This very interesting post at "BlogU" brings to light many of the issues and questions that we've been hearing about at SCUP events and via SCUP communications. It specifically looks at what some institutional associations are doing to collaborate in gaining and sharing expertise in internationalization. As might be expected, the author quotes SCUPer Ann Duin Hill as someone with much related expertise. Her comment to the author was about shared infrastructure development, something that is focused on during the latter half of the post:

[W]hy should universities establish their own IT systems in global higher education hubs when they could collaborate much more closely and reduce costs? Or why should universities from one country work on an individual basis to establish foreign presence via leased space in select city-regions when they could collaborate, via an associational or inter-associational relations, and build a purpose built structure?

After the following paragraph, the author raises a long list of questions to be answered: This list is probably worth accessing and keeping on hand or in your mind.

These associations, and their cousins in other countries and regions, have shown themselves to be adroit and supportive on an increasing number of levels despite constrained resources. This said, it seems to me that there is a growing disjuncture between well-intended associations of universities and the defacto (and often not expressed) needs of their membership bases, especially with respect to the deep internationalization agenda. Members are grappling (or not, which should be a concern!) with complex challenges and topics like: (See the article for the list of 12 itemized questions.)

He recognizes the good work of such groups as the APLU and CIC, but says that much more is needed:

Associations of universities are obvious candidates to build up the capacity of their members but they too are seeing enhanced obligations and mission creep as the denationalization process unfolds. Such associations are also grappling with fiscal constraints for they tend to reply upon membership fees as a main if not majority source of revenue. Thus there is an emerging disjuncture - universities have more on their plate, while associations have more on their plate, but the membership fee revenue foundation has intractable constraints and structural contradictions associated with it.