1、 外文翻译 原文 Brain drain, brain gain and brain circulation Materrial Source: Globalisation, Societies and Education Vol. 4, No. 1, March 2006, pp. 15 Author: Susan L. Robertson The term brain drain, popularised in the 1950s with reference to immigration to the United States, has, in the past 10 years, b
2、ecome an important if not controversial political and economic issue. Its importance derives from the view that politicians and policy-makers have that brains are the basis for a competitive edge in the so-called new knowledge economy. However, it is not just any old brain. Rather, the race is on be
3、tween countries to attract the best brains from around the world in order to generate the ideas that will in turn lead to innovations, patents and profits. The question facing policy-makers, industry leaders and universities, is how to attract and keep these individuals in particular locationswhich
4、is what makes this a particularly political matteras they are clearly moving from somewhere. Much of the concern, then, is with the movement of the talented and highly skilled from those countries that can least afford to lose them, such as many of the sub-Saharan African countries, to countries lik
5、e the United Kingdom, the United States of America, France and Germany, who seem to act like a magnet by offering better conditions for work and study. This seems particularly unfair if the sending country has invested heavily in the education and training of these students and skilled workers, only
6、 to lose them to another country. At the same time, some observers point out that this view fails to take account of the remittances that are often sent back to the home country, in some cases making up a very large proportion of the nations gross domestic product. What makes the issue controversial
7、 is that opinion is quite sharply divided as to exactly what is going on, and how best to assess what is going on. This division can be seen in the different views on the implications of the World Trade Organizations General Agreement on Trade in Services, specifically the issue of what is referred
8、to as Mode 4 or presence of natural persons in education. What this means is that countries committing their education sectors are being asked to remove any barriers to the free movement of students and academic staff. Developing countries regard Mode 4 as potentially useful in that mobile labour mi
9、ght also bring the benefit of remittances. However, the evidence suggests that transfers from educated migrants are not necessarily higher than for uneducated migrants; the former have higher earnings potentials but migrate on a more permanent basis (with family) and hence tend to remit relatively l
10、ess than their unskilled compatriots (Rapaport, 2002, p. 2). Added to this, given the private nature of remittances, there is evidence that remittances are not useful to the macro-economy and that they also push up prices and reduce parity. There is doubt, then as to whether remittances can ultimate
11、ly relieve poverty and income gaps on a macro-economic level (Tanner, 2005, p. 5). It is instructive to think about the movement of students and skilled labour over the past 50 or more years to give us some sense as to whether it is an old pattern that simply has attracted our attention now, or if s
12、omething new is occurring and if so, what the implications of this are for societies. It hardly needs repeating that much of the movement of students or highly skilled labour has been shaped by the patterns of Empire and the legacy of colonial relations. It was not unusual, then, to find Australians
13、 or Indians, for example, studying in British universities. However, this pattern was overlaid with another that had its genesis in the 1950s and the Cold Warparticularly with the USA promoting student mobility to the USA through Fulbright Scholarships and funding from the US Agency for Internationa
14、l Development. Many of these programmes, which were highly successful, were designed to showcase American-style democratic capitalism to the future elites of less developed and non-aligned countries whilst at the same time enhancing foreign trade-making and intelligence-gathering. Many countries had
15、 their equivalent programmes, such as the Commonwealth-based Colombo Plan, which supported students undertaking university studies from countries like Sri Lanka or Botswana. Since the 1980s, however, there has not only been a tremendous increase in the mobility of students and highly skilled labour.
16、 According to a recent United Nations report, the total number of international immigrants (that is, those residing in a country other than where they were born) was 175 million in 2000, or about 3% of the worlds population (United Nations, 2002). This is twice as large as it was in 1970.Less than a
17、 generation later1990the US Census revealed that there were more than 2.5 million highly educated immigrants from developing countries residing in the United States alone, excluding students (Rapoport, 2002). Most importantly, global migration is predominantly the migration of educated labour in the
18、 developing countries to the developed (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development/ Systme dObservation Permanente sur les Migrations, 2000) with 88% of immigrants to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries having a minimum of secondary education.By co
19、mparison, notes Tanner (2005, p. 2), asylum-related migration is only 9% of the 175 million and decreasing. The size of the problem can be seen on the following figures from the Institute for Public Policy Research quoted by Tanner (2005, p. 3)where 40% of tertiary-educated adults from Turkey and Mo
20、rocco, and nearly-one third from Ghana, have emigrated to OECD countries, while over half of the tertiary-educated Jamaicans and Haitians live in the United States.The issue is particularly acute for Africa; Stalker (1994) estimates that between 1960 and 1987, Africa had lost 30% of its skilled prof
21、essions. The reasons for the increased movement are also increasingly economic, spurred on by the dynamics of globalisation. Foreign fee-paying students, for instance, are now a significant source of revenue for higher education institutions, while those who specialise in science, engineering and te
22、chnology are also valued for their potential contribution to the development of new ideas, innovations and patents. Indeed, the USA is dependent on highly skilled science and engineering capacity mostly from countries such as India and China. These individuals are the stars or knowledge entrepreneur
23、s who are sought by the leading global and regional research-intensive universities, research centres and firms. Countries, regions and cities are now developing strategies for attracting the best talent, or seeking to lure talent back. Malaysia, for instance, has a national strategy for bringing ho
24、me Malaysian scientists, while the European Commission (EC) has developed a series of instrumentssuch as Marie Curie resettlement packages or Erasmus Mundus launched in 2004 intended to develop Europe as the most favoured destination for study abroad for scholars from around the world. The competiti
25、onThe United States. Other initiatives promoted by the EC (though initiated by the European Universities Association) have included the development of a new higher education degree architecture amongst member states in order to become a more attractive, responsive and less complicated system which w
26、ould in turn become the basis for a competitive Europe. The movement of talent and skills from one place to the other is not limited to the higher education sector. Particular categories of skilled laboursuch as teachers, doctors and nurses from countries such as South Africa have been prominent (Ad
27、epoju, 2004) and also particularly controversial because of the devastating effects of HIV/Aids, particularly on teachers, undermining an already stressed service. The issue here, it seems, is whether highly skilled labour is likely to return after a period of time in the host country, hence contrib
28、uting not to the idea of draining the intellectual elite from a country but enabling the circulation of ideas and expertise. However, as some observers note, the policies of countries such as Australia, Canada and New Zealand are oriented towards positive integration (for instance through family set
29、tlement), making it more unlikely that this group of emigrant labour return to their home countries (Tanner, 2005). As we can see, the issues are important, complex and controversial, and likely to become more so as competition steps up between countries and regions. This Special Issue, Brain drain,
30、 brain gain or brain circulation, is intended to begin a debate in education circles. The articles in this issue address in different but complementary ways the range of important questions generated by the multiple connotations of such terms. Annie Vinokurs article starts from the recognition that
31、the debates about brain drain in the 1960s are now being reproduced in much the same form, with the same assumptions, despite significant changes in the international economic context. She argues that these debates sidestep a vertical power game of transferring costs and risks to the less powerful,
32、and disguise as a conflict between countries and populations what is fundamentally a conflict between capital and labour. Phil Brown and Hugh Lauder offer an important and provocative analysis of the notion of the magnet economythe idea that highly skilled labour will be and is being drawn to the de
33、veloped centres and that investments in education to generate human capital will produce the envisaged returns to competition states. The article begins by identifying four dominant sub-discourses that are now powering the knowledge economy discourse in the developed economies. More specifically the
34、y argue that these discourses ignore the ways in which multinational firms are transforming their own corporate strategies to take account of the possibility of operating in developing countries with pockets of high skills. They also note that these discourses fail to understand the skill formation
35、strategies of countries such as China, India and Russia. Christopher Ziguras and Siew-Fang Law provide a summary of the role of international students in national development processes in Australia and Malaysia, two key countries with respect to the emerging education industry. Their particular focu
36、s is on the recruitment of international students as skilled migrants, which is increasing in many countries, and most notably in Australia, where the Commonwealth governments immigration and international education policies are closely aligned. They examine how different rationales for linking inte
37、rnational students and migration articulate in with the different political economic locations and priorities of the two countries to produce the likelihood of rather different policies towards international students. Michelle Goldbergs article contains both the elaboration of a novel form of policy
38、 analysis that she calls a discursive web model, and a demonstration/application of that model in an account of the Access to Professions and Trades policy field in Ontario. She describes in detail a discursive shift through which the brain drain discourse became transformed into a dominant skills s
39、hortage discursive web as it travelled through various government and other agencies, and interacted with other discourses at a range of scales. Sylvie Didou Aupetit analyses current discussions taking place on brain drain and Mexico. She notes the increased movement of those who can afford to fund
40、their education abroad themselves, and a decrease in the number of Mexican government scholarships for study abroad. At the same time, Mexico has a limited capacity to attract foreign brains. Her overall argument is that it is possible to see the way in which the Mexican elite is formed with strong
41、inclination towards the United States. 译文 人才外流，人才引进和人才流通 资料来源： 全球化，社会和教育 ,第一卷。 4， 第 1号 ， 2006年 3月 作者： 苏珊 L. 罗伯森 参照移民美国，“人才外流”这一术语在 20世纪 50年代推广开来。如果没有政治上的争议和经济上的问题，在过去的 10年内，这一术语已经变得重要起来。它的重要性源于这样一个观念，即政治家和政策制定者所拥有的人才，是在所谓的“新知识经济”的竞争优势上的基础。然而，这不仅仅是拥有那些 旧人才就足够的。相反，这场比赛是在国家之间，以吸引来自世界各地最优秀的人才来产生想法，这将反过来
42、导致创新，专利和利润。 政策制定者 、 行业领袖和大学 所 面临的问题是 ， 如何吸引 并 留住这些人在特定位置 就是使其成为 一个 特别的 政治问题 的那个因素 因为 他们显然是从 某些 地方 移民过来的 。那么 ， 大部分的关注 将是： 随着 有天赋的 和技术熟练 的人才从 这些国家 移民，他们 至少能够承受失去 这些人才。这些国家 如撒哈拉以南的 许多非洲国家， 以至于 英国 、 美国 、 法国和德国 ，他们 似乎像一块磁铁采取行动，为工作和学习提供更好的条件。 如果 这些派出人才 的 国家 在 这些学生和技术工人 的 教育和培训 上 投入巨资， 仅仅是为了让 他们 流失到 另一个国家
43、去，这似乎特别的不公平 。 与此同时，一些观察家指出，这种观点没有考虑到 的是， 那些汇款 经常是发送回 祖国的 帐户 ，这在某些情况下占了构成 各国的国内生产总值的 一个重大比重。 对这个 问题 有争议的是，在 究竟是怎么回事以及如何最好地评估是怎么回事的意见上 是 相当 尖锐 对立 。这种 分歧 可以 在不同的意见上 看出 。这个不同意见可以 在世界贸易组织总协定 对服务 贸易，特别是 对在教育上被称为 模式 4或 “ 自然人 的在场”意味着什么这一问题的影响上看出。 这意味着 那些国家保 证的 教育部门都被要求 移除在 学生和学术人员的自由流动 上的 任何障碍。发展中国家 将 模式4看作
44、 潜在 有用，因为 移动 劳动力 也可能带来汇款 的利益 。但是，有证据表明 ：“ 受过教育的移民 中的 转移 者 不一定 高于 没有受过教育的外来务工人员 ；前者 有较高的盈利潜力，但 需要在更永久上（带着家庭） 迁移 ， 因此相对 那些 不熟练的同胞 们，前者的汇款比后者的 少 ”（ 拉帕波特， 2002年，第 2页 ） 。 此外 ，考虑到汇款的私人性质，有证据表明，汇款 对 宏观经济 没有用 ， 反而 推动油价上涨 、 降低平价。 那么，疑问是： 汇款是否能够 在 宏观的经济水平 上 最终减轻贫困和收入差距（ 坦纳， 2005年，第 5页 ） 。 思考 一下 在过去 50年 或更早的 学
45、生和熟练劳动力 的运动 是有益的， 这会 给我们一些 意义。比如， 它 是不是 一个旧的模式， 现在 简单地吸引了我们的关注 ；或者 ， 如果有一些 新的东西 发生，如果真是这样，那么，它对社会的影响是什么。无需重复，由于 帝国模式和殖民关系 的遗留，很多的 学生 或 高技能劳动力 的移民运动已经成形了。那么，如果发现 澳大利亚人或印度人在英国大学学习 便不会是特殊的 。 然而，这种模式 曾被另一种模式覆盖，那种模式源于 20世纪 50年代和冷战 特别是美国通过 富布赖特奖学金 和 美国国际开发署 的资助来 促 进学生的流动性 。 这些非常成功的方案 旨在向来自 欠发达和不结盟国家的未来精英
46、们 展示美国式的民主资本主义 ，而同时，加强 外贸决策和情报收集。许多国家 拥有他们的等效案例，例如 英联邦的科伦坡计划， 它 支持学生 去 斯里兰卡 或 博茨瓦纳 这些国家的大学从事研究。 然而，自 20世纪 80年代 开始，不仅学生的流动性大量增加，高度熟练劳动力的流动性也大量增加。 据联合国的一份最近报告， 在 2000年，国际 的 移民总数（也就是 居住在一个不是他们出生地的国家的那些人） 为 1.75亿，约占全球人口总数的 3 （联合国， 2002年） 。 这是 1970年 的 两倍 。 不 超过一代 1990年 美国人口普查显示，超过 250万 来自发展中国家的 受过高等教育的 人
47、 仅在美国居住，不包括学生（拉波波特， 2002年）。 最重要的是，全球移民主要是受过教育的劳动力 从 发展中国家移民到发达国家 （ 经济合作 与发 展组织 / 对莱斯河畔永久性移民的系统性观察 ， 2000年 ）。其中， 88 的移民 是去一些组织，因为 经济组 合作与发展组织（ OECD）国家的中学教育有一个最低限度。相比之下，坦纳（ 2005年，第 2页） 写到 ，庇护有关移民只有 1.75亿 中的 9 ， 而且正在减少。 问题的规模可以从以下的数据中看出。这些数 据来自 公共政策研究所的研究 ，被 唐纳引述（ 2005年，第 3页） 40 来自土耳其和摩洛哥 的和将近 三分之一来自加纳
48、的 受过大专教育的 成年人 ，已经移民去了经济合作与发展组织国家，同时， 超过半数的 受过 大专教育的牙买加人和海地人居住在美国。 这个问题对非洲来说尤其严重；斯塔尔克（ 1994年）估计，非洲在 1960年至 1987年间，已经失去了其 30%的专业技能人才。 移民运动增长的原因也是经济增长的原因，即全球化动力的刺激。 例如，外国付费学生现在已成为高等教育机构重要的收入来源， 同时，那些专修 理科 、 工程和技术 的学生也因为 他们 对 新思路 、 创新和专利 发展的 潜在贡献而 受到 重视。事实上，美国 在 高技能科学和工程能力 的独立，主要是来自对 中国和印度等国家的依赖 。 这些人是
49、领先全球和区域研究型大学，研究中心和 企业正在寻求的“明星”和知识企业家。 国家 、 地区和城市正在 发展战略以 吸引最好的人才 、或寻求吸引人才回来。例如， 马来西亚已经有一个带回“本地”马来西亚科学家的国家战略，同时， 欧洲委员会（ EC） 已经推行了一系列的文书 如 居里夫人 移民 安置包 ，或者如伊拉斯谟在 2004年推出 的 旨在发展欧洲 成为 来自世界各地学者最赞成 的研究目的地。 竞争 美国。由欧 盟推动的其他 举措 （虽然 是由 欧洲大学协会发起的），已包括了一个新的高等教育学位体系 在 会员国之间的发展 。这一举措是为了使其成为一个更具吸引力，反应迅速， 较少 复杂的系统 。这一发展将反过来成为一个有竞争力欧洲的基础。 人才和 技术 从一个地方转移到另一个 地方不限于高等教育界。熟练劳动力中的特定类别 如来自南非等国家的教师、医生和护士 已被突出 （ 艾迪珀举 ， 2004年） 并且也特别引起争议。 由于艾滋病毒 /艾滋病的破坏性影响， 特别是对老师的影响， 破坏 了一个早已强调的服务。 这里的问题似乎是高技能的劳动力是否有可能一段时间后返回 在东道国，从而 对把 知识精
