WORLD ACADEMIC JOURNAL OF BUSINESS & APPLIED SCIENCES-MARCH-SEPTEMBER 2013 EDITION
partnerships have contributed to enhanced human and infrastructural capacity, as well as to a better integration of the Southern partners in international exchanges (Nakabugo
n.d.). Thus, inter-institutional alliances or partnerships are of increasing importance in higher education (Shaw & Holmes, 2005).The motives for the formation of these alliances include resource needs for assets or capabilities which theuniversity does not possess, such as the need to cross organization boundaries to create interdisciplinary teams(Shaw & Holmes, 2005). This suggests that such linkages and inter-institutional collaborations constitute thefuture of higher education. However, despite the benefits of inter-institutional collaborations, myriad of problemshave emerged including management and financial limitation, that this study using primary and secondary data purposes to discuss and through SWOT analysis make tangible recommendations for effective collaborations inview of the benefits (Cultural exchange, networking, academic advancement among others) that are associated with such collaborations.In addition, generally in Africa, and particularly in Kenya, there is a dearth of literature in this area,especially as it relates to internationalization of higher education in tourism. Yet Kenya is one of the leadingtourist destinations in Africa. A position that has led to increased engagements with other parts of the world.Even academic partnerships have been motivated by this position of Kenya and thus Kenyan universities haveintroduced programs in tourism and hospitality which are now attracting more inter-institutional partnerships. InKenya, it is Moi University (MU) which spearheaded higher education in tourism and it is therefore arguable thata study of the MU case is representative of Kenya as a whole. Few studies available, in Kenya, (Munavu, 2004;Jowi, 2009; Ooro, 2009) have focused mainly on internationalization of higher education in general. Likewise,little is known regarding higher education inter-institutional partnerships in tourism education and hence thisconstitutes the gap that this paper endeavors to fill.
2.1Partnerships and Collaborations in Higher Education
In HE, internationalization was for a long time mainly considered as the cross-border mobility of individualstudents (de Wit, 2002; Van der Wende, 2001). In the last three decades, however, the conceptual understandingof internationalization has broadened, and started to include many international activities. This includescollaboration in teaching, research, and other projects; mobility of students and scholars; inclusion of international dimensions into the curriculum; recruitment of foreign students, establishing campuses in foreigncountries; and countries collaborative works toward common frame of reference (Oyewole, 2009; Teferra &Knight, 2008).Previously, development organizations worldwide have endeavored to facilitate North – South universitycollaborations, to help tackle issues that mainly affect the South, such as hunger, ill-health, illiteracy, conflict,human rights abuse, and environmental degradation (Samoff & Carrol, 2002; Bradley, 2007). However, asindicate by Nakabugo
., ( n.d.), though previous North-South partnerships have contributed significantly toenhancing research capacity in the South (Gaillard, 1994), a number of weaknesses have emerged. These include,among others, the fact that such partnerships’ impact on research capacity building has often related more toindividual capacity building rather than at an institutional level (Velho, 2002). Katz and Martin (1997)distinguish between collaboration at different levels and show that inter-institutional and internationalcollaboration need not necessarily involve inter-individual collaboration. Lariviere, Gingras and Archambault(2006), concur that there are two types of collaboration: international and inter-institutional.In addition, the rationale for most North-South partnerships has been narrowly focused on addressingcapacity gaps in the South and less on the learning and building of capacity within Northern counterparts (King,