This study examines how higher education in Flanders works —both structurally and in lived experience—as a form of social investment for highly educated refugees and newcomers (R&N). Research repeatedly shows that many highly educated migrants end up in jobs that they are overqualified for, a problem often called “brain waste” (Mattoo et al., 2008; Eurostat, 2022b; Dietz et al., 2015). Social investment theories suggest that education should reduce this by helping people develop their knowledge and skills and participate in society  (Hemerijck, 2018; Bonoli, 2020). However, integration is also described as a “weak spot” for social investment strategies and procedures in Europe, as they tend to work best for people with stable documentation and immediate readiness to comply with formal requirements (Hemerijck & Patuzzi, 2021).

In this study, we address one overarching research question: To what extent do English-taught programs in Flanders help highly educated newcomers re-enter university and rebuild their careers, and where do the systems themselves create barriers?To answer this question, we looked at two things: what universities offer for R&N and how that offer lived and experienced in practice.

In Phase 1, we mapped English-taught degree and certificate programmes across 18 Flemish HEIs (12 universities of applied sciences and 6 research universities) using publicly available information from official institutional websites. The mapping shows that while English-taught programmes are growing, they are not evenly spread across institutions and disciplines. Research universities tend to offer a broad range of English-taught master’s programmes, while universities of applied sciences and arts offer a narrower selection in their bachelor and postgraduate programmes. However, these programmes often concentrate in certain disciplines such as business, engineering, ICT/STEM, and creative industries. English-taught pathways remain very limited in several socially essential fields, including social work, health care and  education. Moreover, admissions systems are complex and fragmented, often requiring formalized documents and language certifications that are difficult to obtain for R&N. Financial models maintain a high cost barrier for non-EEA students, despite partial access to grants for recognized refugees.

Phase 2 adds a photovoice component documenting newcomer students’ first-hand experiences of admissions and arrival procedures. A thematic analysis points to four intertwined domains of barriers—administrative, financial, practical, and social-emotional—whose prominence shifts over time. Pre-arrival experiences are shaped by documentation demands, delays, and financial uncertainty, while post-arrival experiences foreground the need for clearer communication, predictable procedures, culturally responsive support, and early access to peer networks. These experiences align with international research showing that newcomers often face unique challenges due to their disrupted educational trajectories and limited resources (McBrien, 2005; UNESCO, 2018; Soberon et al., 2017).

Integrating both phases reveals a tension at the heart of English-taught programmes in Flanders. For some R&N, English programmes can function as a meaningful gateway into higher education. Yet the combined evidence also shows how current structures tend to favour applicants who can mobilise stable documentation, pay high costs, and comply with standardised language proof requirements—conditions that are unequally distributed for R&N. As a result, higher education risks reproducing mismatch rather than reducing it (Aleksynska & Tritah, 2013; Mattoo et al., 2008). From a social investment perspective, the central issue is therefore not only whether English-taught programmes are available, but whether access and support conditions are designed as developmental pathways rather than primarily as selection mechanisms (Bonoli, 2020; Hemerijck & Patuzzi, 2021).

The study employed a convergent mixed qualitative design (Padgett, 2009; Mills & Birks, 2014). In a convergent design, different types of data collected and analysed separately, then brought together to answer the same research question. This approach is particularly suitable for this study, because integration barriers are produced at multiple levels: institutional structures shape what is offered and under what conditions, while lived experiences reveal how procedures and rules function in practice. Phase 1: Desk-based mapping We conducted a structured scan of 18 Flemish HEIs, gathering data from official institutional websites. This information was organized according to specific analytical categories, such as programme types, admission and language requirements, ECTS, financing, support/bridging pathways, and Dutch language support. The extracted information was then integrated into a comparative Excel matrix, to facilitate a qualitative content analysis. This allowed us to identify recurring inclusion/exclusion mechanisms as well as broader cross-institutional patterns (Gaber, 2020). Phase 2: Photovoice study We analysed participant-generated photographs and narratives focusing on admissions and arrival experiences. Using thematic analysis, we identified recurring barriers and traced how these barriers shift over time (pre-arrival versus post-arrival). Integration (convergence) We triangulated findings by comparing the structural patterns identified in the mapping with the lived experiences surfaced through photovoice. This allowed us to examine where formal arrangements translate into concrete obstacles or support gaps, and where institutional practices could potentially increase the educational and labour-market “return” of social investment in higher education for R&N (Hemerijck, 2018; Bonoli, 2020).

The study shows that while English-taught higher education in Flanders offers great opportunities for R&N, they also come with specific challenges that limit who can access them and under what conditions. First, the English-taught landscape is uneven. Provision is strong in some institutions and fields—especially business, engineering, ICT/STEM— yet thinner in several socially essential domains such as social work, education and healthcare. For R&N who already have experience in those domains there is often no clear and direct path to continue their education in English. Second, complex and fragmented admissions requirements and procedures can be major barriers for R&N. Photovoice narratives highlight how documentation requirements, uncertainty around timelines, and communication gaps can become significant hurdles, with consequences not only for access but also for well-being and sense of belonging (UNESCO, 2018; McBrien, 2005). These difficulties interact with financial insecurity, including tuition differentiation and additional costs linked to study, mobility, or administrative procedures. Such conditions risk narrowing options and delaying transitions, thereby indirectly sustaining patterns of mismatch and overqualification (Aleksynska & Tritah, 2013; Mattoo et al., 2008). From a social investment perspective, the implication is straightforward: the mere existence of English-taught programmes is not enough. For R&N to truly succeed institutions need to make crucial changes. This includes making entry conditions more predictable and affordable, and improving guidance and support that recognize the realities of R&N (Bonoli, 2020; Hemerijck & Patuzzi, 2021).

Aleksynska, M., & Tritah, A. (2013). Occupation-education mismatch of immigrant workers in Europe: Context and policies. Economics of Education Review, 36, 229–244. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2013.06.002 Bonoli, G. (2020). The origins of active social policy: Labour market and childcare policies in a comparative perspective. Oxford University Press. Dietz, J., Joshi, C., Esses, V. M., Bennett, A. A., & Navas, M. S. (2015). The skill-utilization methods of skilled immigrants in Canada: A systematic review. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 49, 1–34. Eurostat. (2022b). Over-qualification rate of non-EU citizens in the EU. European Commission. Gaber, J. (2020). Qualitative analysis for planning & policy: Beyond the numbers. Routledge. Hemerijck, A. (2018). Social investment as an answer to the double challenge of aging and the knowledge economy. Policy & Politics, 46(2), 231–252. Hemerijck, A., & Patuzzi, L. (2021). Social investment and the integration of refugees in Europe. Migration Policy Institute Europe. Mattoo, A., Neagu, I. C., & Özden, Ç. (2008). Brain waste? Educated immigrants in the US labor market. Journal of Development Economics, 87(2), 255–269. McBrien, J. L. (2005). Educational needs and barriers for refugee students in the United States: A review of the literature. Review of Educational Research, 75(3), 329–364. Mills, J., & Birks, M. (2014). Qualitative methodology: A practical guide. SAGE Publications. Padgett, D. K. (2009). Qualitative methods in social work research (2nd ed.). SAGE Publications. Soberon, A., Jacobs, M., & Vanderwaeren, E. (2017). Higher education for refugees in Flanders: A focus on barriers and support. Journal of International Migration and Integration. UNESCO. (2018). Global education monitoring report 2019: Migration, displacement and education - Building bridges, not walls. UNESCO Publishing.