Accreditation and Quality Assurance in Indonesian and Pakistani Higher Education: A Comparative Systematic Literature Review

Abstract

Higher education accreditation has become a central mechanism through which governments and independent agencies certify institutional and programmatic quality, protect public trust, and support national development goals. This systematic literature review compares the accreditation and quality assurance systems of Indonesia and Pakistan, two large, culturally diverse developing countries in Asia that share comparable histories of educational massification, resource constraints, and reform pressure. Drawing on peer-reviewed journal articles, official regulatory documents, and credible policy and news sources, the review examines the governance architecture, quality assurance mechanisms, and outcomes of Indonesia's National Accreditation Board for Higher Education (BAN-PT) and its emerging cluster of Independent Accreditation Institutions (Lembaga Akreditasi Mandiri, or LAM), alongside Pakistan's Higher Education Commission (HEC) and its Quality Assurance Agency (QAA). The review finds that although both countries have adopted internationally aligned, standards-based accreditation frameworks and pursue membership in regional and global quality assurance networks, they differ markedly in institutional design. Indonesia has moved toward a decentralized, discipline-based accreditation ecosystem coupled with a mandatory internal quality assurance system (Sistem Penjaminan Mutu Internal, or SPMI), while Pakistan has retained a more centralized, research-weighted evaluation model administered directly by HEC. Both systems face persistent challenges, including political interference, uneven resource allocation, limited assessor capacity, weak internal quality cultures in smaller and private institutions, and difficulty translating accreditation status into genuine improvements in teaching and research quality. The review concludes with recommendations concerning governance integrity, capacity building, digitalization of quality assurance processes, and closer regional cooperation between the two systems and their peers in Asia