Journal Rankings After Sponsor Withdrawal: The CAS–Xinrui Transition in Chinese Higher Education

Abstract What changes in higher education assessment when a journal ranking’s original sponsor withdraws? This qualitative documentary case study examines the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) Journal Ranking and Xinrui’s launch in March 2026. Drawing on institutional statements, policy texts and dated assessment provisions, it combines historical reconstruction with comparisons within and across selected assessment settings. The analysis distinguishes sponsorship, maintenance, classification and institutional recognition. Retained CAS references coexist with revisions to edition selection, scoring and degree-specific treatment, while one recommendation provision accepts either CAS or Xinrui. Pre-existing reference-only provisions further distinguish collecting journal information from authorising it as an assessment basis. The central finding is that retaining a classification does not necessarily preserve the assessment rule. Orphaned infrastructure describes continued formal recognition of an identifiable classification after its original sponsor withdraws. Infrastructural entrenchment proposes procedural interdependence as a possible explanation for the difficulty of replacement. The contribution is to locate continuity in the relationship between a classification and an authorised task. For evaluation governance, the implication is to specify recognised editions, assessment functions and transition rules, while distinguishing providers’ responsibility for classifications from institutions’ responsibility for their use.