Vera Maltseva reflects on CERE’s 2025–2026 Expert Seminar Series, “TVET Systems in BRICS Countries: Landscape and Contexts,” discussing key insights and the Observatory’s next research agenda.
From Comparing TVET Systems to New Research Questions: CERE on Its Next Stage of Work
The 2025–2026 research cycle was valuable because it allowed CERE to move beyond separate national descriptions of TVET and develop a comparative conversation across Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa.
The Expert Seminar Series brought together researchers and practitioners with detailed knowledge of their own systems. This enabled us to connect global developments in skills and education with the institutional realities of each country: its economic structure, labour market, demographic profile, education system and traditions of skills formation. We could therefore ask not only what is changing in TVET, but why similar policies or reforms produce different outcomes in different contexts.
A central conclusion was that TVET cannot be understood as an isolated sector. Its role depends on how it connects with general and higher education, how young people move into work, what employers demand, and whether learners have genuine opportunities to progress. CERE’s approach is therefore not to rank systems against a single model, but to compare their positions, functions and trajectories.
— What patterns emerged among the countries discussed during the series? Which differences proved particularly important for understanding how TVET systems are shaped by their institutional, economic, and labour-market contexts?
Across the five countries, TVET is increasingly expected to do several things at once: prepare people for changing economies, support industrial and technological development, widen access to post-school education, help young people enter employment and provide opportunities for adults to update their skills. These functions do not always align. Meeting immediate employer demand, for example, does not automatically guarantee broad learning opportunities, secure employment or progression to further education.
A second common pattern is the changing boundary between vocational and higher education. Tertiary education is becoming a stronger aspiration for many young people and families, and TVET is being repositioned in response. Some systems are developing new progression routes, hybrid qualifications or tertiary-level vocational provision. Elsewhere, vocational education remains more separate and lower in status, even when participation expands.
The differences are equally important. TVET systems reflect national economic structures, labour markets, demographic conditions and traditions of educational selection. The same policy idea — such as employer engagement or work-based learning—can have very different effects depending on the capacities of firms, the availability of skilled jobs and the institutions that coordinate education and employment. This is why CERE examines how systems work in practice, which groups benefit and how educational arrangements shape real pathways into adulthood and work.
— What new research questions have emerged from the TVET series, and how will they shape CERE’s next research agenda?
The TVET research cycle led CERE towards a broader question. We began by examining how vocational education and training systems develop in different national contexts. But the comparative work showed that TVET cannot be separated from the expansion of tertiary education, changing labour-market structures, growing uncertainty around credentials and the rapid emergence of AI.
This is why CERE is broadening its next theme to Reordering Skill Hierarchies: Tertiary Education, AI and Unequal Pathways. The new agenda builds directly on the TVET cycle, but looks more widely at how the relationship between education, skills, occupational status and opportunity is changing.
The key issue is that established distinctions between academic and vocational routes, high- and low-skilled work, and higher and lower-status qualifications are becoming less stable. Tertiary education is expanding, but degrees do not carry equal value across institutions, fields and regions. At the same time, vocational pathways are expected to provide more advanced technical, digital and transferable skills, although they may still offer limited progression or social recognition.
AI sharpens these questions. Its impact is not only about replacing particular jobs; it is also about changing tasks, redistributing expertise and altering the value of different forms of knowledge. We will examine how education systems can help people develop the technical competence, judgement and adaptability needed in this environment — and how they can ensure that these opportunities are not restricted to already advantaged groups.
— Why are these questions particularly important to investigate now? What broader changes in education, work and society make them relevant?
These questions matter now because tertiary expansion, AI and inequality are reshaping education and work at the same time.
For many young people, tertiary education remains a major route to social mobility and economic security. Yet access to higher education does not necessarily mean equal opportunity. Qualifications have different value depending on the institution, field of study, region and links to the labour market. As participation expands, the issue is increasingly not only who obtains a credential, but what that credential enables a person to do.
At the same time, AI is beginning to affect a growing range of tasks, including routine cognitive, clerical and professional work. This makes lifelong learning more important, but it also raises questions about who has access to high-quality learning, guidance and opportunities to reskill. Without such opportunities, technological change may reinforce divisions between those able to adapt and those concentrated in lower-paid, less secure work.
The central issue is therefore not whether AI or tertiary expansion is positive or negative. It is how education systems organise their consequences. They can deepen inequality by creating sharply differentiated pathways with unequal resources and weak progression. Or they can widen opportunity by building transparent bridges between vocational and academic education, supporting lifelong learning and ensuring that technological change is linked to broad-based mobility.
— Looking ahead, what are CERE’s main plans for the next stage of its work? What outputs can we expect, and how will they contribute to CERE’s mission of advancing understanding of education systems in emerging economies through research, reliable data and attention to local contexts?
CERE’s next stage of work will build on the evidence and expert dialogue generated through the TVET research cycle. The immediate outcome will be the 2026 Annual Report, which brings together CERE TrendWatch findings, expert perspectives and nationally grounded analysis of TVET in Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa.
The report will not rank countries or promote a single model of TVET. Instead, it will offer a comparative framework for understanding how vocational education occupies different positions within national education systems and skill-formation regimes. It will identify common pressures while showing how national institutions shape distinct responses.
CERE will then develop its next research cycle around Reordering Skill Hierarchies: Tertiary Education, AI and Unequal Pathways. This work will extend the insights of the TVET cycle beyond one educational sector and explore how technological change, credential expansion and unequal access to learning are reshaping social mobility and work.
Through TrendWatch, expert seminars and collaborative research, CERE will continue to bring nationally grounded perspectives into international discussion. Our aim is to produce reliable comparative knowledge that helps explain not only what is changing in education and skills, but how those changes create different opportunities for learners and workers across countries and social groups.
A central conclusion was that TVET cannot be understood as an isolated sector. Its role depends on how it connects with general and higher education, how young people move into work, what employers demand, and whether learners have genuine opportunities to progress. CERE’s approach is therefore not to rank systems against a single model, but to compare their positions, functions and trajectories.
— What patterns emerged among the countries discussed during the series? Which differences proved particularly important for understanding how TVET systems are shaped by their institutional, economic, and labour-market contexts?
Across the five countries, TVET is increasingly expected to do several things at once: prepare people for changing economies, support industrial and technological development, widen access to post-school education, help young people enter employment and provide opportunities for adults to update their skills. These functions do not always align. Meeting immediate employer demand, for example, does not automatically guarantee broad learning opportunities, secure employment or progression to further education.
A second common pattern is the changing boundary between vocational and higher education. Tertiary education is becoming a stronger aspiration for many young people and families, and TVET is being repositioned in response. Some systems are developing new progression routes, hybrid qualifications or tertiary-level vocational provision. Elsewhere, vocational education remains more separate and lower in status, even when participation expands.
The differences are equally important. TVET systems reflect national economic structures, labour markets, demographic conditions and traditions of educational selection. The same policy idea — such as employer engagement or work-based learning—can have very different effects depending on the capacities of firms, the availability of skilled jobs and the institutions that coordinate education and employment. This is why CERE examines how systems work in practice, which groups benefit and how educational arrangements shape real pathways into adulthood and work.
— What new research questions have emerged from the TVET series, and how will they shape CERE’s next research agenda?
The TVET research cycle led CERE towards a broader question. We began by examining how vocational education and training systems develop in different national contexts. But the comparative work showed that TVET cannot be separated from the expansion of tertiary education, changing labour-market structures, growing uncertainty around credentials and the rapid emergence of AI.
This is why CERE is broadening its next theme to Reordering Skill Hierarchies: Tertiary Education, AI and Unequal Pathways. The new agenda builds directly on the TVET cycle, but looks more widely at how the relationship between education, skills, occupational status and opportunity is changing.
The key issue is that established distinctions between academic and vocational routes, high- and low-skilled work, and higher and lower-status qualifications are becoming less stable. Tertiary education is expanding, but degrees do not carry equal value across institutions, fields and regions. At the same time, vocational pathways are expected to provide more advanced technical, digital and transferable skills, although they may still offer limited progression or social recognition.
AI sharpens these questions. Its impact is not only about replacing particular jobs; it is also about changing tasks, redistributing expertise and altering the value of different forms of knowledge. We will examine how education systems can help people develop the technical competence, judgement and adaptability needed in this environment — and how they can ensure that these opportunities are not restricted to already advantaged groups.
— Why are these questions particularly important to investigate now? What broader changes in education, work and society make them relevant?
These questions matter now because tertiary expansion, AI and inequality are reshaping education and work at the same time.
For many young people, tertiary education remains a major route to social mobility and economic security. Yet access to higher education does not necessarily mean equal opportunity. Qualifications have different value depending on the institution, field of study, region and links to the labour market. As participation expands, the issue is increasingly not only who obtains a credential, but what that credential enables a person to do.
At the same time, AI is beginning to affect a growing range of tasks, including routine cognitive, clerical and professional work. This makes lifelong learning more important, but it also raises questions about who has access to high-quality learning, guidance and opportunities to reskill. Without such opportunities, technological change may reinforce divisions between those able to adapt and those concentrated in lower-paid, less secure work.
The central issue is therefore not whether AI or tertiary expansion is positive or negative. It is how education systems organise their consequences. They can deepen inequality by creating sharply differentiated pathways with unequal resources and weak progression. Or they can widen opportunity by building transparent bridges between vocational and academic education, supporting lifelong learning and ensuring that technological change is linked to broad-based mobility.
— Looking ahead, what are CERE’s main plans for the next stage of its work? What outputs can we expect, and how will they contribute to CERE’s mission of advancing understanding of education systems in emerging economies through research, reliable data and attention to local contexts?
CERE’s next stage of work will build on the evidence and expert dialogue generated through the TVET research cycle. The immediate outcome will be the 2026 Annual Report, which brings together CERE TrendWatch findings, expert perspectives and nationally grounded analysis of TVET in Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa.
The report will not rank countries or promote a single model of TVET. Instead, it will offer a comparative framework for understanding how vocational education occupies different positions within national education systems and skill-formation regimes. It will identify common pressures while showing how national institutions shape distinct responses.
CERE will then develop its next research cycle around Reordering Skill Hierarchies: Tertiary Education, AI and Unequal Pathways. This work will extend the insights of the TVET cycle beyond one educational sector and explore how technological change, credential expansion and unequal access to learning are reshaping social mobility and work.
Through TrendWatch, expert seminars and collaborative research, CERE will continue to bring nationally grounded perspectives into international discussion. Our aim is to produce reliable comparative knowledge that helps explain not only what is changing in education and skills, but how those changes create different opportunities for learners and workers across countries and social groups.
CERE has recently finished its 2025–2026 Expert Seminar Series, “TVET Systems in BRICS Countries: Landscape and Contexts”. The series brought together leading experts in VET and skills development to discuss vocational education and training systems in Russia, China, India, South Africa and Brazil to examine how vocational education and training systems develop within diverse institutional, economic and labour-market contexts.
What made this comparative research cycle particularly valuable for CERE? What questions emerged from looking across different national contexts — and how will they shape the Observatory’s next stage of work? In this interview, Vera Maltseva, CERE Programme Director, reflects on the key insights from the series and looks ahead to the Observatory’s new research agenda.
— From CERE’s perspective, what made the 2025–2026 TVET research cycle particularly valuable? How did looking at TVET systems in different BRICS countries allow us to gain insight into their development?
What made this comparative research cycle particularly valuable for CERE? What questions emerged from looking across different national contexts — and how will they shape the Observatory’s next stage of work? In this interview, Vera Maltseva, CERE Programme Director, reflects on the key insights from the series and looks ahead to the Observatory’s new research agenda.
— From CERE’s perspective, what made the 2025–2026 TVET research cycle particularly valuable? How did looking at TVET systems in different BRICS countries allow us to gain insight into their development?
22 September 2026