University leaders behind some of the first ventures to get off the ground in India have conceded that transnational education “is not for the faint hearted” as critics warn that high fees, small cohorts and operational challenges could limit their impact.
Several institutions have launched or are on the cusp of launching branch campuses in the country after encouragement from both home governments and the Indian state, with many hoping to reach new audiences and shore up creaking finances.
Times Higher Education spoke to some of those heavily involved in the operations so far and they described strong demand and a supportive regulatory environment but also a complex and resource-intensive process.
The University of Southampton became the first to secure full approval last year, launching its Delhi campus in September 2025 with an initial cohort of about 120 students, and aiming to reach 5,000.
The University of York is preparing to open in Mumbai with roughly 260 students expected in its first intake, and plans to scale to 5,000 by its 10th year, while the University of Bristol is also developing a campus in the city.
Australia’s University of New South Wales has already begun teaching in Bangalore with just over 100 students and plans to scale significantly in the coming years to up to 8,000 students.
Other UK institutions exploring or establishing a presence in India include the universities of Surrey, Exeter, Liverpool and Aberdeen, Queen’s University Belfast and Coventry University, alongside universities from Australia and elsewhere.
Nigel Healey, from the International Centre for Higher Education Management, said the rush is being driven by both “pull” and “push” factors, pointing to India’s policy of opening up a more welcoming regulatory environment and unmet student demand alongside tighter UK visa rules that are making it harder to recruit Indian students to home campuses.
Universities involved in the first wave describe a regulatory system that is open but demanding.
Andrew Atherton, vice-president for international at Southampton, described the framework as “clear and explicit”, with a “transparent” and “robust” approval process, even if it involved “a significant amount of work”.
York vice-chancellor Charlie Jeffery characterised engagement with regulators as “straightforward”, although requiring “meticulous documentation”.
Atherton said students are opting for these campuses to access an international degree while remaining in India, including the opportunity to take up internships and employment locally. Many applicants, he suggested, are looking for global qualifications but cannot afford to study abroad or prefer to stay closer to home.
Programmes are also designed to mirror those at the home campus. Attila Brungs, vice-chancellor of UNSW Sydney, said courses in Bangalore would deliver the same academic content and outcomes as those offered in Sydney, while Jeffery said students in Mumbai would receive a full York degree aligned to the UK campus.
“It is not a branch campus,” said Brungs, describing UNSW Bangalore as an extension of the Sydney campus, with the same teaching and research standards.
But questions remain over what the campuses will add to India’s higher education system.
“Foreign universities in India will mostly work like high-end private colleges, not large public universities for everyone,” said Nishidhar Borra, chief executive of Atlas Education Consultants and president of the Association of Australian Education Representatives in India, a body representing education agents working with overseas universities.
Borra said many would still choose to leave India, particularly to access post-study work opportunities and international experience. He added that those studying at branch campuses may not gain the same “life skills, networking” and exposure as students overseas.
Concerns have also been raised about access. Pawan Agarwal, former director in India’s education ministry, said foreign campuses are “unlikely to significantly expand access” and will instead serve “a relatively small segment of students who can afford higher fees”.
Universities themselves point to the scale of the task. Michele Acuto, pro vice-chancellor for global engagement at the University of Bristol, said transnational education “is not for the faint-hearted” and requires “ample determination and resolve”.
“You’re effectively starting a university from scratch,” Jeffery noted, referring to the process of building campuses, recruiting staff and establishing systems. Many of the campuses are being staffed by a mixture of academics from home sites and those recruited locally.
That challenge extends beyond set-up. Healey said branch campuses tend to be sustainable when universities take a long-term approach and build deep partnerships, pointing to the University of Nottingham’s campuses in Malaysia and China. Where institutions have treated them as short-term teaching ventures, results have been more mixed, he said, citing the University of Reading’s scaled-back Malaysia campus as an example.
Atherton said the focus after launch is on boosting student experience, employability pathways and campus culture. Brungs said delivering outcomes comparable to the home campus requires integration of teaching, research and industry engagement, including “work-integrated learning”.
Nick Hillman, director of the Higher Education Policy Institute, said expansion into India reflects financial pressures, government encouragement and geopolitical factors but warned that transnational education “is hard, really hard to do well” and that “there is rarely a quick buck to be made”.
Even then, risks remain difficult to predict. Healey said projects can be disrupted by “unknown unknowns”, including policy shifts, geopolitical shocks or leadership changes within institutions.
Borra said “it’s all very new”, and that outcomes will depend on factors including fees, faculty, student demand and graduate employment availability.
