In the context of shifting global geopolitics, the landscape of higher education is undergoing a profound transformation from a traditional unipolar structure to a fractured multipolar order. As emerging economies like China rise alongside a simultaneous wave of de-globalization and new nationalism (Huang, 2025; Flint, 2021), higher education has increasingly been constructed as a core arena for inter-state competition. Within this scenario, universities are viewed not merely as academic institutions but as geopolitical instruments for projecting soft power and maximizing strategic advantages (Cantwell, 2021; Hazelkorn, 2017). Consequently, the discourse surrounding international academic mobility has shifted from traditional paradigms of "brain drain" or "talent circulation" to a securitized focus on "research security" and "de-risking" (Lee & Haupt, 2020; Marginson, 2022). This "geopolitical turn" has engendered a complex environment where the logic of scientific openness increasingly clashes with the logic of national security, creating new forms of borders—both physical and ideological—that impede the free flow of knowledge. While existing studies have valuably explored international student mobility under these tensions (e.g., Mok, Shen, & Gu, 2024), there remains a critical gap regarding international scholars. Unlike students, scholars are the primary agents of knowledge production and are thus more deeply entangled in the web of "knowledge security" and state competition.
This research specifically addresses the mobility of non-Chinese foreign scholars to China, investigating how they navigate a "non-traditional" academic destination that is simultaneously a rising scientific powerhouse and a focal point of geopolitical anxiety in the West. We aim to understand the micro-dynamics of scholar mobility against the macro-backdrop of geopolitical reconfiguration by addressing two central inquiries: In an era of intensified geopolitical uncertainty, how is China imagined and experienced as an emerging global academic destination by individual mobile scholars? And how do changing global geopolitics reshape the higher education field at the levels of materiality, imagination, and social practice?
To interpret these dynamics, we adopt a spatial perspective through Lefebvre’s (1991) conceptual lens of the production of space, integrated with Marginson’s (2002; 2022) scales of higher education. We conceptualize the academic environment not as a fixed container, but as a relational space continuously constructed through a triad of dialectically interconnected moments: materiality (spatial practice), imagination (representations of space), and social practice (spaces of representation). Materiality refers to the objective structures that enable or constrain mobility, such as the "Thousand Talents" funding schemes, visa regimes, and the physical infrastructure of research centers. Imagination encompasses the dominant ideologies and discourses, specifically examining how China is "imagined" through conflicting narratives—the Western media's depiction of political risk versus the academic discourse of rising university rankings—and how these representations guide scholars' intentionality. Finally, social practice covers the lived, embodied experiences of scholars, serving as the arena where abstract geopolitical imaginations are grounded, contested, or reinforced through specific research projects and human connections. By employing this framework, we reveal the disjunctures between macro-level geopolitical narratives and micro-level lived realities, arguing that scholars are not passive recipients of policy but active "space makers" who negotiate their professional identities amidst these structural constraints.

Based on 45 in-depth interviews, this study investigates the subjective experiences of international scholars working in Chinese research-intensive universities. Participants were selected through purposive sampling to ensure a diverse representation of academic ranks and national origins, comprising scholars from both the Global North (e.g., USA, Germany, Italy) and the Global South (e.g., Pakistan, Iran). Their tenure in China ranges from one to eleven years, providing longitudinal insights into their evolving trajectories. The interview protocol was designed to elicit narratives regarding their motivations, professional encounters, and perceptions of the local academic field. Data analysis followed a deductive approach guided by the theoretical framework of spatial production. Specifically, we coded the transcripts to identify themes corresponding to the three dimensions of social space: the material constraints of infrastructure and policy, the imaginary dimension of geopolitical perceptions, and the social practices embedded in their daily academic lives. This methodological design enables us to capture the nuanced interplay between individual habitus and the shifting geopolitical structures.

We identify that the mobility of foreign scholars to China is a complex process of "space making" situated at the intersection of conflicting geopolitical forces. First, in terms of materiality, we find that China’s state-led investment serves as a powerful "pull" factor, yet this material advantage is often complicated by regulatory hurdles and the securitization of academic borders. Moreover, the study reveals a significant disjuncture between the "imagined China"—often portrayed in Western media through narratives of political risk—and the "experienced China" of the scholars. Participants actively navigate these competing discourses, leveraging China’s rising academic status to justify their career choices while managing reputational risks. Through social practices, scholars engage in a form of everyday diplomacy, constructing micro-spaces of collaboration that transcend national boundaries. Ultimately, we argue that international scholars are not passive subjects of geopolitics but active agents who strategically utilize the "China opportunity" to accumulate academic capital, thereby reconfiguring the global academic map through their embodied practices.

Cantwell, B., & Grimm, A. (2018). The geopolitics of academic science. In B. Cantwell, H. Coates, & R. King (Eds.), Handbook on the politics of higher education (pp. 319–335). Edward Elgar Publishing. Chen, J., Fang, Y., & Shen, W. (2025). Broken Desire: Chinese Students’ Abandonment of Overseas Study Amidst the Changing Global Landscape and Geopolitical Tensions. Population, Space and Place, 31(7), e70109. Flint, C. (2022). Introduction to geopolitics (4th ed.). Routledge. Hazelkorn, E. (2018). Reshaping the world order of higher education: the role and impact of rankings on national and global systems. Policy Reviews in Higher Education, 2(1), 4-31. Huang, F., Kotake, M., Kim, Y., Chen, L., Li, X., & Daizen, T. (2025). Rethinking Internationalization of Higher Education under Geopolitical Shifts: Policy Responses in China, Japan, Korea, Australia, and the United States. Lefebvre, H. (1991). The production of space (D. Nicholson-Smith, Trans.). Blackwell. (Original work published 1974). Marginson, S., & Rhoades, G. (2002). Beyond national states, markets, and systems of higher education: A glonacal agency heuristic. Higher education, 43(3), 281-309. Marginson, S. (2022). Space and scale in higher education: The glonacal agency heuristic revisited. Higher Education, 84(6), 1365-1395. Mok, K. H., Shen, W., & Gu, F. (2024). The impact of geopolitics on international student mobility: The Chinese students' perspective. Higher Education Quarterly, 78(4), e12509. Moscovitz, H., & Sabzalieva, E. (2023). Conceptualising the new geopolitics of higher education. Globalisation, Societies and Education, 21(2), 149-165.