Is China overproducing highly qualified talent?

The rise of benyan daogua

This situation has been shaped by a variety of factors spanning the state, society, universities and individual choices. Historically, China has placed a strong emphasis on education and talent development and this has intensified under Xi, whose administration prioritizes cultivating scientific and technological capabilities. For example, last July, the Chinese Communist Party decided to accelerate the establishment of a self-reliant talent development mechanism in response to escalating competition with the United States.

Chinese authorities also view the enhancement of human capital as a way to offset downward economic pressures caused by an aging population. In addition, Beijing aims to sustain productivity growth through intense domestic competition and advanced technological innovation in emerging sectors, with higher education playing a critical role.

Chinese universities are rapidly gaining global prominence. In this year’s Times Higher Education (THE) World University Rankings, Tsinghua and Peking Universities are in 12th and 13th places respectively — by comparison, the University of Tokyo is 28th — with Chinese institutions performing remarkably well overall.

One of THE’s criteria is the ratio of doctoral students to undergraduates and, as research-oriented universities seek to climb the rankings, developing graduate education has become a strategic priority not just for elite schools but for many others seeking to enhance their reputation.

Labor market preferences and individual choices further drive benyan daogua. A commonly cited sentiment in China, that “there are just too many Chinese people,” reflects intense competition across all facets of life. In educational economics, academic qualifications act as a signal to employers of candidates’ capabilities.

In a populous nation, this signaling effect is even more critical. Graduates with advanced degrees often enjoy better career prospects and favorable treatment in both the public and private sectors. As higher education has become increasingly accessible, people strive for ever-higher academic credentials to stand out, even if they have no intention of pursuing careers in research.

This escalation has triggered a feedback loop: Some employers now require master’s-level education or higher, fueling credential inflation. The result is an intensifying cycle of academic signaling between job seekers and employers, exacerbating China’s reliance on educational qualifications as the ultimate benchmark for opportunity.

Talent supply and demand mismatch

While the pursuit of higher degrees and career advancement is desirable, China’s rapid changes raise concerns, such as the quality of graduate education.

Many universities are ill-prepared and poorly resourced to ensure the quality needed to accommodate a rapidly increasing number of students, resulting in the latter being used as inexpensive intellectual “workers” for their advisers — frequently tasked with labor-intensive activities such as data cleaning and information gathering.

China also faces the pressing issue of youth unemployment. Graduates from prestigious universities — where benyan daogua is most prevalent — often aspire to white-collar positions, which are nearing a point of saturation. Meanwhile, industries with high demand for blue-collar workers suffer from chronic labor shortages, creating a severe mismatch.

Continuously increasing graduate student numbers is viewed by some as a way to prevent unemployment among undergraduates. However, this approach merely postpones the issue by a few years: With youth unemployment remaining high, students without job offers often express despair, encapsulated in the bitter irony of phrases such as “graduation equals unemployment.”

Exporting hypereducation

While benyan daogua primarily concerns Chinese universities, its impact extends well beyond China’s borders.

Traditionally, the country’s students have favored destinations like the U.S. and United Kingdom for their graduate studies. However, in recent years, rising geopolitical tensions have prompted a shift toward Asian institutions, including in Japan and Hong Kong.

Chinese graduate students often possess formidable academic skills, honed through fierce domestic competition, making them highly competitive in host countries’ academic and labor markets. At the same time, many of these students seek to bypass cutthroat competition at home and enjoy better treatment abroad, adding to a mass migration that parallels the outflow of Chinese-made goods toward global markets.

All this has geoeconomic implications. In the U.K., elite institutions have seen a surge in Chinese doctoral students, creating a dependency on tuition revenue and research contributions from this group that is increasingly viewed as a geopolitical risk, prompting calls for de-risking education.

The involvement of foreign students in research raises concerns around research integrity and the potential leakage of sensitive technologies. To mitigate these risks, universities are being urged to adopt measures such as preventing information leaks, implementing strict data management protocols and closely monitoring who can access sensitive materials.

Just as open trade fosters economic benefits, the free movement of students promotes open science and generates significant advantages — but China’s overproduction of highly qualified talent mirrors the geoeconomic challenges posed by the deluge of Chinese products on world markets.

Many Chinese graduates have made invaluable contributions to their host universities. On the other hand, these institutions are made vulnerable if they rely too heavily on students from a single country.

While new economic security measures in higher education may appear to contradict the principles of shared science, clarity about their rationale and scope can help alleviate concerns. This, in turn, allows academic and research activities to remain as accessible and collaborative as possible.

Striking a balance between openness and regulation is essential to preserve the internationalized university environment that so many have benefited from.

(Photo Credit: VCG/ Aflo)

[Note] This article was posted to the Japan Times on Apri 11, 2024:
https://www.japantimes.co.jp/commentary/2025/04/11/world/china-universities-graduates-youth-unemployment/

Geoeconomic Briefing

Geoeconomic Briefing is a series featuring researchers at the IOG focused on Japan’s challenges in that field. It also provides analyses of the state of the world and trade risks, as well as technological and industrial structures (Editor-in-chief: Dr. Kazuto Suzuki, Director, Institute of Geoeconomics (IOG); Professor, The University of Tokyo).

Click here for the details

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in Geoeconomic Briefing do not necessarily reflect those of the International House of Japan, Asia Pacific Initiative (API), the Institute of Geoeconomics (IOG) or any other organizations to which the author belongs.