With more than 30 years of experience, Jamil Salmi is a specialist in higher education policy who has collaborated with numerous governments, universities and international organisations around the world. He’s a former World Bank Coordinator of Tertiary Education and has worked in more than 90 countries. Salmi was in Nepal recently to attend the commencement ceremony of Madan Bhandari University of Science and Technology (MBUST), where he participated as a guest speaker.

The Post’s Aarya Chand sat with Salmi to discuss why higher education should be central to Nepal’s development strategy and what lessons the country can learn from others when it comes to strengthening its universities. Excerpts.

How do you see the current state of higher education in Nepal?

Looking at Nepal’s higher education system today, there is still much that needs to be improved. I have been working in Nepal’s higher education sector for nearly 25 years, and this is my fourth visit. Unfortunately, I do not see the level of progress one would expect over such a long period.

The future of Nepal is in its greatest resource: Its people. However, it does not have any facility to sustain them in the country. So I’d say developing human resources by investing in higher education is the best way for this country to realise its full potential. It will help create a mass of educated people who will be able to innovate, conduct quality research, increase productivity, and build new businesses.

Research Universities like MBUST in Chitlang can also play a role in regional development, much like how Bangalore, Silicon Valley, or Shenzhen became growth hubs around their education institutions. With a new government coming, it is important that higher education becomes a priority.

From a policy perspective, what are the critical elements the government needs to address to strengthen Nepal’s educational institutions?

From my experience working in many countries, good higher education institutions require three things, and they must come together at the same time: sufficient resources, talented people and good governance.

First, universities need sufficient funding to attract and retain qualified faculty and capable students. Talent cannot be developed or sustained without proper financial support. Governance also plays an equally important role.

Universities should not be victims of political interference. One of the major challenges in South Asia, including in Nepal, is excessive politicisation within universities. This slows decision-making and reduces flexibility.

Universities need the ability to respond quickly. For example, in well-governed institutions, decisions such as, say, replacing broken equipment like computers can be instantly taken. In poorly governed systems, these same decisions can take months, thereby severely disrupting academic work.

For higher education to function effectively, institutions must be given the autonomy and flexibility to manage their resources responsibly. This is why governance reform is just as urgent as increased funding.

Do you think the poor state of institutions of higher education is the reason Nepali students go abroad to study?

In many cases, that is part of the reason. If they do not trust the quality of universities at home and they have the financial means, they will naturally look for opportunities abroad.

The problem is that when students study abroad, many of them do not return. Nepal benefits from remittances, but no country can be built on remittances alone. Development depends on well-trained, talented people working at home.

I’m not saying studying abroad is a bad thing. I studied in France, the UK and the US, but countries need conditions to attract people back. Without competitive salaries, good working conditions and strong institutions, it is very difficult to retain talent.

Which countries can we learn from, in terms of strengthening our higher education system?

China and South Korea can be two examples. These countries show how vision and long-term investment can transform higher education. After the Cultural Revolution, China rebuilt its universities by investing heavily in research and sending students to top institutions abroad. In 2003, no Chinese university was in the top 100 of the Shanghai Ranking. However, by 2025, 11 were listed.

South Korea followed a similar path, prioritising education and innovation in national development. Currently, Vietnam is also advancing quickly.

The main lesson is clear: Successful nations have a clear vision, they invest consistently in education and research, and commit to long-term development.

MBUST positions itself as a research-focused institution. How is it different from traditional universities, and what role can it play in Nepal’s knowledge ecosystem?

Well, I think it stands out in a few ways: First, it operates without political interference; second, it has excellent research labs; and third, it has skilled professors who focus on research addressing Nepal’s challenges.

I visited laboratories conducting research directly relevant to Nepal, such as studies on mushrooms found in the Chitlang region. This kind of work can have applications in medicine, cosmetics and even new technologies.

Research institutes like this can help solve national problems and develop innovations that benefit local industries. If they build a strong reputation, they can also attract students who might otherwise pursue postgraduate studies abroad. That would strengthen the entire higher education ecosystem.

You have evaluated and designed excellence initiatives and world-class university strategies globally. Is it realistic for Nepal to aim to develop world-class universities, or should its focus be elsewhere?

Nepal needs a balanced and differentiated higher education system. Research-oriented institutions like MBUST are important, but they are not enough. Large universities like Tribhuvan University with massive enrollments also need quality improvement and resources.

There is a need for a mix of institutions: One or two top research universities, like the one MBUST hopes to become. There should also be online universities and teaching-focused colleges that prepare students for jobs. For example, in Korea, junior colleges collaborate with companies like Samsung and LG. These companies help design what students learn, so the education matches real job needs. This makes education highly relevant, and most graduates are able to secure jobs rather than stay unemployed.

You talked of global university rankings. Are these rankings helpful for national policy-making?

Global rankings are helpful, especially at the beginning. They act as a wake-up call for governments and universities, showing that reputation alone does not guarantee quality. For example, when the first Shanghai Ranking appeared, countries like France and Germany were disappointed by their results. This pushed their universities to improve governance and funding, leading to major excellence initiatives.

However, rankings can also create problems. Some are commercial and encourage universities to focus on improving indicators rather than real quality. For instance, courting international students may raise a university’s score, but you also need to factor in the quality of those students.

Rankings are useful as a benchmarking tool, but harmful if institutions chase positions over meaningful academic improvement.

Looking at 10 to 15 years ahead, both for Nepal and globally, what will matter most for universities?

Strong and efficient governance, long-term funding, and smart use of technology, in my opinion, are necessary for universities. None of these elements alone is enough. Funding provides the required resources, and good governance guarantees clear strategy and accountability. Likewise, technology should be used as a tool to support teaching, research and management rather than to take the place of academic judgment or critical thinking. How well universities integrate all three will determine their future success.