Unlock the Editor’s Digest for free
Roula Khalaf, Editor of the FT, selects her favourite stories in this weekly newsletter.
More than half of British universities featured in a leading global ranking of academic institutions have seen their ratings decline this year as the UK higher education sector faces a financial squeeze and domestic political attacks on its reputation.
The annual QS World University Rankings features 90 British universities, including three in the top five, but lower-ranked institutions have gradually fallen down the list in the face of a looming funding crisis and increasing competition from Asia.
The 2025 rankings were published as a growing number of UK universities struggle with financial deficits, job cuts and a political backlash against the recruitment of large numbers of higher fee paying overseas postgraduate students to stabilise the sector’s finances.
Jessica Turner, chief executive of QS, said the results suggested that British higher education was feeling the squeeze from funding shortages and a recent fall in international applications and warned that future governments would need to take action to arrest the slide.
“Whatever the result of July’s election, the next government must make a properly resourced, continually championed higher education sector an urgent priority. It is one of the UK’s great assets and achievements and must be maintained accordingly,” she added.
Massachusetts Institute of Technology topped the rankings for the 13th year in a row. Imperial College London took second place from Cambridge, which slipped to fifth, while Oxford retained the third spot.
Of the UK’s total ranked universities, 22 per cent improved their ranking, 58 per cent slipped down the table while 20 per cent held steady. Fifteen British institutions made the world’s top 100, two fewer than last year.
Vivienne Stern, chief executive of Universities UK, which represents more than 140 British institutions, said the ranking demonstrated the strength of the UK sector but also how competitive the global university landscape had become.
“It is unquestionably in the national interest that we have a strong university system, driving growth and opportunity right across the UK. Preserving our position cannot mean standing still, let alone allowing the system to run into the sand,” she said.
The UK’s slide came in the context of the increased competition from Chinese and Indian universities that are improving rapidly against previously dominant research institutions in the US, Canada, Japan and Europe.
Both Japan and the US saw higher rates of decline than the UK, with 67 and 63 per cent respectively of universities seeing their ranking fall. By contrast, only 16 and 9 per cent respectively of Chinese and Indian institutions were ranked lower than last year.
Still, most countries with a large number of top-ranked universities saw their rankings held up better than the UK, with Australia, Italy and South Korea all having lower rates of decline.
UK scientific leaders hailed the results of the leading universities but expressed concern about the decline of others and the threats to success across the sector, caused by recent government policy changes.
Institutions that promote research such as the Royal Society have raised further alarm over soaring visa costs for overseas scientists and their dependants.
Sir Adrian Smith, Royal Society president, warned future governments against complacency in maintaining the UK’s standing against fierce international competition.
“The next government must provide a long-term plan for research funding and a visa regime that supports universities in attracting the best minds from overseas, to supplement our home grown talent,” he said.
Professor Hugh Brady, Imperial College London’s president, said his institution’s success stemmed partly from strong international collaboration, including with institutions in India, Singapore and Ghana, but warned UK universities had “much shallower” pockets than many leading competitors.
“We want a research funding model that’s sustainable,” he said. “That’s ultimately what’s going to drive our economy, job creation and by extension the quality of our public services, social mobility and so on. And I don’t hear a plan B — so a high technology-intensive economy has got to be our number one priority.”
