This article examines how de-risking policy instruments interact to shape implementation conditions for Sino-research collaboration in Danish, Norwegian and Swedish higher education institutions (HEIs). Using comparative policy analysis, it analyses how instruments combine across types, functions and actor loci, and what these interactions mean for HEIs. The findings show that implementation conditions are shaped less by individual instruments than by broader governance arrangements. Across the three cases, nodal instruments like guidelines depended on organisational settings to be reinforced, with different consequences for institutional practice. Denmark displays a reinforced, security-oriented mix that supports more coherent action among HEIs. Norway exhibits a layered mix that offers coordination support while preserving interpretive space. Sweden shows a less coordinated set of instruments that leaves HEIs with greater interpretive space but less coherent national guidance. The article shows that the actor loci behind nodal and organisational instruments matter. Policy mixes anchored more closely in security-oriented state structures appear more protection-oriented, while mixes mediated through higher education sector actors preserve more room for collaboration-oriented logics. The article contributes to research on policy instrument mixes, research security and higher education governance by showing that de-risking is an interactive governance arrangement rather than a set of isolated instruments.

This chapter provides a comprehensive analysis of the evolving role of universities in the context of Science, Technology, and Innovation (STI) and their contribution to international affairs, particularly through the lens of the Swedish academic landscape. It delves into the concept of "Entrepreneurial Universities" and their growing influence in the realm of science diplomacy, which extends into research, innovation, and international collaboration. In summary, it encapsulates the strategic roles of universities in STI collaborations and international affairs, highlighting the pivotal roles played by universities in STI collaborations and global affairs, with a deep dive into the Swedish educational framework. It notably showcases the KTH Royal Institute of Technology's strategic approach to internationalization, emphasizing their targeted geographical focus. It underscores the importance of a synergistic approach, combining top-down policy directives with bottom-up academic innovation, facilitated through the meso-level of university administrations, to maximize the impact of science diplomacy. The recommendations aim to enhance global STI engagement, aligning with national innovation, competitiveness, and sustainable development goals.

This thesis investigates how governments respond to the threats and opportunitiesposed by academic internationalisation within an increasingly complex global setting.The primary focus is on the mix of policy instruments employed to navigate thetensions between openness vs protectionism and autonomy vs government control. Focusing on Sweden and the broader Nordic context, the study examines how instruments across three distinct modes – hierarchical, market-based, and networked– are designed, combined and recalibrated to balance competing rationales within ahybrid governance setting. Two research questions guide the analysis: (1) How and why do governments designand implement policy instrument mixes to steer academic internationalisation, andhow are these shaped by competing governance rationales and the tensions between(i) openness and protectionism and (ii) autonomy and state control? (2) How do these policy instrument mixes shape the conditions and trade-offs associated with academicinternationalisation? The conceptual framework emphasises how policy instruments operate in a multilayeredhigher education (HE) system, including government ministries, intermediaryfunding agencies, and higher education institutions (HEIs). By drawing on literaturerelated to hybridity in HE governance, internationalisation, policy instruments, andmetagovernance, the framework establishes a foundation for addressing the research questions. Empirically, the thesis comprises four articles that explore three policy settings:international student recruitment, bilateral research funding/science diplomacy, andresearch security. A qualitative, multi-case policy analysis is employed to illustrate howthese instruments are constructed, interpreted, and implemented across the multilayeredHE policy system. Quantitative data are also partially used to triangulatefindings and to enhance a mixed-methods approach. In the concluding discussion, the thesis highlights the significance of combiningvarious policy instruments, and their relationship to governance modes in establishingconditions for academic internationalisation. Governance is portrayed as a process ofcontinuous recalibration, where autonomy, control, openness, and protectionism arerelational dynamics influenced by instrument design, actor agency and implementationprocesses. From this perspective, the governance of internationalisation is less aboutseeking an optimal balance than about managing ongoing negotiations betweencompeting imperatives, a challenge likely to intensify amid growing geopolitical uncertainties.

Denna avhandling studerar hur regeringar svarar på de hot och möjligheter somakademisk internationalisering innebär i en alltmer komplex global kontext. Analysensfokus ligger på hur policyinstrument kombineras och hur de används för att balanseraspänningar mellan öppenhet kontra protektionism och autonomi kontra statligkontroll. Med fokus på Sverige, och en bredare nordisk kontext, undersöks hurinstrument inom tre distinkta styrformer – hierarkiska, marknadsbaserade ochnätverksbaserade – utformas, kombineras och justeras. Två forskningsfrågor vägleder analysen: (1) Hur och varför utformar och genomförregeringar policyinstrumentkombinationer i styrningen av akademiskinternationalisering, och hur formas dessa av spänningar mellan (i) öppenhet ochprotektionism och (ii) autonomi och statlig kontroll? (2) Hur formar dessapolicyinstrument villkor och avvägningar för akademisk internationalisering?Det konceptuella ramverket betonar hur policyinstrument verkar i ett flerskiktathögskolesystem bestående av regeringsdepartement, forskningsfinansiärer ochlärosäten. Med utgångspunkt i litteratur om hybriditet i styrning av högre utbildning,internationalisering, policyinstrument och metastyrning utgör ramverket en grund föratt besvara forskningsfrågorna. Empiriskt består avhandlingen av fyra artiklar som spänner över tre policykontexter:internationell studentrekrytering, bilateralforskningsfinansiering/vetenskapsdiplomati samt forskningssäkerhet. En kvalitativ, flerfallsbaserad policyanalys används för att visa hur instrument konstrueras, tolkasoch implementeras i olika institutionella och nationella kontexter. Kvantitativa dataanvänds också i viss utsträckning, både för att triangulera resultaten och som del av en’mixed methods’-ansats.I den avslutande diskussionen framhäver avhandlingen hur kombinationen av olikapolicyinstrument, och deras koppling till en styrningsform, har betydelse för att skapaförutsättningar för akademisk internationalisering. Styrning framträder som enprocess av kontinuerlig kalibrering, där autonomi, kontroll, öppenhet ochprotektionism inte är binära val utan formade av instrumentens utformning, aktörershandlingsutrymme och implementeringsdynamik. Ur detta perspektiv handlarstyrningen av internationalisering mindre om att söka en optimal balans och mer omatt hantera spänningar mellan konkurrerande imperativ – en utmaning som sannoliktintensifieras i takt med växande geopolitiska osäkerheter.

The introduction of tuition fees in Sweden in 2011 is an interesting example of how the design of a tuition fee reform for international students surges beyond simple narratives of revenue generation. More than 10 years after implementing the Swedish reform, this article examines to what extent such market-oriented instruments induce HEIs and the government to seek revenue on the global market. Through a comprehensive analysis, the research employs two theoretical models–the ‘revenue-seeking’ and the ‘cost-sharing and control’ model–to explore the inherent hybridity governance features between market and state-centred objectives. The findings reveal that while the reform primarily adheres to its intended goals of cost-sharing and controlled internationalisation, there is an emerging trend towards revenue generation, particularly in HEIs with strong market positions and in lucrative disciplines like Engineering & Technology and Business Management. The study highlights the reform’s multifaceted impact, aligning with state-centric objectives but gradually shifting towards a revenue-seeking approach. This research contributes to understanding the nuanced effects of tuition fee policies on HEIs and calls for further comparative studies to deepen insights into the diverse outcomes of such reforms in the context of higher education internationalisation.

This study explores the role of network administrative organizations (NAOs) in science diplomacy (SD) by means of a qualitative case study approach. The case in point is a Swedish government initiative to coordinate the internationalization efforts of domestic funding agencies. We examine how the NAO IntSam balances between governmental directives and agency autonomy. Utilizing primary data from semi-structured interviews supplemented by internal documents and policy reports, the analysis delves into the challenges and potential of NAOs in harmonizing top-down directives with agency autonomy. The findings highlight IntSam’s role in facilitating collaboration and aligning domestic and international policy landscapes, while also revealing inherent tensions due to divergent governmental and agency priorities. This study contributes to understanding the complexities of coordinating cross-border Science, Technology, and Innovation efforts, offering insights into the nuances, potentials, and limitations of NAOs in the realm of SD.

This article sheds light on some challenges that internationalisation raises for policymakers regarding public funding of higher education in a welfare state by examining policy logics for introducing tuition fees for international students in Sweden 2011. Using thematic analysis of documents related to the Swedish reform, we identify how an increasing number of international students was the perceived policy problem, threatening national students’ access to free higher education. Policy objectives included sharing the cost of internationalisation but also enabling control of cost and influx of international students, enhancing quality and strengthening national branding. Many of these objectives concur with more established understandings on why policymakers turn to the market according to a more neo-liberal ‘market’ logic. However, a policy mix of tuition fees and scholarships enabled a governance model of control, which more relates to a ‘welfare’ logic. Likewise, the policy problem indicates that a search for profit and revenue cannot simply explain tuition fee reforms for international students. By discussing how underlying normative assumptions at the policy formulation stage contrast reality ten years after the reform, it appears that revenue from the global market has been more significant for Swedish policymakers than the rhetoric suggests. 

Amid rising geopolitical tensions, governments increasingly face the challenge of balancing open academic collaboration with China against the imperatives of national security and institutional autonomy. This study examines how the governments of Sweden, Denmark, and Norway operationalise the de-risking agenda through distinct policy instrument mixes related to their research and innovation Sino relationship. The study uses qualitative, comparative policy analysis based on desk research and semi-structured interviews. It employs an abductive approach to analyse the type, coerciveness, and objectives of policy instruments, focusing on whether they enable or restrict collaboration, and how they interact with each other. While all three governments deploy similar instruments such as guidelines, export controls, and coordination forums, their design and combination differ significantly. The interaction of instruments - through reinforcement, layering, or drift - profoundly shapes national governance conditions. A key finding is the varying role of coordination mechanisms, depending on whether they are state-led, intra-academic, theme-specific, or framed around national security. Particularly notable is the involvement of security authorities in Denmark, which contributes to a more protectionist orientation. The study highlights how policy instruments are not neutral but reflect deeper institutional tensions between openness, autonomy, and securitisation in global science governance.