The hegemonic wave of neoliberalism in higher education does not eradicate academic freedom in universities one by one. The possibility of resistance necessarily exists within the configuration of contemporary power relations. This study contributes to the theoretical debate on how global neoliberal forces are reproduced with local characteristics by providing a Hong Kong case. Based on interviews with 15 academics, their reactions and responses to a specific research evaluation system in Hong Kong, namely the Research Assessment Exercise 2020, are examined. The findings suggest that academic freedom has survived by adopting different forms of ‘masked resistance’ in the highly performative culture of Hong Kong academia. Such masked acts of resistance include ‘criticisms behind the curtain of conformity’, ‘scepticism and feigned compliance’, ‘cautious acceptance with substantial reservations’, ‘no reaction as an expression of muted dissatisfaction’, and ‘defence without rupture’. The ‘specificity’ of such inconsistent, ambivalent and nuanced responses is discussed by drawing on several local contextual factors: the political–educational culture, the government–institution relationship, and the disciplinary knowledge tradition. This study calls for greater flexibility in assessment regimes to make room for academics’ professional autonomy, which in essence enables, rather than dismantles, accountability in managerial reforms. © International Association of Universities 2021.

This study assesses how four types of mobility, which are analysed simultaneously, are associated with the current research output quality and visibility of academics working in the city-based higher education systems of Hong Kong and Macau. Transnational educational mobility is associated with the academics' educational path, whilst intrasectoral job mobility, intersectoral job mobility and transnational job mobility are related to their professional careers. The research output, quality and visibility of academics are based on three indicators pertaining to the publications of these academics in international, peer-reviewed and indexed journals: the number of publications, the cumulative SCImago journal rank of these publications (which measures quality from an output perspective) and the citations obtained by these publications (which measures visibility). The results show that different mobilities have different effects on research output, quality and visibility, and that often these effects can be beneficial to one indicator but concurrently detrimental to another. Nested analyses of science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) and non-STEM academics, and by sex, offer further insight into the associations of these mobilities with knowledge output and outcomes. Copyright ©Palgrave Macmillan Ltd.

The global drive for world-class universities is twinned with a radical movement to create research assessment indicators, and universities have never been pressured as much as today by global rankings. This paper aims to focus on how research assessment exercises have reconfigured the institutional missions of the university in terms of knowledge production, teaching, and service address, by comparing three top research-intensive universities in Mainland China, Hong Kong, and Japan. It critically investigates how far and in what ways academics in the three systems have been pressured to respond to these exercises. The empirical findings show that all the three cases have been affected severely and that Hong Kong universities are the most internationalized and Mainland universities are the most productive in research outputs, as also evidenced in recent QS rankings. The paper argues that the global ranking regime has created a Double Bind for East Asian universities, and has brutally dominated their institutional reconfigurations. To turn the tide, the manipulated emphasis, flawed methodology, and unethical desirability of global university rankings and research assessment exercises should be avoided to help universities healthily and meaningfully focus on real missions to which they should commit themselves. Meanwhile, critical reflections and policy actions are particularly urgent on the indigenousness of knowledge exploration and production by higher education systems in East Asia and other post-colonial contexts. Furthermore, the paper anticipates that the importance of teaching and service will be revitalized in the new stage of East Asian universities, e.g., the Chinese University 3.0.

With the processes of inter- and intranationalization, higher education in Hong Kong has been rapidly expanding in an effort to develop the city into a regional education hub. This article explores the trends and developments of higher education research (HER) in Hong Kong in the context of inter- and intranationalization. By drawing on the data from the Scopus database, this article analyzes a selection of journal articles on higher education published in Hong Kong over the past three decades. Findings show that significant growth and some new outputs have been seen in the field during the study period. In addition, local researchers have complied with the rule by forming more transnational and intranational research teams and by conducting more non-local studies. Interestingly, many of them have not abandoned local collaboration and studies, but they further developed their roots. These findings reveal that some internal signs of cosmopolitanization have been recorded in the field.
[Copyright © 2015 International Association of Universities.]