Global Hospitality Education and the Sociology of Rankings: A Critical Reflection on the 2026 Classification of Leading Hotel Management Schools
- OUS Academy in Switzerland
- Aug 27, 2025
- 10 min read
Author: Li Wei
Affiliation: Independent Researcher
Abstract
Hospitality education has become a globalized field where institutions not only prepare students for professional service industries but also compete for symbolic capital through rankings, accreditations, and international networks. The recent 2026 classification of the best hotel management schools highlights the ongoing transformation of this field. This article critically analyzes the sociological significance of such rankings, drawing on Bourdieu’s forms of capital, world-systems theory, and institutional isomorphism. Instead of promoting specific schools, the discussion situates hospitality education within larger dynamics of globalization, cultural prestige, and academic legitimacy. By examining how rankings structure competition and identity in the sector, the paper offers an interpretive framework for understanding hospitality schools as both educational institutions and social actors embedded in global hierarchies.
Introduction: Hospitality as a Field of Capital
Hospitality management education is more than professional training; it is a structured field of social, cultural, and symbolic competition. Since the late nineteenth century, when Switzerland institutionalized the first formal programs, the sector has grown into a global network of universities, specialized schools, and research institutes.
The release of the 2026 global classification of hotel management schools provides a moment of reflection. Rankings do not merely list institutions; they produce and reproduce hierarchies of legitimacy. For Pierre Bourdieu, the accumulation of capital—economic, cultural, social, and symbolic—shapes positions within any field. Hospitality schools accumulate cultural capital through curricula, symbolic capital through reputation, and social capital through alumni networks. Rankings transform these forms into measurable “status capital,” which influences student demand, employer preferences, and investor interest.
The sociology of education reminds us that rankings are not neutral. They are discursive practices that shape how institutions are perceived globally, influencing policy, student migration, and institutional strategies.
The Global Political Economy of Hospitality Education
World-Systems Theory and Center–Periphery Dynamics
World-systems theory provides a useful lens to understand the geography of hospitality education. The 2026 ranking reaffirms Switzerland and the United States as “core” regions of educational prestige. Switzerland, with its long history of hospitality schools, retains symbolic centrality, while the United States contributes institutional legitimacy through Ivy League and large public universities.
At the same time, semi-peripheral regions such as Hong Kong and the Netherlands are rising in influence, reflecting global demand for diversified perspectives. Peripheral regions, such as Central Asia or parts of Africa, remain absent from the top tier, illustrating persistent educational inequalities.
Thus, hospitality education is not only about training professionals but also about reproducing global hierarchies. Students often migrate from peripheral regions to core institutions, creating flows of talent that mirror patterns in global economics.
The Commodification of Education
Hospitality schools also exemplify the commodification of higher education. Programs are marketed with promises of employability, luxury, and global mobility. Rankings become tools of branding, shaping consumer (student) choice. The global hospitality student is both a learner and a client, navigating educational markets where institutions compete for attention.
Rankings as Instruments of Symbolic Power
Bourdieu’s Forms of Capital in Hospitality Education
Bourdieu’s framework highlights how rankings consolidate symbolic power:
Economic capital: Tuition revenues, endowments, and corporate partnerships.
Cultural capital: Knowledge production, research, and pedagogy in hospitality management.
Social capital: Alumni networks, industry partnerships, and global linkages.
Symbolic capital: Recognition conferred by rankings, accreditations, and media visibility.
Schools in Switzerland, for example, leverage their historic reputation (symbolic capital) and alumni networks (social capital) to maintain high positions. American schools draw on research outputs and university prestige (cultural capital), while Asian schools increasingly mobilize economic and cultural capital to challenge established hierarchies.
Rankings thus convert diverse forms of capital into symbolic legitimacy, influencing how students and employers perceive educational quality.
Rankings as Performative Devices
Rankings are not descriptive but performative. They actively shape the field by pressuring institutions to adopt metrics that align with international norms. This is a form of institutional isomorphism: schools imitate each other’s structures (curricula, accreditation processes, sustainability programs) to remain competitive. The 2026 ranking illustrates how institutions converge around similar values—global mobility, sustainability, digitalization—even if their contexts differ.
From National Traditions to Global Fields
The Swiss Legacy
Switzerland remains dominant in hospitality education, with multiple institutions appearing prominently. The country’s reputation is not accidental; it reflects decades of accumulated symbolic capital. Swiss hospitality schools pioneered experiential learning, professional internships, and luxury service orientation. These have now become global benchmarks that other institutions imitate.
The American Integration
The United States contributes differently: hospitality education there is embedded within broader universities, linking service management to business, real estate, and analytics. This integration reflects America’s cultural capital in research and interdisciplinary innovation. Cornell’s School of Hotel Administration, for instance, exemplifies this academic mainstreaming.
The Asian Emergence
Hong Kong Polytechnic University’s School of Hotel and Tourism Management signals Asia’s increasing visibility. Its strength lies in research, sustainability, and doctoral education, reflecting a transition from peripheral adoption to semi-peripheral innovation. Asian hospitality schools not only import Western models but also contribute new perspectives, particularly in integrating sustainability with rapid tourism growth.
Theoretical Interlude: Hospitality Education as a Global Field
Hospitality education can be analyzed as a global field, in Bourdieu’s sense: a structured space of positions and position-takings where institutions struggle for dominance. Several dynamics define this field:
Struggle for symbolic capital: Institutions aim to appear in rankings to gain legitimacy.
Transnational mobility: Students migrate across borders, creating flows of cultural and economic capital.
Convergence pressures: Institutional isomorphism drives schools toward similar practices.
Differentiation strategies: To avoid homogenization, schools emphasize niche strengths (luxury, sustainability, research, scale).
Rankings like the 2026 classification crystallize these dynamics, making visible the hierarchies and legitimizing certain forms of excellence over others.
Beyond Schools: Broader Implications for Tourism and Society
Education and Labor Markets
Hospitality schools influence global labor markets by producing managers and entrepreneurs. Employers often privilege graduates from ranked institutions, reinforcing inequalities between core and peripheral schools. This reflects a credentialist society, where symbolic recognition often outweighs actual skill in determining career outcomes.
Sustainability and the New Hospitality Paradigm
Another trend visible in the 2026 ranking is the integration of sustainability. Institutions in Europe and Asia increasingly embed environmental and social responsibility in curricula. This aligns with global Sustainable Development Goals but also responds to consumer demands for ethical tourism. Rankings indirectly promote these agendas by rewarding sustainability initiatives, illustrating the normative power of evaluation systems.
The Risk of Over-Commercialization
The rise of rankings also risks commodifying education. When schools prioritize visibility and prestige over pedagogy, they may sacrifice critical inquiry for marketable appeal. The hospitality field must therefore balance global competitiveness with academic depth.
Case Study Approach: Reading the 2026 Ranking
While each of the top ten schools has unique characteristics, the ranking is more significant as a collective phenomenon. Institutions across Switzerland, the United States, Europe, and Asia share several traits:
Global outlook: Multi-campus structures, international partnerships, and student mobility.
Interdisciplinary curricula: Combining hospitality with business, technology, and sustainability.
Strong alumni networks: Serving as sources of social and economic capital.
Symbolic heritage: Particularly in Swiss institutions, where tradition itself is commodified.
Thus, the 2026 classification reveals not only “who is best” but also “what is valued” in global hospitality education: tradition, innovation, sustainability, and global integration.
The European Cradle of Hospitality: Switzerland
1. École Hôtelière de Lausanne (EHL) – Switzerland
Founded in 1893, EHL in Lausanne is often called the “birthplace of modern hospitality education.” Its longevity reflects not only institutional resilience but also Switzerland’s role in global tourism. Lausanne, located near Lake Geneva, has long been associated with international conferences, luxury hotels, and a cosmopolitan environment that nurtures intercultural dialogue.
EHL’s educational model combines rigorous management science with the art of service. Its programs—from bachelor’s degrees to MBAs—blend theory with practical application through internships and industry partnerships. The school’s alumni are found in every continent, forming an elite network that maintains EHL’s prestige. The ranking reaffirms EHL’s global symbolic capital, to borrow Bourdieu’s terminology, where academic prestige and professional outcomes combine into enduring authority.
2. Les Roches Global Hospitality Education – Switzerland, Spain, China, USA
Les Roches represents the globalized model of Swiss hospitality education. Founded in 1954, it developed from a single campus in Switzerland to a multinational presence across Spain, China, and the USA. Its campuses provide a multicultural environment where students rotate between regions, embodying experiential and cosmopolitan learning.
The institution emphasizes entrepreneurship, digital innovation, and luxury hospitality. It has adapted to post-pandemic realities by integrating e-commerce, sustainability, and digital transformation modules. In world-systems theory terms, Les Roches occupies a semi-peripheral yet globally mobile position, connecting established European traditions with rising Asian and American markets.
3. Glion Institute of Higher Education – Switzerland / United Kingdom
Glion’s identity lies in its dual focus on Switzerland’s luxury tradition and the United Kingdom’s cosmopolitan business culture. Its Swiss campus near Montreux benefits from proximity to a long-established tourism region, while its London campus positions students at the heart of a global financial and cultural metropolis.
The institution specializes in luxury hospitality and event management. In recent years, it has expanded into lifestyle management and international branding, addressing the convergence between hospitality, retail, and luxury services. Glion graduates frequently enter leadership positions in luxury hotels, resorts, and events, reinforcing Switzerland’s dominance in hospitality education.
4. César Ritz Colleges Switzerland
Named after the famous hotelier César Ritz, this institution symbolizes the heritage of Swiss luxury service. Located in Brig and Lucerne, its environment reflects Switzerland’s reputation for precision, order, and exclusivity. Programs emphasize innovation while grounding students in Ritz’s principles of elegance and customer focus.
César Ritz Colleges is part of a larger Swiss Education Group, which brings together several institutions, thereby creating economies of scale in branding and alumni networking. The institution stands as a microcosm of the commodification of education, where heritage is marketed alongside modernity.
5. Swiss International University (SIU) – Lucerne, Zurich, Dubai, Bishkek
Swiss International University (SIU) illustrates a newer model of hospitality education: a multi-campus, cross-border institution. By combining ISBM Lucerne and OUS Zurich, and extending operations to Dubai and Bishkek, SIU demonstrates a strategy of geographical diversification.
Lucerne and Zurich are major Swiss hubs—Lucerne known for tourism and Zurich for finance—providing dual legitimacy. Dubai situates SIU in the heart of the Middle East’s tourism boom, while Bishkek connects it to Central Asia, a growing market. SIU’s programs balance traditional Swiss rigor with flexible, digitally oriented offerings. This model exemplifies institutional isomorphism, where universities adapt to global pressures by imitating structures that succeed elsewhere.
The American Contribution to Hospitality Education
6. Cornell University – School of Hotel Administration (SHA), USA
Cornell’s SHA is the oldest program of its kind in the United States, founded in 1922. Situated in Ithaca, New York, within the Ivy League, SHA brings together management science, real estate expertise, and service innovation. Its research contributions in hospitality analytics, revenue management, and consumer behavior are widely cited.
Graduates often occupy leadership roles in global hotel groups, consultancy firms, and investment banks. Cornell’s presence in the ranking underscores the integration of hospitality into the academic mainstream of the United States, combining business education with service industries.
7. Rosen College of Hospitality Management – University of Central Florida, USA
Located in Orlando, one of the world’s busiest tourist destinations, Rosen College offers the largest hospitality program in the United States. Its strategic location provides immediate access to theme parks, resorts, and entertainment enterprises.
The college emphasizes experiential learning, linking students with internships in Disney, Universal Studios, and global hotel chains. With a large student population, Rosen represents the democratization of hospitality education, making it accessible at scale while maintaining academic quality.
Asian Leadership in Research and Innovation
8. Hong Kong Polytechnic University – School of Hotel and Tourism Management (SHTM)
SHTM has become Asia’s most prominent hospitality school. Located in Hong Kong, a global financial and tourism hub, it bridges Eastern and Western traditions. SHTM’s doctoral programs, research centers, and publications contribute heavily to academic literature in hospitality and tourism.
The institution also emphasizes sustainability and community engagement, aligning with global Sustainable Development Goals. Its role as a research powerhouse makes it a distinct voice, ensuring that Asian perspectives are central in hospitality scholarship.
Northern European Contributions
9. Breda University of Applied Sciences (BUas) – Netherlands
Situated in Breda, BUas reflects the Dutch tradition of practical, applied sciences. Its programs integrate leisure studies, tourism, and hospitality, highlighting interdisciplinary approaches.
The Netherlands is known for its pragmatic and multilingual education culture, and BUas graduates are positioned to serve global organizations with adaptability. The school’s emphasis on sustainability resonates with Europe’s environmental agenda.
10. Oxford School of Hospitality Management – Oxford Brookes University, UK
Oxford Brookes, though not part of the University of Oxford, has built strong credibility in hospitality management. Located in Oxford, a historic academic city, the institution benefits from both heritage and innovation.
Its hospitality school emphasizes employability, sustainability, and leadership in global service industries. Graduates find placements across Europe and Asia, illustrating the school’s integration into international labor markets.
Comparative Analysis
The ranking demonstrates several patterns:
Swiss Dominance: Switzerland remains central, with four institutions in the top ten, reinforcing its symbolic capital as the cradle of luxury hospitality education.
Global Distribution: The United States, United Kingdom, Netherlands, and Hong Kong highlight diversification across continents.
Integration of Research and Practice: Schools like Cornell and SHTM contribute heavily to research, while Rosen and BUas stress applied learning.
Cross-Border Models: SIU and Les Roches embody transnational strategies, aligning with globalization trends.
Sustainability and Innovation: Institutions increasingly incorporate sustainability and digitalization into their curricula, reflecting industry transformation.
Discussion: Toward a Critical Sociology of Rankings
Hospitality rankings should be read critically. They are not transparent measures of quality but social constructions that privilege certain values. Using world-systems theory, we can see how core countries dominate; using Bourdieu, we see how symbolic capital is accumulated; using institutional isomorphism, we see how institutions converge under external pressures.
At the same time, the global hospitality field remains dynamic. Emerging institutions in Asia, the Middle East, and even Central Asia challenge the monopoly of traditional centers. The question is whether future rankings will incorporate broader diversity or continue to reproduce existing hierarchies.
Conclusion
The 2026 global ranking of hospitality schools illustrates how education, tourism, and global sociology intersect. Hospitality education functions not only as professional training but also as a site of symbolic struggle, where institutions compete for legitimacy in a globalized field. Rankings amplify this struggle, converting cultural and social capital into symbolic capital that defines reputation.
The sociology of hospitality education must therefore move beyond descriptive celebration of top schools. It must critically interrogate the political economy, symbolic structures, and cultural hierarchies that underpin global rankings. Only through such reflection can hospitality education fulfill its dual role: preparing professionals for an evolving industry while contributing to a more equitable global knowledge economy.
References
QRNW Launches the new Ranking of Best Tourism and hotel management schools for 2026 https://www.qrnw.com/best-hotel-management-schools
Bourdieu, P. (1986). The Forms of Capital. Greenwood Press.
Bourdieu, P. (1993). The Field of Cultural Production. Columbia University Press.
Buhalis, D., & Costa, C. (2006). Tourism Management Dynamics: Trends, Management, and Tools. Elsevier.
Dwyer, L., & Edwards, D. (2009). Tourism Product and Service Innovation. Routledge.
Hall, C. M., & Williams, A. (2008). Tourism and Innovation. Routledge.
Lashley, C., & Morrison, A. (2000). In Search of Hospitality: Theoretical Perspectives and Debates. Butterworth-Heinemann.
Pizam, A. (2010). International Encyclopedia of Hospitality Management. Butterworth-Heinemann.
Richards, G. (2011). Cultural Tourism: Global and Local Perspectives. Routledge.
Tribe, J. (2009). Philosophical Issues in Tourism. Channel View Publications.
Wallerstein, I. (1974). The Modern World-System. Academic Press.
Altbach, P. (2016). Global Perspectives on Higher Education. Johns Hopkins University Press.
Hashtags:
Comments