As a counterpoint to the excellent article by C.K. Yeung in the South China Morning Post, Hong Kong’s Focus on Rankings Distorts Universities’ True Mission, (June 24, 2026), on the issues and problems with global university rankings — much of which I agree with — it is necessary to point out some objective realities about the system, flawed as it is. To begin with, rankings serve as a vital strategic asset and a critical barometer of institutional health for Hong Kong, directly enabling the attraction of top-tier talent, vital to the city’s overall well-being.
University rankings matter because they create an influential, self-fulfilling cycle of prestige, funding, and career opportunities, even though their underlying data may be heavily biased. They act as a “cheap but strong signal”, a quick shorthand for value that individuals, governments, and employers use because measuring the true, deep quality of an institution is too expensive and time-consuming. This is a global phenomenon, as self-interest keeps the system going and helps keep elite universities elite, which many would argue is an important national objective for many reasons, even if it is unfair.
This reality stands in sharp contrast to the views expressed in the article, which dismisses the city’s academic standing as a mere collection of superficial marketing slogans. This perspective somewhat misinterprets how international league tables function within an increasingly hyper-competitive global tertiary education landscape.
The argument that ranking metrics actively obstruct high-impact local research or compromise traditional teaching values is perhaps a false dichotomy. In truth, institutional excellence and international visibility are deeply symbiotic. Hong Kong should confidently leverage its unprecedented academic momentum, with five universities ranked in the global top 100. This includes the recently announced historic double achievement of the University of Hong Kong at 11th and the Chinese University of Hong Kong (CUHK) at 18th in the latest Quacquarelli Symonds (QS) World University Rankings. These impressive results help secure Hong Kong’s position as the premier international education hub across Asia. This is a very good thing.
Critics contend that the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region government’s proud assertion of its university achievements has devolved into a distracting numbers game, suggesting that the pursuit of higher global placement forces public institutions to prioritize international faculty recruitment and citation counts over local community engagement and foundational undergraduate teaching. This perspective, while containing elements of truth, portrays global ranking methodologies, such as those from QS or Times Higher Education, as external corporate straightjackets that distort authentic scholarship. However, this critique treats metrics as a superficial, box-checking exercise (something Hong Kong is rather good at) rather than as what they actually represent: the tangible, quantifiable output of sustained academic investment. A rising international ranking does not emerge from a vacuum. It is the direct consequence of world-class peer assessment and review, robust institutional funding, and groundbreaking scientific scholarship and research. Dismissing these metrics as a distraction ignores the concrete structural improvements that drive them.
The strategic focus on global university rankings is not a distortion of institutional purpose, but a necessary validation of Hong Kong’s status as a world-class education hub that successfully turns international prestige into tangible talent retention and research excellence
To understand why international league tables matter, one must look closely at how the global academic ecosystem operates. High-performing universities act as powerful talent magnets. To start with, top-tier scholars, doctoral researchers, and talented, ambitious international students do not choose institutions blindly. They rely heavily on global reputations to guide their choices. Hong Kong’s prominent presence in these rankings ensures the city remains highly visible to the world’s best academic minds.
Second, international prestige serves as a gateway to lucrative internal, cross-border, and international research grants, corporate research and development investments, and elite global institutional partnerships. A university with a strong standing can secure major collaborations far more effectively than one operating in isolation. It is the game that everyone plays, flawed or not, and if you are not at the table, you are, to quote a recent leader, “on the menu”.
Third, as demonstrated by recent surges in employer reputation scores for local institutions like CUHK, international rankings provide global corporations with immediate confidence in the caliber of our graduate recruits. So, far from isolating universities from their home communities, a strong international reputation infuses local campuses with diverse perspectives and cultures, bringing enriching, global expertise directly to bear on regional challenges and local minds.
The unprecedented concentration of academic excellence in Hong Kong is an extraordinary strategic achievement and a unique advantage that no other global city currently matches at this level. Indeed, it signals a profound reordering of the international higher education hierarchy. Such comprehensive institutional strength across multiple Hong Kong campuses demonstrates that our success is systemic and driven by a highly effective combination of public funding, strong governance, superb leadership, and structural autonomy.
Rather than retreating into defensive localism or succumbing to ranking fatigue, Hong Kong’s tertiary sector should continue to look outward with confidence. Of course, international rankings and other metrics should never be pursued as ends in themselves; they must remain grounded in the natural byproducts of a rigorous, well-funded, and open academic ecosystem. By sustaining deep investments in basic science, engineering, technology, and health in particular, expanding international recruitment networks, and maintaining high standards of scholarly freedom, Hong Kong can continue to protect and elevate its global standing. The city’s universities do not need to choose between serving their local community and leading on the world stage because they are entirely capable of doing both.
In summary, the strategic focus on global university rankings is not a distortion of institutional purpose, but a necessary validation of Hong Kong’s status as a world-class education hub that successfully turns international prestige into tangible talent retention and research excellence.
The author is director of the Laboratory for Space Research at the University of Hong Kong.
The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.
