A declaration is necessary to preface this commentary. As a global higher education leader, I have celebrated the rankings achievements at institutions across three different regions. And I confess I continue to monitor the rankings of those institutions, alongside my current one. Whatever your opinion of university rankings, they do offer some recognition for the hard work, commitment and strategic effort it takes to achieve institutional goals

Yet, for me, they have never been the primary goal. Ranking success is an outcome of the purposeful and meaningful mission that sits at the heart of sector. It is not the main play.

Thus, a top-100 ranking is incidental to the efforts made in teaching, learning, research and the innovation delivered to our communities. In summary, a high ranking is an endorsement of the work of thousands of academics, professional staff and students.

The year 2025 has exposed the pressures tertiary education has endured for more than a decade. The sector is grappling with declining funding, concerns about the sustainability and quality of mass higher education, challenges to freedom of expression and academic freedom, questions around institutional neutrality and autonomy, and the rapid rise of technology and AI. Geopolitical tensions have arrived on campuses around the globe.

At the same time, we have had to respond to societal and industry challenges about the value of higher education, concerns about the employability of graduates and accusations of “wokeness”.

In short, for many, our social licence has been seriously eroded. In some countries, this loss of licence is serious. Other countries are witnessing this loss in the shadows. It is paradoxical that at the same time society is challenging the university model, many universities are experiencing record domestic enrolments.

I am interested in the origins of this loss of social licence. The reasons are multifaceted, and while it may be tempting to point to global trends and political forces, we must also look to ourselves. We must accept some accountability and explore how we have contributed to this loss of society’s support and belief in what we do.

University rankings systems were initially designed to provide transparency in a crowded and opaque higher education sector. Specialist rankings agencies have developed systems to help academics, students, funders, and policymakers navigate the complex higher education sector and make informed choices about where to work, study or engage. Rankings have provided a snapshot of institutional prestige and reputation, academic performance and global competitiveness. But increasingly, they have turned into an Olympics for the sector, and from the outside looking in, all about us, our status and our brand, rather than what we do. The public has become cynical.

University rankings began in the mid-20th century and have grown rapidly in the 21st, especially since the launch of the QS World University Rankings in 2004. In the past few years, the rankings have included a more diverse and globally distributed group of universities. But at the same time, a growing number of elite universities have begun to withdraw from long-established ranking systems. The United States’ Harvard and Yale Law Schools, the University of Zurich in Switzerland, Utrecht University in the Netherlands, China’s Renmin and Nanjing universities, South Africa’s Rhodes University, and some Indian Institutes of Technology are among the higher education institutions that have rejected the rankings system. There is no single reason for these withdrawals, but the institutions that have chosen to walk away from rankings systems are sending a strong message. There is growing disillusionment in modern rankings.

University leaders and academics have long questioned the value of rankings, citing flawed methodologies and arguing that they overemphasise reputation surveys, can distort institutional priorities, individual behaviours and sectoral incentives, and reward wealthy research institutions ahead of critical metrics associated with student access and innovation.

As universities face profound challenges, many are re-examining their core values and mission, reflecting deeply on their purpose, their social licence and what their communities truly expect from them. Our communities want fair access, their students to be employed, and the research they fund to have impact. While rankings agencies have developed metrics to address these attributes, they remain difficult to embed within existing ranking frameworks.

With this in mind, it is interesting to observe the emergence of new forms of rankings that aim to capture the nuanced aspects of support for students and communities, alongside research impact. This evolution signifies a shift from knowledge transfer to collaborative knowledge generation, prioritising societal value creation through challenge-based learning, mission-driven innovation, and transdisciplinary research.[DM1] It focuses on building strong local innovation networks while staying connected to the global stage. It recognises that universities can play a key role in their regions by working with others to create knowledge and align efforts across education, research, and community impact.

One example is QS’s Future 17 programme, a global initiative that brings together students, universities, and multinational organisations to work on real-world projects supporting the Sustainable Development Goals. Students from the University of Auckland have taken part and had positive, meaningful experiences through the programme.

It is simplistic to suggest that we are witnessing the beginning of the end of university rankings systems. What we are seeing is a demand for these systems to evolve and transform. Now is the time for universities to speak up about what they want measured and to highlight metrics that are of value to them and their communities.

For me, rankings will continue to be useful as a benchmark for higher education institutions. This relevance will come through transparency and an evolution to a model that captures a more holistic picture of institutional performance. Most importantly it needs to be one that lends itself to the reparation of our social licence, founded in trust and truth.

This evolution means universities are shifting from just passing on knowledge to working together with others to create it. The focus is now on solving real-world problems through hands-on learning, purpose-driven innovation, and research that brings together different fields.

Professor Dawn Freshwater leads Waipapa Taumata Rau, University of Auckland, which retained its #65 QS World University Ranking for 2026.