Multidisciplinary Journal Epistemology of the Sciences
Volume 3, Issue 2, 2026, July–September
DOI: https://doi.org/10.71112/pswymb08
EDUCATIONAL POLICIES AND GLOBAL COGNITIVE POWER: TOWARD A
COMPLEX THEORY OF GEOPOLITICAL INFLUENCE IN LATIN AMERICA
POLÍTICAS EDUCATIVAS Y PODER COGNITIVO GLOBAL: HACIA UNA TEORÍA
COMPLEJA DE LA INFLUENCIA GEOPOLÍTICA EN AMÉRICA LATINA
Jorge Fajardo Molinares
Colombia
DOI: https://doi.org/10.71112/pswymb08
1761 Multidisciplinary Journal Epistemology of the Sciences | Vol. 3, Issue 3, 2026, July–September
Educational policies and global cognitive power: toward a complex theory of
geopolitical influence in latin america
Políticas educativas y poder cognitivo global: hacia una teoría compleja de la
influencia geopolítica en américa latina
Jorge Fajardo Molinares
a,*
jjfajardo@unibarranquilla.edu.co
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9283-1132
*
Autor de correspondencia: jjfajardo@unibarranquilla.edu.co,
a
Facultad de Ciencias, Educación,
Artes y Humanidades, Institución Universitaria de Barranquilla, Colombia.
ABSTRACT
This article analyzes the influence of the United States, China, and Russia on Latin America
from the perspective of educational policies, knowledge production, and complexity theory. The
objective was to understand how contemporary geopolitical dynamics shape new forms of
cognitive influence through education, science, and technological innovation. Methodologically,
a qualitative and interpretative study was conducted based on documentary analysis and data
processing using ATLAS.ti software. Through the construction of semantic networks, categories
related to educational geopolitics, cognitive influence, multipolar educational governance, the
reconfiguration of the international order, and Latin American regional dynamics were identified.
The findings reveal that knowledge has become a strategic resource for the consolidation of
new forms of global power, in which universities, scientific networks, and international
cooperation mechanisms play a central role. As a theoretical contribution, the article proposes
the concept of Global Cognitive Power, defined as the capacity to produce, legitimize, and
DOI: https://doi.org/10.71112/pswymb08
1762 Multidisciplinary Journal Epistemology of the Sciences | Vol. 3, Issue 3, 2026, July–September
disseminate knowledge capable of influencing other social systems. The study concludes that
education has become a key arena for geopolitical competition and the construction of
international influence.
Keywords: Complexity; Educational geopolitics; Educational governance; Educational policy;
Global cognitive power.
RESUMEN
Este artículo analiza la influencia de Estados Unidos, China y Rusia en América Latina desde la
perspectiva de las políticas educativas, la producción de conocimiento y la teoría de la
complejidad. El objetivo fue comprender cómo las dinámicas geopolíticas contemporáneas
configuran nuevas formas de influencia cognitiva a través de la educación, la ciencia y la
innovación tecnológica. Metodológicamente, se realizó un estudio cualitativo e interpretativo
basado en el análisis documental y el procesamiento de datos mediante el software ATLAS.ti. A
través de la construcción de redes semánticas, se identificaron categorías relacionadas con la
geopolítica educativa, la influencia cognitiva, la gobernanza educativa multipolar, la
reconfiguración del orden internacional y las dinámicas regionales latinoamericanas. Los
hallazgos revelan que el conocimiento se ha convertido en un recurso estratégico para la
consolidación de nuevas formas de poder global, en las que las universidades, las redes
científicas y los mecanismos de cooperación internacional desempeñan un papel central. Como
contribución teórica, el artículo propone el concepto de Poder Cognitivo Global, definido como
la capacidad de producir, legitimarla y difundir conocimiento capaz de influir en otros sistemas
sociales. El estudio concluye que la educación se ha convertido en un escenario clave para la
competición geopolítica y la construcción de influencia internacional.
Palabras clave: Complejidad; Geopolítica educativa; Gobernanza educativa; Política
educativa; Poder cognitivo global.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.71112/pswymb08
1763 Multidisciplinary Journal Epistemology of the Sciences | Vol. 3, Issue 3, 2026, July–September
Received: august 3, 2026 | Accepted: august 24, 2026 | April: august 25, 2026
INTRODUCTION
Recent transformations in the international system have reinforced the growing
interdependence among knowledge, education, innovation, and geopolitical power. Over the
past decades, competition among states has expanded beyond military and economic
capabilities to include scientific production, technological development, and the formation of
highly skilled human capital. In this context, education has become a strategic domain through
which states build national capacities, promote development models, and project international
influence beyond traditional geopolitical boundaries (Morin, 1990; Rosales, 2022; Gómez,
2020).
The increasing strategic value of knowledge has generated new forms of geopolitical
competition. The United States, China, and Russia have strengthened their scientific and
technological capabilities through policies that promote innovation, research, and the
internationalization of higher education, recognizing that global leadership increasingly depends
on the ability to produce, legitimize, and disseminate knowledge (Ruiz, 2013; Rosales, 2022; De
la Gándara, 2025). Consequently, universities, research centers, scientific networks, and
multilateral organizations have become influential actors in shaping new forms of global
governance and international influence.
At the same time, the international system is undergoing a gradual transition toward
multipolarity, challenging traditional hegemonic structures. China's emergence as a scientific
and technological power (Santiago, 2022; Fabelo, 2022; Simonit, 2022), Russia's strategic
repositioning, and the relative transformation of U.S. global influence have reshaped
contemporary power dynamics, directly affecting educational policies and international
cooperation (Scarpino, 2025; Gojayev, 2024; Sánchez & Buzo de la Peña, 2021). As a result,
DOI: https://doi.org/10.71112/pswymb08
1764 Multidisciplinary Journal Epistemology of the Sciences | Vol. 3, Issue 3, 2026, July–September
education has become a central instrument of international projection, diplomatic legitimacy,
and geopolitical influence.
Mendieta (1996) these dynamics are particularly significant in Latin America, where
international cooperation, technology transfer, and the internationalization of higher education
have strengthened scientific and institutional capacities while simultaneously reinforcing forms
of cognitive dependency through the adoption of external educational and scientific models
(Arteaga, 2024; Zapata & Martínez, 2020; Viola & Mora, 2025). Consequently, the region faces
the challenge of enhancing its educational and scientific autonomy within an increasingly
competitive geopolitical environment.
Despite the extensive literature on international relations, geopolitics, and comparative
education, an important analytical gap remains regarding the role of education as a mechanism
of power construction in multipolar contexts. Existing studies continue to privilege economic,
military, or institutional explanations while paying comparatively less attention to the production,
legitimization, and circulation of knowledge as drivers of international influence (Tello, 2012;
Gómez, 2020). Likewise, only a limited number of studies have applied complexity theory as a
framework for understanding the interactions among geopolitics, education, and global
governance.
From the perspective of complexity theory, educational phenomena cannot be
understood as isolated or linear processes but rather as open systems characterized by
interdependence, feedback, and emergent dynamics operating across multiple levels of analysis
(Morin, 1990; Rodríguez & Aguirre, 2011). This perspective makes it possible to interpret
educational policies not merely as domestic policy instruments but also as mechanisms involved
in knowledge production, international cooperation, legitimacy building, and geopolitical
competition. Accordingly, education may be understood as a central component of
contemporary systems of global influence.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.71112/pswymb08
1765 Multidisciplinary Journal Epistemology of the Sciences | Vol. 3, Issue 3, 2026, July–September
Against this background, this article examines the influence of the United States, China,
and Russia in Latin America through the lens of educational policies, knowledge production, and
complexity theory. It addresses the following research question: How is the geopolitical
influence of the United States, China, and Russia in Latin America configured through
mechanisms associated with education, science, ¿and knowledge production in the context of
the transition toward a multipolar international order?
The study aims to explain how major powers employ education, technological
innovation, and scientific cooperation as mechanisms of international influence in Latin America.
As its principal theoretical contribution, the article introduces the concept of Global Cognitive
Power, defined as the capacity of state, institutional, and transnational actors to produce,
legitimize, transfer, and position knowledge, technologies, and educational models capable of
shaping other social systems. By proposing this concept, the study seeks to advance a
complexity-based interpretation of geopolitical influence grounded in knowledge production,
thereby extending conventional approaches to international relations and educational policy.
Theoretical framework
Complexity Theory and the Analysis of Global Educational Policies
Complexity theory provides one of the most influential contemporary frameworks for
understanding social phenomena characterized by interaction, uncertainty, and
interdependence. Rather than explaining social systems through linear cause-and-effect
relationships, it conceives them as dynamic configurations in which multiple actors interact
simultaneously, generating emergent processes that continuously reshape the system (Morin,
1990). Accordingly, complexity theory overcomes reductionist perspectives by integrating
political, economic, cultural, scientific, and educational dimensions within a common analytical
framework.
From this perspective, Morin (1990) identifies recursivity, feedback, emergence, and
self-organization as defining principles of complex systems. These principles explain how the
DOI: https://doi.org/10.71112/pswymb08
1766 Multidisciplinary Journal Epistemology of the Sciences | Vol. 3, Issue 3, 2026, July–September
outcomes of a system become new causes that transform its subsequent development,
emphasizing knowledge as a dynamic process of continuous construction rather than a static
representation of reality.
Applied to public policy, complexity theory challenges hierarchical and rational models of
policy design and implementation. Rodríguez and Aguirre (2011) argue that policies should be
understood as open systems involving multiple actors, institutions, and interests that interact
simultaneously. Consequently, educational policies are not merely state-designed regulatory
instruments but complex configurations emerging from processes of negotiation, cooperation,
conflict, and knowledge production.
This perspective is particularly relevant in the context of globalization, where
international organizations, universities, research centers, scientific networks, and governments
jointly shape educational agendas across multiple scales (Tello, 2012). From the epistemology
of educational policy, Tello (2012) further argues that policy processes are also processes of
meaning-making influenced by competing rationalities, discourses, and forms of knowledge
production. Therefore, the analysis of educational policies requires the simultaneous
consideration of institutional, cognitive, and cultural dimensions.
Within this framework, complexity theory provides the conceptual foundation for
understanding the interconnections among education, knowledge, and geopolitics. The
international influence exerted by the United States, China, and Russia cannot be interpreted as
isolated actions but as systemic processes involving educational systems, scientific networks,
technological strategies, and global governance structures (Flórez, 2020). Consequently,
education emerges as a strategic component of contemporary power relations, supporting the
theoretical proposition developed in this study to explain the emergence of Global Cognitive
Power within an international system characterized by multipolarity, interdependence, and
continuous transformation.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.71112/pswymb08
1767 Multidisciplinary Journal Epistemology of the Sciences | Vol. 3, Issue 3, 2026, July–September
Geopolitics of Knowledge and Global Cognitive Power
Contemporary transformations in the international system have positioned knowledge as
a strategic source of global power. Unlike traditional geopolitical approaches centered on
territorial, military, or economic control, current dynamics demonstrate that scientific production,
technological innovation, and educational capacity have become essential resources for
international influence. In this context, the geopolitics of knowledge has emerged as an
analytical perspective that examines how states, academic institutions, and international
organizations produce, circulate, and legitimize knowledge that shapes the global order
(Gómez, 2020; Rosales, 2022).
From this perspective, scientific knowledge is not a neutral product but is closely linked
to power relations, institutional structures, and struggles for epistemic legitimacy. Consequently,
educational and scientific systems become strategic arenas through which states strengthen
their international position. As noted by Rosales (2022) and De la Gándara (2025), major
powers have incorporated research, innovation, and higher education into their geopolitical
agendas, recognizing that global leadership increasingly depends on the capacity to generate
and strategically apply knowledge.
The rise of the knowledge-based economy has also transformed traditional mechanisms
of international influence. According to Gómez (2020), scientific production, technological
innovation, and human capital development have become central instruments for building
legitimacy and global leadership. Universities, research centers, and international scientific
networks therefore play strategic roles in fostering national scientific capabilities while
expanding forms of cognitive influence. These processes are reinforced through academic
internationalization, scientific cooperation, student mobility, and technology transfer, where
education increasingly intersects with scientific, economic, and geopolitical interests (Zapata &
Martínez, 2020; Arteaga, 2024).
DOI: https://doi.org/10.71112/pswymb08
1768 Multidisciplinary Journal Epistemology of the Sciences | Vol. 3, Issue 3, 2026, July–September
Complexity theory provides an appropriate framework for interpreting these transformations.
Morin (1990) argues that knowledge production and circulation operate within complex systems
characterized by interdependence, feedback, and emergence. Consequently, international
influence based on knowledge should be understood as the outcome of dynamic interactions
among governments, universities, international organizations, technology companies, and
global scientific networks rather than as the product of isolated actors.
Building on these foundations, this study introduces the concept of Global Cognitive
Power, defined as the capacity of state, institutional, and transnational actors to produce,
legitimize, transfer, and position knowledge, technologies, and educational models capable of
influencing other social systems. This concept broadens conventional understandings of power
by incorporating epistemological and educational dimensions, thereby providing a complexity-
based explanation of contemporary international influence grounded in the strategic production
and circulation of knowledge. Within this framework, Global Cognitive Power constitutes the
central theoretical category of this study and offers a new perspective for analyzing the
relationships among knowledge, education, and geopolitical influence in an increasingly
multipolar and interdependent international system.
Reconfiguration of the International Order and the Transition toward Multipolarity
During the first decades of the twenty-first century, the international system has
undergone profound transformations that challenge the power structures established after the
Cold War. The redistribution of economic, technological, scientific, and political capabilities has
fostered the emergence of a multipolar order, in which global influence is increasingly shared
among several major powers rather than concentrated in a single hegemonic actor (Scarpino,
2025; Gojayev, 2024).
Multipolarity represents not only a redistribution of state power but also a structural
transformation of international relations. Sánchez and Buzo de la Peña (2021) argue that
contemporary changes in the global order are closely associated with shifts in productive,
DOI: https://doi.org/10.71112/pswymb08
1769 Multidisciplinary Journal Epistemology of the Sciences | Vol. 3, Issue 3, 2026, July–September
technological, and financial systems, which have altered the traditional foundations of global
hegemony. As a result, international competition increasingly revolves around scientific
innovation, knowledge production, and technological development, creating new forms of global
leadership.
China has become one of the principal actors in this transformation by significantly
strengthening its research capacity, technological innovation, and higher education system
while expanding its international cooperation and institutional influence (Murillo, 2023; Gojayev,
2024). At the same time, Russia has pursued strategies to restore its geopolitical influence
through investments in science, technology, and strategic autonomy, reflecting broader patterns
of competition that extend beyond traditional military power (Scarpino, 2025). Meanwhile,
although the United States continues to play a dominant economic, scientific, and technological
role, its global leadership has evolved within an increasingly competitive environment in which
emerging powers actively challenge established structures of influence (Sánchez & Buzo de la
Peña, 2021; Murillo, 2023).
From the perspective of complexity theory, these transformations can be understood as
processes of systemic reorganization characterized by the simultaneous coexistence of stability,
adaptation, and change. Morin (1990) argues that complex systems evolve through continuous
interactions among complementary and contradictory forces, generating new emergent
configurations. Applied to international relations, this perspective suggests that multipolarity is
not a fixed global order but an evolving process in which cooperation and competition coexist
within changing structures of global governance.
Within this context, knowledge has become a strategic source of international influence.
The capacity to generate innovation, develop advanced technologies, educate highly skilled
human capital, and strengthen scientific systems increasingly shapes states' international
positions. Consequently, the transition toward multipolarity involves not only the redistribution of
political and economic power but also the reconfiguration of cognitive capabilities that underpin
DOI: https://doi.org/10.71112/pswymb08
1770 Multidisciplinary Journal Epistemology of the Sciences | Vol. 3, Issue 3, 2026, July–September
contemporary global leadership. This structural transformation provides the context in which the
concept of Global Cognitive Power proposed in this study emerges, highlighting the central role
of education, scientific research, and knowledge production in understanding contemporary
geopolitical influence.
The United States, China, and Russia as Architects of Contemporary Cognitive Power
The transition toward a multipolar international system has profoundly transformed the
mechanisms through which states build and project power. While international influence during
much of the twentieth century relied primarily on military, economic, and territorial capabilities,
contemporary dynamics increasingly position knowledge, innovation, and education as strategic
resources for global leadership. Within this context, the United States, China, and Russia have
emerged as key architects of contemporary cognitive power, strengthening their scientific,
technological, and educational capacities to expand international influence (Rosales, 2022; De
la Gándara, 2025).
The United States has maintained a leading position through the integration of world-
class universities, research institutions, technological innovation, and academic
internationalization. According to Rosales (2022), its leadership in artificial intelligence,
biotechnology, advanced computing, and the digital economy has reinforced its capacity to
shape global scientific and educational agendas. Furthermore, Chiriboga (2024) argues that
higher education, scientific cooperation, and international talent attraction have strengthened
transnational knowledge networks that consolidate U.S. global influence.
China, by contrast, has pursued a strategy centered on expanding research, innovation,
and higher education while promoting internationally competitive universities and scientific
cooperation. As noted by De la Gándara (2025), China has transformed knowledge into a
strategic resource for international projection through investments in research, academic
exchange, joint research initiatives, and educational diplomacy, thereby increasing its influence
over global scientific agendas (Rosales, 2022).
DOI: https://doi.org/10.71112/pswymb08
1771 Multidisciplinary Journal Epistemology of the Sciences | Vol. 3, Issue 3, 2026, July–September
Russia has adopted a different approach by emphasizing technological sovereignty,
scientific cooperation, and strategic autonomy. Although its higher education system has a more
limited global reach than those of the United States or China, Russia continues to strengthen its
international position through scientific research, technological development, and specialized
training (Ruiz, 2013). At the same time, it increasingly integrates knowledge and technological
innovation with broader geopolitical and security strategies, demonstrating that cognitive
capabilities have become an essential component of contemporary international competition
(Ruiz, 2013; De la Gándara, 2025).
From a theoretical perspective, these three cases illustrate how knowledge has become
a central dimension of global power. Gómez (2020) argues that knowledge societies have
transformed international influence by placing scientific production, innovation, and epistemic
legitimacy at the center of geopolitical competition. Consequently, universities, research
institutions, and scientific networks have acquired strategic importance comparable to that of
traditional foreign policy instruments.
Complexity theory provides an appropriate framework for interpreting these dynamics as
systemic processes involving interactions among governments, universities, international
organizations, and technological sectors. Rather than being concentrated solely in political or
economic structures, power emerges from complex networks in which education, science, and
innovation function simultaneously as mechanisms of cooperation and competition. Within this
context, the United States, China, and Russia can be understood as architects of Global
Cognitive Power, as their capacity to generate innovation, attract talent, lead scientific networks,
and shape international educational agendas has become a defining indicator of global
influence in the twenty-first century.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.71112/pswymb08
1772 Multidisciplinary Journal Epistemology of the Sciences | Vol. 3, Issue 3, 2026, July–September
Latin America as a Strategic Space for Geopolitical and Educational Influence
Contemporary transformations in the international system have increased the
geopolitical significance of Latin America as a strategic arena for the projection of influence by
major global powers. Beyond its economic and geographic importance, the region has become
a key setting for international cooperation, knowledge transfer, educational internationalization,
and scientific development, reflecting the growing integration of education, science, and
innovation into the geopolitical strategies of the United States, China, and Russia (Arteaga,
2024; Luján, 2024).
Historically, Latin America has maintained relationships of economic, technological, and
scientific dependence on the world's principal knowledge-producing centers. According to
Zapata and Martínez (2020), this cognitive dependency is reflected in the adoption of external
educational models, research agendas, and scientific validation systems that often shape
regional knowledge production. However, from the perspective of complexity theory, these
relationships should not be interpreted as purely deterministic. Instead, they involve dynamic
processes of appropriation, adaptation, and transformation, through which international
cooperation can simultaneously strengthen institutional capacities while reproducing forms of
dependency (Morin, 1990; Zapata & Martínez, 2020).
International cooperation has played a fundamental role in expanding scientific and
educational capacities across the region. Academic mobility programs, international research
networks, university partnerships, and collaborative innovation projects have promoted
knowledge circulation and institutional development (Viola & Mora, 2025). At the same time,
they have intensified competition among international actors seeking to expand their influence
through education and scientific cooperation.
In recent decades, China has significantly expanded its presence in Latin America
through academic exchange programs, technological cooperation, scholarships, and joint
research initiatives, diversifying the region's opportunities for scientific collaboration (Arteaga,
DOI: https://doi.org/10.71112/pswymb08
1773 Multidisciplinary Journal Epistemology of the Sciences | Vol. 3, Issue 3, 2026, July–September
2024). Meanwhile, the United States continues to exert substantial influence through research
funding, university internationalization, academic cooperation, and talent attraction,
demonstrating that contemporary geopolitical competition increasingly extends into the fields of
education, science, and technological innovation.
From a theoretical perspective, complexity theory views Latin America not as a passive
recipient of external influence but as an open system in which governments, universities,
research centers, and international organizations continuously interact through processes of
negotiation, adaptation, and knowledge production (Morin, 1990; Tello, 2019). Likewise,
university internationalization has become a key mechanism for integrating the region into
global scientific networks, although important challenges related to research funding, scientific
infrastructure, and academic autonomy remain (Luján, 2024).
Within this context, Latin America represents both a strategic arena of geopolitical
influence and an active participant in the global circulation of knowledge. Understanding the
interactions among international cooperation, cognitive dependency, educational
internationalization, and scientific development is therefore essential for explaining the
emergence of Global Cognitive Power, which provides the conceptual foundation for the
theoretical framework developed in the following section.
Toward a Complexity Theory of Global Cognitive Power
The transformations discussed in the preceding sections demonstrate that contemporary
international influence cannot be fully explained through approaches focused solely on
economic, military, or institutional variables. The growing importance of education, scientific
research, technological innovation, and knowledge production has generated new forms of
interaction among international actors, extending geopolitical influence beyond traditional
conceptions of power. Within this context, complexity theory provides a conceptual framework
for understanding these processes as dynamic systems characterized by interdependence,
feedback, emergence, and continuous reorganization (Morin, 1990).
DOI: https://doi.org/10.71112/pswymb08
1774 Multidisciplinary Journal Epistemology of the Sciences | Vol. 3, Issue 3, 2026, July–September
From this perspective, knowledge is no longer merely a driver of economic development
but a structural component of international relations. The literature reviewed shows that the
United States, China, and Russia have integrated education, science, and innovation into their
global strategies, while Latin America participates through international cooperation, educational
internationalization, and knowledge transfer (Rosales, 2022; De la Gándara, 2025; Arteaga,
2024). These interactions reveal complex systems in which multiple actors produce, legitimize,
and disseminate knowledge that shapes the international order.
Building on this interpretation, this study proposes the concept of Global Cognitive
Power, defined as the capacity of state, institutional, and transnational actors to produce,
legitimize, transfer, and position knowledge, technologies, and educational models capable of
influencing other social, political, and cultural systems. Unlike traditional forms of power, Global
Cognitive Power is rooted not only in material resources but also in the ability to shape the
processes through which knowledge is generated, validated, and circulated.
This concept is closely linked to Educational Geopolitics, defined as the set of strategies
through which states and international actors employ education, scientific research, and
academic cooperation to strengthen their international influence. Complementing this
perspective, the study introduces Cognitive Influence, understood as the capacity to shape the
production, validation, and dissemination of knowledge through epistemic legitimacy,
technological innovation, human capital development, and educational models. As an
operational dimension of Global Cognitive Power, cognitive influence explains how specific
actors succeed in establishing internationally recognized knowledge and scientific paradigms.
The study also proposes the concept of Multipolar Educational Governance, referring to
the mechanisms, institutions, and networks through which multiple actors coordinate and
influence international educational systems. Unlike hierarchical governance models, this
framework recognizes the interaction of governments, universities, multilateral organizations,
and global scientific networks through processes of cooperation, negotiation, and competition.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.71112/pswymb08
1775 Multidisciplinary Journal Epistemology of the Sciences | Vol. 3, Issue 3, 2026, July–September
Together, these categories constitute an integrated analytical framework in which
Educational Geopolitics strengthens Cognitive Influence, Cognitive Influence reinforces Global
Cognitive Power, and Multipolar Educational Governance provides the institutional conditions
for the international circulation of knowledge. This recursive relationship reflects Morin's (1990)
principle of organizational recursivity, according to which the products of a system become the
causes of its own transformation.
The principal theoretical contribution of this study is the integration of complexity theory,
the geopolitics of knowledge, and the epistemology of educational policy into a unified
framework for interpreting contemporary international relations. From this perspective,
geopolitical competition increasingly depends on the capacity to generate knowledge, develop
human talent, foster innovation, and shape global scientific agendas. Consequently, education
should no longer be understood merely as a sectoral policy but as a strategic component of
contemporary systems of global power, providing the conceptual foundation for the
methodological analysis and discussion presented in the following sections.
METHODOLOGY
This study adopted a qualitative interpretive approach to examine the relationships
among geopolitics, education, knowledge production, and power within the context of
contemporary transformations in the international system. This approach is appropriate for
analyzing complex social phenomena by recognizing the interactions among political,
educational, scientific, and institutional dimensions that shape global dynamics of influence
(Rodríguez & Aguirre, 2011; Tello, 2012).
Grounded in complexity theory, the study assumes that social phenomena cannot be
explained through linear causal relationships but should be understood as open systems
characterized by cooperation, competition, adaptation, and emergence (Morin, 1990).
DOI: https://doi.org/10.71112/pswymb08
1776 Multidisciplinary Journal Epistemology of the Sciences | Vol. 3, Issue 3, 2026, July–September
Accordingly, the analysis of educational policies and geopolitical dynamics associated with
knowledge production requires methodologies capable of identifying systemic relationships and
interdependencies that extend beyond traditional descriptive approaches.
Research Design
The research employed a qualitative documentary design, enabling a critical
examination of the literature on the geopolitics of knowledge, international educational policies,
educational governance, multipolarity, scientific cooperation, and the relationship between
education and global power. Documentary analysis is widely recognized as an appropriate
strategy for investigating complex social processes because it facilitates the identification of
conceptual categories, analytical trends, and emerging relationships within the scientific
literature (Tello, 2012).
The study followed an analytical-interpretive orientation, seeking not only to describe
contemporary transformations in the international system but also to explain how these
transformations contribute to the emergence of new forms of influence based on knowledge.
Through a systematic review of specialized literature, the research developed a conceptual
framework to explain the strategic role of education in contemporary global power dynamics.
Documentary Corpus
The documentary corpus comprised 30 academic sources published between 2011 and
2025, including peer-reviewed journal articles, book chapters, institutional reports, documents
from international organizations, and specialized theoretical works.
The documents were selected according to the following criteria:
• Thematic relevance to geopolitics, education, knowledge, and international relations.
• Academic relevance and recognition within the field.
• Currency of theoretical and empirical contributions.
• Direct alignment with the study's core analytical categories.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.71112/pswymb08
1777 Multidisciplinary Journal Epistemology of the Sciences | Vol. 3, Issue 3, 2026, July–September
• Duplicate records, non-scholarly publications, and documents unrelated to the
research objectives were excluded from the analysis.
Data Processing and Analysis
The documentary corpus was organized, coded, and analyzed using ATLAS.ti, which
facilitated the systematic management of the data and the construction of semantic networks to
identify relationships among categories, subcategories, and emerging concepts.
The analytical process was conducted in three stages:
• Phase 1. Open Coding. Recurrent concepts were identified throughout the literature,
generating initial codes related to multipolarity, educational geopolitics, international
cooperation, knowledge transfer, technological innovation, educational governance,
cognitive influence, cognitive dependency, and scientific development.
• Phase 2. Axial Coding. The initial codes were integrated into broader analytical
categories, revealing relationships of causality, interdependence, and
complementarity. This process resulted in six core categories: Global Actors, Latin
America, Educational Geopolitics, Multipolar Educational Governance, Cognitive
Influence, and Reconfiguration of the International Order.
• Phase 3. Theoretical Integration. Finally, the categories were connected through
semantic networks that represented the systemic relationships among the
components of the phenomenon under study. This process led to the emergence of
the central category Global Cognitive Power, which constitutes the study's principal
conceptual contribution.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.71112/pswymb08
1778 Multidisciplinary Journal Epistemology of the Sciences | Vol. 3, Issue 3, 2026, July–September
Categorical Framework
The analytical framework was organized around one core category and six analytical
categories.
Core Category
Global Cognitive Power
Defined as the capacity of state, institutional, and transnational actors to produce,
legitimize, transfer, and position knowledge, technologies, and educational models capable of
influencing other social systems.
• Analytical Categories
• Educational Geopolitics
• Cognitive Influence
• Multipolar Educational Governance
• Reconfiguration of the International Order
• Global Actors
• Latin America
Each category was operationalized through specific subcategories, enabling a deeper
analysis of the dynamics of cooperation, competition, knowledge production, and international
influence identified throughout the documentary analysis.
Construction of Semantic Networks
The semantic networks developed in ATLAS.ti (see Appendices) visually represented
the relationships among the analytical categories and subcategories. From the perspective of
complexity theory, these networks were interpreted as dynamic configurations characterized by
feedback, interdependence, and emergence.
The Global Actors network illustrated the strategies employed by the United States,
China, and Russia to expand their influence through education, science, and innovation. The
DOI: https://doi.org/10.71112/pswymb08
1779 Multidisciplinary Journal Epistemology of the Sciences | Vol. 3, Issue 3, 2026, July–September
Latin America network highlighted the tensions among international cooperation, knowledge
transfer, educational autonomy, and cognitive dependency. The Educational Geopolitics
network revealed the links between scientific diplomacy, university internationalization, and
global knowledge networks.
Likewise, the Multipolar Educational Governance network showed how international
organizations, global universities, and scientific networks jointly shape international educational
agendas. The Cognitive Influence network explained the mechanisms through which knowledge
is produced, legitimized, and disseminated, while the Reconfiguration of the International Order
network illustrated how multipolarity, China's rise, Russia's strategic repositioning, and the
transformation of U.S. hegemony contribute to the contemporary restructuring of the
international system.
The integration of these networks revealed recursive relationships among education,
knowledge, and power, providing the analytical foundation for the proposed Complexity Theory
of Global Cognitive Power.
Epistemological Considerations
This study is grounded in an interpretive epistemological perspective that recognizes
knowledge as a socially constructed phenomenon. Consistent with the epistemology of
educational policy and complexity theory, educational policies, scientific knowledge production,
and geopolitical dynamics are understood as interdependent processes that require analytical
approaches capable of integrating multiple levels of analysis.
Accordingly, the categories developed in this study should not be viewed as fixed
structures but as open conceptual configurations that facilitate the interpretation of
contemporary transformations linking education, science, and power within an international
system characterized by multipolarity and the growing strategic importance of knowledge.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.71112/pswymb08
1780 Multidisciplinary Journal Epistemology of the Sciences | Vol. 3, Issue 3, 2026, July–September
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Multipolarity as the Emerging Context of Global Cognitive Power
The semantic network associated with the Reconfiguration of the International Order
revealed that multipolarity constitutes the structural context in which new forms of knowledge-
based international influence emerge. The relationships among China's rise, Russia's strategic
repositioning, the transformation of U.S. hegemony, and geopolitical competition indicate that
global power is increasingly shaped by the capacity to generate scientific knowledge,
technological innovation, and national research capabilities, rather than solely by economic or
military resources (Scarpino, 2025; Gojayev, 2024).
From the perspective of complexity theory, this transformation represents a process of
systemic reorganization in which multiple actors interact to generate new configurations of
global influence. Thus, multipolarity should be understood not merely as the coexistence of
several major powers but as the emergence of more complex forms of governance grounded in
the production and circulation of knowledge. This interpretation is consistent with Sánchez and
Buzo de la Peña (2021), who argue that contemporary changes in the international system are
driven by structural transformations in innovation, technology, and global power relations.
The United States, China, and Russia as Producers of Cognitive Influence
The Global Actors semantic network showed that the United States, China, and Russia
pursue distinct strategies to strengthen their international influence through education, science,
and technology. The United States maintains its leadership through elite universities, scientific
excellence, and technological innovation; China combines scientific diplomacy, educational
cooperation, and technological expansion to increase its global presence; while Russia
reinforces its geopolitical position by strengthening scientific and technological capacities linked
to strategic autonomy (Rosales, 2022; Ruiz, 2013).
These findings indicate that contemporary international influence increasingly depends
on the capacity to build national knowledge systems. Rather than competing solely for material
DOI: https://doi.org/10.71112/pswymb08
1781 Multidisciplinary Journal Epistemology of the Sciences | Vol. 3, Issue 3, 2026, July–September
resources, major powers seek leadership through scientific research, human capital
development, and technological innovation. Consequently, knowledge production has become a
fundamental source of international legitimacy and global influence, supporting the emergence
of Global Cognitive Power as a defining feature of twenty-first-century geopolitics (De la
Gándara, 2025; Gómez, 2020).
Educational Geopolitics and the Construction of International Influence
The Educational Geopolitics semantic network revealed that education has become a
strategic instrument of contemporary international influence. The relationships among scientific
diplomacy, academic cooperation, student mobility, educational internationalization, and
technology transfer demonstrate that the circulation of knowledge is a central component of
current geopolitical strategies. Universities and educational systems actively contribute to the
development of international networks that extend state influence beyond territorial boundaries.
These findings indicate that education can no longer be understood solely as a sectoral
public policy, but as a strategic arena where scientific, economic, and geopolitical interests
converge. This interpretation supports the perspective of the geopolitics of knowledge, which
views the production and dissemination of knowledge as key mechanisms through which
international actors expand their influence over other social systems (Rosales, 2022; Tello,
2012).
Latin America Between International Cooperation and Cognitive Dependency
The Latin America semantic network revealed a dual configuration characterized by the
coexistence of institutional strengthening and cognitive dependency. On the one hand,
international cooperation, knowledge transfer, and university internationalization contribute to
scientific development and the expansion of regional academic capacities. On the other hand,
the adoption of external research and educational models may reinforce forms of dependency
that constrain the region's scientific and educational autonomy (Arteaga, 2024; Zapata &
Martínez, 2020).
DOI: https://doi.org/10.71112/pswymb08
1782 Multidisciplinary Journal Epistemology of the Sciences | Vol. 3, Issue 3, 2026, July–September
From the perspective of complexity theory, these dynamics should be understood as
complementary rather than contradictory processes operating within the same system. The
findings suggest that international cooperation can simultaneously promote institutional
development and reproduce dependency, depending on the conditions under which knowledge
transfer occurs. Consequently, strengthening regional scientific capacity emerges as a key
strategy for expanding Latin America's autonomy within global knowledge production networks
(Viola & Mora, 2025).
Multipolar Educational Governance and the Global Circulation of Knowledge
The Multipolar Educational Governance semantic network revealed an international
structure characterized by the simultaneous participation of multilateral organizations, global
universities, scientific networks, and educational cooperation mechanisms. The findings indicate
that international educational agendas are no longer shaped exclusively by states but
increasingly by diverse actors capable of influencing educational policies and scientific priorities.
The coexistence of North–South and South–South cooperation reflects the emergence of more
decentralized and complex governance models. From this perspective, Multipolar Educational
Governance provides a framework for understanding how knowledge circulates within the
contemporary international system. Scientific and academic networks function as spaces where
priorities are negotiated, consensus is built, and decisions are made that ultimately shape
national educational systems (Luján, 2024; Zapata & Martínez, 2020).
The Emergence of Global Cognitive Power: Theoretical Contribution of the Study
The integration of the six semantic networks led to the emergence of a unifying analytical
category: Global Cognitive Power. The findings demonstrate that contemporary international
influence increasingly depends on the capacity to produce, legitimize, transfer, and disseminate
knowledge, technologies, and educational models. This capacity is generated through the
interaction of educational systems, universities, research centers, international organizations,
and state strategies aimed at strengthening scientific and technological development.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.71112/pswymb08
1783 Multidisciplinary Journal Epistemology of the Sciences | Vol. 3, Issue 3, 2026, July–September
The principal theoretical contribution of this study is the proposal of Global Cognitive
Power as an analytical framework for explaining contemporary forms of international influence
based on the strategic production and circulation of knowledge. From the perspective of
complexity theory, this concept highlights that international relations operate within dynamic
systems characterized by cooperation, competition, adaptation, and continuous feedback.
Consequently, education, science, and innovation emerge as central components of
contemporary global power, shaping new forms of leadership and influence within an
increasingly multipolar international order.
CONCLUSIONS
The findings demonstrate that contemporary transformations in the international system
have fundamentally reshaped traditional forms of power. The growing importance of education,
science, technological innovation, and knowledge production indicates that global influence
increasingly depends not only on military or economic capabilities but also on the ability to
generate, legitimize, and disseminate strategic knowledge. Within this context, the transition
toward a multipolar international order has fostered new forms of geopolitical competition in
which knowledge has become a central source of international leadership.
The study shows that the United States, China, and Russia have incorporated higher
education, scientific research, and technological innovation into their global strategies. Although
each pursues distinct mechanisms of influence, all recognize knowledge as a strategic asset for
strengthening their international position. Consequently, universities, research centers, scientific
networks, and academic cooperation programs have become as significant as traditional foreign
policy instruments in shaping global influence.
The analysis also highlights Latin America's strategic role within contemporary
knowledge dynamics. While international cooperation, knowledge transfer, and educational
internationalization have strengthened regional scientific capacities, they have also generated
DOI: https://doi.org/10.71112/pswymb08
1784 Multidisciplinary Journal Epistemology of the Sciences | Vol. 3, Issue 3, 2026, July–September
challenges related to cognitive dependency. These findings underscore the importance of
reinforcing regional scientific development and educational autonomy to enhance Latin
America's participation in global knowledge networks.
From an institutional perspective, the results reveal that international educational
governance is evolving toward a polycentric model involving multilateral organizations, global
universities, scientific networks, and international cooperation mechanisms. This transformation
demonstrates that the governance of knowledge increasingly depends on interactions among
multiple actors rather than on state-centered structures alone.
The principal theoretical contribution of this study is the formulation of Global Cognitive
Power, defined as the capacity of state, institutional, and transnational actors to produce,
legitimize, transfer, and position knowledge, technologies, and educational models capable of
influencing other social systems. This concept extends conventional approaches to international
relations by incorporating epistemological and educational dimensions into the analysis of
contemporary geopolitical influence.
Finally, this research strengthens complexity theory as an analytical framework for
understanding the relationships among education, knowledge, and power. It argues that twenty-
first-century geopolitical competition increasingly revolves around the capacity to generate
innovation, develop human capital, and lead scientific agendas. Accordingly, the study proposes
advancing toward a Complexity Theory of Global Cognitive Power, recognizing education as a
strategic component of contemporary international relations and a key driver of emerging forms
of global power.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.71112/pswymb08
1785 Multidisciplinary Journal Epistemology of the Sciences | Vol. 3, Issue 3, 2026, July–September
Conflict of Interest Statement
The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest related to this research.
Author Contributions
Jorge de Jesús Fajardo Molinares: Conceptualization, Methodology, Investigation,
Formal Analysis, Data Curation, Software, Visualization, Validation, Project Administration,
Resources, Writing – Original Draft, and Writing – Review & Editing.
Artificial Intelligence Statement
The authors declare that artificial intelligence tools were used solely as a support
resource during the preparation of this manuscript. These tools did not replace the intellectual
work of the authors at any stage of the research process. The interpretation of the evidence,
conceptual development, theoretical formulation, analysis, conclusions, and final writing were
carried out exclusively by the authors. After rigorous review using plagiarism detection tools, the
authors confirm that this manuscript is the result of their own original intellectual work and has
not been generated or previously published through any electronic platform or artificial
intelligence system.
REFERENCES
Arteaga, Y. (2024). La rivalidad geopolítica entre Estados Unidos y China, caso de estudio:
América Latina. . Revista DATEH., 6(1), 1–8.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.61236/dateh.v6i1.881
Chiriboga, D. (2024). Geopolítica, poder blando y transformaciones del sistema internacional
contemporáneo. https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14005/14969
De la Gándara, M. (2025). Las estrategias de China y Rusia y su impacto en Latinoamérica. .
Revista Política y Estrategia, , (145), 13-38. https://doi.org/10.26797/rpye.vi145.1106
DOI: https://doi.org/10.71112/pswymb08
1786 Multidisciplinary Journal Epistemology of the Sciences | Vol. 3, Issue 3, 2026, July–September
Fabelo, S. (2022). Iniciativa de la Franja y la Ruta. Cultivar saberes para reducir incertidumbres.
En R. I. León de la Rosa (Ed.), Jiexi Zhongguo: Análisis y pensamiento iberoamericano
sobre China. . Observatorio de la Política China.
https://doi.org/10.24201/aap.2024.390
Fajardo, J. (2026). Políticas públicas educativas en contextos dictatoriales latinoamericanos:
una lectura desde la teoría de la complejidad y la epistemología política. . Revista
Polinorte., 2(2), 96–107. DOI: 10.65489/2af80a93
Flórez, G. (2020). Innovación en países desarrollados y subdesarrollados.
https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12494/16629
Gojayev, F. (2024). Transformaciones en el poder mundial: la expansión de China y Rusia en
las relaciones internacionales (Master's thesis, Universidad Internacional de Andalucía).
https://hdl.handle.net/10334/10345
Gómez, J. (2020). Innovación, conocimiento y desarrollo en la economía global
contemporánea.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/378568485_Innovacion_y_competitividad_en_las_org
anizaciones
Luján, C. (2024). ¿Qué piensan los latinoamericanos sobre el sistema mundial? . Revista de
Estudios Internacionales., 11(2), 71–89. https://doi.org/10.5752/P.2317-
773X.2023v11n2p71-89
Mendieta, E. (1996). Modernidad, posmodernidad y transmodernidad: una búsqueda
esperanzadora del tiempo. . Universitas Philosophica., 27, 63–86.
https://revistas.javeriana.edu.co/index.php/vniphilosophica/article/download/11505/9385
Morin, E. (1990). Introducción al pensamiento complejo. . Gedisa.
https://campus.unirep.edu.ec/pruebas/files/curseconten/constructivismo/recursos/docum
entos/u1doc1.pdf
DOI: https://doi.org/10.71112/pswymb08
1787 Multidisciplinary Journal Epistemology of the Sciences | Vol. 3, Issue 3, 2026, July–September
Murillo, C. (2023). Análisis de política exterior en un contexto cambiante: una aproximación. .
Revista Relaciones Internacionales., 96(1), 131-164. DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15359/ri.96-1.5
Rodríguez, J., y Aguirre, J. (2011). Teorías de la complejidad y ciencias sociales: nuevas
estrategias epistemológicas y metodológicas.
Rosales, O. (2022). El conflicto Estados Unidos-China y las perspectivas del “desacoplamiento
estratégico”. El trimestre económico. 89(354), 491-532.
doi: 10.20430/ete.v89i354.1491
Ruiz, F. J. (2013). El concepto de política exterior de Rusia: Un estudio comparativo. Pre-bie3,
(2), 22-0. https://mid.ru/es/foreign_policy/official_documents/1860586/
Sánchez, J. A., y Buzo de la Peña, R. M. . (2021). El reajuste de la economía mundial. .
Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México. https://doi.org/10.24275/uama.363.10397
Santiago, A. (2022). Modelo de administración pública china: una breve revisión de la literatura.
En R. I. León de la Rosa (Ed.), Jiexi Zhongguo: Análisis y pensamiento iberoamericano
sobre China. Observatorio de la Política China.
Scarpino, S. (2025). Sistemas educativos latinoamericanos. Reconfiguración de poder y
autonomía regional: desafíos y oportunidades para Latinoamérica y el Caribe en el siglo
XXI. CICLOS en la Historia, la Economía y la Sociedad, , 32, 64-85.
Simonit, S. (2022). República Popular China (中国)-ALC/MERCOSUR: pragmatismo y acciones
estratégicas para el desarrollo sostenible. En R. I. León de la Rosa (Ed.), Jiexi
Zhongguo: Análisis y pensamiento iberoamericano sobre China. . Observatorio de la
Política China.
Tello, C. G. (2012). Las epistemologías de la política educativa: vigilancia y posicionamiento
epistemológico del investigador en política educativa. Praxis educativa, 7(1), 53-68.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.71112/pswymb08
1788 Multidisciplinary Journal Epistemology of the Sciences | Vol. 3, Issue 3, 2026, July–September
Viola, C., y Mora, D. (2025). Economía política de la cooperación china en América Latina:
continuidades, rupturas, límites y contradicciones. . Estado & comunes, revista de
políticas y problemas públicos., 2(21), 85-106.
https://doi.org/10.37228/estado_comunes.399
Zapata, M., y Martínez, J. (2020). Cooperación internacional, educación superior y producción
de conocimiento en América Latina. https://doi.org/10.7440/colombiaint104.2020.03
