Bibliometric analysis reveals trends and gaps in education financing in Europe, suggesting areas for further research.
This bibliometric study provides a comprehensive mapping of the scientific landscape on education financing in Europe, highlighting its main trends, conceptual foundations, and influential contributions. Based on 168 publications indexed in the Web of Science and analyzed using VOSviewer, the research traces the chronological evolution of the field, explores keyword co-occurrence networks, and identifies the most impactful studies. Findings indicate a steady growth of academic interest after 2005, with a notable peak from 2014 to 2019, stimulated by major European policy frameworks such as Europe 2020 and Horizon 2020. Keyword analysis reveals dominant themes—including higher education, performance-based funding, human capital, digitalization, and governance—while areas such as pre-university education, digital equity, and large-scale comparative assessments remain insufficiently explored. Highly cited publications focus on the diversification of funding sources, the tensions generated by neoliberal approaches in higher education, and the persistent challenges of financing inclusive education. In addition, country-level analysis highlights an uneven geographic distribution of research output, with scientific production concentrated in a limited number of European countries, alongside contributions from non-European partners reflecting international collaboration patterns. Overall, results show that European research on education financing is fragmented and often shaped by political and institutional priorities. By identifying major research directions and uncovering existing gaps, this study offers a valuable foundation for future investigations aimed at strengthening equity, sustainability, and innovation in the financing of education systems.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Badareu et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: