Scientists and politicians regularly debate the impact of researchers who cross borders to live and work in other countries. Some countries boast about the talent they are attracting, while others worry about the talent they are losing. A new study from the National Bureau of Economic Research (abstract available here) provides data on just which countries are gaining and which are losing talent.
Switzerland has by far the greatest percentage of scientists from other countries (56.7 percent), while India has the lowest (0.8 percent).
The unique factor of this study is that — unlike analyses prepared by individual countries, which frequently try to demonstrate that brain drain is a problem — a consistent method was used. The study was based on an analysis of the scientists in 16 countries working on biology, chemistry, earth and environmental sciences, and materials.
For researchers in each country, the study asked where they were at age 18, yielding data both on which countries rely on immigrant talent and on which countries are supplying that talent. Here are the data for the 16 countries in the survey:
Mobility Patterns of Scientists, 2011
Some of these findings are, of course, not surprising, given the public discussion of the influx of scientists from China and India to the United States. But the data show interesting patterns far beyond the typical tale of scientists leaving countries with less-developed research universities for those with top institutions. There is considerable movement within regions for example, with European scientists and South American scientists crossing borders within their regions. German scientists are playing key roles in the work forces of Belgium, Britain, Denmark, Italy, the Netherlands, Sweden and Switzerland. But scientists who started out in Russia are a major force only in Swedish science.
The study also asked immigrant scientists a series of questions about the relative importance of certain factors in motivating them to make their careers elsewhere. The answers were similar, regardless of the country in which the researchers made their homes or where they were born. The top two answers were: “opportunity to improve my future career prospects” and the chance to work with “outstanding faculty, colleagues or research team.” Tying for third were “excellence/prestige of the foreign institution in my area of research” and the “opportunity to extend my network of international relationships.”
Immigrant scientists clearly value their careers over other factors. Among the factors that were least important: family reasons or fringe benefits.
The study was done by three economists: Chiara Franzoni of Politecnico di Milano, Giuseppe Scellato of Politecnico di Torino and Paula Stephan of Georgia State University.
By Scott Jaschik. Posted at Inside HigherEd