INTERNATIONAL COMPETITIVENESS OF INDONESIA’S HIGHER EDUCATION SERVICES TRADE

Asia is one of the fastest growing destinations for international students. Therefore, this paper was conducted by conducting a comparative study and empirical study with the aim to find out Indonesia's international competitiveness for the higher education service trade aspect, which is compared with seven other countries. To measure the international competitiveness in the higher education services trade, data from 2010 to 2017 on the number of sending and receiving students in a country and other more complex data have been used to obtain valid results. A comparative study conducted by calculating data from eight countries using the IMS, TCI and RCA measurement methods, and empirical analysis conducted using a questionnaire survey with 302 respondents' data obtained to find out the significant factors that influence the competitiveness. The results show that although Indonesia's higher education service trade is unstable every year, it still has certain competitiveness in the international scope. In addition, culture, quality of higher education and cost of living have a significant impact on the international competitiveness of higher education service trade. On this basis, this paper puts forward some countermeasures and suggestions on how to improve the international competitiveness of Indonesia's higher education service trade, including: promoting the development of Indonesian culture, improving the quality of higher education, reducing tuition fees and living costs, increasing the employment opportunities for foreign students and promoting the balanced growth of Indonesian economy.


International Market Share (IMS)
The purpose of calculating this indicator is to find out the proportion of total exports a country of international students for higher education to the total exports in the world of international students who also go abroad for higher education, which is can reflect changes in international competitiveness or international competitive position and is a direct indicator of international competitiveness and this measurement has changed into: : International students who go abroad to take higher education IMS ij : International market share of i country for j international students (go abroad) X ij : Total of International students who go abroad to take higher education from i country (country of origin) X wj : Total of International students who go abroad to take higher education in the world

Figure 1-1 International Students (Higher Education) From Country of Origin In The World
The number of students from China who take higher education in the world continues to increase every year with an increase in the average number of 13.6 thousand students. An increase in numbers also occurs annually for students from Australia with an average increase of 26.3 thousand students each year from 2012 to 2017. The increase also occurs for the number of students from Germany with an average of 15.8 thousand students. Then for the number of students from Indonesia who take higher education in the world also increases every year from 2012 to 2017 with an average increase of 3.3 thousand students. Increases occur every year for the number of students from Thailand with an average growth of 2.9 thousand students.
Instability occurred for the number of students from French, Malaysia and South Korea. The decline occurred in 2013 for the number of French's students from 271,399 students in 2012 to 228,639 students. However, the increase has slowly returned from 2013 to 2017. The number of students from Malaysia has increased in 2012 to 2016 but there has been a drastic decline in 2017. The instability in the number of students from South Korea occurred with a drastic decline and increase in 2012 and 2016.  China experienced a considerable decline of 0.20 in 2014 and increased again by 0.39 in the year 2017. France has decreased every year except in 2017 which has increased in value by 0.22 from 2016. Indonesia's market share is also small, in 2012 Indonesia's market share did not reach 1%, but continued to grow to more than 1% since 2014 and has declined in the next two years until 2017 has increased again. Indonesia showed instability with the biggest increase of 0.14 in 204 and a decrease in value of 0.03 in 2015. Malaysia had an increase of 0.47 in 2013, but From these data it can be seen that Indonesia's market share experiences instability and Germany's market share has continues to increase every year. From the market share value stated in the table, it can be seen that China has the largest market share value from 2012 to 2015. In 2016 and 2017 the largest market share value is owned by Australia. Whereas the lowest market share's value is owned by Thailand, Indonesia, South Korea and Malaysia.

2. Trade Competitiveness Index (TCI)
The trade competitiveness index is one of the more commonly used measures for the analysis of international competitiveness. It indicates the difference between the import and export trade of a country and the total volume of import and export trade. In the context of services for higher education, what is meant by the number of exports is the number of students of the country of origin studying in other countries, while import is the number of foreign students studying in the destination country. The understanding of the indicator will change into: = − + J : International students who go abroad to take higher education TCI ij : The trade competitiveness index of i country for j international students (go abroad) X ij : Total of International students who go abroad to take higher education from i country (country of origin) M ij : Total of International students who go abroad to take higher education from the world in i country (country of destination) The data is a total of international students from all countries in the world who took the higher education study period in the destination country. This data shows that from the eight destination countries, the number of international students in China ranked first compared to seven other countries. From these data, it can be seen that the number of international students in the world is taking a higher education in 8 countries of destination which continues to increase every year is China and France. The number of international students who take higher education in China every year has increased by an average of 34 thousand students, with the largest increase occurring in 2014 with a total increase of 51.4 thousand students. The number of international students who take higher education in France every year has increased by an average of 5.3 thousand students, with the largest increase occurring in 2014 with a total increase of 5.4 thousand students. The number of international students in the world who take higher education in Australia, Germany, Indonesia, Malaysia, South Korea and Thailand shows instability with the increase and decrease every year. The highest number of international students who choose to take higher education in Australia is in 2016. Germany has the highest number of international students from all over the world in 2013. South Korea has the highest number of international students from all over the world in 2012. The number of international students from all over the world taking higher education in Indonesia, Malaysia and Thailand which was the most in 2016. The country with the least number of international students from these eight countries is Thailand with more than twenty thousand and this number has experienced instability from 2012 to 2017.
To calculate the higher education service trade competitiveness of a country, the author uses the data in table 14 and table 16 to get the results as below. When TC result is higher than 0, it means that productivity for higher education service in a country is higher than international level, and its international competitiveness is strong. This happens when the total number of students from origin countries who continue their study abroad is more than the number of foreign students studying in the country. For simplicity, it can be interpreted as more exports than total imports. If the result of TC is equals to 0, it means that productivity from a country to a higher education service is equivalent to the international level, where the amount of import and export occurs only as a balanced exchange. If the result of TC is lower than 0 indicates that productivity for higher education in a country is lower than international level and international  From the above table, it can be seen that the trade competitiveness index of 8 countries consists of Australia, China, France, Germany, Indonesia, Malaysia, South Korea and Thailand. By using the TCI formula, the results show that only one country is close to 1. Australia with the value of its trade competitiveness is more than 0.9.

3. Revealed Comparative Advantage Index (RCA)
The revealed comparative advantage is a method adopted by the American economist, Balassa Bela in 1965 to measure the comparative advantages of international trade, which can reflect the comparative advantage of a certain country's trade. It expresses the ratio of the industry's share of the country's exports to the share of the world's total trade in world trade, excluding the effects of fluctuations in national aggregates and world aggregates, which can better reflect the comparative advantage of the export of a certain industry in the country compared with the average export level of the world. So the revealed comparative advantage refers to the share of the export value of a certain commodity or services in a country to the total value of all exports of the country, and the proportion of the world's exports of such commodities or services to the world's total exports of all commodities or services. In this case the formula is specific only to examine revealed comparative advantages in education services that change to: X ij : Total of International students who go abroad to take higher education j from i country (country of origin) X i : Total of people who go abroad from i country (country of origin) X wj : Total of International students who go abroad to take higher education j in the world w X w : Total of people who go abroad in the world w From the above data of the total number of people who go abroad in the world from 8 countries of origin it can be seen that the people from Australia, China, Germany, Indonesia, South Korea and Thailand have experiences an increase every year. China occupies the largest increase compared to other countries. This number is increasing every year with an average growth of 11.9 million people each year. The highest number of growth occurred in 2013 with an increase of 18.4 million people; Total citizens from Germany experienced an increase every year with an average growth of 1.4 million people. The largest number of people from German origin abroad occurred in 2015 with an increase of 1.97 million people; People from South Korea also experienced growth with an average of 2.07 million per year. The most increase occurred in 2017 as much as 4.38 million from 2016; Citizens from Indonesia To calculate the higher education service trade competitiveness of a country using this RCA formula, the author uses the data in table 15 and table 18 to get the results as below. When a country's RCA index of more than 2.5 indicates that the country's international competitiveness is extremely strong; RCA between 2.5 and 1.25 indicates that the country has a very strong international competitiveness; RCA between 1.25 and 0.8 means that the country's international competitiveness is relatively strong; An RCA of less than 0.8 indicates that the country's international competitiveness is weak.  From the results of revealed comparative advantage available in the table, it proves that 8 countries have instability every year. Australia shows a very high RCA value compared to 7 other countries, which is more than 8  number of students from Indonesia who go abroad to take higher education and have such a large comparison with the total abroad to take higher education throughout the world.
From the calculation results for the trade competitiveness index shows that Indonesia experienced instability in these six years. The decline occurred in 2013, but again increased dramatically in 2014. Setbacks occurred again in 2015 and 2016 then increased again in 2017 with the same value that occurred in 2014. In terms of trade competitiveness index, Indonesia with a TCI value equal to 0 from 2012 to 2017 which is 0.07 for the mean value of TCI, and it has shown that the number is equivalent to the international level. This result was obtained from the number of students from Indonesia who went abroad to study in higher education and the number of international students to Indonesia to take higher education was directly proportional, where the number of students was almost the same, and the TCI value of Indonesia is equivalent or balance to the international level.
While in terms of revealed comparative index, Indonesia proves that its competitiveness has decreased to be relatively strong in 2017, with the mean value of RCI since 2012 to 2017 is 1.42, and from this result it can be concluded that the revealed comparative advantage for Indonesia is unstable but strong to International competitiveness. The research conclusions have proven that Indonesia's international competitiveness for higher education service trade shows instability every year by using international market share formula measurements, trade competitiveness index and revealed comparative index.

1. Description of Analysis
Total participants who filled out the questionnaire were 302 people consisting of 126 men and 176 women who came from various countries with appropriate age limits to pursue higher education in a country. These questionnaires are distributed randomly by distributing questionnaire links to people who are continuing their education outside their home country, people who are preparing to continue their education abroad, and people who have finished their higher education abroad.
The questionnaire consists of nine questions consisting of mandatory content and free content questions. Of the nine questions, three of them are related to self-identity, and six questions are related to the determining factors of a person's consideration of continuing higher education abroad. In the questionnaire there are questions about higher education institutions, selection of educational majors, consideration factors in choosing a country as the destination country for furthering higher education, and the chosen destination country.

Analysis of Selection Factors of Higher Education in a Country
The author had collected data using a questionnaire to support writing on this topic. The total number of participant who filled out the questionnaire amounted to 302 people, consisting of 176 women (58.28%) and 126 men (41.72%). Participants who filled out this questionnaire consisted of various age ranges. The age range of participants aged <18 years was 7 participants (2.32%), aged 18-25 years was 201 participants (66.56%), aged 26-30 years was 59 participants (19.54%), 31-40 years was 33 participants (10.93%), and 41-50 years was two participants (0.66%).

Figure 2-3 Nationality of Participant
The graphic shows that there were 122 participants who filled in the questionnaire which were Chinese citizens, 102 participants were Indonesian citizens, 16 participants were Laos's nationality, 15 participants were Malaysian citizens, 9 participants were Pakistani citizens, and participants were less than five are citizens of other countries. Of the total 302 participants, there were 267 people (88.41%) who stated their willingness to continue their education on abroad and the remains of participants did not want to continue their education abroad.

Figure 2-4 Percentage of Country of Destination
The participants chose a country as the destination country to continue their education considering many factors. From the results of the questionnaire conducted by 302 participants from various countries, it was found that culture is the main sequence of factors for them to choose a destination country to continue their education. Culture includes food, language, people and habits. Participants choose the quality of education in a country as the second order from the selection factor of the country. The next important sequence chosen by the participants is the cost of living and employment opportunities.

Figure 2-5 Factor of Consideration for Choosing Destination of Country
Regarding the choice factor about the quality of education, there were 21.85% choosing language and culture as professional fields to be chosen by the participants. In addition, the most chosen professional field participants were finance and economics (12.91%), management (9.27%), humanities and law (8.94%), teacher education (8.61%), medicine (6.95%), computer science (5.63%) and art (5.63%).  In a comparison to find out the competitiveness results of the seven selected countries, which of these results can be known as follows: Nationality of the participants is drawn from the largest number of participants from a country that chooses the destination country. Whereas the consideration option taken is the highest option chosen by participants, and for the professional field only the highest two types are taken. In this case it seems very clear that what becomes a person's consideration for choosing a country as a destination country to continue higher education study is the choice of quality of education, and the selection of the most chosen professional fields is language-culture and finance-economics.

3. Analysis of Influencing Factor of Indonesia's Higher Education Trade
From 302 participants who filled out the questionnaire, it was found that only 4 participants (1.5%) showed the willingness to continue their education in Indonesia. From these results it can be concluded that participants who consider and choose Indonesia as one of the destination countries to continue their education show that the cost of living and employment opportunities play the role of the most important factors but quality of education and tuition fees are also the most important factors in them. 72 participants have choosing Australia as their destination country. The participants considered that the quality of education in Australia deserves to be the main consideration, besides that language-culture and finance-economics were also the biggest choice of professional fields. The results of the empirical analysis are in accordance with the results of the comparative study with the largest RCA and the second largest IMS besides China.
Based on the results of comparative analysis using the IMS, TCI and RCI methods, it can be seen that higher education services in Indonesia are equivalent to the international level. However, based on the results of empirical analysis it is proven that there are only 1.5% of the total 267 participants who chose to continue their studies in Indonesia. There were only 4 participants who chose Indonesia as the destination country, with the main consideration being the cost of living in Indonesia which reached out, and the specialization of the same professional fields, language-culture and finance-economics. From the elaboration of the results of the analysis conducted, it was found that the selection of consideration and major options does indeed have an influence that can determine a country's international competitiveness for the higher education service trade category. From these two different analytical methods it is concluded that higher education in Indonesia does indeed have international competitiveness in the service trade sector.
From the results of the analysis conducted through the questionnaire it has been found that the quality of education, the culture, the cost of living and the percentage of scholarships in the destination country are sequential factors that are considered by participants to fill out the questionnaire to continue their higher education in the countries that most interest someone to be a destination country, such as Australia, China, France and Germany. Unlike the consideration factors chosen by participants who chose Indonesia as their destination country, they instead chose the cost of living and employment opportunities as the main consideration factors.
In addition, the selection of professional fields is also a big consideration. Language-culture, finance-economics, humanities-law, teacher education and management are the five majors that are the biggest choices for both those participants who choose other countries and Indonesia as their destination country to continue their higher education.