DOI: 10.12688/f1000research.190164.1 ISSN: 2046-1402

Governing State-Sponsored Scholarship Programmes for Human Capital Development: A Systematic Review of Legal Instruments, Return Migration, and Programme Management

Putri Ellen Gracia Risamasu, Dwi Prasetya Budi, Ayreine Nisya' D, Linda Dit Balubun, Imanuel David Yanter Hindom, Mutia Faradila, Michael Hagana Bangun, Frans Josua Napitu, Cleopatra Gloria E Umbora, Muhammad Akbar, Oktovianus Ola Bage Ariana, Adam Galih Purnama
Show PDF Cite
Background State-sponsored scholarship programmes are a primary policy tool for human capital development. However, empirical evidence regarding their governance remains dispersed across disparate disciplines. This systematic review synthesises evidence on how public scholarship schemes are governed and what their evidentiary base supports. Methods Following PRISMA 2020 and PRISMA-S guidelines, we searched Scopus, ProQuest, and ERIC on 1 September 2026. Screening applied a Population–Exposure–Outcome framework with a substantive governance threshold across three higher education instrument classes: merit/access aid, international mobility, and workforce/service scholarships. From 307 reports sought, 211 were retrieved and 209 assessed at full text after two unconvertible files were removed, yielding 92 new inclusions alongside 74 re-adjudicated baseline studies (166 included studies total). Extraction used a standardised 39-field form with independent verification. Studies were critically appraised across five domains adapted from Joanna Briggs Institute and Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool principles. Synthesis was narrative and thematic with inferential-tier mapping; no meta-analysis was performed. The review was not prospectively registered. Results Screening yielded 166 included studies. The critical appraisal profile classified 60 studies as low concern (36.1%), 91 as moderate concern (54.8%), and 15 as high concern (9.0%). Interpretive or documentary designs predominate (57.8%), while 22.9% utilise designs supporting counterfactual or adjusted longitudinal inference. Governance mechanisms address monitoring (68.7%), selection (65.1%), equity (54.8%), service obligations (39.2%), and technology (37.3%). Legal instruments are documented extensively, but enforcement outcomes rarely. Mandatory return conditions are associated with higher physical repatriation rates, though domestic absorption governs subsequent developmental impacts. Six studies evaluate algorithmic decision models for applicant selection. Conclusions Scholarship governance is documented more thoroughly in statutory design than in operational administration. The review advances an institutional-chain framework wherein an instrument’s developmental value depends on downstream linkage. Longitudinal recipient record linkage emerges as the critical administrative infrastructure upon which subsequent policy evaluation depends.

More from our Archive