Expenditure per student in bachelor’s, master’s and doctoral educational institutions continues to differ widely across OECD countries, ranging from below USD 6 000 in Greece to more than USD 70 000 in Luxembourg.
Public funding remains the main source of financing across the OECD for bachelor’s, master’s and doctoral educational institutions, accounting for 68% of total expenditure on average, although the share coming from government sources ranges from over 90% in Norway to 21% in the United Kingdom, reflecting differences in tuition fee policies and funding models.
Research and development (R&D) represents around one-third of total expenditure across the OECD on bachelor’s, master’s and doctoral educational institutions, underlining the dual role of tertiary educational institutions in both teaching and research.
Education at a Glance 2026
Expenditure on educational institutions, in equivalent USD converted using PPPs for GDP, including R&D
1. Data include or exclude some categories, please refer to the source table for more information.
For data, see Table C5.1. The data for this figure can be accessed via https://stat.link/h7ub2s.
Context
The expansion of tertiary education across OECD countries has widened access and increased attainment, while also increasing the resources needed to support quality, equity and financial sustainability. As student populations increase and public budgets come under strain from competing priorities such as health care, pensions and defence, countries are adopting increasingly diverse approaches to financing tertiary education. These differences reflect not only varying levels of public investment capacity, but also broader policy choices regarding tuition fees, cost-sharing arrangements and the respective roles of governments, households and other private actors in funding higher education.
At the same time, tertiary institutions fulfil multiple functions that extend beyond teaching. In many countries, tertiary educational institutions play a central role in research and innovation systems, meaning that a substantial share of expenditure is devoted to R&D activities. As a result, differences in expenditure per student across countries reflect not only differences in teaching costs, but also differences in institutional structures, research intensity and staffing profiles.
This chapter examines how tertiary education is financed across OECD and partner countries by analysing expenditure per student, the balance between public and private funding sources, differences across types of institutions, the role of R&D expenditure, and the distribution of spending within institutions. It also explores how expenditure patterns have evolved over time, highlighting the impact of demographic change, staffing developments and national policy priorities on tertiary education financing.
The analysis focuses mainly on bachelor’s, master’s and doctoral or equivalent programmes, which enrol most tertiary students across OECD countries and provide a more comparable basis for analysis. However, as short-cycle tertiary programmes play an important role in some systems and may follow different funding arrangements, the data tables at the end of the chapter also include information on this level of education.
Other findings
The distribution of expenditure within all tertiary institutions differs markedly across countries, with Ireland and Portugal concentrating over 70% of resources on teaching staff while at the other end of the scale, Luxembourg allocates 92% of its current expenditure to non-teaching staff and other current expenditure such as research and operational costs.
Denmark and Sweden have above-average expenditure per student at bachelor’s, master’s and doctoral or equivalent levels, and devote over 50% of this expenditure to R&D activities, the highest shares across OECD countries.
Australia, Canada and the United Kingdom have well-developed government-backed student loan systems to support access to tertiary education and rely far more heavily on household expenditure than other OECD countries. This partly explains why they have higher than average expenditure per student at bachelor’s, master’s and doctoral or equivalent levels.
Expenditure by source of funding
Across OECD and partner countries, spending per student in tertiary education varies widely, both in terms of overall investment levels and the balance between public and private sources of funding, reflecting differences in funding models and tuition fee policies (Johnstone, 2004[1]; Židonė-Bylė and Krušinskas, 2025[2]). On average across the OECD, expenditure per full-time equivalent student in bachelor’s, master’s and doctoral programmes amounts to USD 16 405 from government sources and USD 7 780 from private and non-domestic sources (Figure C5.1). This latter category covers a range of funding sources, with households accounting for the largest share of private expenditure in most countries. Across OECD countries, household expenditure represents 19% of total tertiary expenditure on average, compared to 9% from other private entities and 5% from non-domestic sources (Table C1.6, available online).
Overall, the data reveal no strong correlation between the funding model and the level of expenditure per student across countries. Countries such as Greece, Romania and the Republic of Türkiye report relatively low levels of overall expenditure per student, combined with limited private and non-domestic contributions. In Greece, for example, total expenditure per student remains below USD 6 000, with public funding accounting for about three-quarters of the total, indicating constrained overall investment in bachelor’s, master’s and doctoral programmes (Figure C5.1).
In contrast, Luxembourg and the Nordic countries have some of the highest overall expenditure per student and tend to rely heavily on public funding. Luxembourg records by far the highest total expenditure, at over USD 70 000 per student, with nearly 90% financed publicly. Similarly, Denmark, Norway and Sweden each spend over USD 31 000 per student, while private funding represents less than one-fifth of total expenditure. Finland and Iceland also show strongly public-oriented funding models, with private and non-domestic expenditure accounting for only around 12% of total spending (Figure C5.1). These patterns reflect the long-standing practices among Nordic countries of providing tertiary education with low or no tuition fees for domestic students, alongside well-developed public support mechanisms for students (see Figure C5.6 in (OECD, 2025[3])).
Other countries take a different approach and rely strongly on private and non-domestic funding to support high levels of expenditure. In the United Kingdom, total expenditure exceeds USD 34 000 per full-time equivalent student, close to 80% of which comes from private and non-domestic sources, the largest share among OECD countries with available data. This is largely driven by uncapped tuition fees for international students, while the figure for domestic students is likely to be lower given that their tuition fees are capped. Australia also combines high total expenditure in bachelor's, master's and doctoral programmes (over USD 32 000) with high private and non-domestic contributions, accounting for around 70% of the total. In Canada, where expenditure per student is similarly high, private and non-domestic funding slightly exceeds public funding, representing 54% of total expenditure (Figure C5.1).
In other countries where private and non-domestic sources play a dominant role, overall spending levels are more moderate. In Israel and Japan, such sources account for around 60% of total expenditure per full-time equivalent student. Chile, Korea and Latvia also rely comparatively heavily on private and non-domestic funding, which makes up more than half of total expenditure (Figure C5.1). In Chile, the state-guaranteed student loan (“Crédito con Aval del Estado”, a low-interest financing scheme for higher education) is classified as private expenditure. In practice, however, the government typically pays in advance for the loan portfolios of higher-risk students, and also pays when students default. As a result, a significant share of what is recorded as private funding is ultimately borne by the government.
These differences in funding structures are closely linked to countries’ tuition fee and student-support policies. Nordic countries combine low or no tuition fees with extensive public financial support for students, reflecting a model in which tertiary education is financed predominantly through progressive taxation. In contrast, Australia, Canada, England (United Kingdom), New Zealand and the United States rely more heavily on tuition fees and private contributions, often combined with well-developed student loan systems to support access. Other countries, including France, Germany and Switzerland, tend to combine moderate tuition fees with more targeted forms of public support. These different approaches illustrate the variety of policy choices countries make to balance financial sustainability, access and equity in tertiary education systems (OECD, 2025[3]).
Expenditure by type of institution
Expenditure per student also differs considerably according to the type of tertiary institution attended, reflecting the diversity of institutional profiles and funding arrangements within tertiary education systems (Figure C5.2. ). Today, on average across OECD countries, about half of 25-34 year-olds hold a tertiary qualification, compared with less than one-third of 55-64 year-olds, signalling a significant expansion of tertiary education (see Chapter A1 and the OECD Data Explorer – Education and Skills (OECD, 2026[4])). As access has expanded, some tertiary systems have also diversified their modes of provision (OECD, 2025[5]; Teixeira et al., 2022[6]), relying not just on public institutions, but also on government-dependent private and independent private institutions (see Box C5.1).
Educational institutions can be divided into two categories: public and private. An institution is classified as private if its overall control and management rest with a non-governmental organisation (e.g. a church, trade union, business enterprise or foreign or international agency) and if most of the members of its governing board are not selected by a public agency. Private institutions can be further divided into government-dependent and independent private institutions.
A government-dependent private institution is a private institution that receives 50% or more of its core funding from government agencies, or one whose teaching personnel are paid by a government agency or by the government directly.
An independent private institution is a private institution that receives less than 50% of its core funding from government agencies and whose teaching personnel are not paid by a government agency.
In most OECD countries with available data, expenditure per full-time equivalent student is higher in public institutions than in private institutions, reflecting their central role in delivering both teaching and research, as well as their access to core public funding streams. Where they exist, government-dependent private institutions often show lower levels of expenditure per student compared with public institutions. This is partly because they operate on a mix of public transfers and private resources and receive lower levels of direct public funding per student than public institutions. As a result, expenditure levels in these institutions are often lower than in the public sector (Figure C5.2).
Expenditure on educational institutions, in equivalent USD converted using PPPs for GDP, including R&D
1. Data include or exclude some categories, please refer to the source table for more information.
For data, see Table C5.1. The data for this figure can be accessed via https://stat.link/h7ub2s.
Expenditure per student in independent private institutions varies widely across countries. In some systems, they operate with relatively low expenditure per student but in contexts where these institutions are small, specialised or highly selective, expenditure per student can be comparatively high. This is the case for Belgium, where less than 1% of students are enrolled in independent private institutions and the exceptionally high expenditure per student (USD 68 644) corresponds almost exclusively to those enrolled in the College of Europe, which receives significant funding from the European Union. In contrast, in New Zealand, where independent private institutions enrol a similarly low share of students, expenditure is much more modest, at only USD 5 274 per student (Figure C5.2).
In Korea, a large share of students are educated in private institutions (OECD, 2025[5]). This is a well-established feature of this system: private institutions have historically played a central role in absorbing increasing demand for higher education. As a result, private institutions are not marginal providers but a core component of the tertiary landscape. Despite its large enrolment share, expenditure per full-time equivalent student in independent private institutions is less than half that in public institutions (Figure C5.2. Figure C5.2. ). This reflects potential structural system characteristics: limited R&D activity may reduce per-student costs in private institutions, while public institutions may be more selective and offer a greater concentration of higher-cost programmes, which raises average expenditure levels.
Expenditure on research and development
R&D is a central component of tertiary education spending because it reflects the broader role of tertiary educational institutions as key producers of knowledge and innovation, not just as providers of teaching. Universities are among the main centres of public research in many OECD countries, contributing directly to scientific progress, technological development and innovation capacity. This dual function means that a significant share of expenditure per student is linked to activities that extend beyond instruction. In countries with strong research systems, such as the Nordic countries, tertiary institutions are closely integrated into national innovation ecosystems, supporting productivity growth and long-term economic development. For example, in Finland, three universities leading in the areas of science and technology, art and design, and business and economics were merged into Aalto University in 2010, which ranks high internationally in research and innovation collaboration (OECD, 2022[7]).
The extent of this dual teaching and research role varies significantly across countries, leading to differences in the share of expenditure devoted to R&D activities. On average across OECD countries, around one-third of total expenditure per student is related to R&D, amounting to USD 8 433, while USD 15 753 is devoted to teaching and other core educational activities. Countries with the highest overall spending per student also tend to allocate substantial resources to R&D. In Luxembourg, R&D expenditure reaches nearly USD 30 000 per student, reflecting the strong integration of research into its tertiary system. Denmark and Sweden show a similar pattern, with R&D expenditure representing a very large share of total spending (Figure C5.3).
In contrast, Bulgaria, Chile and Romania stand out for combining comparatively low overall levels of expenditure per student with very limited investment in R&D activities within tertiary institutions. In Bulgaria and Chile, R&D expenditure amounts to less than USD 1 000 per student, while in Romania it is almost negligible (USD 28 per student). It is important to note that these figures exclude R&D taking place outside of tertiary education institutions. In countries with dedicated public research institutes, these data do not capture the share of their public R&D undertaken in those institutes. For example, research activities in Bulgaria have historically been concentrated in public research institutes rather than universities (OECD, 2025[8]). This highlights how cross-country comparisons of R&D expenditure within tertiary educational institutions should be interpreted in light of the broader organisation of national research systems and the different roles assigned to universities and non-university research institutions (Figure C5.3).
Romania’s R&D figures reflect its lower overall investment capacity, with very little and decreasing R&D expenditure in the public sector, leaving the country ranked 27th among the 27 EU Member States (European Commission, 2025[9]). Like Bulgaria, Romania inherited the Soviet model of organisation of the science system where universities were primarily teaching institutions and scientific research was undertaken in separate research institutes. After 1990, the number of R&D personnel in higher education increased slightly due to the new research mission of universities. As a member of the European Union (EU) since 2007, Romania participated in the EU-wide target to increase R&D to 3% of GDP but has not managed to attain its national objective. Recent trends show a decline with Romania having the lowest R&D intensity across the EU (European Commission, 2021[10]). In Chile, R&D expenditure is among the lowest in the OECD and fewer than 10% of large firms collaborate with universities, well below the OECD average of 29% (OECD, 2025[11]).
Expenditure on educational institutions, in equivalent USD converted using PPPs for GDP
1. Data include or exclude some categories, please refer to the source table for more information.
For data, see Table C5.1. The data for this figure can be accessed via https://stat.link/h7ub2s.
Distribution of current expenditure
Expenditure within tertiary educational institutions is distributed differently across countries, reflecting variations in institutional organisation, staffing structures and the balance between teaching, administration and other operational activities (Figure C5.4. ). On average across the EU25 countries, teaching staff account for 44% of current expenditure, non-teaching staff for 25% and other current expenditure for 31% (Figure C5.4).
In Ireland expenditure is strongly concentrated on teaching staff, with 85% of current expenditure devoted to teaching personnel, followed by Portugal (74%). In contrast, Luxembourg devotes a relatively large share of expenditure to non-teaching staff, with 63% of expenditure allocated to non-teaching personnel and only 8% to teaching staff. This reflects both the strong research orientation of the University of Luxembourg and the functional allocation rules used in reporting expenditure. In particular, the non-teaching category includes a large number of postdoctoral researchers, doctoral researchers, technical staff and administrative personnel, whose activities are classified under research or administration rather than teaching. There are also comparatively high shares of spending on non-teaching staff in Estonia (46%) and in Latvia (43%) (Figure C5.4).
In a number of countries, a substantial share of spending comes under the category of other current expenditure. This includes expenditure on materials, operational costs and contracted services obtained from external providers, such as building maintenance, ancillary services and facility rents. Italy, Korea and Saudi Arabia devote close to half of current expenditure to this category (Figure C5.4).
In per cent
1. Data include or exclude some categories, please refer to the source table for more information.
2. Year of reference 2022.
For data, see Table C5.2 The data for this figure can be accessed via https://stat.link/h7ub2s.
Trends in expenditure per full-time equivalent student
Changes in expenditure per student are shaped not only by overall funding levels, but also by demographic changes and the distribution of resources across levels of education as well as policy priorities, labour-market conditions and institutional reforms. On average across the OECD, total expenditure per student in tertiary education increased by 10% between 2015 and 2023. Changes in staff compensation were generally more moderate, with expenditure on all staff compensation rising by 7% on average over that period (Figure C5.5).
Expenditure per student has evolved differently across OECD and partner countries between 2015 and 2023, reflecting differences in demographic trends, institutional funding, salary developments and investment priorities. Several Central and Eastern European countries recorded particularly strong growth in expenditure per student over the period. The largest increases were in Hungary, at 73%, and Slovenia, at 59%, followed by Lithuania, Poland and Korea where expenditure per full-time equivalent student rose by more than 30%. In Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Romania, the growth in staff compensation per student outpaced overall expenditure per student due to the declining student numbers in these countries, which may have led to smaller class sizes and higher unit costs, even as total staffing levels remained relatively stable (Figure C5.5).
In contrast, expenditure per student declined in several countries between 2015 and 2023. The largest falls were observed in Bulgaria (-29%) and Finland (-15%). In Luxembourg, all staff compensation per student increased over the period, while expenditure on teaching staff per student decreased. This reflects a shift in the staffing structure, with strong growth in postdoctoral and doctoral research staff, as well as other non-teaching staff, contributing to faster growth in expenditure on research and administrative functions than on teaching staff. Similarly, in Estonia, Korea and Lithuania, expenditure on teaching staff compensation grew much more slowly than overall staff expenditure, suggesting stronger growth in non-teaching or research-related personnel costs (Figure C5.5).
In Bulgaria, Finland and the United Kingdom, declining total expenditure per student was accompanied by substantial reductions in expenditure on staff compensation between 2015 and 2023. The largest fall for both categories of staff expenditure was in the United Kingdom where expenditure per student on teaching staff compensation fell by 46% and expenditure on all staff compensation fell by 45%. This fall is surprising given that expenditure per student only decreased by 9% in the United Kingdom over the same period (Figure C5.5).
In per cent, expenditure on bachelor’s, master’s and doctoral or equivalent educational institutions (including R&D)
1. Data include or exclude some categories, please refer to the source table for more information.
For data, see Table C5.3. The data for this figure can be accessed via https://stat.link/h7ub2s.
For the definition of expenditure on educational institutions, government expenditure on educational institutions, private expenditure on educational institutions and research and development, refer to Chapter C1.
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[12]). For country-specific notes, see Education at a Glance 2026 Sources, Methodologies and Technical Notes (https://doi.org/10.1787/dcf64a14-en.
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 2026 Sources, Methodologies and Technical Notes (https://doi.org/10.1787/dcf64a14-en).
References
[9] European Commission (2025), European Innovation Scoreboard 2025: Country Profile Romania, European Commission, Brussels, https://ec.europa.eu/assets/rtd/eis/2025/ec_rtd_eis-country-profile-ro.pdf.
[10] European Commission (2021), “PSF review of the Romanian R&I System”, Background Report, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, https://doi.org/10.2777/38334.
[1] Johnstone, D. (2004), “The economics and politics of cost sharing in higher education: Comparative perspectives”, Economics of Education Review, Vol. 23/4, pp. 403-410, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2003.09.004.
[4] OECD (2026), Data Explorer - Education and Skills, http://data-explorer.oecd.org/s/5q.
[8] OECD (2025), Education and Skills in Bulgaria, Reviews of National Policies for Education, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/ac0229da-en.
[3] OECD (2025), Education at a Glance 2025: OECD Indicators, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/1c0d9c79-en.
[11] OECD (2025), OECD Economic Surveys: Chile 2025, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/efad96ce-en.
[5] OECD (2025), The Financial Sustainability of Higher Education: Insights from Policy in OECD Countries, Higher Education, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/f544ccfe-en.
[7] OECD (2022), OECD Economic Surveys: Finland 2022, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/516252a7-en.
[12] 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.
[6] Teixeira, P. et al. (2022), “Competition and diversification in higher education: Analysing impacts on access and equity in the case of Portugal”, European Journal of Education, Vol. 57/2, pp. 235-254, https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12501.
[2] Židonė-Bylė, G. and R. Krušinskas (2025), “Who pays, who graduates? Funding mechanisms and other drivers of graduation in the European Union”, Economies, Vol. 13/12, p. 364, https://doi.org/10.3390/economies13120364.
The data for the figures and tables in this chapter can be downloaded via https://stat.link/h7ub2s.
To access further data and/or other education indicators, please visit the OECD Data Explorer: http://data-explorer.oecd.org/s/4s.
Data cut-off for the print publication 17 June 2026. Please note that the Data Explorer contains the most recent data.
a – category not applicable; b – break in series; d – contains data from another column; m – missing data; u – partial 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 2026: Sources, Methodologies and Technical Notes (https://doi.org/10.1787/dcf64a14-en)
Expenditure on educational institutions, including and excluding R&D, by level of education, in equivalent USD converted using PPPs for GDP
Note: columns showing government expenditure are available for consultation online
1. Expenditure for all institutions excludes expenditure by international sources. Expenditure for private institutions includes some expenditure outside educational institutions.
2. Expenditure on public educational institutions includes transfers from international sources to the government and to private educational institutions.
3. Expenditure on bachelor's, master's and doctoral or equivalent includes non-R&D expenditure on short-cycle tertiary education.
4. Excludes central government expenditure on independent private institutions.
5. 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).
6. Expenditure on short-cycle tertiary education excludes payments from non-educational private entities to private institutions.
7. Excludes some local government expenditure.
8. Year of reference 2022.
The data for this table can be accessed via https://stat.link/h7ub2s.
Expenditure from all sources within educational institutions, including R&D
1. Current expenditure includes expenditure for retirement.
2. Capital expenditure includes expenditure on government-dependent private institutions.
3. Expenditure in short-cycle tertiary education lacks payments from non-educational private entities to private institutions.
4. Current expenditure includes expenditure for ancillary services.
5. Year of reference 2022.
The data for this table can be accessed via https://stat.link/h7ub2s.
Expenditure from all sources within educational institutions including R&D, by level of education, constant prices (2020=100)
Note: averages only include countries with available data for both 2015 and 2023. Columns showing expenditure on teaching staff and total expenditure per student are available for consultation online.
1. Excludes some expenditure from private and international sources (web columns).
2. Excludes current expenditure from international sources (web columns).
3. Excludes current expenditure on independent private institutions.
4. Expenditure on bachelor's, master's and doctoral or equivalent includes non-R&D expenditure on short-cycle tertiary education.
5. 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).
6. Expenditure on short-cycle tertiary education excludes payments from non-educational private entities to private institutions.
7. Data refer to public institutions only.
8. Teaching staff expenditure includes expenditure on non-teaching staff in public institutions (web columns).
The data for this table can be accessed via https://stat.link/h7ub2s.