Abstract

This paper examines how PhD students in Kazakhstan experience mandatory publication requirements introduced as part of national higher education reforms aimed at enhancing research quality and global competitiveness. Implemented within broader post-Soviet transformations and Kazakhstan’s integration into the Bologna Process, the policy requires PhD candidates to publish in Scopus- or Web of Science–indexed journals prior to degree conferral (Kuzhabekova, 2025). While designed to strengthen research capacity and increase international visibility, the reform reflects global trends associated with academic capitalism (Slaughter & Rhoades, 2004) and neoliberal university governance (Brown, 2015; Shore, 2008), in which measurable research outputs serve as key indicators of institutional performance.

Drawing on the conceptual frameworks of academic capitalism and neoliberal university logic, this study employs a descriptive qualitative design (Sandelowski, 2000). The analysis is based on semi-structured interviews with 22 PhD students from public universities across Kazakhstan. Interviews were conducted in Russian and Kazakh, transcribed verbatim, translated into English, and analyzed using descriptive content analysis to identify recurring patterns and shared experiences.

The findings indicate that although students acknowledge the aspirational goal of increasing international recognition, the publication requirement generates significant unintended consequences. Participants report intense pressure to produce measurable outputs, reflecting an audit culture that prioritizes performance metrics over intellectual development (Ball, 2012; Espeland & Sauder, 2007). Uneven access to experienced supervisors, research infrastructure, funding, and English-language support creates stratified conditions of competition, reinforcing patterns documented in other non-Western contexts (Lei, 2019; Kudaibergenova et al., 2022). In response, students adopt strategic and instrumental research behaviors, such as modifying research topics to align with perceived Western journal expectations and, in some cases, resorting to questionable publication practices (Hladchenko, 2023; Horta & Lee, 2023). Supervisory relationships shift from Humboldtian models of mentorship toward more transactional management of publication outputs (Ruegg, 2004). Tensions also emerge between global visibility and local scholarly relevance, particularly in the humanities, where research grounded in the Kazakh language and cultural contexts is perceived as less publishable internationally, reflecting broader hierarchies in global knowledge production (Mignolo, 2013).

By centering PhD students’ lived experiences, this study contributes to scholarship on doctoral education under neoliberal reform in post-Soviet and Global South contexts. It demonstrates how outcome-based policies reconfigure doctoral training by individualizing responsibility for systemic constraints and transforming intellectual inquiry into academic capital accumulation. The paper calls for more balanced doctoral policies that support equitable resource distribution and recognize diverse forms of scholarly contribution.