The nexus of national educational and migration policies and international student mobility (ISM) in Europe becomes strikingly visible in Luxembourg. ISM is central for higher education policy in Luxembourg, but also for larger questions of social integration and economic development. Based on a discourse analysis of the political debates surrounding the foundation of the University of Luxembourg in 2003, we analyse how and why ISM became a cornerstone of higher education policy in Luxembourg. Our findings reveal that, on the one hand, incoming student mobility -and the establishment of an international research university -was and is seen as a means of competing for the best and brightest, regionally and globally, and of securing human resources to satisfy a booming, internationalised labour market. On the other hand, outgoing student mobility has traditionally been viewed as the main mechanism to establish international networks across Europe and foster elites back home. Both incoming and outgoing student mobility are thought necessary to establish and maintain a competitive and sustainable knowledge economy. Reconstructing the underlying rationales behind the support for ISM as the key to higher education policy, we explain why Luxembourg currently has the highest proportion of ISM worldwide.

The geographical mobility of young Europeans takes place within institutional realms that frame young people´s educational and vocational situations. These institutional framings provide unequal preconditions for going abroad. Starting from an action-oriented theoretical approach, the aim of this work was to explore young people´s international moves within different mobility settings. Based on 52 qualitative interviews with mobile youth from three mobility fields in three countries (students from Luxembourg, employees in Norway and Luxembourg and apprentices from Germany), the dynamic concept of context-sensitive mobility-related modes of action (MRMA) was developed. The applied analytic framework reflects the fact that individual perceptions and actions relating to going abroad differ greatly according to the young people’s specific current educational/vocational situations. Moreover, the comparative approach sheds light on different dimensions of inequality caused by these framing systems.

Student mobility is a common phenomenon in Luxembourg, as almost every student spends a period abroad before graduating. Based on material from this “hyper-mobile” academic context, we will focus on the first phase of going abroad. First, we will analyse how the idea to study abroad is related to different notions of forced or non-forced mobility. Second, we will turn to the choice of destination, focussing on geographical distance and language distance between the country of origin and the place of destination. Geographical distance is not a goal as such but is a proxy for other dimensions, e.g. greater distance can be equated with a wish to try out new things and start a new life phase while shorter distance emphasises strong embeddedness in pre-existing social ties and obligations. In terms of language, students mostly choose countries where one of Luxembourg’s official languages is spoken (either because they have mastered it or because they would like to improve it for professional reasons), and countries where an additional language can be learnt or practised. Our results show that studying abroad is not the decision of a moment, but rather a process embedded in students’ past, present and future as well as in their social surroundings.

Even though intra-European youth mobility is valued as a boost for personal and professional development, few opt for it. While obstacles preventing young people to become mobile have been discussed broadly, less attention has been paid to the obstacles for the youth who are already on the move. We offer this rare perspective in regard to intra-European mobility. We focus on youth in four types: pupil mobility, vocational (education and training) mobility, higher education student (degree and credit) mobility and employment mobility, in six countries: Germany, Hungary, Luxembourg, Norway, Romania and Spain. Our analysis, based on qualitative (140 interviews) and quantitative (N=1.682) data, reveals that the perceived obstacles vary between the mobility types, with the greatest divergence between the educational and work-related mobilities. Obstacles such as lack of financial resources and guidance, the perceived incompatibility of institutional regulations within Europe, are shared by all mobile youth.