Global higher education policies are often underpinned by bibliometric performance metrics. While these targets ostensibly aim at raising the quality of academic work, Aikerim Bektemirova argues in authoritarian states they can be deployed to discipline and constrain academic freedom.
(29 Aug 2025) Across the world, academic metrics (journal impact factors, citation indexes and university rankings) are often seen as markers of progress. Framed as tools to ensure transparency, quality and global competitiveness, they form the backbone of many higher education reforms.
However, in authoritarian contexts, these instruments are increasingly repurposed not just to promote excellence but also to consolidate state control over research and academia.
Kazakhstan, Russia and China offer three instructive examples of how ‘modernisation’ narratives are used to reshape universities into more compliant institutions. When implemented without democratic oversight, global performance metrics risk becoming tools of centralisation, eroding academic freedom, marginalising critical scholarship, and aligning research with state-defined agendas.
Find out more here.
