Tertiary education has expanded significantly, with nearly half of 25-34 year-olds now holding a degree compared to less than one-third of 55-64 year-olds. This growth places pressure on public budgets already strained by other priorities, making private funding sources important. They represent a larger share of total funding at the tertiary level than at any other level of education.
Expenditure per student differs widely across OECD and partner countries and between types of institutions. Luxembourg and Norway spend over USD 33 000 per student in public institutions, while Greece and Israel spend less than USD 10 000.
Countries and economies adopt different approaches to cost-sharing, reflecting both fiscal constraints and policy choices. Some systems, like Norway, maintain high levels of public financing, while others, like England (United Kingdom), rely more heavily on private funding, often coupled with student support mechanisms such as grants and loans.
Education at a Glance 2025
In equivalent USD converted using PPPs, expenditure on educational institutions
Note: The percentage in parentheses represents the share of students enrolled in independent private institutions.
1. In Denmark, there are only three government-dependent private institutions and the substantial expenditure per student is primarily influenced by research grants, which tend to fluctuate significantly over time.
For data, see Table C5.7, available on line. For a link to download the data, see Tables and Notes section.
Context
The rapid expansion of tertiary education across OECD countries has heightened the pressure on public budgets, particularly given ageing populations and growing demands for health care and defence spending. Ensuring the financial sustainability of tertiary education increasingly requires mobilising private contributions, including tuition fees, alongside public investment. However, the share of private expenditure in tertiary education is shaped not just by financial constraints, but also by broader societal and policy choices. Countries differ significantly in their views on the role of government in funding education – reflected, for example, in their tuition fee policies and the extent to which they promote cost-sharing between the state and individuals. As a result, funding structures have become more diverse, with differences across levels of study, types of institutions and student profiles. In this context, policy makers face complex trade-offs: they must secure adequate resources for each student to maintain quality, ensure equitable access through well-designed student support systems, and balance the respective contributions of households, governments and other entities, such as businesses and philanthropic organisations. Moreover, with research and development (R&D) representing a significant function of tertiary institutions, understanding how R&D activities are financed is central to assessing the overall investment in the sector. This chapter reviews national practices in tuition fee policies, the design of grant and loan systems, and the broader financing landscape, including public and private expenditure per student, the role of non-household actors, and R&D funding models, to inform policy choices that support access and affordability of tertiary education systems.
Other findings
OECD countries and economies follow four main models of tuition and financial support in tertiary education, ranging from no or low tuition fees with generous aid to high tuition fees with limited support. Between these extremes, some pair high fees with robust financial aid, while others charge moderate fees and offer targeted support to a smaller share of students.
Tuition fees for master’s programmes often reflect the higher expected earnings of master’s graduates compared to bachelor’s graduates. In 13 out of 24 OECD countries and economies with available data, average tuition fees charged by public institutions are higher for master’s degrees than for bachelor’s degrees.
Independent private institutions generally charge higher tuition fees than public institutions, particularly at master’s level. This is partly because, by definition, they receive a smaller share of their funding from the government and are therefore more reliant on tuition fees to cover their costs. The only exceptions among OECD countries are Lithuania and Poland.
Foreign students typically pay higher tuition fees than national students in about two-thirds of OECD countries and economies. However, higher fees do not necessarily deter international enrolment. In Australia, Canada and New Zealand, the share of international students in master’s programmes is among the highest across the OECD, with international students representing at least 19% of enrolments – despite facing some of the highest tuition fees in the OECD.
Expenditure by type of institution
Today almost half of 25-34 year-olds hold a tertiary qualification, compared to less than one-third of 55-64 year-olds, signalling a significant expansion of tertiary education. Securing sufficient resources to support this growth is a challenge for countries. With growing defence expenditure and rising healthcare costs associated with ageing populations, public budgets are increasingly strained and the expansion of tertiary education increasingly depends on private funding sources.
As countries expand access to tertiary education and some diversify how it is provided, it is increasingly important to assess the provision of tertiary education taking place outside public institutions and examine spending across all types of institutions: public, government-dependent private and independent private. These categories vary not only in their governance and sources of funding but also in their cost structures and resources available to students. Public institutions are primarily funded by governments, while government-dependent private institutions receive significant public funding but are privately governed. Independent private institutions, in contrast, rely largely on tuition fees and private funding sources.
In some systems, independent private institutions play a dominant role, educating most tertiary students: Chile (where 62% of tertiary students are enrolled in independent private institutions) and Korea (76%) are notable examples with longstanding traditions of private provision. These institutions help to absorb the growing demand for tertiary education. In contrast, many European countries rely almost exclusively on public or government-dependent private institutions, with independent private institutions serving only a marginal share of students. This is the case for example in Belgium, New Zealand and Slovenia with less than 5% of students enrolled in such institutions (Figure C5.1).
Data show that total expenditure per student can also vary markedly across institution types within countries. In Chile, for example, public institutions spend significantly more per student (USD 17 890) than independent private ones (USD 8 407), despite a majority of students being enrolled in independent private institutions. In Belgium, fewer than one per cent of students are enrolled in independent private institutions, but spending per student is very high (USD 65 739) and corresponds almost exclusively to expenditure on students enrolled in the College of Europe, which receives important funding from the European Union. Some systems, like the Netherlands, show more balanced spending per student, suggesting more similar funding structures across types of institutions (Figure C5.1).
Tertiary education systems also show significant variation in total expenditure per student across countries. In Luxembourg, total spending per student in public institutions reaches nearly USD 68 000, by far the highest among all OECD and partner countries with data. Nordic countries such as Denmark, Norway and Sweden also invest heavily, with public institutions spending over USD 31 000 per student. In contrast, Greece and Israel report spending below USD 10 000 per student in public institutions (Figure C5.1). These patterns highlight the importance of monitoring not just public funding levels but also total resource availability across different types of institutions. Policy makers should ensure that funding aligns with quality and equity goals, and that disparities across institutional types do not translate into unequal learning opportunities for students.
Expenditure on research and development in tertiary education
Investment in research and development (R&D) at the tertiary level is a key driver of long-term economic growth and competitiveness. Higher education institutions play a central role in producing the knowledge and innovation that fuel productivity gains, industrial transformation and technological advancement. Moreover, R&D activities in tertiary institutions often lead to spillover effects across the economy, as findings and technologies spread to other sectors through partnerships and skilled graduates.
Data show that R&D expenditure accounts for a large share of investment in tertiary education, underscoring the financial weight and economic importance of research within higher education systems. For example, in Denmark, expenditure on tertiary education as a share of GDP rises from 0.86% of GDP to 1.87% and from 0.73% to 1.50% in Sweden, meaning that about half of the total expenditure at this level goes to R&D activities (Table C5.1).
Between 2015 and 2022, expenditure on R&D within tertiary education institutions as a share of GDP remained relatively stable across OECD and partner countries. The OECD average rose slightly from 0.42% to 0.43% of GDP. While some countries such as Austria (from 0.44% to 0.69% of GDP), Belgium (from 0.48% to 0.56%) and Greece (from 0.36% to 0.44%) recorded notable increases, others recorded more modest rises. In contrast, several countries saw R&D expenditure stagnate or decline, including the Slovak Republic, where it fell from 0.59% of GDP to 0.29%. Others, such as Romania and Bulgaria, maintained very low levels throughout the period (Table C5.8, available on line).
It is important to note that the figures on R&D spending refer to expenditure occurring within tertiary education institutions and exclude R&D taking place outside of tertiary education institutions. In countries with extended dedicated research institutes, these data do not capture a considerable share of their R&D.
Box C5.2 uses data from government budget allocations for R&D to present comparative data on government-financed R&D into the field of education, offering a complementary perspective on public investment in R&D covering expenditure within and outside higher education institutions
Research and development (R&D) into the education field of study underpins continuous efforts to improve education systems, teaching and learning. Such research helps identify which teaching methods work best and how students learn most effectively. Data from the government budget allocations for R&D (GBARD) show that 3.7% of public R&D budgets across OECD countries is allocated to research in this field, making it the third least-funded area out of the 12 areas covered (OECD, 2025[1]). Despite growing demands for innovation in education systems, a consistently low share of R&D has been dedicated to the field of education since 2020 (Vincent-Lancrin, 2023[2]), highlighting a persistent underinvestment in educational research.
While direct comparisons should be made with caution due to the differing nature of data across countries, most OECD and partner countries (22) allocate less than 3% of their public R&D budget to education, 7 allocated between 3% and 6%, and 7 over 6%. The two fields receiving the largest shares of public R&D budgets are industrial production and technology (26.1%) and health (15.7%) (Figure C5.2).
In per cent
Note: The category "other" includes: “energy”, “exploration and exploitation of space”, “environment”, “transport, telecommunication and other infrastructures”, “political and social systems, structures and processes”, “exploration and exploitation of the Earth”, and “culture, recreation, religion and mass media”. Expenditure on general advancement of knowledge has been excluded from the analysis.
1. Data refer to 2024.
2. Data refer to 2025.
Source: OECD (2025), Government budget allocation for R&D (GBARD). For a link to download the data, see Tables and Notes section.
GBARD is the most widely available indicator of public funding for educational R&D in OECD countries, capturing the share of national budgets explicitly allocated to research across specific socio-economic objectives (or fields of research), including education. However, a large share of research activities is classified under the broader category of general advancement of knowledge and various research areas (e.g. educational sciences, psychology and sociology) fall under this broader category (OECD, 2015[3]). To focus more precisely on funding allocated to specific fields, the data in Figure C5.2 exclude the category of general advancement of knowledge.
Government expenditure on tertiary education
While primary and secondary education are mainly publicly funded, the lower share of public sources in the funding of tertiary education is not solely driven by constrained public budgets. There are also theoretical reasons for partly financing tertiary education through private sources. Tertiary education brings broad societal benefits but also economic returns to individuals in the form of better employment rates and higher earnings. This underpins the rationale behind cost-sharing: the idea that students (and their families) should bear part of the cost of their tertiary studies.
In practice, the extent of cost-sharing varies widely across countries, and recent trends show divergent paths. Despite some national shifts over time, the overall share of expenditure covered by government sources has remained relatively stable across OECD and partner countries with data. In traditionally publicly funded systems such as Norway, government sources still account for a large share of tertiary education funding, although the share has declined slightly from 99% in 2015 to 94% in 2022. In other countries, such as Bulgaria and Romania, the public share has increased by more than 10 percentage points. Other countries remain heavily reliant on private funding sources. In Chile, only 47% of tertiary education expenditure comes from government sources, and in the United Kingdom, it is just 43%, the lowest across OECD and partner countries with data (Figure C5.3).
These differences reflect not just fiscal capacity but also distinct policy choices about who should bear the costs of education. However, high private costs do not necessarily mean reduced access or equity: countries with well-developed student support systems, including income-contingent loans or generous grants, can still maintain high levels of participation and mitigate financial barriers. Ultimately, the effectiveness of cost-sharing models depends not just on the balance of public and private funding, but also on how student support is designed and targeted to promote fairness and affordability.
In per cent, expenditure on educational institutions, initial expenditure
For data, see Table C5.2. For a link to download the data, see Tables and Notes section.
Other sources of funding in tertiary education
A comprehensive understanding of tertiary education funding requires examining not only the level and evolution of public spending, but also the scale and role of private contributions. This helps clarify how the costs of education are shared among key actors. Unlike primary and secondary education, where public sources account for 90% of total expenditure on average, almost one-third of total funding for tertiary institutions came from the private sector across OECD countries in 2022 (Table C5.6, available on line). The large share of private spending at the tertiary level reflects the widespread use of cost-sharing arrangements, in which public authorities, households and, in some cases, other private entities such as businesses or foundations, jointly finance the system. Notably, about two-thirds of this private funding comes from households, with the remainder coming from other private entities including private businesses and non-profit organisations (Box C5.2).
The scale of non-household private expenditure on tertiary institutions varies substantially across OECD and partner countries, from 0% of total expenditure in Mexico and Romania to 23% in Canada, Israel and the United States (Table C5.6, available on line). These differences reflect differences across systems: whether institutions operate revenue-generating services or have substantial investments or endowments that generate income, or whether there is an established tradition of private research funding or philanthropy in the country. For example, in some OECD countries, such as the United Kingdom and the United States, private foundations play a significant role in funding research activities, whereas in others, such as the Nordic countries, this pattern of funding is less developed, as companies cover nearly all the private funding.
The joint data collection by UNESCO, the OECD and Eurostat (UOE), which is the basis for the data provided in this chapter, uses specific concepts and categories to refer to the financing of tertiary education institutions, which do not necessarily correspond to the concepts and categories used in national data and reporting systems (OECD, 2018[4]). The UOE data categorise expenditure on tertiary education institutions into spending by public bodies (government), households, other private entities and organisations based abroad (non-domestic). The government category encompasses all forms of public subsidy to tertiary educational institutions, including core operating grants, competitive research funding provided by public research funding agencies and other targeted, project-based grants from public bodies. Household expenditure captures tuition and other fees paid by domestic and international students and their families, while non-domestic (international) expenditure measures funding to institutions from public agencies and private companies and organisations based in another country. This latter category may include grants from European Union funds or international organisations, as well as funding by foreign governments or companies and non-profit bodies based abroad.
The category of other private entities is used to capture sources of funding which cannot be categorised as public bodies, households or organisations based abroad. The main sources of funds captured by this category are:
research grants or contracts agreed with private entities, including businesses and non-profit organisations
other service contracts with private entities (to provide consulting or contracted training services, for example)
income from operating student residences, catering and other student services
income from investments, endowments and donations.
National statistical bodies report data to the UOE data collection based on institutions’ national data collections, which are themselves based on institutional income statements. The precise categories included in these income statements vary by country, which, in turn, influences what is included in the category of expenditure by other private entities for each OECD country.
Tuition fee policies in tertiary education
This section reviews national practices in tuition fee policies, with a particular focus on the interaction between tuition fees and public support for students. It examines the financing models countries adopt, the design of grant and loan systems, and the implications of different approaches for student debt, affordability and access to education.
Differentiation by level of study
In most OECD countries and economies, tuition fees vary considerably by level of study, with fees for master’s programmes typically higher than those for bachelor’s programmes – by 29% on average – reflecting the increased labour-market value of advanced degrees. For example, tuition fees for master’s degrees in public institutions are 40-86% higher than for bachelor’s programmes in countries such as Australia, Canada, the French Community of Belgium, France, Latvia and Spain. In Lithuania, fees at the master’s level are more than double those at the bachelor’s level. In contrast, Austria, the Flemish Community of Belgium, Japan, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and Switzerland charge similar fees for both levels, while Nordic countries (like Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden) and Türkiye do not charge tuition fees at any level for national and EU/EEA students (Table C5.3).
Short-cycle tertiary programmes (ISCED 5) are also expanding in many countries as a more affordable and shorter alternative to longer tertiary programmes. In public institutions, tuition fees for these programmes are generally lower than those for bachelor’s degrees. In France and Spain, they are generally free of charge – unlike other levels of tertiary education – while in the United States, fees average less than USD 3 600 per year, less than half the average cost of bachelor’s programmes. In contrast, in Lithuania, Luxembourg and the Netherlands, tuition fees for short-cycle and bachelor’s programmes are broadly equivalent. In Norway, short-cycle tertiary programmes are the only level of tertiary education for which tuition fees are charged (Table C5.3).
Differentiation by type of institution
The growing demand for higher education is not only changing student pathways but also prompting structural shifts in tertiary education systems. While the bachelor’s degree remains the most commonly obtained qualification, a rising share of students are continuing their studies to the master’s level: in 2024, 17% of young adults held a master’s degree as their highest qualification, up from 15% in 2019 (see Chapter A1). This upward trend reflects higher aspirations, increased competition in the labour market and greater availability of advanced programmes.
The resulting expansion has major implications for the financing and development of higher education institutions, which need to respond by increasing capacity and adapting their programmes and infrastructure to meet diverse and growing needs. Private institutions have played a growing role in absorbing this demand. Between 2013 and 2023, the share of students enrolled in master’s programmes in independent private institutions increased in most countries and economies, and from 15% to 19% on average. This trend was particularly marked in Finland, France, Italy and Spain, where enrolment in private institutions at the master’s level rose by more than 9 percentage points over this period (Table C5.3).
Tuition fees in independent private institutions are often significantly higher than in public ones – over five times in Spain and more than twice in countries including Israel, Italy and the United States, but less than double in countries like Australia, Japan, Korea and Romania. In some countries, the large gap is largely driven by the relatively low tuition fees in public institutions, rather than exceptionally high fees in private ones. For example, in Spain, the average annual tuition for students enrolled in master's programmes in independent private institutions exceeds USD 13 900, compared to around USD 2 400 in public institutions (Figure C5.4 and Table C5.3).
The growing role of private institutions raises concerns about quality assurance and regulatory oversight, particularly where institutions rely heavily on revenue from tuition fees to sustain operations. As tertiary education systems continue to diversify, the challenge for policy makers will be to strike a balance between expanding access, ensuring quality and maintaining financial sustainability across both public and private sectors.
In USD converted using PPPs
Note: The percentage in parentheses refers to the share of master's students enrolled in independent private institutions.
1. Reference year differs from 2022/23.
2. Government-dependent private institutions instead of public institutions.
3. Data on independent private institutions are missing.
4. Government-dependent and independent private institutions are combined. Data includes foreign students in Germany.
5. Government-dependent private institutions instead of independent private institutions.
For data, see Table C5.3. For a link to download the data, see Tables and Notes section.
Differentiation between national and foreign students
In a growing number of countries, tuition fees vary not only by the type of institution or programme, but also by the nationality or residency status of students. Globally, around 21% of students enrolled in master’s programmes in public institutions across OECD countries are international or foreign students. They contribute positively to the global visibility and prestige of tertiary institutions and also provide an opportunity to generate additional revenue, particularly if they pay higher tuition fees than national students. About two-thirds of OECD countries (12 out 18 with available data) charge higher tuition fees to foreign students than to domestic ones for master's or equivalent programmes, making this an increasingly important source of institutional funding. However, it should be noted that not all foreign students are subject to higher fees. In EU countries, for example, tuition fee policies distinguish between EU/EEA and non-EU/EEA students: only the latter are generally required to pay different fees, while EU/EEA students are treated on the same footing as domestic students (Figure C5.5 and Table C5.3).
In some countries, the gap in tuition fees between domestic and foreign students can be substantial. In Australia, Canada, Denmark, Finland, Latvia, the Netherlands and New Zealand, foreign students pay over USD 10 000 more per year for master’s programmes than domestic students in public institutions. Despite these higher fees, these countries continue to attract large numbers of international students, drawn by the quality of education, English-speaking environments and favourable post-graduation labour-market opportunities (Figure C5.5).
As countries seek to balance the goals of equitable access and financial sustainability, many have revised their tuition policies. This includes traditionally tuition-free systems such as Denmark and Sweden, which have introduced fees for non-EU/EEA students over the past decades. These changes reflect a broader trend among countries to impose higher charges on international students as part of efforts to diversify funding sources for tertiary education and alleviate pressure on public budgets.
In USD converted using PPPs
Note: The percentage in parentheses refers to the share of mobile/foreign students enrolled in master’s or equivalent programmes in 2022 (see Chapter B4). It is important to note that some foreign/mobile students are subject to the same tuition fees as national students. For instance, in the EU countries depicted in this chart, only students from outside the EU/EEA are typically required to pay higher fees, while EU/EEA students are generally treated the same as domestic students regarding tuition policies. For detailed information on foreign/mobile students by country of origin, please refer to Chapter B4.
1. Reference year differs from 2022/23.
2. Government-dependent private institutions instead of public institutions.
3. The percentage in parentheses refers to the share of mobile students and less than 10% of mobile students from outside the EU/EEA end up paying higher tuition fees than national students.
4. Tuition fees charged for foreign students are between USD 8 000 and USD 21 000.
For data, see Table C5.3. For a link to download the data, see Tables and Notes section.
Public financial support for tertiary students
Country approaches to supporting students
As tertiary education continues to expand, countries must find sustainable ways to fund growing enrolment while ensuring equitable access and maintaining quality. This balancing act increasingly relies on a mix of tuition fees, student support schemes and private contributions. In 2023, OECD countries and economies could be grouped into four broad financing models for tertiary education (Figure C5.6 and Table C5.3 and Table C5.4):
Low or no tuition fees combined with high levels of financial support are characteristic of systems in countries such as Denmark, Finland, Luxembourg, Norway, Sweden and Türkiye, where annual tuition fees in public institutions are below USD 500 and more than half of students receive public support through grants and/or loans. These systems offer generous student benefits that reduce upfront costs and promote access, but graduates often contribute more through higher income tax rates later in life. This reflects a broader policy choice to finance tertiary education collectively through progressive taxation rather than through individual student payment (OECD, 2024[5]).
High tuition fees combined with well-developed financial aid systems, as seen in Australia, England (United Kingdom), Latvia, Lithuania, New Zealand and the United States. In these countries, average tuition fees for bachelor's programmes in public institutions typically exceed USD 4 000. However, more than 50% of students receive robust financial aid, primarily in the form of student loans and, in some cases, need-based grants. Loans in Australia, England (United Kingdom), New Zealand and the United States are income contingent, meaning graduates only start repaying them once they reach a certain income threshold, whereas in Latvia and Lithuania loans have fixed-term repayments (see next section). Student debt levels are high in many of these countries, with average debt per borrower exceeding USD 20 000 in Australia, England (United Kingdom) and the United States (Table C5.5, available on line).
Moderate tuition fees combined with targeted student support are characteristic of systems in Austria, the Flemish and French Communities of Belgium, Croatia, France, Germany, and Switzerland. In these countries and economies, annual tuition fees for bachelor’s programmes in public institutions typically range from USD 150 to USD 2 000. Financial aid is generally means tested and directed toward the most disadvantaged students, based on family income or other social criteria, rather than being universally available. As a result, less than 40% of students receive public financial support in all of these countries. These systems rely predominantly on public funding to ensure broad access to higher education, while limiting the accumulation of student debt.
Relatively high tuition fees with limited public financial support, as observed in countries like Canada and Poland. In these systems, less than 40% of students receive public grants or scholarships, while tuition fees are substantial, averaging over USD 5 500 in both countries for a year in bachelor’s programmes in public institutions. As a result, students and their families bear a significant share of the cost, which can create financial barriers for low-income groups unless mitigated by institutional aid or private support mechanisms.
These four models of tuition fee and financial aid systems offer distinct advantages and trade-offs. Countries with low or no tuition and generous public support promote broad access and low student debt, but often finance these benefits through higher taxes later in life. High-fee systems with strong financial aid can maintain access for many, yet often result in high levels of student debt and long repayment periods. Moderate-fee systems with targeted aid rely on progressive taxation to limit overall costs, but risk under-supporting middle-income students. Finally, systems with high fees and limited aid may incentivise institutional efficiency but can create financial barriers for disadvantaged groups. Ultimately, no model is without its challenges – the effective design of policies depends on national priorities, fiscal capacity and equity goals (OECD, 2024[5]).
1. Reference year differs from 2022/23.
2. Government-dependent private institutions instead of public institutions.
3. Master's and doctoral programmes are combined with bachelor's programmes. Data includes foreign students in Germany.
4. Short-cycle tertiary programmes are combined with bachelor's programmes.
For data, see Table C5.3 and Table C5.4. For a link to download the data, see Tables and Notes section.
Forms of public financial support for tertiary students
The four broad models of tuition fees and financial support do not tell the whole story about how countries and economies support their tertiary students. Beyond whether students receive a loan or a grant, countries differ considerably in the amount of support provided, the eligibility criteria and the repayment conditions. These factors significantly shape students’ financial realities both during their studies and after graduation.
Grant amounts vary widely across countries and economies, with an OECD average of around USD 5 500 per year. In Romania and the United States, States, average grants are below USD 2 500, whereas in Austria, Denmark, Italy and Switzerland, they exceed USD 9 000. In roughly two-thirds of countries and economies with available data, public grants surpass average tuition fees charged by public institutions, offering students some support for living expenses. However, in countries including Korea, Latvia, Romania and the United States, grants cover only a small fraction of tuition fees, pushing students to rely more heavily on loans or family resources. While there is some variation in the eligibility criteria for public grants and scholarships across countries and economies, common patterns can still be observed. About three-quarters of countries and economies award means-tested grants based on financial need, around two-thirds offer merit-based scholarships and only about one-quarter provide universal grants to all tertiary entrants (Table C5.4).
In comparison, student loans tend to be more universally accessible, with less variation in eligibility across countries. However there are differences in how repayment is structured. In fixed-repayment systems – used in the majority of countries with available data – graduates must begin repaying their loans within a set timeframe, regardless of income. In contrast, income-contingent repayment systems, implemented in countries and economies including Australia, England (United Kingdom) and New Zealand, mean repayments are delayed until graduates reach a minimum income threshold. These systems provide greater financial protection for low-income earners but may lead to longer repayment periods and increased fiscal costs for governments (Table C5.4 and Table C5.5, available on line).
Across OECD countries and economies, the average amount students borrow through loans varies more than four-fold. In countries with high tuition fees and relatively well-developed loan systems – defined here as systems with average annual tuition fees of over USD 5 000 for bachelor’s programmes in public institutions and where more than 40% of students take out loans – borrowing ranges from around USD 5 000-6 000 per year in Latvia and Australia, to approximately USD 8 800 in New Zealand, and over USD 23 000 in England (United Kingdom). In some countries, such as New Zealand, students can also borrow to cover living costs or course-related costs in addition to tuition fees. Interestingly, even in tuition-free systems such as Norway, Sweden and Finland, more than half of students also take out loans, primarily to cover living expenses (Table C5.5, available on line).
These differences in loan amounts and repayment designs, alongside tuition levels and living expenses, shape the total debt burden that students carry upon graduation. In countries and economies where fees and living costs are both high, students often graduate with substantial debt – exceeding USD 68 683 on average in England (United Kingdom). Yet even in Norway, despite a lack of tuition fees, student debt can mount up (averaging over USD 46 000) due to generous loans covering living expenses. These examples underline how the structure and targeting of financial aid, and not just the overall level of public support, are critical to promoting equity, affordability and sustainable outcomes for students (Table C5.5, available on line).
In this chapter, national students are defined as the citizens of a country who are studying within that country. Foreign students are those who are not citizens of the country in which the data are collected. While pragmatic and operational, this classification is inappropriate for capturing student mobility because of differing national policies regarding the naturalisation of immigrants. For European Union (EU) and the European Economic Area (EEA) countries, citizens from other EU countries usually pay the same fees as national students. In these cases, foreign students refer to students who are citizens of countries outside the EU. Further details of these definitions are available in Chapter B4.
Tuition fee amounts refer to gross tuition fees charged by institutions, before grants, scholarships and tuition waivers are applied.
For the definition of expenditure on educational institutions, direct government expenditure on educational institutions, direct private expenditure on educational institutions, initial and final spending, and research and development, refer to Chapter C1.
For the definition of public and private educational institutions, refer to Chapter C2.
Tuition fees and loan amounts in national currencies are converted into equivalent USD by dividing the national currency by the purchasing power parity (PPP) index for gross domestic product. The same PPPs as those used in Education at a Glance 2024 were applied in this edition to ensure consistency between data released in both editions. The amounts of tuition fees and associated proportions of students should be interpreted with caution, as they represent the weighted averages of the main tertiary programmes and may not cover all educational institutions.
Student loans include the full range of student loans extended or guaranteed by governments, in order to provide information on the level of support received by students. The gross amount of loans provides an appropriate measure of the financial aid to current participants in education. Interest payments and repayments of principal by borrowers should be taken into account when assessing the net cost of student loans to public and private lenders. In most countries, loan repayments do not flow to education authorities and the money is not available to them to cover other expenditure on education.
Chapter C5 takes the full amount of scholarships/grants and loans (gross) into account when discussing financial aid to current students. Some OECD countries have difficulty quantifying the amount of loans to students. Therefore, data on student loans should also be treated with caution.
For an overview of the methodology based on the joint data collection by UNESCO, the OECD and Eurostat (UOE), see Chapter C1. For more detailed information, please refer to the OECD Handbook for Internationally Comparative Education Statistics (OECD, 2018[4]). For country-specific notes, see Education at a Glance 2025 Sources, Methodologies and Technical Notes (https://doi.org/10.1787/fcfaf2d1-en).
Data on tuition fees and financial support to tertiary students refer to the academic year 2022/23 or calendar year 2022 and are based on a special survey administered by the OECD in 2023. Trend data refer to academic year 2012/13 or calendar year 2012.
For an overview of the data sources used based on the joint data collection by UNESCO, the OECD and Eurostat (UOE), refer to Chapter C1. For additional details, see Education at a Glance 2025 Sources, Methodologies and Technical Notes (https://doi.org/10.1787/fcfaf2d1-en).
References
[1] OECD (2025), Government budget allocations for R&D, http://data-explorer.oecd.org/s/1z0.
[5] OECD (2024), Taxing Wages 2024: Tax and Gender through the Lens of the Second Earner, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/dbcbac85-en.
[4] OECD (2018), OECD Handbook for Internationally Comparative Education Statistics 2018: Concepts, Standards, Definitions and Classifications, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264304444-en.
[3] OECD (2015), Frascati Manual 2015: Guidelines for Collecting and Reporting Data on Research and Experimental Development, The Measurement of Scientific, Technological and Innovation Activities, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264239012-en.
[2] Vincent-Lancrin, S. (ed.) (2023), Measuring Innovation in Education 2023: Tools and Methods for Data-Driven Action and Improvement, Educational Research and Innovation, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/a7167546-en.
To download the data for the figures and tables in this chapter, click StatLink above.
To access further data and/or other education indicators, please visit the OECD Data Explorer: https://data-explorer.oecd.org/.
Data cut-off for the print publication 13 June 2025. Please note that the Data Explorer contains the most recent data.
Table C5.1 Expenditure on tertiary educational institutions (2022)
Note: Columns showing data on expenditure per student as a percentge of GDP per capita, and on expenditure on educational institutions as a percentage of GDP are available for consultation on line.
1. Total expenditure on educational institutions includes payments by households outside educational institutions.
2. Expenditure on tertiary education includes some expenditure on post-secondary non-tertiary education and some expenditure on upper secondary vocational education (KOSEN grades 1 to 3).
3. Year of reference 2021.
Table C5.2 Change in total expenditure on tertiary institutions (2015 to 2022)
Note: Columns showing the data used to calculate changes between 2015 and 2022 are available for consultation on line.
1. Total expenditure on educational institutions includes payments by households outside educational institutions.
2. Expenditure on tertiary education includes some expenditure on post-secondary non-tertiary education and some expenditure on upper secondary vocational education (KOSEN grades 1 to 3).
Table C5.3. Annual average (or most common) tuition fees charged by tertiary institutions to national and foreign students (2022/23)
1. Reference year differs from 2022/23: calendar year 2021 for Australia and Germany; academic year 2021/22 for England (UK), Spain and the United States; and academic year 2023/24 for Türkiye.
2. Government-dependent and independent private institutions are combined. In Germany, only academic programmes are included.
3. Government-dependent private institutions instead of independent private institutions.
4. Government-dependent private institutions instead of public institutions.
5. Tuition fees for foreign students typically refer to tuition fees for out-of-state national students. However, in a minority of institutions, tuition fees can be lower for out-of-state national students.
Table C5.4. Public financial support for students enrolled in tertiary programmes (2012/13 and 2022/23) and types and eligibility of public grants/scholarships (2022/23)
1. Reference year for distribution of public financial support differs from 2022/23: calendar year 2021 for Australia; academic year 2021/22 for Austria, England (UK), France and Spain; calendar year 2022 for Germany; academic year 2019/20 for the United States; and academic year 2023/24 for Türkiye.
2. Public institutions only.
3. Government-dependent private institutions instead of public institutions.
a – category not applicable; b – break in series; d – contains data from another column; m – missing data; x – contained in another column (indicated in brackets). For further control codes, see the Reader’s Guide.
For further methodological information, see Education at a Glance 2025: Sources, Methodologies and Technical Notes (https://doi.org/10.1787/fcfaf2d1-en)].
In equivalent USD converted using PPPs for GDP, direct expenditure within educational institutions, by level of education
Note: For notes on this table and a link to download the data, see Tables and Notes section above.
Constant prices (2020=100), by level of education
Note: For notes on this table and a link to download the data, see Tables and Notes section above.
In equivalent USD converted using PPPs, for full-time students, by type of institutions and level of education
Note: For notes on this table and a link to download the data, see Tables and Notes section above.
Note: For notes on this table and a link to download the data, see Tables and Notes section above.