Samenvatting

The European principle of free movement of people enables European citizens to travel and reside freely in other member states. This applies also to students. Besides this legal establishment of rights, the process of harmonization of higher education in Europe has
contributed to the ease with which a student can study abroad. The disappearance of both the borders of the nation states and the self-evidence of studying in the home country, led to an open market of higher education in Europe. It is estimated that half of the 1.5 million foreign students in Europe are from an EU/EEA country themselves.
As an open market is driven by supply and demand, mobile students are driven by push and pull factors. Difficult access to higher education in the home country, such as a numerus clausus, high costs of education in the home country or the lack of expertise on a certain subject may be an incentive to leave the country. Complementary, the existence of top level tertiary education institutions, attractive financial terms and good future work prospects may pull the student towards another country.
As the above factors differ so much per area and per nation state, student degree mobility within Europe is not equally distributed. In fact, considerable imbalances exist in intra-European student mobility, forcing European states to deal with a substantial inequality of inbound and outbound fluxes of students.
The countries within the European Union and the European Economic Area have agreed on financing the bachelors and masters degrees under the same conditions for foreign EU/EEA students as for their own citizens. This implies that a country where the inbound flux of EU/EEA students by far surpasses the outbound flux, costs of education will rise significantly. The educational budget and the overall higher education capacity of traditional import countries might thus come under increased pressure. Meanwhile, export countries benefit from the fact that other states carry the costs for their nationals' education.
Along with the negative effects, being a popular destination for EU/EEA students can hold benefits for the host country. Beside the positive cultural and educational effects that are attributed to student mobility, foreign students can also mean a prospective additional highly educated labour force.
Although having positive both as negative effects, a disproportional lack of balance between both fluxes seems in any case to be undesirable. Both for the import countries as for the export countries.
73 percent of all foreign students in the Netherlands are from within the EU/EEA. According to the Dutch system of higher education funding, the state invests approximately 6050 euro per year per student, leaving the student to contribute 1771 euro annually. The extra spending for welcoming other member states' students adds up to an estimated 257 million euro. Notably German students account for a large share of the inbound students, attracted by the higher education institutions in the border region.
The same situation applies to Denmark, that received 2500 Norwegian students in 2010, while only 195 Danes went to Norway. In both cases, the countries sought a solution to the implications of this imbalance.
The affected European countries have different methods of dealing with this imbalance. In the case of Denmark, the Nordic countries have established a system where the imbalance of their mutual student fluxes is financially compensated. Within the Nordic Agreement, the countries transfer an agreed per capita sum to the country that educates their subject. This measure ensures the continuity of intra-Nordic student mobility without the economic risks that imbalances would imply.
In the case of the Netherlands, no such measures have yet been taken. However, the discussion has been raised, fuelled by the economic crisis and subsequent budget cuts. The self-evidence of which the tax-payers should pay for a foreigners education was questioned. Despite the fiery discussion, the Dutch minister of education seemed unable to get the German minister to compensate for the incoming German students. Instead, a solution was found in limiting the border institutions' recruitment activities in Germany.
These cases do not stand alone. As long as there are disparities in quality of education, the payment required of foreign students and the chances on the labour market, imbalance in intra-European student fluxes will continue to exist.
A possible way to eliminate disparities would be to harmonize costs for higher education at a federal level, similarly to the Nordic system. This would call for further research on a federal system of study funds and study grants.
Another way of thinking would imply a more open view towards student mobility. Within a community of countries, a certain solidarity towards other member states can be expected. The economic consequences of intra-European student mobility should be taken for granted, as mobile citizens lead to a more interconnected society and a competitive Europe.
Inspired by the positive (long-term) side effects is also the following rationale, although arguing from a rational economical, and perhaps national interest, perspective. Research shows that foreign students actually add money to the host country's treasury if they stay there to work. The short-term negative effects on the national economy are thus surpassed by the long-term contribution that foreign graduates have if they work in the country of study. It is this concept on binding, retaining foreign alumni in the country, that currently leads the vision of policy makers in the Netherlands. This rationale, although sometimes criticized as being pragmatic and expedient, enables a positive perspective on internationalisation in higher education and the welcoming of foreign students. Moreover, it opens a new discussion on how to increase quality of the care for foreigners during, and, more importantly, after their studies.