The Dynamics of ASEAN Universities’ International Cooperation:
Case Studies of Indonesia and Thailand
Anggia Utami Dewi, R. Dudy Heryadi and Akim Akim
Department of International Relations, Universitas Padjadjaran, Bandung, Indonesia
Keywords: International Cooperation, Higher Education, ASEAN, Indonesian Universities, Thailand Universities.
Abstract: As one of the consequences of globalization, the nature of higher education and universities has drastically
changed. The shifts could be seen in the way most universities nowadays are aspired to be world-class, also
in how international cooperation of university has become increasingly important. Written based on a
qualitative research conducted through interviews and literature reviews, this paper discusses the dynamics
of international cooperation management of universities in two ASEAN members, Indonesia and Thailand.
In this paper, two countries are selected as a comparison with consideration that both are non-English
speaking ASEAN member countries, that have their best universities enlisted in top regional even world
university ranking. By using the assessment from the awareness, commitment, organizational structure and
selection of partners and platform of international cooperation, the results show that to enhance the
performance of international cooperation, universities could take notes in having a more serious approach
especially in making a renewable direct statement or commitment for internationalization continuously that
always try to catch up the challenges from external and internal forces. A better organizational structure and
improvement should be also taken into account, in order to meet the expectations and efforts needed to
achieve the vision, mission and goals of the institutions.
1 INTRODUCTION
Entering the era of massive flow of globalization,
the nature of higher education and its institutions has
drastically changed. It is seen nearly everywhere,
where being world-class is what a university aspired
to be. This current approach on higher education in
globalization era, has also changed the role of
international cooperation in universities. Universities
these days, build and maintain linkages to gain and
share benefits each other. Also according to Chan
(2004), one of the most important rationale of
universities alliance is to be able to compete and
survive in the severe competition due to the
massification and marketization of higher education.
It is argued that internationalization of higher
education becomes one important key to help
boosting the quality, reputation and global ranking
of universities, where international cooperation
counted as one important element within it. Together
with broad scope of internationalization strategies,
development of international collaboration and
strategic partnership for teaching to research, are
believed to play crucial role as tools of how
universities can survive and compete each other
(Dewi, 2014; Maringe, 2010; Chan, 2004). Several
researches also show the positive relation of
international collaboration and research productivity
in university, which support the importance of
discussion on international cooperation of
universities (Lee and Bozeman, 2005; Kwiek, 2014).
In regional context, cooperation and
collaboration between countries or universities exist
in several kind of platforms, from bilateral to
multilateral one, such as a higher education
consortium. South East Asia is not an exemption. In
1992, during the 4
th
ASEAN Summit, the call for the
cooperation in the field of higher education and
human resource development took place (AUN,
2017). Improving the quality of higher education in
the region is one of the aims.
Looking at assessment on regional and global
level, the data shows that some ASEAN universities
are listed in top global university ranking. According
to QS World University Ranking in 2017, National
University of Singapore, is ranked 12
th
globally;
Nanyang Technological University Singapore
ranked 13
th
globally; University of Malaya Malaysia
Dewi, A., Heryadi, R. and Akim, A.
The Dynamics of ASEAN Universities’ International Cooperation: Case Studies of Indonesia and Thailand.
In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Sociology Education (ICSE 2017) - Volume 2, pages 349-354
ISBN: 978-989-758-316-2
Copyright © 2018 by SCITEPRESS – Science and Technology Publications, Lda. All rights reserved
349

is ranked 133
rd
globally, even in Thailand,
Chulalongkorn University is ranked 45
th
in Asia and
252
th
globally and Mahidol University is ranked 61
st
in Asia and 283
th
globally, while in Indonesia,
Universitas Indonesia is ranked 325
th
globally,
Bandung Institute of Technology (ITB) is ranked
between 401-410
th
, and Gadjah Mada University is
ranked between 501-550
th
(QS, 2017). From this
data, it could be seen that Indonesia, as one of the
key players in ASEAN, actually performs lag behind
the other members, accordingly Singapore,
Malaysia, and even Thailand.
As a country with non-English speaking
background, Thailand shows their hard work
towards the improvement of their global
competitiveness and higher education development.
With the similar background, Indonesian leading
universities seemingly still in the middle of the
process to be able to compete equally with their
counterparts from Thailand.
Based on the background mentioned above, this
paper discusses the assessment on comparison of
dynamics of international cooperation in Indonesian
and Thailand Universities. It aims to see what the
similarities and differences are between the cases of
two countries, and suggests the possibilities of
further improvement of the international cooperation
management.
2 METHODS AND ANALYTICAL
FRAMEWORK
This paper presents the dynamics of international
cooperation management in universities in Indonesia
and Thailand. The approach of methodology in this
paper is a qualitative one, where the data are taken
through interviews and literature reviews. The data
collections were mainly consisted of the semi-
structured interviews with senior leaders or officers
in universities that responsible for the international
cooperation management, such as the Vice Rector or
the Head of Office of International Affairs (OIA),
also from the important documents related to
international cooperation.
The analytical framework of this paper will be
based on the concept of international cooperation in
internationalization of higher education. To see the
dynamics of international cooperation, this paper
will adapt and combine the model of international
cooperation process and strategy from Chan (2004)
that explain how a higher education institutions see
the importance of international cooperation, and turn
it into commitment in paper and in action, supported
by conducive organizational strategies such as
governance, organizational structures, staffs
resources, financial resource and support service (as
cited in Heryadi et al., 2017).
As for the design, the analysis will be taken from
the institutions chosen from both Indonesia and
Thailand. The data from Indonesian case will be
based from three institutions which are Bandung
Institute of Technology (ITB), Gadjah Mada
University (UGM), and Universitas Padjadjaran
(UNPAD). While in Thailand, the data are taken
from the Mahidol University (MU). The basic
considerations of the selection are the type of
institutions (comprehensive universities or special
focused institutions), management status, reputation,
and their membership in academic networking or
consortia, in this case the ASEAN University
Network (AUN).
3 CURRENT DYNAMICS OF
INTERNATIONAL
COOPERATION:
COMPARATIVE ASSESSMENT
BETWEEN INDONESIA AND
THAILAND
3.1 Appraisal from National-Level
Policy
The dynamics of international cooperation in
Indonesian higher education institutions could not be
separated from national policy on higher education
in general. In Indonesia, the 2015-2019 vision of
Ministry of Research, Technology and Higher
Education (Kemenristekdikti) is to create the
qualified higher education and the knowledge,
technology and innovation capacity to support the
nation’s competitiveness (Kemenristekdikti, 2015).
To achieve the vision, the ministry and directorates
under it formulate strategic plans that include the
priority to boost the number of international
publication and citation level of Indonesian scholars,
also mentions the importance of university
cooperation and partnership to improve affectivity,
efficiency, productivity, creativity, innovation,
quality and relevance of Tridharma (education,
research and community services) as the role of
university (Kemenristekdikti, 2015).
From the national level, the government has
provided adequate support in the term of legal
ICSE 2017 - 2nd International Conference on Sociology Education
350

framework that regulate the general platform for the
international cooperation of higher education
(Heryadi et al., 2017). As for programs,
Kemenristekdikti supports university to develop
their international cooperation through several
aspects, such as widening the chance for cooperation
from working group, exhibition to the development
of academic collaboration; providing grant schemes
for academic partnership from grant for the science
consortium development, facilitation of international
cooperation and strengthening the international
office to technical training for academic cooperation
(Heryadi et al., 2017).
On the case of Thailand, the higher education
policies always relate to the national strategy and
national economic and social development plan that
is based by the guidance philosophy from the King
of Thailand. Currently, the grand framework of
Thailand government is the 20-Year National
Strategy (2017-2036). As for the development, it is
guided by the 12th National Economic and Social
Plan (2017-2021) which was initiated in 2016. In
addition, the Thailand 4.0 is now used as the
country’s economic model that focuses on a value-
based economy that push creativity and smart
innovation.
Higher education and its institutions, are given
mandates to contribute to the success achievement of
Thailand 4.0. Universities are expected to play major
part in developing knowledge of technologies
needed in order to implement the strategy within the
Thailand 4.0 framework. Higher education is
believed to be able to support Thailand 4.0 in the
efforts of maximizing the national human capital
development (Eua-arporn, 2017). For the
advancement of higher education quality, Thailand’s
government continuingly developed policies and
strategies to fit the expectation from the current
globalized world.
The responsible government body to manage the
higher education provision and promoting higher
education development in Thailand is the Office of
the Higher Education Commission (OHEC) under
the Ministry of Education. The policy
recommendations and higher education plans that fit
the international standards are formulated within this
office. Consisted of several bureaus, the Bureau of
International Cooperation Strategy is the one that
responsible for the international cooperation sector
in higher education management (OHEC, 2017).
3.2 Examination on the Institutional-
Level
In institutional level, by referring to the suggestion
by Chan (2004), the dynamics of international
cooperation could be assessed from several stages of
processes, which are: 1) the awareness of needs,
purposes, and benefits of international cooperation;
2) commitment through mission statement and
strategic plan; 3) organizational structure; 4)
implementation and resource provision; 5) review
and assessment; 6) refinement and improvement,
which within the process includes the strategy of
selection of partners in accordance with goals,
objective and compatibility. In this paper, the
assessment is focusing on the awareness,
commitment, organizational structure and selection
of partners and platform of international
cooperation.
3.2.1 Awareness of Needs, Purposes, and
Benefits of International Cooperation
From the selected institutions in Indonesia and
Thailand, the awareness of needs, purposes and
benefits of international cooperation is affirmatively
existed, although in different level of awareness.
ITB, UGM and MU stated their high awareness in
the needs of international cooperation as part of
internationalization, while UNPAD shows medium
awareness.
The senior leader in ITB is clearly aware on the
benefits of international cooperation to the
significance impact on university’s international
publication. By noticing that this positive correlation
between the performance of international
cooperation with partners from highly qualified
universities and the number of citation, ITB
positively look forward to focus on strategic
alliances that will bring benefits to the achievement
of the institution’s goal (ITB, 2017a). While in
UGM, the senior officer stated that international
cooperation is needed as the main gate and
contributor to the realization of the vision of
university (UGM, 2017a).
While UNPAD mentioned the role of
international cooperation as “part” of efforts in
achieving the vision and mission of the institutions
(UNPAD, 2017a), MU is positively aware that to be
a world-class university that is recognized globally,
internationalization is a key component to create
one. Especially with the implementation of programs
and activities on collaborative research, innovations
The Dynamics of ASEAN Universities’ International Cooperation: Case Studies of Indonesia and Thailand
351

will nourish and be beneficial to enhance the
country’s global competitiveness (MU, 2017).
3.2.2 Institution’s Commitment through
Mission Statement and Strategic Plan
In all Indonesian institutions, the statement of vision
of the institution include the aspiration to be world-
class university. UNPAD’s vision is to be a
“Leading University in Delivering World Class
Education in 2026” or world-class research
university in 2026 (UNPAD, 2017b). ITB’s vision is
ITB as an outstanding, distinguished, independent,
and internationally recognized university that leads
changes toward welfare improvement of the
Indonesian nation and the world (ITB, 2017b).
While UGM’s vision is to be a pioneer of national
universities with world-class and innovative
excellence, serve the interests of nation and
humanity (UGM, 2017b).
However, regarding the international cooperation
per se, between three institutions in Indonesia, ITB
is a step ahead since ITB has a specific
internationalization statement, which directly stated
their awareness of the urgency of
internationalization, and mention international
cooperation as key element of it (ITB, 2008). This
statement is a proof of governance commitment
from senior leaders to plan, implement and evaluate
the initiatives. In the case of UNPAD and UGM,
there are no formal document provided according
the institution’s mission statement or strategic plan.
Although in UNPAD’s case, the commitment of
internationalization is declared in the office’s web,
(UNPAD, 2017b). As for UGM, an attractive video
is shared publicly, where the Rector described the
strategic plan towards the goal of being world-class,
to be able to compete and meet the standards of
world’s best universities (UGM, 2017b).
In Thailand, MU recently produced the
university Globalization Strategy (2016-2019)
shows a clear and direct prove of how the
university’s senior leaders are fully aware in the
needs of serious planning and implementation of
internationalization and international cooperation
initiatives (MU, 2016).
3.2.3 Institution’s Organizational Structure
In the case of organizational structure, all four
institutions have appointed body or office that is
responsible for the global engagement.
UNPAD has the Office of International Affairs
(OIA) acts as the main gate of UNPAD to
international arena. The OIA is stated as one of the
most important office in UNPAD (UNPAD, 2017a).
Currently named as Universitas Padjadjaran’s
Global Relation and Advancements, the OIA is
responsible in escorting the key dimensions of
internationalization of UNPAD: internationalized
staffs and students, international research
collaboration, and internationally focused curricula
(UNPAD, 2017b).
UGM also has the OIA that deals with the
maintenance and the extension of international
cooperation with the foreign universities and other
international institutions. In addition to international
cooperation with foreign institutions, UGM’s OIA
also engage in several major activities including
organizing cultural and educational programs for
international students; supporting various
international conference and activities held at UGM;
and providing assistance for international students or
professors during their stay in Indonesia (OIA
UGM, 2015). In addition, UGM also has its own
units of international affairs in every faculty, for the
operational platform of international cooperation
under the supervision of OIA (UGM, 2017).
In ITB, the international engagement and
cooperation is under the Directorate of Partnership
and International Relation, with another
classification between partnership and international
relation. This structure also include the vice director
for each field. The supporting body for international
engagement is the International Relation Office
(IRO). This office is responsible for several
programs include building partnership with foreign
institutions and international network also
supporting the development of international
education and research programs.
The International Relations Division Office
(IRDO) serves as the main gate that will facilitate all
international-related activities in MU. The current
approach of internationalization organizational
structure is also followed the changing external
factors, from previously ASEAN Community
towards more global force of innovation-based
competition without leaving the ASEAN aspect. The
adjustment of university administration is seen when
in the past there was a vice president for research
and one for internationalization, separated. While in
the new administration, these two positions are
combined together, so today vice president for
research and international engagement is the same. It
means that MU uses research as tools of
internationalization (MU, 2017). In the IRDO of
MU, there is also foreign staff which is a sign that
MU develop the organization body towards more
internationalized working team.
ICSE 2017 - 2nd International Conference on Sociology Education
352

3.2.4 Selection of Partners and Platform
For the platform of international cooperation, ITB,
UNPAD, UGM and MU stated that both bilateral
and multilateral frameworks bring benefits, where
bilateral cooperation focuses more to the deep
connection between institutions while multilateral
platform ease the efforts of achieving something
bigger with comparatively lower energy. All
institutions agreed that it is important to see whether
the cooperation is a strategic one with real activities
or not. This approach is necessary to avoid the
sleeping MoUs or agreements.
All institutions selected here, have hundreds
various agreements with national and international
partners. In ITB, the partnership is categorized in
education, research, training, entrepreneurship and
recently, innovation areas (ITB, 2017a). In UNPAD,
the scope of cooperation covers exchange programs
on academic information and materials, students and
staff mobility, joint research, visiting professors or
lecturers, and other academic activities based on
mutual agreement. While MU, as stated in the first
globalization strategy, is currently focusing to
establish and maintain a sustainable collaboration
with selective partners. Means, MU focuses to as
many as possible beneficial and profitable
collaborations that are strategic.
For international networking group, almost all
institutions are members of various consortia or
grouping, where ITB, UGM (together with
Universitas Indonesia and Airlangga University) and
MU (with other four Thailand’s universities) are
members of AUN. The membership, which was
firstly appointed by the government of each member
countries, are stated to bring benefits for the
member. ITB senior leader mentioned that their
membership in such regional networking has placed
the institution into advantageous privileged position
(ITB, 2017a). However, for UNPAD that is
mentioned as member of Association of Southeast
Asian Institutions of Higher Learning (ASAIHL),
there is no further significant data both on UNPAD’s
contribution to the association nor the other way
around.
4 CONCLUSIONS
After elaborating the dynamics of universities’
international cooperation in Indonesia and Thailand,
several points could be highlighted here.
First, that both in Indonesia and Thailand, the
international cooperation and internationalization
agenda is government-driven, although the national
policy and framework is not the only rationale that
push universities in both countries pursuing to be
world-class.
Second, by taking the cases of top universities in
the Indonesia and Thailand, Thailand universities
have more advantageous position as the
internationalization initiatives in national level in
Thailand came earlier compare to Indonesia. Also
with almost similar size of economy, Thailand has
far less number of higher education institutions than
Indonesia. This condition makes it harder and
challenging for the government of Indonesia to
manage the higher education institutions, especially
when it comes about the balance distribution of
quality and budget allocation.
Third, ASEAN universities could take notes in
having a more serious approach especially in making
a renewable direct statement or commitment for
internationalization continuously that always try to
catch up the challenges from external and internal
forces. A better organizational structure and
improvement should be also taken into account, in
order to meet the expectations and efforts needed to
achieve the vision, mission and goals of the
institutions.
Lastly, regardless of the challenging dynamics in
international cooperation management, the recent
2017 QS world university ranking enlists three top
Indonesian higher education institutions, -UI, ITB,
UGM-, as top 500 universities globally. It is a good
sign that hopefully could motivate the Indonesian
universities to enhance their quality and
international visibility, and finally leading together
with their other ASEAN counterparts such as
Thailand, in Asia and beyond.
REFERENCES
AUN, 2017. ASEAN University Network Annual Report,
The AUN Secretariat. Bangkok.
Chan, W. W. Y., 2004. International Cooperation in
Higher Education: Theory and Practice. Journal of
Studies in International Education. pp. 8-32.
Chan, W., 2004. International Cooperation in Higher
Education: Theory and Practice. Journal of Studies in
International Education. pp. 32-55.
Dewi, A. U., 2017. Towards Knowledge Economy: A
Comparative Study of Indonesian and South Korean
Internationalization of Higher Education, Depok, s.n.
Eua-arporn, B., 2017. How Higher Education can support
Thailand 4.0, Chulalongkorn University. Bangkok.
The Dynamics of ASEAN Universities’ International Cooperation: Case Studies of Indonesia and Thailand
353

Heryadi, D., Dewi, A. U., Akim, 2017. Survival of The
Fittest: a Search for Models of International
Cooperation Strategy of Indonesian Universities,
Yogyakarta, s.n., pp. 239-249.
ITB, 2017a. International Partnership of Institute
Teknologi Bandung, [Interview with Vice Rector
Research, Innovation and Partnership ] (May 2017).
ITB, 2017b. Visi dan Misi ITB, [Online]
Available at: https://www.itb.ac.id/visi-dan-misi.
Kemenristekdikti, 2015. Rencana Strategis
Kemenristekdikti , Kemenristekdikti. Jakarta.
Kwiek, M., 2014. Internationalization and Research
Productivity: “Internationalists” and “Locals” in
Polish Universities. Higher Education in Russia and
Beyond, pp. 13-15.
Lee, S., Bozeman, B., 2005. The Impact of Research
Collaboration on Scientific Productivity. Social
Studies of Science. Vol. 35, No. 5, pp. 673-702.
MU, 2016. Mahidol University's Globalization Strategy
(2016-2019), s.l.: s.n.
MU, 2017. International Cooperation Strategy of Mahidol
University, [Interview with Director of International
Relations Division Office] (11 July 2017).
OHEC, 2017. Higher Education Policies, [Online]
Available at: http://inter.mua.go.th/higher-education-
policies/
OIA UGM, 2015. OIA Profile, [Online]
Available at: http://oia.ugm.ac.id/oia-profile/.
QS, W., 2017. QS World University Rankings® 2016-
2017, [Online] Available at:
https://www.topuniversities.com/university-
rankings/world-university-rankings/2016.
UGM, 2017a. International Cooperation of Gadjah Mada
University, [Interview with Head of Office of
International Affairs] (26 07 2017).
UGM, 2017b. Universitas Gadjah Mada, [Online]
Available at: http://ugm.ac.id/en.
UNPAD, 2012. Rencana Strategis Universitas
Padjadjaran 2012-2016, Universitas Padjadjaran.
Bandung.
UNPAD, 2017a. Universities' International Cooperation,
[Interview with Vice Rector Research, Community
Engagement, Cooperation and Academic Corporation]
(26 April 2017).
UNPAD, 2017b. World Class University, [Online]
Available at: http://international.unpad.ac.id/world-
class-university/.
ICSE 2017 - 2nd International Conference on Sociology Education
354