The government’s decision to scrap the one-year fees-free tertiary scheme in this month’s Budget will be contentious. Some will see it as a sensible saving, others as another blow to students facing high living costs.

But the bigger question is not whether the scheme should survive. It’s why making a year of tertiary education free did so little to change how many people studied, or who studied.

Our new research finds little evidence a fees-free year widened tertiary access. It points to the broader issue that many barriers to tertiary study emerge well before students face a fees bill.

The logic behind the fees-free scheme was simple: reduce the cost of tertiary education and more people will study.

In some countries, that argument has more force. If students face high upfront tuition fees, removing them can make tertiary education more accessible.

New Zealand is different. Before the fees-free scheme was introduced in 2018, domestic students could already borrow for tuition through the student loan scheme. For borrowers who remain in New Zealand, those loans are interest-free.

This means many students don’t pay tuition fees upfront. The fees-free scheme reduced future debt, but for many students it didn’t remove a pressing cash barrier to enrolling.

That distinction matters. If the main barriers are living costs, school........

© The Conversation