Push and Pull Factors of Migration

[Exile]

Natasha C. Parkins The University of the West Indies, Mona


ABSTRACT

Peoples of the Caribbean in general, and Jamaicans in particular, have always been a migratory people.However, over the last 30 years, the emigration rates have increased substantially, with alarming rates in particular, of highly skilled individuals. There are four major factors which emerged in this study and influence this phenomenon:

1. Crime, violence, lawlessness and general societal indiscipline,
2.Occupation and skill mismatch,
3. Lack of economic opportunities, and
4. Lack of social opportunities.

This study suggests that both the direct and indirect effects of crime in general and violent crimes in particular, combined with suitable employment for the migrant’s skill set, have forced some members of Jamaica’s professional class to gr vitate towards First World countries, taking their skill set which their home country has financed. This places their host country in an advantageous position as these skills contribute to that country’s development and growth. In return, such countries offer migrants secure
economic (e.g., skill-career match and ability to afford their desired lifestyle) and social opportunities (e.g.,desired health care) currently unavailable in the country of origin.

Read article:

http://arpejournal.com/ARPEvolume8number2/Parkins.pdf

[Islandman]

Interesting read. Clearly a lot of useful research remains to be done on this subject.

Remittances are a great help to many but really the diaspora can deliver a whole lot more value than that.

[Exile]

Is it that the 'Diaspora' is just a term used to described widely scattered and disorganized Jamaicans...

[Karl]

I have not read the article yet but the title and the paragraphs posted follows along the lines fed to us from high school through tertiary education institutions that there is a 'brain drain'.

That argument of a brain drain and the terrible effects it is having on 'poor countries' development process has always not provided the answer on; what happens when a country produces year after year professionals and others in quantities more than it can absorb in its workforce or provide with gainful employment? ...are there not a finite number of positions to be filled and it is excess numbers seeking employment who of necessity must seek employment elsewhere?

It would appear to me that #3 on "Lack of economic opportunities" points to...suggests available opportunities have been 'taken'/filled...right?

#1, #2 and #3 suggest mismanagement.
If, as I think, the ability to perform at managing depends on passion - will to do - then what stops a country such as Jamaica from moving from poised to take off to actually taking off? Is it that as a generalization there is "lack of will" and not that 'brain drain' that is the hindrance?

Oh yes, I shall read the article at a later date. It may have a view point that is unique...and not a repeat of the old 'there is a 'brain drain' and thus those left behind are raging idiots. ...that would be great.

[Exile]

Sections » Society » General

The brain drain: Old myths, new realities

Mario Cervantes and Dominique Guellec
Directorate for Science, Technology and Industry
Brain drain - Click bigger

In 2000 the British government and the Wolfson Foundation, a research charity, launched a five-year research award that raised little attention outside scientific circles. The £20 million scheme aims to attract the return of Britain’s leading expatriate scientists and the migration of top young researchers to the United Kingdom. That same year under greater media coverage, the US Congress announced it was raising the annual cap on the number of temporary work visas granted to highly skilled professionals under its H1B visa programme, from 115 000 to 195 000 per year until 2003.

These are just two examples that illustrate the growing demand and competition for talent in OECD countries. And they show a policy problem: how to attract and hold on to skilled labour. The British initiative also dispels a myth: that the problem only affects developing and transition economies. In fact, the British Royal Society first coined the expression “brain drain” to describe the outflow of scientists and technologists to the United States and Canada in the 1950s and early 1960s.
GLOBAL SKILLED WORKERS
Internationally comparable data on the migration of the highly skilled is incomplete, but sources confirm an increase in migration flows during the 1990s, from Asia to the United States, Canada, Australia and the United Kingdom. The increase comes from strong demand in OECD countries for IT and other skills in science and technology as well as the selective immigration policies that favour skilled workers. Not all skilled migrants are in search of educational, economic or intellectual opportunities. Sometimes, they are forced to leave their homes as a result of war, or political, ethnic and religious persecution.
Skilled migration between OECD countries is also on the rise but appears dominated by temporary flows of advanced students, researchers, managers and IT specialists, suggesting more a pattern of brain circulation than a draining of skills from one place to another. The globalisation of firms has helped fuel temporary flows; in the mid-1990s intra-company transfers accounted for 5-10% of the total flows of skilled workers to the United States from Canada.
The United States is the main pole of attraction for foreign skilled workers; 40% of its foreign-born adult population have tertiary level education. Since the early 1990s, some 900 000 highly skilled professionals, mainly IT workers, from India, China, Russia and a few OECD countries (including Canada, the UK and Germany) have migrated to the United States under the H1B temporary visa programme. The United States also takes in 32% of all foreign students studying in the OECD countries. Indeed, higher education is an important channel for US firms recruiting highly skilled migrants; some 25% of H1B visa holders in 1999 were previously students enrolled at US universities.
But the United States is not the only magnet. Canada also attracts talent and, despite its modest loss of skilled migrants to the US, is in fact a net importer of human capital. Skilled migration to Germany and France has been lower in recent history, but these countries have now implemented policies to attract foreign students, researchers and IT workers. In 2000, Germany launched a sort of “green-card” scheme to recruit 20 000 foreign IT specialists and by the end of the following year had recruited half that number, mainly from eastern Europe. In addition, dynamic Asian economies like Singapore are trying to plug shortages in IT workers through immigration from neighbouring Malaysia or even China. Even if the current economic slump has reduced global demand for IT and other specialty workers, foreign talent remains in demand.
In January this year, the UK government announced it would launch a skills-based migration programme and similar schemes exist in Australia and New Zealand.
WINNERS AND LOSERS
The costs and benefits of the brain drain and circulation of talent are hotly debated. International mobility of skilled workers can generate global benefits by improving knowledge flows and satisfying the demand for skills. The contribution of foreign skilled workers to economic growth and achievement in host countries, in particular to research, innovation and entrepreneurship, is increasingly recognised – witness the number of foreign-born US Nobel Prize winners or creators of global high tech companies, such as Intel or eBay, and other successful start-ups. It is important to distinguish between emigrants from OECD countries and those from developing countries.
The risk of a brain drain damaging rich countries is arguably lower, but it does exist. Canada may well lose skilled workers to the United States and import skilled human capital from other countries. However, the quality of the two-way flow is key, though it is difficult to calculate whether the loss of a top genetics researcher at a public lab can be compensated for by the arrival of even several hundred IT specialists. But as skilled migration between advanced countries is often temporary, there may be a double gain from the circulation of the highly skilled: first from the overseas experience acquired by their genetics researcher, and second from the constant inflow of skilled workers.
In sending countries in the developing world, the challenge is greater. For these countries, capturing benefits mostly depends on attracting back skilled emigrants and providing opportunities for them to use their new technological competencies. Returnees also can bring valuable management experience, entrepreneurial skills and access to global networks. They may even bring venture capital. But this is looking on the bright side.
Mostly, the problems caused by the brain drain in poorer sending countries are great. Migrants from developing countries are generally more likely to stay in the host country than migrants from advanced countries. Survey evidence on the share of foreign PhD graduates in science and technology who stay abroad show that 79% of 1990-91 doctoral recipients from India and 88% of those from China were still working in the United States in 1995. In contrast, only 11% of Koreans and 15% of Japanese who earned science and engineering (S&E) doctorates from US universities in 1990-91 were working in the United States in 1995. In the longer term, however, return flows of people and capital may not only offset some potential negative effects of international migration but also constitute an economic development strategy in its own right. In Chinese Taipei, for example, half of all the companies emerging from that economy’s largest science park, Hsinchu, were started by returnees from the United States. And in China, the Ministry of Science and Technology estimates that returning overseas students started most Internet-based ventures.
WHAT GOVERNMENTS CAN DO
The harsh reality is that only a handful of countries have been successful in luring their talented emigrés back home. The International Organisation for Migration (IOM) estimates that some 300 000 professionals from the African continent live and work in Europe and North America. By some estimates, up to a third of R&D professionals from the developing world are believed to reside in the OECD area. While there are often media reports of successful Indian entrepreneurs in the United States who establish branches or even firms in India only a small number actually return; in 2000, it was estimated that some 1,500 highly qualified Indians returned from the United States, although more than 30 times that number depart each year.
The relative success of Chinese Taipei, Korea and Ireland in fostering return migration has been attributed to the opening of their economies and policies to foster domestic investments in innovation and R&D. Developing countries with some infrastructure in R&D, like India, are more likely to attract the return of migrants, as well as money and business contacts. “Scientific diaspora” and “immigrant entrepreneur networks” can also help sending countries capture benefits and know-how from emigrants overseas. Grass roots initiatives in South Africa and Latin America have been developed to link researchers abroad to networks in their home countries. Indian professionals in the US have been the primary drivers of knowledge and capital flows to India. The Indian government has contributed to the emergence of these private networks through legislative and tax rules that encourage remittances and investment from Indians abroad. The diaspora idea has been put to work by advanced countries too, like Switzerland, whose online network, Swiss-List.com was established to encourage networking among Swiss scientists in the US and to foster contacts with peers in Switzerland.
Governments can do quite a lot to address the causes of the brain drain. Science and technology policies are key in this regard. Developing centres of excellence for scientific research and framing the conditions for innovation and high tech entrepreneurship can make a country attractive to highly skilled workers, both from within the country and from outside. The task is not easy and it takes time; India’s investment in human resources in science and technology and own R&D capabilities dates from the 1950s. China has recently launched a project to develop 100 universities into world-class institutions that not only provide higher education training, but also academic employment and research opportunities.
In the OECD, the UK government plans to increase the salaries of post-doctorates by 25% and increase funding for the hiring of university professors. In France, some 7 000 teaching-researcher posts have been created since 1997 to retain talent and encourage the return of post-doctorates working abroad. The European Commission is looking to improve the attractiveness of the European research area and has doubled the amount of funding devoted to human resources in the Sixth Research Framework Programme to € 1.8 billion.
The risk of a brain drain is real. Yet countries can create opportunities for research, innovation and entrepreneurship at home and stimulate a return flow of migrants and capital, as well as win access to international innovation networks. With the right mix of policies and sustained international co-operation, several countries could, as one Indian official pointed out, see the “brain drain” be transformed into a “brain bank”.
Mario Cervantes and Dominique Guellec
REFERENCES
International Mobility of the Highly Skilled, OECD, 2002. See also: www.oecd.org/migration
Science, Technology and Industry Scoreboard, OECD, 2001.
“Brains Abroad”, Devan, J. and Tewari, P.S., McKinsey Quarterly No. 4, 2001.
©OECD Observer No.230, January 2002

[Exile]

https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/...pdf?sequence=1

[Exile]

Thursday, March 10, 2005

The Brain Drain Myth

You often hear of 3rd world countries that have a "brain drain" where their best and brightest leave for the United States or other rich nations. I argue that if a country is thinking in its best interest it should let (and even encourage) its best and brightest to leave the country. Why do I think this? Lets go through it.

In many cases a person can immigrate to the US and still be able to send more money home then they could if they lived and worked in their home country. By immigrating to the US they are more able to take advantage of their skills and education with the better working environment in the US. The world is best off when people are in situations where they are able to maximize their contributions. A person living in a 3rd world country that doesn't have the ability to do this.

I read the following in an article a while back though I don't remember who wrote it:

In 2002 the US gave $12.9 billion in foreign aid. Foreign workers on the other hand earned at least $20 billion in US that they took back to their homeland in private remittances. For some countries this is larger than their exports and tourism trade. This private "aid" bypasses the sticky fingers of corrupt government and banking officials.

So the workers in the US are still contributing to their mother country.

Most people would still rather live in their country of birth (unless of course you are a Democrat) so if opportunities appear they will want to move back.

In an article in the Washington Post you see this scenario playing out in Ethiopia.

Among Ethiopians, however, many young emigres from the business and professional set are looking to return. This unique situation can be attributed in part to the financial success of Ethiopians in the United States, and in part to a campaign by the government to woo them back.

Last year, Ethiopians in the United States sent home $6 million in remittance money, eclipsing coffee, the country's biggest export, which earned $4 million.

"There is the sentimental pull of home and at the same time a thriving business atmosphere," Kinfe said. "Successful people feel they owe something back to their country. Ethiopians love their culture. They want to come back. They just want to know they can also support their families here."

But officials hope that after the first investors come, doctors, lawyers, educators and other professionals will follow. The government is especially eager to attract those in the medical profession. At present, there are more Ethiopian doctors living in the United States than in Ethiopia.

My 3rd world development plan:

Step 1: Let your best and brightest leave for the US, Europe and developed Asia.

Step 2: Collect remittances from these workers and use the money to improve your country. Meanwhile your best and brightest are working with the world's best and brightest learning the ways of the best companies and academic institutions in the world.

Step 3: Your best and brightest see that their home country has made changes and is committed to progress. The best and brightest determine that they can have a larger impact in their home country (and quite possibly live better) than in the US. They return bringing with them the tricks of the trade that they picked up in the US.

http://fatknowledge.blogspot.com/200...rain-myth.html

[Karl]

Good post!
...Have read the conclusions and 'raced through the body of the work'. "Nice'(ly filled with stats) ...recognizes more needs to be unearthed.

From my layman's point of view...as generalization...nothing not already known/heard. ...and the aim was not to suggest how to move the countries forwards...save stating 'migration should be managed (well)'. Oooookay???

[Karl]

The risk of a brain drain is real. Yet countries can create opportunities for research, innovation and entrepreneurship at home and stimulate a return flow of migrants and capital, as well as win access to international innovation networks. With the right mix of policies and sustained international co-operation, several countries could, as one Indian official pointed out, see the “brain drain” be transformed into a “brain bank”.
Mario Cervantes and Dominique Guellec

What is the risk?
Let me take JA -

If overnight we had full employment and there was naturally matching of skill with job (actual work occupation)...at the rate at which we churn new graduates out of our tertiary institutions, rising life expectancy and persons retiring at progressively older and older years in a few decades we would be right back where we started - oversupply of workers! ...and great need for opportunities for our graduates/people outside of the island.

Our professionals leaving have nothing to do with our slow rate of development. Rather our slow rate of movement towards first world status lies elsewhere. That elsewhere is that generalization - Poor management of the country('s development process)!!! Lousy management at every level!!! In homes, schools and every other facet of that euphemistic = the country's business.

[Karl]

Thursday, March 10, 2005

The Brain Drain Myth

You often hear of 3rd world countries that have a "brain drain" where their best and brightest leave for the United States or other rich nations. I argue that if a country is thinking in its best interest it should let (and even encourage) its best and brightest to leave the country. Why do I think this? Lets go through it.

In many cases a person can immigrate to the US and still be able to send more money home then they could if they lived and worked in their home country. By immigrating to the US they are more able to take advantage of their skills and education with the better working environment in the US. The world is best off when people are in situations where they are able to maximize their contributions. A person living in a 3rd world country that doesn't have the ability to do this.

I read the following in an article a while back though I don't remember who wrote it:

In 2002 the US gave $12.9 billion in foreign aid. Foreign workers on the other hand earned at least $20 billion in US that they took back to their homeland in private remittances. For some countries this is larger than their exports and tourism trade. This private "aid" bypasses the sticky fingers of corrupt government and banking officials.

So the workers in the US are still contributing to their mother country.

Most people would still rather live in their country of birth (unless of course you are a Democrat) so if opportunities appear they will want to move back.



In an article in the Washington Post you see this scenario playing out in Ethiopia.

Among Ethiopians, however, many young emigres from the business and professional set are looking to return. This unique situation can be attributed in part to the financial success of Ethiopians in the United States, and in part to a campaign by the government to woo them back.

Last year, Ethiopians in the United States sent home $6 million in remittance money, eclipsing coffee, the country's biggest export, which earned $4 million.

"There is the sentimental pull of home and at the same time a thriving business atmosphere," Kinfe said. "Successful people feel they owe something back to their country. Ethiopians love their culture. They want to come back. They just want to know they can also support their families here."

But officials hope that after the first investors come, doctors, lawyers, educators and other professionals will follow. The government is especially eager to attract those in the medical profession. At present, there are more Ethiopian doctors living in the United States than in Ethiopia.

My 3rd world development plan:

Step 1: Let your best and brightest leave for the US, Europe and developed Asia.

Step 2: Collect remittances from these workers and use the money to improve your country. Meanwhile your best and brightest are working with the world's best and brightest learning the ways of the best companies and academic institutions in the world.

Step 3: Your best and brightest see that their home country has made changes and is committed to progress. The best and brightest determine that they can have a larger impact in their home country (and quite possibly live better) than in the US. They return bringing with them the tricks of the trade that they picked up in the US.

http://fatknowledge.blogspot.com/200...rain-myth.html

One part of managing migration! ...but not the whole story. The whole story demands 'good managers' at every level of society=home, school,...private and public sectors.

Look at it this way - It has to become a cultural thing...from the individual worker who goes to work to do 'one simple task' knowing he/she at work is a manager of one=himself/herself...through to him/her managing our largest or most successful private entity or public entity.

[Islandman]

Disorganized as a total unit yes, but there are some well organized groups in the diaspora. Not nearly enough though.

[Gamma]

Yuh out of touch with reality

[Karl]

Yuh out of touch with reality

That is your opinion...mine is; your above shows you are brain-washed into believing that in societies like ours - small markets, miniscule job market, *tremendously slow/low rate of attrition from the workforce, raising population, annual ever increasing flood of graduates from our education institutions...etc., etc. is a boon to retain oversupply of qualified professionals and others/prevent the migration of excess qualified professionals and excess unskilled labour!!! ...that my friend is a recipe for 'man eating...man'!

What do you think has led to our high poverty levels and crime-rates?
...an abundance of job opportunities? ...easy social upwards mobility?

If per chance you agree with the findings of the paper Exile posted that there is a dearth of jobs, high crime rates and limited access to upwards social mobility what impact do you think 'chasing' of the few job opportunities by an ever increasing flood of job seekers have?

*An example: Let us look at numbers of teachers our teacher training institutions graduate each year and consider the working life of the teacher...(in the classroom at 23 years old and retiring at 60)==37 years.

Consider that year over year churning out of teachers, numbers our education institutions need to have all positions satisfied/filled...and ask yourself if the government should embark on taking another Teacher Training institution off 'the grid'? - (Mavis Gilmour took out a few to slow numbers of teachers being put in the job market...that may have provided a targeted temporary solution/release of some pressure as it relates to teaching positions...but the unintended consequence of limiting opportunities for high school graduates and thus increase in 'walk-bout-kick-stone' youth...was not addressed). ..and in any case, the pressure just about immediately returned to 'explosion point'. Migration - leaving of those 'brains' - is a safety valve. Of itself that migration is not the complete answer...but think on it, where would those tens of thousands who migrate each year be if they had remained on the island? What would they be engaged in besides forming relationships and increasing the population...increasing the internal social pressures?

It is arrogant to not believe, "man is, man...is man"=We shall always have the talented (talent abounds) to be trained as professionals and fitted with other skills (trained) to fill our local (on the island) needs.

Surely if say, rates of attrition of nurses (doctors, lawyers, architects, policemen, hotel-workers, IT professionals, whatever...) require....(fill in your number) entering the workforce annually for the next 5 years...as we would not be denying our young who wish to be nurses (or whatever the discipline) the opportunity of the necessary education to graduate as same...what would we do with the others graduating each year?

You guessed it - 'sell' their services outside of the island. ...and even if suddenly management of the economy becomes such that current rates of graduation in this field allows for full employment local in any one year or two years then the task would be to create an equilibrium in workforce needs:graduates in a situation/a marketplace/workplace where other outside forces - population rates, attrition from the workplace etc. would not make for continuous FULL EMPLOYMENT as eventually our small physical size must lead to managing population growth and retention of our citizens colliding. Boss 'brains must be drained' ...it is for us to produce that set of 'brains' that we need=quantities must be such that local need is/needs are met and there is massive 'brain drain'=migration.

Aside: I know someone is going to say - build out all possible avenues of employment - but even if we build out to the max we shall 'run up' against physical space...and migration becomes even more crucial.

[Gamma]

You REALLY out of touch. I am in it daily and speak to persons who are in it daily, especially young professionals.

Opportunities is the main issue and this is married to earning potential here and abroad.

[Karl]

I am in it daily and speak to persons who are in it daily, especially young professionals.

Opportunities is the main issue and this is married to earning potential here and abroad.

...and in the light of/context of the posts here - What does your above mean?