The State of International Relations Studies in Canada, mid-2020s Edition

What is the state of International Relations (IR) programs in Canada these days? Every few years, the Teaching, Research and International Policy [TRIP] project, based at the College of William and Mary in Williamsburg, Virginia, surveys international relations scholars around the world on a variety of topics. For the past several times, I have had the opportunity to be one of the Canadian co-investigators, so I have presented on the state of Canadian IR in 2014 and 2018. I also have data from last year that once again assesses how IR scholars think of the various programs and think tanks in Canada as well as the profession at large.

The first observation to make is that response rates declined in 2024 compared to 2018. Indeed, less than half as many respondents (109) replied compared to the previous survey (266), and of those only 80 or so answered most of the questions. While that is not optimal, the results are still interesting. Of the 109 respondents, 65% identified as male, 30% as female and 5% preferred not to say. This reflected a decrease in female respondents, but given the decrease in overall respondents, it is not likely that the IR professoriate in Canada has regressed.

In terms of racial identification, there was a decline in those who stated that they are Caucasian (83% in 2018):

Caucasian	55	69%
Non-Caucasian	10	13%
Prefer not to say	10	13%
Multiple racial identities	5	6%

The sample also had a more senior distribution than last time:

2024 (n = 109)

Full Professor	30%
Associate Professor	28%
Chaired Full Professor	11%
Assistant Professor	9%
NA	8%
Emeritus	6%
Adjunct	5%
Lecturer/Senior Lecturer	3%

2018 (n = 266)

Associate Professor	34%
Full Professor	25%
Assistant Professor	15%
Instructor or lecturer	6%
Chaired Professor	5%
Other	5%
Sessional	4%
Emeritus	3%

Because the response rate was lower in 2024, it is not clear if this reflects an aging professoriate with 41% being full or chaired full or whether more senior professors were more willing to do the survey. These results might also reflect the weak job market of the past several years – that there is much less new blood in Canada’s IR programs and that professors may be retiring later and later.

When it comes to graduate programs, before considering how they are ranked, there are a couple of prior questions that depend on what students are being told: should they pursue PhDs in such dire times and should they go to the US instead of choosing Canada? Given how awful the job market has been, are IR professors recommending students enter PhD programs given a very bleak job market?

According to the survey results, respondents had this to say:

I would encourage only the very best students to pursue a PhD	59%
I would encourage students not to pursue a PhD	11%
I would inform students but not encourage nor discourage	25%
No Answer/None of the Above	5%

These results are very similar to the 2018 survey, which is a bit surprising given the downturn in the academic job market. While the Canadian academic job market has rarely, if ever, been bountiful, Canada is in a particularly bleak moment with the federal government significantly reducing the number of foreign student visas and provincial governments cutting financial support for universities. I also found these answers surprising as my own experience and discussions with colleagues in the discipline led me to expect more discouragement. I checked to see if there was a relationship between rank and recommendations as one thought might be that more senior professors might be more out of touch with the challenging job market, but I didn’t find one.

Another question is whether Canada’s IR professors recommend students go to the US? The general idea has been that getting one’s PhD in the US is advantageous in a number of ways: that an American PhD makes one more competitive in Canada and the US whereas a Canadian PhD makes one competitive in Canada only; some of the elite schools in Canada may be viewed as preferring American PhDs; that there are more rigorous programs at American universities; and that the funding may be more generous. To be clear, this question and the rest of the survey was asked before Donald Trump became president for a second time, so the answers probably do not reflect any anticipation of what has happened to American higher education since January 2025.

Nevertheless, the plurality of Canada’s IR professors, recommend students should head south for their PhDs. In response to the question, “Would you recommend that a student go to the US for their PhD over staying in Canada?” 43% said yes, 32% said no and 26% declined to say one way or the other.

There may be a rank bias to this as Full Professors and Emeritus Professors said yes more than no, while Associate and Assistant Professors were both about as likely to say yes or no. This answer may offend Canadian nationalists at this moment in time, but the survey does support the general perception that many professors still view American graduate schools as the better bet. Of all the questions asked in the survey, I suspect that this one would have the biggest change given Trump 2.0, but as mentioned before, the survey was conducted before the 2024 election.

Do Canadian IR professors recommend Canadian programs?

For PhD programs, respondents were asked to list their top three programs. So, for example, 47 out of the 109 respondents listed U of Toronto in their top three. In addition, the top three did not change at all from the 2018 survey although the gap between UBC and McGill may have narrowed. Carleton dropped entirely from the top five (whether that is Poli Sci or NPSIA the survey did not reveal) with Ottawa keeping its fourth-place position from last time. Montreal slipped slightly, joining Queens at 5^th. York joined Carleton in falling out of the top five.

Toronto	47
UBC	33
McGill	31
Ottawa	9
Montreal/Queen’s	6

At the MA level, the survey asked respondents to provide the names of the three programs they saw as the best in Canada. To be clear, the survey did not define what ‘best’ was. A degree of interpretation was also required as some would say, for instance, Carleton and others would say NPSIA. In these cases (as in the Munk School and Toronto and Ottawa and the Graduate School of Public and International Affairs (GSPIA)), it was assumed that when the respondents said a university’s name, they were referring to their well-known MA in international affairs programs and not the MA program of the local political science department.

Overall, there was stability in the MA rankings as previous surveys had these schools in the exact same order. However, as a professor at NPSIA, I have to note that the gap between NPSIA as the highest-ranking International Affairs MA program and the Munk School has narrowed considerably. Both are head and shoulders above the rest with Ottawa’s GSPIA program clearly favoured as the third most prominent MA program in Canada.  

1. NPSIA (Carleton)	36
2. Munk (Toronto)	35
3. GSPIA (Ottawa)	25
4. Balsillie (Waterloo)	11
5. SPPAG (Vancouver/UBC)	11

Respondents could also choose up to four programs at the undergraduate level, and the top five they recommended were :

Toronto	45
UBC	38
McGill	35
Carleton	17
Montreal/Ottawa	11

The top three should not be a surprise as size and international visibility matters quite a bit. And they are similar to the 2014 results, except that Queen’s drops out of the top five, replaced by Carleton.

Finally, respondents were asked each time which four think tanks they considered to be the most influential.

1. Fraser Institute	15
2. C. D. Howe Institute	14
3. Centre for International Governance Innovation	13
4. Macdonald Laurier Institute	12
5. Institute for Research on Public Policy	9

Of all the categories, this one had the most flux from the previous surveys with the Canadian Global Affairs Institute and the Canadian Center for Policy Alternatives dropping off the top five and with the Macdonald Laurier Institute and the Institute for Research on Public Policy moving up.

In general, the opinions of Canada’s IR professors on the state of the discipline are rather stable. This should not be that surprising as we are not seeing massive shifts in which programs are better funded or in international reputations that might lead to different patterns of student enrollment. At the moment, some provinces are imposing greater cuts on their universities at a time where the federal government is decreasing the numbers of international students. This may ultimately lead to some shifts in reputation as some IR programs may be hit harder and adjust better or worse than others. Another potential trend to follow is whether those programs that focus more on defence than other aspects of international relations will get more applicants at a time where the government is prioritizing defence over pretty much everything else. But those are questions for the next survey.