1、 外文翻译 原文 Turning brain drain into brain networking Material Source:Science and Public Policy Author:Ioan M Ciumasu SCIENTIFIC TALENT IS ESSENTIAL for countries development, because modern growth is about innovation. Loss of human capital in the form of emigration of highly skilled individuals is gen
2、erally described by the concept of brain drain (e.g. Adams, 2003). Individuals regarded as highly skilled are those who have graduated from higher education to at least bachelor level or equivalent. In general, the direction of the brain drain is from less-to more-developed countries. The process th
3、at is symmetrically opposed to brain drain is known as brain gain, that is,accumulation of human capital in a country via immigration of highly skilled individuals from a less-developed country (Mahroum, 2005). Brain drain can be a serious problem, because it is a loss of the essential human capital
4、 necessary for development. Indeed, brain drain can trigger a vicious cycle of general underdevelopment (Ranis et al, 2000): the loss of the highly skilled worsens the situation in the country, which in turn reinforces the reasons for the highly skilled to leave. By contrast, brain gain improves the
5、 situation in a country, which in turn reinforces the reasons for the highly skilled to immigrate. Typically, there is a combination of pull factors (attraction by some foreign countries) and push factors (discontent with the context in home country). Talent migration grows from a basic prisoners di
6、lemma: the individual strategy for success is not the best collective strategy for success (Ellerman, 2006). People of talent and drive, who represent limited and critical human capital in every country, are more likely to leave one country for another where the chances of self-betterment and succes
7、s are clearly higher. Their exit reduces the pressure for general improvement in the country they have left. Past discussions on potential solutions to brain drain developed around the JohnsonPatinkin debate, to which both a liberal, internationalist model and a nationalist model of migration can br
8、ing valid although opposite arguments (Young, 1962; Johnson, 1968; Patinkin, 1968). What remains is that restriction-based policies are not applicable when applied, they have failed (Ellerman, 2006). On the contrary, solutions must begin with the recognition of the benefits of international migratio
9、n for talented individuals and for the environment with which they interact. Regarding the incentives, three basic long-term trends have been identified to reinforce current talent migration (Kwok and Hayne, 1982; Kapur and McHale, 2005; The Economist, 2006a), and must be addressed by countries unde
10、rgoing talent loss: 1. Innovation-based companies in the developed world often face talent shortages. This makes rich countries ease inflows of highly skilled immigrants. 2. National budget and taxation rationale makes rich countries need highly productive foreigners to Dr Ioan M Ciumasu is Research
11、 Associate (co-founder and research coordinator) at the Centre of Expertise for Sustainable Exploitation of Ecosystems (CESEE) at Alexandru Ioan Cuza University (UAIC) of Iasi, Romania, national contact for Romania of the European Society for Ecological Economics (ESEE), and the editor of ISEE/ESEE-
12、Romania, a bilingual (EnglishRomanian) newsletter. He holds a masters degree in natural resources from UAIC in 2001, benefitting from an EU Socrates university exchanges scholarship at the University of Groningen, The Netherlands, and a magna cum laude PhD in biology environmental analyses and techn
13、ologies at the Technical University Munich, Germany, in 2006. He has also been active in institutional reforms and studies of science and curricula in Europe, being awarded the University in Society medal in 2006. boost public budgets. This is why they often develop explicit institutional mechanisms
14、 to attract and integrate highly skilled immigrants into national science policy (e.g. Scholten, 2009; Skeldon, 2009). Employers in rich countries usually understand better the true productivity of the highly skilled; therefore they tend to provide better chances for merit-based success. In addition
15、, and most importantly for our study, science is becoming more internationalized than ever. Numbers on the mobility of the highly skilled are scarce. Currently, most countries of emigration do not collect data on their migrants, not even on the highly skilled. The data they have is usually vague and
16、 unreliable, but it is known that skilled migration is increasing. Brain drain is negatively related to country size, with small countries having higher migration rates, especially the developing ones (Docquier and Schiff, 2009). Having 22 million inhabitants, and being (by 2008, according to the Wo
17、rld Bank) 39th in the world in gross national product (c. US$200 bn) but 49th in its estimated average per capita GDP at purchasing power parity (c. US$14,000 and increasing at a pace above 5% per year), Romania is a typical case for both Central and Eastern Europe and for the developing world. The
18、average income of the personnel in research is about one third above the national average, that is about US$19,000. According to the last report by the National Institute of Statistics (INS) (2008), Romanias expenditure on R Docquier and Marfouk, 2004), and about average within the world ranking. Th
19、is results in roughly 2030,000 migrants for any given year. It is not known how many of them work as scientists. For policy-makers, the question is: Are there any possible solutions to the problem represented by brain drain in countries where this happens? Potential solutions will necessarily be rel
20、ated to the present world context. First of all, mobility of individuals across the world must be seen as a fact, and part of any policy. Most countries, especially the developed-hence-highly-attractive ones, host communities of foreign-born individuals. And most countries, especially the developing
21、 ones, have a number of its individuals living abroad, either temporarily or for an indefinite period of time. All these individuals represent the countrys diaspora. Sometimes, members of a countrys diaspora associate themselves in cultural or professional organisations, usually functioning as netwo
22、rks which include individuals and local organisations that spread through entire countries, continents or even the entire world (e.g. Meyer, 2001). Diaspora networks can have various degrees of diversity, connectivity and density of agenda. This article focuses on a professional Romanian diaspora sc
23、ientists and tries to identify the main lines of its involvement in the development of science in Romania in present international and national contexts. Because of the recently increased Romanian brain (Sometimes, members of a countrys diaspora associate themselves in cultural or professional organ
24、isations, usually functioning as networks which include individuals and local organisations that spread through entire countries, continents or even the entire world ) drain, the dimensions of the Romanian scientific diaspora have been increasing. During the last few decades, humanity has been evolv
25、ing as a knowledge society. In addition, we now live in a networking age. Therefore, international tacit knowledge transactions (Williams, 2007), and diaspora networks can provide means to escape the old stay-or-go dilemma at the origin of brain drain, as suggested by recent initiatives and dynamics
26、 (e.g. Meyer, 2001; Kuznetsov, 2006, Ciumasu, 2006, Cai, 2009). However, the same international experiences have shown that the brain drain is more complex a problem than is usually thought of. Thus, any a priori assumption that brain drain will ultimately trigger development in every single country
27、 is risky (Ellerman, 2006). In addition, brain drain is a somewhat misleading concept, notably when it is narrowly used to suggest an exclusively unilateral movement of talent. In reality, brain drain can also be a first step of a countrys dynamic towards accelerating development of human resources.
28、 Thus, a reverse flux of talent can actually accelerate the technological catch-up of developing countries in comparison with the situation existing before any important brain drain (e.g. Dinar et al, 2008; Paglayan and Lafuente, 2009). But before having a reverse brain drain, there must be a brain
29、drain in the first place. Further, since a brain drain is a self-enforcing dynamic, reversing it requires a very large amount of effort and resources and an exceptional convergence of favourable factors of both policy and national and international context. The wider dynamics of brain drain followed
30、 by reverse brain drain (or generally the world-scale mobility of the highly skilled) is known as brain circulation. This concept corresponds to a dynamic in which talented/highly skilled individuals first pursue study and personal betterment abroad and then return to seize good opportunities in the
31、 home country (Johnson and Regets, 1998). Yet, this still refers to the physical mobility of individuals, and does not take into account the possibility of intellectual capital exerting influence through contemporary means of communication. Romanian governmental efforts to relate to the Romanian sci
32、entific diaspora are new and, for the time being, not systematic. While some funding mechanisms have been established to attractthe scientific diaspora, as inspired by similar mechanisms in the European Union (Box 1),their efficiency remains to be proven. Occasionally, some conferences and workshops
33、 have taken place. But there is no national strategy towards scientist expatriates. Recent signals indicate that some Romanian universities reflect upon the issue and may take a lead, thanks to university autonomy. However, ministerial support remains necessary. Current knowledge about Romanian scie
34、ntist expatriates is insufficient to allow efficient policies towards involving the scientific diaspora in Romanian science and technological developments. And, despite recent socio-economic improvements, a wide return of scientist expatriates brain circulation appears to be very unlikely. Recently,
35、 an alternative mechanism has been proposed (Ciumasu, 2006): brain networking, a form of mainly internet-based professional collaboration between scientist expatriates and their peers in Romania. The goal of this study is precisely to identify which of the two approaches is favoured by the members o
36、f the scientific diaspora, and under what financial and administrative and cultural provisions. The hope is that the results of this study will enable further steps in developing informed policies and strategies, and discover whether brain circulation and brain networking should be viewed as necessa
37、rily exclusive rather complementary. From the publicly available internet database of the main non-governmental association of the scientists working in Romania and abroad (Ad Astra, ), I have selected all individuals working abroad and having a record of internationally relevant achievements, as by
38、 14 July 2008. Typically qualifying people had at least one recorded research article in peer-reviewed journals with impact factor listed by Thomson Scientific. Regarding the expatriate scientists coverage of the study, two notes deserve to be made. First, while it is not possible to have accurate n
39、umbers on the size of the Romanian scientists abroad, the numbers should be (according to the website) in the range of tens of thousands, PhD students included. Specifically I have used the Who is who section of the Ad Astra website, where scientists made a free choice to register themselves their p
40、rofile, affiliations, interests and achievements (personal webpages). Second, the employers of the selected/responding individuals at the time of the survey were usually the worlds best universities (according to the Top 500 Shanghai, starting with the very top position in this ranking). The date us
41、ed here data is the best available at present under the above-mentioned criteria. This association is very active and the most visible among the global community of Romanian scientists; it is a regular dialogue partner with Romanian authorities in science. It also published the only ranking of Roman
42、ian universities based on their research efficiency (now available for 2005, 2006, 2007), using methodology akin to that used by the authors of the Shanghai world university ranking. In order to scan opinions and preferences at a given point in time, each of the 230 persons on the resultant list has
43、 been solicited by email to respond to a 10question questionnaire (Table 1, Box 1). The responses received during the following three weeks (flash survey: 16 June to 6 July 2008) have been used to draw a synoptic map of preferences and provisions. The potential respondents have also been encouraged
44、to provide free comments and to circulate the questionnaire among their expatriate scientist peers. The priority of the questionnaire was to discern preferences between brain circulation and brain networking policy options. The main risk of the survey was that the questionnaire would be perceived as
45、 excessively intrusive (too many details demanded), too long or too complicated. This was a real concern 2. The response rate in such social surveys is usually below 50%. In addition, it was anticipated that the answers would be biased towards those who want to get involved. The hope was to minimize
46、 this bias by doing everything not to discourage skeptic respondents from returning the questionnaire. This being said, the final questionnaire used appeared to be the best compromise between detail and potential rate of response. When the responses were solicited by email, it was explicitly specifi
47、ed that the questionnaire asked only 10 questions and it took only three minutes to fill in. In their reply emails, many respondents appreciated this format, which suggested that this was indeed a good compromise. This was also confirmed by the response rate which actually neared 60%. In a world whe
48、re human capital is vital for development, and is therefore actively attracted by development agents, universities tend to acquire more complex roles within society, moving closer to social and economic stakeholders and themselves becoming true development hubs, and main economic development engines
49、 (e.g. G.ransson et al, 2009; Rapini et al, 2009). The time is ripe to recognise and use the reality that the connectionist approach of intellectual diasporas opens great opportunities for innovation and development which go beyond the traditional cultural kinship understanding. Brain networking may be a good method to confirm this. The discussions on what makes the difference between failure and success of a policy or strategy to involve scientific diaspora in the science and development of the home country revolve ar
