Gonzaga Debate Institute 2011 Mercury Scholars International Brain Drain da
Download 425.95 Kb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- No Impact - Brain Circulation
No Impact – GeneralNo Impact- 50% of Scientists return to their original country and bring increase knowledge Georghiou, University of Manchester, Director of Institute for Policy Research in Engineering ‘04 (Luke, Science and Technology (PREST) and Chair, Institute of Innovation Research, February 22-23 2004, “‘BEYOND BRAIN DRAIN’ MOBILITY, COMPETITIVENESS & SCIENTIFIC EXCELLENCE” Workshop Report p. 29 BLG)
Within the European Union there are already flows of graduates taking place. Doctoral & postdoctoral flows are mainly from the South to the scientifically advanced systems of the North. With the accession of New Member States these flows will increasingly also be from East to West. While there may be overall benefits to Europe resulting from placing some of the brightest individuals in the best supported systems the downside to this (and to retention of students) is that of perpetuation of regional inequity by removing some of those who could make a major contribution to development of their own countries. Against this, in the present era of high mobility and broadband communication, expatriates are rapidly gaining in recognition of their value as a network resource for their country of origin. In a sense mobility of researchers to the USA repeats the same problem but with all other countries affected. The issue is less one of absolute numbers and more a problem of the loss of the best. However, again the long-term incidence of benefits is not clear. An international evaluation of the International Human Frontier Science Program, which operates an elite postdoctoral scheme in the biosciences, found an eventual (10 year) return rate of fellows of around 50% overall. Thos would suggest that, at least in a well-managed scheme, the benefits of an enhanced individual are reasonably shared between host and country of origin. Status quo programs solve brain drain Georghiou, University of Manchester, Director of Institute for Policy Research in Engineering ‘04 (Luke, Science and Technology (PREST) and Chair, Institute of Innovation Research, February 22-23 2004, “‘BEYOND BRAIN DRAIN’ MOBILITY, COMPETITIVENESS & SCIENTIFIC EXCELLENCE” Workshop Report p. 29 BLG) In summary, despite the unlikelihood of the 3% target being met, a major quantitative challenge exists in the matching the supply of researchers to increased future demand. The precise numbers needed are unpredictable, not least because they are affected by possible changes in capital intensity and productivity. Nonetheless, conditions governing the entry and retention of researchers in the profession are important. Also critical is the qualitative challenge in matching skills to needs even though the evidence suggests that the problem is specific to certain mainly numerate areas. What this review of some recent studies suggests is that the issues can only be addressed by complete systemic approaches. The systemic approach needs to be simultaneously vertical and horizontal: the vertical approach encompasses the life pattern through education, training, mobility and careers, while the horizontal approach places human resource policy in the context of the full range of innovation policies with which it needs to be coordinated. No Impact - Brain CirculationInternationalists believe in the value of brain circulation – a multidirectional flow of knowledge that benefits everyone Solimano, chairman of the International Center of Globalization and Development, 8 (Andrés, “The International Mobility of Talent: Types, Causes and Development Impact”, Oxford University Press, vol. 1, p. 2-4, CW) The topics of brain drain and brain circulation—more colloquial names for the international mobility of talent—is now reviving after being largely dormant for a few decades. In the 1960s and 1970s there were interesting polemics among economists between the ‘nationalists’ (represented by Don Patinkin) and the ‘internationalists’ (represented by Harry Johnson) that also affected the views of policymakers at the time. The internationalist view stressed that the mobility of talent was the result of better 1-2 economic and professional opportunities found abroad than in the home country and that this mobility leads to clear gains for those who move and also for the world economy as resources moved from places with lower productivity to places with higher productivity, thereby raising world income and global welfare. The nationalist school, in turn, questioned the practical meaning of the concept of ̈world welfare ̈ and pointed out the asymmetric distribution of gains from mobility between receiving and sending countries associated with the mobility of qualified human resources. At that time the topic was strongly influenced by the notion of ‘brain drain’, say a one-way flow of qualified human resources from poor to rich countries (or from the periphery to the core nations in the world economy) that entailed a net permanent loss for the source country. These flows were often viewed as having a negative effect on source countries that made an educational investment in qualified human resources that ultimately left their home nations. These views are evolving and at the start of the twenty first century we think more in terms of ‘brain circulation’, a two way (or multiple directional) movement of talented individuals such as students, professionals, information technology experts, entrepreneurs, cultural workers, and others in the world economy in response to new opportunities open to them by globalization in different cities and countries around the world. This trend has been reinforced by the now greater information flows on economic opportunities and life-styles across the globe and by lower transportation costs. New literature on the topic, distancing itself from the old emphasis on the costs of talent emigration, is highlighting mechanisms through which there can be a “beneficial brain drain” emphasizing some possible positive effects for source countries of the emigration “knowledge workers”. These effects are in terms of flows of remittances, production of 1-3 goods of superior technological content that can benefit consumers and producers in the home country, transfer of new technologies and ideas. In turn, this new literature more than lamenting the fiscal cost of talent emigration poses that the higher mobility of human capital can be a good thing as it ties the hands of government that want to tax human, a needed ingredient for economic development. Directory: 2011 2011 -> Enterprise Network Management iPost: Implementing Continuous Risk Monitoring at the Department of State 2011 -> Voices of the Old Sea Norman Lewis 2011 -> Malevil Robert Merle 2011 -> The Elephant Keeper’s Children Peter Hoeg 2011 -> January 1: Ecstasy zZz January 2: King of Anything Sara Bareillis 2011 -> Tracks, Mixes, Masters, and More!: Analyzing Preservation Priorities for Multitrack Recordings 2011 -> Department of Electrical Engineering 2011 Annual Report 2011 -> Jv packet •Mars Colonization Affirmative •Mars Colonization Negative 2011 -> Asian Pacific Mathematical Olympiad(apmo) 2011 -> Registration Form (Rev. 8-86) omb no. 1024-0018 Download 425.95 Kb. Share with your friends:
|