commercial models. It is, nevertheless, currently regarded as a legitimate competitor, thanks in particular to its two-year master’s programmes, the quality of its research, the increased availability of English-language courses, and the appeal of its doctoral programmes. 

What is often lacking from this debate is a finer analysis of student profiles and France’s own unique characteristics. Behind these differentiated fees also lies an implicit intention to conduct selective admissions and redirect certain flows of international students. At national level, this change could infringe upon France’s scientific and industrial sovereignty strategy, by undermining recruitment pools in several sectors facing shortages, particularly in the fields of science and technology. As a reminder, more than 40% of doctoral students in France are international students, often recruited at the end of their master’s. Undermining these recruitment pools could potentially heighten the country’s scientific disengagement.

Could the budgetary tensions affecting universities be to blame for this change in differentiated tuition fees?

D.L. :

We cannot rule out this theory. We must remember that in 2018, after the differentiated tuition fee policy was announced, the first decision taken by the Ministry was to reduce the public service subsidies paid to universities. This decision was eventually revoked after receiving strong backlash from university directors.

Currently, French universities are facing unprecedented financial pressures, which have escalated significantly since 2022. These are primarily due to the disconnect between the increase in expenses facing institutions (salary measures, inflation, energy costs) and resources that, on the other hand, are not being developed at the same pace. This is now a widely held view, particularly following the research carried out as part of the Assises du financement des universités [Conference on University Funding].

In this context, and given the precedent set in 2018, we are more than entitled to question the role that these new, differentiated fees could play in the funding of higher education institutions. There is a risk that these additional revenues will gradually come to be seen as a form of partial compensation for this structural underfunding of universities. This question becomes even more relevant when we consider that a further increase in university contributions to the “special pensions” fund is expected by 2027, representing an estimated cost of €200 million. This sum, however, is of a similar magnitude to the revenue that could potentially be generated by differentiated tuition fees.

What would be the specific implications of this new decree for students and organisation within universities?

D.L.: At this stage, we are waiting to see the definitive version of the decree in order to assess its impact. Actually, the text was already redrafted when presented at the CNESER [French National Council for Higher Education and Research] meeting of 12 May, following the amendments suggested by France Universités. For the time being, we are measuring the level of concern among the students affected. Many have already started their administrative procedures, chosen their field of study and set out their educational path based on the rules currently in force. Institutions themselves have also built their tuition fee exemption policies around this current framework.

The new scheme will implement a so-called ‘degressive’ application of fee exemptions, with intermediate rates (30%, 25%, etc.) calculated not on the basis of the total student intake but solely on the number of non-EU students, which significantly reduces the scope for tuition fee waivers. However, one question remains: what will happen to the students already enrolled in a study programme when the changes come into force? This change threatens to negatively affect the student populations already enrolled in our courses, who may end up facing significant changes mid-way through their education.

The conditions of these fee exemptions are another cause for concern. These will no longer be based on collectively-established criteria associated with geographical origin, but on individual decisions alone. In practical terms, this means that students will have to pay their tuition fees before they can apply for a possible exemption. In addition to the dissuasive effect this could have at the enrolment stage, universities fear they will be unable to process the entirety of cases in a timely manner amidst preparations for the start of the 2026/2027 academic year.

In the long term, one solution could be to improve grant schemes. But this would require the implementation of additional administrative processes, with the risk of overly complicating procedure and placing an excessive administrative burden on institutions.

With these challenges in mind, what do you think about this reform?

D.L. : International students make an essential contribution to the research, appeal and international influence of our universities, as well as their exposure to other cultures. These contributions are a boon to our universities, one that must be preserved. At the same time, institutions must remain faithful to the principles of equality, universality and accessibility represented by the French university. At this stage, we believe that this draft decree raises more questions and risks than benefits, both for the students affected and institutions.