Turkey`s efforts regarding humanitarian assistance, which is a sub-category of ODA, are quite remarkable. According to the Global Humanitarian Assistance report released in 2016 by Development Initiatives – an independent organisation with an aim at ending poverty by 2030, in which the data provided by TIKA is considered – Turkey is the second largest contributor to humanitarian assistance, after the USA. In terms of humanitarian assistance with respect to the ratio of a nation’s Gross National Income (GNI), Turkey is in first place. Without doubt, a great majority of Turkey’s humanitarian assistance was delivered to Syrian s who were forced to leave their country due to the civil war that has been continuing since 2011.

Having said this, Turkey`s remarkable efforts to increase its humanitarian aid capacity should deserve more domestic and international attention. It should be noted that Turkey`s approach to humanitarian assistance differentiates markedly from those of other donors. However, to deem Turkey’s development assistance and cooperation policies simply as humanitarian aid seems to oversimplify Turkey`s vision, efforts and activities in this field, as well as its potential to contribute to the field with its experience that has been accumulated over the last two decades.

In 2007, the Development Assistance Committee in Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) introduced a new concept called Country Programmable Aid (CPA), in order to measure the volume of resources transferred to developing countries. The main goal of the CPA metric is to measure how much resources are delivered directly into the recipients countries. To do this, some components of ODA (such as humanitarian aid, refugee spending in donor countries, etc.) are not added to the gross ODA data. The remaining is considered as the direct resources transferred to the recipient countries.

When the CPA is taken into consideration, Turkey`s accomplishment can be understood more clearly. Until 2011, a great majority of Turkish ODA was also counted as its CPA. After that, however, the share has decreased due to the increase in Turkish humanitarian aid. In spite of its focus on humanitarian aid, Turkey`s development assistance in terms of CPA composes one-third of ODA in 2014, which reveals that Turkey was committed to increasing and diversifying its development cooperation with many countries all around the world.

While Japan has the largest number of beneficiaries with 141 recipients, the USA is the second with 132 countries. Turkey provides 125 countries with its aid, placing it among the top ten donors worldwide. Besides this, even though Syria is the main focus of Turkey; in terms of CPA, the recipients aided by Turkey have changed the most over the years. As a result, Afghanistan, Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan and Pakistan have benefited from Turkey’s assistance more than many other countries do.

This indicates three significant points regarding Turkey`s commitment to development assistance. Firstly, along with the fact that Turkey fulfils the increasing needs of its Syrian guests – as they are officially referred to – it has also been able to increase the number of countries which it cooperates with by providing them development assistance. Secondly, the top countries in terms CPA are high-income countries except for Turkey, an upper-middle income country. Lastly, institutions in Turkey related to development assistance and humanitarian aid seem to have kept pace with this trend. For example, TIKA currently has 56 coordination offices in different countries. It also works closely with its counterpart institutions, especially in Africa and Latin America, in order to share Turkey`s experiences in the field.

In order to comprehend Turkey`s effort on development assistance beyond humanitarian aid, we may have a close look at the procedure Turkey follows in selecting recipient countries and sectors. It is strongly based on a demand-driven orientation. Therefore, preferred sectors and implementation instruments may vary widely depending upon the needs of recipient countries. Since the main focus is to address the basic needs of the local people, Turkey generally implements specific projects rather than comprehensive programs.

To give an example, Turkey has implemented projects for developing radio/television/print media in the Balkans, in which transportation infrastructure is relatively developed, whereas projects to develop transportation systems have been applied in Asia and Africa, including such countries as Somalia and Afghanistan, in order to address the needs and demands of the local people in recipient countries. For instance, TIKA constructed a road between Poli Sohta and Darulamana Palace in Afghanistan. This road has then become a commercial and social attraction center. Likewise, an airport constructed by the Turkish government in Somalia has become a gateway that connects Somalis to the world. Another example is Bilge Tonyukuk road in Mongolia. TIKA constructed this road in order to ease transportation to the Orkhon Inscriptions, which have cultural and historical importance for Turks. As mentioned before, we mostly observe radio/television/print media projects in the Balkans. In this sense, many Turkish official institutions provide media equipment, and share technical know-how through training programs in Balkan countries such as Bosnia-Herzegovina, Macedonia, Albania and Moldova.

In order to appreciate Turkey’s achievements in humanitarian aid, as well as its vision and efforts in development assistance in a proper way, one needs to bear in mind the bigger picture.

Picture: Whirling dervishes perform at the Dome of the Rock at the Al-Aqsa Mosque compound in Jerusalem, Palestine, during the Nabi Mosa Festival sponsored by the Turkish Cooperation and Coordination Agency, TIKA in April 2016.

Social Demand and the Quality Issue

No matter what is said, comparisons between Turkey and other countries clearly show that Turkey has neglected the higher education demands of its young people for decades. The existing higher education institutions have, for different reasons, resisted the increase in demand. Therefore, one way or the other, the demand has not been met.

To fulfill the tremendous demand for higher education, the political establishment has committed to opening new higher education institutions, in the 2000s in particular. Hence, the policy of expansion in higher education is based on an extremely rational foundation and this policy in itself is not problematic. In fact, it has already yielded positive results. The numbers of higher education institutions and students have soared and the enrollment percentage in higher education has increased owing to such growth. In addition, female access to higher education has also improved; in particular, the enrollment percentage of females has outpaced that of males in recent years.

Despite the above positive developments, however, the increase in the number of faculty members in the Turkish higher education system is not sufficient to support such growth. As a result, the number of students per faculty member has increased, resulting in negative impacts on both the quality of education and research capacity in Turkey.

One of the most critical points in the quality issue is the number of faculty members with doctoral degrees, coupled with the quality of doctoral education. So, although the growth in higher education is not problematic, increasing the number of qualified PhD holders, in order to achieve sustainable growth, is an urgent issue in the Turkish higher education system.

The Doctoral Issue in the World and in Turkey

Every country has its own unique perspective of doctoral graduates depending on its own state of affairs. While one country achieves growth in its higher education system or economy and makes plans to increase growth; another may try to stabilize the number of postgraduates. For instance, China is one of the two world leaders in terms of the annual number of PhD graduates across all disciplines, with some 50,000 PhD holders per year. The yearly average number of doctoral graduates in all disciplines grew by 40% between 1998 and 2006. This has led to discussions regarding the quality issue in China due to the rapid growth in the number of PhD holders. Despite the discussions, however, doctoral graduates easily find jobs both in industry and higher education institutions.

In Germany, the number of PhD holders per year amounts to approximately 25,000, as the country tries to stabilize this figure as much as possible. In other countries, such as the UK and the US, the number of doctoral graduates increases beyond their own market demands due to demand from foreign students studying in these countries. It is becoming more difficult for PhD holders to take academic positions in the US. For instance, only 12.8% of PhD holders in engineering secure academic positions. Consequently, PhD holders tend to have post-doc positions, and decision makers tend not to intervene in the situation as the competitive environment offers the opportunity to employ more qualified human resources in a less expensive way. Albeit 40–50% of doctoral candidates in North America never graduate, enrollment in advanced research programs increased by approximately 70% in the US and Canada between 1998 and 2012, according to an OECD report.

As for Turkey, the same problems were voiced in the report entitled “Views on the Status of PhD Education in Turkey” (Turkish Academy of Sciences (TÜBA), 2006). In the years covered by the report, the number of master students increased from 92,862 to 417,084, and the number of PhD students from 27,393 to 86,094 in the 2015–2016 academic year. Again, the number of PhD graduates per year increased from 2,000–2,500 to 4,500–5,000 to date. However, the number of graduates has not increased as expected, despite the remarkable jump in the numbers of graduate students and faculty members. The quality of doctoral education, too, is another issue we must dwell upon. According to the same report, one or two faculty members graduated one master’s student as 10 or 11 faculty members graduated one PhD student in 2004. The data for the academic year 2013–2014 reveals that the same characteristic is seen in master’s programs, i.e. one or two faculty members graduated one master’s student, but the situation worsened for PhD programs (13 or 14 faculty members graduated one PhD student). In short, most higher education institutions hire PhD holders, but they fail to provide the supply to meet their own demands.

PhD Education must be Examined

The data on graduate enrollment in doctoral programs indicates that the demand for PhDs has increased in Turkey, as in other countries. Negative developments, according to the above data in the given years, signal that the structural problems of the past still remain, that they have grown, and that, no matter how much the input (enrollment) increases, the output (graduation) is alarmingly low.

For this reason, qualified field research on current PhD programs, and PhD students in particular, are needed. Prospective findings of such research and relevant processes must be reviewed and urgent preventive measures must be taken. To this end, the recently launched YÖK project involving 2,000 PhD students who have scholarships in 100 different disciplines is promising. While arrangements to eliminate existing problems are being made, Turkish higher education definitely needs such new promising projects. In fact, this is not only the problem of the YÖK and universities; it is also a national issue. Therefore, the Ministry of Science, Industry and Technology, the Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TÜBİTAK), and TÜBA must all be involved actively in the process and develop solutions together. Enhancements will enable sustainability of the growth in higher education as they will help to fill the gaps in the education system.

It is known that the number of foreign students in Turkey has been on the rise. According to data from the last 10 years, the number of international students remained level at about 15,000 until 2008. It has dramatically increased since YÖK actively has taken charge of the process and introduced regulations in procedures and implementations. The uptrend continues. For instance, the number of foreign students in Turkish higher education institutions in the 2013-2014 academic year was 48,183, but jumped to 72,178 in the 2014-2015 academic year and increased by 1.8 times and settled at 87,903 in the 2015-2016 academic year.

The number of foreign students enrolled in graduate programs in Turkish higher education institutions was 10,855 in the 2013-2014 academic year; the figure almost doubled and jumped to 22,721 in the 2015-2016 academic year. Therefore, the ratio of international students to the total number of students enrolled in Turkish graduate programs increased as well. This ratio was 3.3 percent in the 2013-2014 academic year and improved to 4.5 percent in the 2015-2016 academic year. Notwithstanding, the ratio of foreign students in total graduate programs across the world has hardly changed in the last years and remains almost at the level of 25 percent.

Turkey needs consolidation and rehabilitation in its internationalization of higher education. Internationalization of Turkish higher education lacks in-depth study, field studies in particular. Articles containing general assessments or short reports are seen more often. It is very difficult to administer the process without conducting field research and without observations from the field. More studies should be carried out in order to help policy makers to make the right decisions.

One of the most critical areas that needs rehabilitation is, beyond the total number of enrolled foreign students, the distribution of foreign students in undergraduate, graduate, and doctoral degree programs. International students in Turkey mostly concentrate on associate degree programs (approximately 6 percent) and bachelor’s degree programs (approximately 69 percent). In developed countries, however, the ratios of foreign students in graduate degree programs constitute higher percentages. The OECD’s Education at a Glance 2015 report indicates that the OECD average number of international students enrolled in bachelor’s or equivalent degree programs stood at 6 percent in 2013, but rose as the level of education increased, settling at 14 percent for master’s programs and reaching 24 percent for PhD programs.

In Turkey, however, the numbers of foreign students enrolled in bachelor’s, master’s, and PhD programs were 1 percent, 4 percent and 4 percent, respectively, in 2013. Having qualified international students in graduate programs amplifies research capacities in higher education institutions as it positively contributes to a country’s power of economic competition. Therefore, it is necessary for Turkey to concentrate more on the distribution of foreign students in higher education programs, develop new policies to this end, and accelerate the relevant implementations.

The percentage of foreign students in PhD programs in Turkey is one-sixth of the OECD average and this points to a significant issue. It seems that doctoral programs in Turkey are not attractive for international students. In fact, irrespective of the perceptions of the foreign students, master’s and PhD programs in Turkey need improvement. Although the problems of master’s and PhD programs and solution recommendations are not the topic of this article, the situation involving these programs must be promptly addressed and remedial steps must be taken.

The problems involving PhD programs in Turkey were presented in a report titled “Views on the Status of PhD Education” by the Turkish Academy of Sciences (TÜBA) in 2006. Apparently, the same problems still exist today. The number of master’s students increased from 92,862 in the years covered in the report to 417,084, and the number of PhD students from 27,393 to 86,094 in the 2015-2016 academic year. Again, the number of PhD graduates remained between 2,000 and 2,500 in the same years, and the current figure has risen to 4,500-5,000. However, the number of graduates has not increased as expected, though the numbers of master’s students and faculty members have increased considerably.

According to the same report, one master’s student graduated per one or two faculty members, and one PhD student graduated per 10 or 11 faculty members. The data for the academic years of 2013-2014 and 2014-2015 reveal almost no change for master’s programs, but the situation worsened for PhD programs to one PhD graduate per 13 or 14 faculty members. The ratio of the number of graduate students enrolled to the number of graduate degrees granted was calculated in the same report. The ratio was four for master’s degree programs, while it was 10 for PhD programs. It is stated that the difference stems from the prolongation of postgraduate education programs. The difference is even wider today. For instance, the ratio for master’s programs increased to approximately six in the 2013-2014 academic year (262,752/41,842) and to approximately eight in the 2014-2015 academic year (342,101/43,713). As for PhD programs, the ratio increased to approximately 15 in the 2013-2014 academic year (65,864/4,516) and to approximately 16 in the 2014-2015 academic year (78,223/4,910).

PhD programs are the education programs that have multiple effects. Quality and quantity problems in doctoral degree programs negatively affect many areas involving R&D activities in our higher education system and our country. To maintain the enormous growth of recent years in our higher education system, an in-depth discussion of doctoral education is necessary. Additionally, the quality of these programs must be improved and immediate measures must urgently be taken in order to increase the number of PhD graduates. To this end, TÜBA must play an active role and develop solutions. In particular, opening graduate level courses with languages of instruction completely in English, French, and Arabic is a must. The international recognition of Turkish higher education institutions must be achieved and encouraged as well. Efforts in this direction will naturally have a positive effect on the number of international students enrolled in Turkish higher education and increase their capability to conduct joint international research projects.

One of the issues that needs improvement is the scarcity of international students and faculty members in the universities of good reputation in education and research capabilities. The number of international students in leading universities around the world has a good share in the total number of students. For instance, the ratio of foreign students to the total number of students is 62 percent at the London School of Economics, 33 percent at MIT, 21 percent at Stanford, and 17 percent at Harvard. In the academic year of 2013-2014, a sizeable portion of international students in Turkey (3,051 students, 6.33 percent) were enrolled at Istanbul University; however, this figure amounts to 2.37 percent of the total number of students enrolled at the same university.

The countrywide distribution also reveals that international students in Turkey are mostly from neighboring and Turkic-language countries. Turkmenistan topped the list, followed by Azerbaijan and Iran in the 2013-2014 academic year. However, Turkey receives very few foreign students from the countries sending the highest numbers of students abroad, and the ratio of the students Turkey receives from these countries is very low compared to the total number of students it sends abroad. The international fair promotion support provided by the Ministry of Economy should be used more actively and extensively, targeting these countries in particular.

On the other hand, the number of foreign faculty members in Turkish higher education institutions steadily increases. Still, this is a small number. According to the last 10 years’ data, the total number of foreign faculty members stood at 1,057 in the 2006-2007 academic year and increased by approximately 2.9 times, settling at 3,114 in the 2015-2016 academic year. The number of faculty members coming from other countries to teach in Turkish universities is approximately 2 percent of the total number of faculty members. Turkey must urgently take measures in the matter. YÖK has recently launched the Foreign Academics Information System (YABSIS) to this end. This is a joint project run by YÖK and the Turkish Prime Ministry to primarily create a database of foreign academics and researchers (who had to immigrate to Turkey due to natural disasters and wars), by compiling their job applications, and providing assistance to them to find employment in Turkish higher education institutions in accordance with the relevant procedures. It is reported that the scope of the online portal will be broadened to take in applications from all foreign academics and researchers who are willing to work in Turkey.

It is good news to highlight the efforts towards the internationalization of Turkish higher education institutions. Universities in Turkey are known to have international cooperation and almost every university puts effort into this. References to the numbers of foreign students and faculty members and of international agreements signed by each university are included in advertising and promotion campaigns. However, it is also the case that these efforts are limited to programs involving the mobility of foreign students and faculty members. The number of students in the Erasmus exchange program coming into Turkey is lower than Turkish students going abroad via the same program.

In the last 10 years, from 2004 to 2014, a total of 23,109 Erasmus students attended Turkish higher education programs as opposed to 74,231 Turkish students who joined Erasmus programs abroad. On the other hand, similar exchange programs do not seem to boost joint research programs among universities, and problems exist in this regard. So, this needs to be investigated thoroughly. It is critical for national initiatives to take action in this direction. The Ministry of Development, regional development agencies, and new support programs of the Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TÜBİTAK) should provide more assistance to the process, develop more international projects, and make more contributions to the development of such projects. All and all, this will mean a crucial step in regional development.

Herewith, Turkey has taken critical steps in recent years to strengthen the internationalization of its higher education system. The enrollment ratio in Turkish higher education has also increased, together with the recent remarkable growth in higher education; at present, Turkish higher education experiences the internationalization phase in a similar fashion. Therefore, the state of higher education today is not independent from that of yesteryears. Although Turkey falls behind other countries in terms of developments in higher education, it is extremely encouraging to see that higher education institutions attach importance to internationalization while competing with one another, and that they are eager in the subject matter.

From the Ministry of Economy to the Ministry of Development, from YÖK to YTB and the Yunus Emre Institute, all shareholders contribute significantly to the internationalization process of Turkish higher education, being aware of the importance of this process to our country. For sound management of the internationalization of higher education institutions, Turkey needs to put forth more effort and conduct studies to closely follow similar processes, developments, and good examples around the world, and to provide venues for constant improvement by taking the potential and opportunities of our country into consideration.