Strategic Intersection: Higher Education, Economic Development, and International Relations in Georgia

Authors: Prof. Zaza Rukhadze, George Tutberidze

Introduction: Rethinking Higher Education as Strategic Infrastructure

In the contemporary era, higher education can no longer be relegated to the margins of national policy. Especially for small, geopolitically exposed countries like Georgia, universities must be repositioned not only as centers of learning but as engines of strategic resilience. The role of higher education now transcends its traditional boundaries: it influences labor adaptability, drives technological innovation, and serves as a node in the complex web of international relations.

Yet, Georgia’s current educational policy landscape reflects structural fragmentation. While both the Ministry of Education and Science and the Ministry of Economy and Sustainable Development increasingly recognize universities as strategic actors, their policies remain disjointed. As a result, Georgia lacks a unified framework that could harness the full potential of academia for economic transformation and global relevance.

This blog argues for a comprehensive national repositioning of higher education within Georgia’s strategic architecture, guided by three interlinked pillars: economic infrastructure, international engagement, and inter-ministerial coherence.

1. Higher Education as Economic Infrastructure: Innovation, Not Just Instruction

In advanced economies, higher education is not merely a producer of skilled labor-it is a cornerstone of innovation sovereignty. Countries such as Finland, South Korea, and Ireland have successfully embedded their universities into the heart of national economic planning, investing in sector-specific R&D, and creating symbiotic links between academia and industry (OECD, 2020).

In stark contrast, Georgia’s public expenditure on research and development lags far behind, standing at less than 0.3% of GDP, compared to the OECD average of 2.7% (UNESCO, 2022). Georgian universities rarely play a significant role in developing technology platforms, start-up ecosystems, or cross-sector innovation clusters.

To reverse this trend, Georgia must:

• Institutionalize university-industry linkages through dedicated innovation clusters (e.g., health tech, agri-tech, fintech);

• Establish competitive research grant mechanisms aligned with national priorities.

• Create tax and funding incentives for private sector collaboration with academia.

Furthermore, regional integration through knowledge networks can elevate Georgia’s strategic profile. Participation in Black Sea regional innovation platforms and EU cross-border research programs would not only enhance academic output but also serve as a soft security mechanism in a volatile geopolitical environment.

2. Universities as Vectors of Diplomatic Engagement

Academic institutions are increasingly wielded as tools of diplomacy. From Erasmus+ and Horizon Europe to China’s Belt and Road education networks, higher education ecosystems have become crucial elements of statecraft.

While Georgia participates in mobility schemes and bilateral education agreements, it lacks a systemic platform for academic diplomacy. The current model suffers from three structural gaps:

• Minimal university autonomy in defining international strategy.

• Weak alignment between foreign policy priorities and higher education goals.

• Lack of funding mechanisms for high-impact international collaborations.

A National Platform for Academic Diplomacy should be established through inter-agency collaboration between the Ministries of Foreign Affairs and Education, with a mandate to:

• Support strategic joint degree programs in high-priority fields (e.g., energy diplomacy, cybersecurity, EU integration);

• Fund international chairs and Georgian studies programs abroad to project cultural and academic soft power;

• Foster institutional partnerships with target regions such as Central Asia, the Baltic, and East Asia.

Such a strategy is not unprecedented. Singapore and Israel, both small states with complex geopolitical environments, have leveraged their academic systems to shape global narratives and build strategic alliances (Altbach & Salmi, 2011).

3. Whole-of-Government Alignment: Bridging Institutional Silos

The disjointed architecture of Georgia’s governance-where education, foreign policy, and economic development operate in silos-undermines the potential of universities to serve national priorities. A realist-functional approach demands that higher education be reimagined as a multi-sectoral strategic asset.

Key reforms should include:

• Alignment of academic programs with Georgia’s National Innovation and Science Agenda (NISA), focusing on green energy, public health, and digital transformation.

• Inter-agency co-funding schemes, combining resources from economic, diplomatic, and educational sectors.

• Academic foresight labs within universities to conduct policy-relevant research and scenario planning for state institutions.

Baltic countries such as Estonia and Lithuania offer successful models of inter-ministerial collaboration, where universities directly support national policy through research contracts, strategic foresight, and capacity-building programs.

4. Strategic Recommendations: Towards a Coherent National Framework

To institutionalize the strategic role of higher education, Georgia should adopt the HEEDDS Framework (Higher Education for Economic and Diplomatic Development Strategy) - a coordinated mechanism under the Prime Minister’s Office. This structure would synchronize actions across government and academia with the following components:

• Strategic Academic Platforms: Establish Centers of Excellence on Black Sea Geopolitics, Innovation Diplomacy, and Digital Transformation.

• Public-Private-Academic Partnerships: Incentivize industry-academia collaboration through grants, internships, and innovation vouchers.

• National Fellowship for Academic Diplomacy: Fund emerging scholars to represent Georgia abroad in priority research areas.

• Knowledge Security Protocols: Embed legal safeguards on data access, research autonomy, and transparency in foreign-funded academic projects.

These measures would transform higher education into a sovereign instrument of economic and diplomatic agency, rather than a reactive service sector.

Conclusion: A National Imperative, Not a Policy Option

The 21st century poses unprecedented challenges to small states: economic vulnerability, technological dependency, and strategic marginalization. For Georgia, the recalibration of higher education into the core of national planning is no longer aspirational-it is existential.

Universities must be seen as strategic actors-institutions capable of shaping national identity, generating innovation, and amplifying Georgia’s voice in global governance. To that end, policies must be coherent, funding must be purposeful, and governance must be integrative.

The choice is clear: either Georgia will treat higher education as a pillar of sovereignty and international relevance or continue to marginalize it at the cost of long-term viability.

References

• Altbach, P. G., & Salmi, J. (Eds.). (2011). The Road to Academic Excellence: The Making of World-Class Research Universities. World Bank Publications.

• Marginson, S. (2016). The Dream is Over: The Crisis of Clark Kerr’s California Idea of Higher Education. University of California Press.

• OECD. (2020). Resourcing Higher Education: Challenges, Choices and Consequences. OECD Publishing.

• UNESCO. (2022). Global Investment in R&D: Fact Sheet. UNESCO Institute for Statistics.

• World Bank. (2023). Georgia Economic Update. World Bank Group.

• Yang, R. (2020). China’s Internationalization of Higher Education: A Soft Power Strategy. Higher Education, 79(1), 1–18.