Skip to main content
Article thumbnail
Location of Repository

Elite scientists and the global brain drain

By Showkat Ali, Giles Carden, Benjamin Culling, Rosalind Hunter, Andrew J. Oswald, Nicola Owen, Hilda Ralsmark and Natalie Snodgrass

Abstract

There are signs – one is world university league tables – that people increasingly think globally when choosing the university in which they wish to work and study. This paper is an exploration of data on the international brain drain. We study highly-cited physicists, highly-cited bio-scientists, and assistant professors of economics. First, we demonstrate that talented researchers are being systematically funnelled into a small number of countries. Among young economists in the top American universities, for example, 75% did their undergraduate degree outside the United States. Second, the extent of the elite brain drain is considerable. Among the world’s top physicists, nearly half no longer work in the country in which they were born. Third, the USA and Switzerland are per capita the largest net-importers of elite scientists. Fourth, we estimate the migration ‘funnelling coefficient’ at approximately 0.2 (meaning that 20% of top researchers tend to leave their country at each professional stage). Fifth, and against our prior expectations, the productivity of top scientists, as measured by the Hirsch h-index, is similar between the elite movers and stayers. Thus it is apparently not true that it is disproportionately the very best people who emigrate. Sixth, there is extreme clustering of ISI Highly Cited Researchers into particular fields in different universities. Seventh, we debate the questions: are the brain drain and this kind of funnelling good or bad for the world, and how should universities and governments respond?\ud \ud To be presented at the World Universities Conference in Shanghai, October 2007

Topics: HB, LB2300
Publisher: University of Warwick, Department of Economics
Year: 2007
OAI identifier: oai:wrap.warwick.ac.uk:1391

Suggested articles

Citations

  1. (2007a), “An examination of the reliability of prestigious scholarly journals: Evidence and implications for decision-makers”, doi
  2. (2007). America must not surrender its lead in life sciences”, Financial Times,
  3. (1982). An economic model of the brain drain”,
  4. (2005). An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output”, doi
  5. (1999). Are the foreign born a source of strength for doi
  6. (2002). Benchmarking international scientific excellence: Are highly cited research papers an appropriate frame of reference?”,
  7. (2001). Brain drain and economic growth: theory and evidence”, doi
  8. (2007). Brain drain and human capital formation in developing countries: winners and losers”, Economic Journal, forthcoming. [Working version of paper accessed online at http://www.ires.ucl.ac.be/CSSSP/home_pa_pers/docquier/articles.htm
  9. (1997). Can a brain drain be good for growth in the source economy?”, doi
  10. (2000). Citation figures suggest that the UK brain drain is a genuine problem”,
  11. (1963). Emigration of scientists from the United Kingdom: Report of a committee appointed by the Council of the Royal Society”, doi
  12. (2003). Europe slow in stemming ‘brain-drain’ to America”,
  13. (2003). Evaluating economics research in Europe: An introduction.” doi
  14. (2001). Exceptional contributions to US science by the foreign-born and foreign-educated”,
  15. (1977). Factor mobility, regional development and the distribution of income”, doi
  16. (1997). From brain drain to reverse brain drain: three decades of Korean experience”, doi
  17. (2004). Global estimates of high-level brain drain and deficit”, doi
  18. (1998). How big is the brain drain?”, doi
  19. (1999). How extensive is the brain drain?”,
  20. (2005). How much better are the most-prestigious journals? The statistics of academic publication”, doi
  21. (2007). International labor and capital flows: complements or substitutes?”, doi
  22. (1998). International mobility of scientists and engineers to the United States - Brain drain or brain circulation?” National Science Foundation (June).
  23. (2004). Measuring the international mobility of skilled workers (1990-2000)”, Policy-Research Working Paper Series No. WPS3381, The World Bank: Washington doi
  24. (2005). Migration currents among the scientific elite”, doi
  25. (2001). Network approach versus brain drain: Lessons from the diaspora”, doi
  26. (2000). Scientists and global spaces”, doi
  27. (2007). Skilled migration: The perspective of developing countries”, in doi
  28. (2003). Studying the brain drain: Can bibliometric methods help?”,
  29. (2007). Talent wars: the international market for academic staff”, Policy Briefing,
  30. (1977). Taxing the brain drain: A global point of view”, in
  31. (1974). The brain drain, international integration of markets for professionals and unemployment: A theoretical analysis”, doi
  32. (2004). The Brain Drain: Curse or Boon? A survey of the literature”, doi
  33. (2004). The brain drain: Some evidence from European expatriates in the United States”, IZA Discussion Paper series; Institute for the Study of Labour
  34. (2005). The impact of clustering on scientific mobility”, Innovation: doi
  35. (1997). The international mobility of brains: exodus or circulation?”, doi
  36. (2005). The number that is devouring science”,
  37. (2000). The Pandora’s box of citation analysis: Measuring scientific excellence – The last evil?”,
  38. (1993). The weakness of strong ties”,
  39. (2000). UK economics and the future supply of academic economists”, doi

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.