1. The “Brain Drain” Phenomenon Global Mobility of Science and Technology Personnel Salah A. Soliman Alexandria University Email: samsoliman@lik.net samsoliman@lik.net November 2002

2. The Demand As of the second half of the 20 th century, skilled migration has often flowed from the developing world to the advanced OECD countries. By 1980s, as globalization gained momentum owing to liberalization of trade and capital flows in 1980s, technological exchange and demand for skilled labor by high-tech. and R&D- intensive industries accelerated flows of highly skilled foreign workers (HSFW) to OECD countries. S. A. Soliman, 2002.

3. In a number of the industrial countries, immigration policies have became more selective and skill- based and resulted in relaxed immigration demand for talented labor. The demand for foreign talent also emanates from universities and public research organizations, especially in the US, Canada, the UK and a few other European countries. S. A. Soliman, 2002.

4. Industrial countries increasingly compete for talented students researchers from the developing world in order to maintain their lead in cutting-edge research and, in some cases, to offset the decline in S&T graduate among nationals. S. A. Soliman, 2002.

5. Inflows of Highly Skilled Foreign workers (HSFW) and Share of Asian migrants Among them (Latest Available Year) 86,200--------52,10043.256.4 Canada (2000) Inflows of HSFW (number) Inflows of HSFW (number) As a % of total temporary migrant As a % of total temporary migrant % of Asian among the HSFW % of Asian among the HSFW 129,90070.653.2 ------------ Japan (2000) Inflows of HSFW (number) Inflows of HSFW (number) As a % of total temporary migrant As a % of total temporary migrant % of Asian among the HSFW % of Asian among the HSFW 370,70046.336.924,10046.046.4 USA (1999) Inflows of HSFW (number) Inflows of HSFW (number) As a % of total temporary migrant As a % of total temporary migrant % of Asian among the HSFW % of Asian among the HSFW TemporaryPermanentCountry S. A. Soliman, 2002.

6. In Japan, temporary migration of HSFW increased sharply in the 1990s following a revision of immigration lows in 1989 that facilitated the temporary residence and employment of HSFW. S. A. Soliman, 2002.

7. Globalization also fuels temporary migration of S&T personnel. That is, intra-multinational companies transfers have contributed to the increase in the mobility of S&T personnel. S. A. Soliman, 2002.

8. Intra-Company Transferees in Selected OECD Countries (1996-1999 in thousands) USA1996140.51997----1998203.31999---- UK13.018.o22.015.0 Japan2.83.43.53.8 Canada----2.12.82.9 (Source: OECD, 2001) S. A. Soliman, 2002.

9. Additional Indicators of HSFW Mobility Another indicator of the increase in the temporary mobility of S&T personnel comes from the US data on the inflows of HSFW holding H-1B visas. In response to industry demand for skills, the US increased the quota for H- 1B visas, which allow employment for three years and renewable once. In response to industry demand for skills, the US increased the quota for H- 1B visas, which allow employment for three years and renewable once. In 2000, the cap was raised to 195,000 a year for the years 2001-2003. In 2000, the cap was raised to 195,000 a year for the years 2001-2003. S. A. Soliman, 2002.

10. H-1B Visa Petition Approved by the US Immigration and Naturalization Service for the Top Ten Companies (October 1999- February 2000) Rank Company # Visas Rank Company # Visas 1 Motorola Inc 2 Oracle Corp 3 Cisco Systems 4 Mastech 5 Intel Corp 618455398389367 6 Microsoft Corp 7 Rapidigm 8 Syntel Inc 9 Wipro LTD 10 Tat Consult. 362357337327320 S. A. Soliman, 2002.

11. H-1B Petitions Approved by the US Immigration and Naturalization Service for the Top Seven Universities (October 1999- February 2000) Rank University Number of Visas 1 University of Washington 2 University of Pennsylvania 3 Stanford University 4 Harvard University 5 Baylor College of Medicine 6 University of Minnesota 7 Yale University 113977370656561 (Source: OECD, 2002) S. A. Soliman, 2002.

12. The Competition for S&T Foreign Students The competition for foreign students in S&T between the OECD countries is increasing. They direct their efforts to attract specialized foreign PhD students, particularly in the field of S&T, and to facilitate their access to the labor market. S. A. Soliman, 2002.

13. Stock of Foreign Students in Selected OECD Countries, 1998 Rank Country # Students % from OECD 1 USA 2 UK 3 Germany 4 France 5 Australia 6 Japan 7 Canada 8 Spain 9 Austria 10 Turkey Total OECD 430,800 430,800 209,600 209,600 171,200 171,200 148,000 148,000 109,400 109,400 55,800 55,800 32,900 32,900 29,000 29,000 28,400 28,400 18,700 18,7001,327,20039.059.856.326.818.438.242.165.765.6 8.9 8.944.5 (Source: OECD, 2002) S. A. Soliman, 2002.

14. Foreign Students Enrolled in PhD Programs, 1999 (as % of All Students Enrolled) Rank Country % Foreign PhD Students 1 Switzerland 2 Belgium 3 UK 4 USA 5 Australia 6 Denmark 7 Canada 8 Norway 9 Austria 10 Sweden 35.934.128.825.622.318.218.115.914.613.9 (Source: Education at Glance, OECD, 2001) S. A. Soliman, 2002.

15. Share of Temporary Residents Enrolled in US Graduate Programs in S&T, by Field of Study (% of Total) Rank Field of Study 1990199519971999 1 Engineering 2 Mathematics & Computer Sciences 3 Natural Sciences 4 Social Sciences 5 Total S&T 35.5 32.3 27.3 13.725.933.031.824.711.823.336.134.823.812.024.240.839.224.013.126.7 (Source: Science and Engineering Indicators, NSF, 2002) S. A. Soliman, 2002.

16. Attraction of Foreign Talent by Centers of Excellence and Innovation Clusters Foreign S&T personnel are drawn to academic centers of excellence and clusters of research-intensive and innovative firms. The Us share of Nobel Prizes in the medical sciences increased from just 50% to 74% from the middle to the end of the 20 th century. Many of them are concentrated around a small number of research universities (MIT, Stanford, UCB) and public labs as well as some R&D-intensive companies (e.g. Lucent Technologies). S. A. Soliman, 2002.

17. Share of Foreign-Born Workers in Highly-Skilled Employment (1999/2000) (Source: Trends in International Migration, OECD, 2002) S. A. Soliman, 2002.

18. Total Investment in Knowledge as a % 0f GDP by the Top Investors (R&D + Software + High Education)* Rank Country % GDP Rank Country % GDP 1 Sweden 2 USA 3 Finland 4 Canada 5 Japan 6 Denmark 7 Netherlands 6.76.05.24.84.84.54.2 8 Germany 9 France 10 Norway 11 UK 12 Australia 13 Austria 14 Greece 4.154.14.03.93.83.51.7 * About 50% goes to R&D. (Source: OECD Science, Technology & Industry Outlook, OECD, 2002) S. A. Soliman, 2002.

19. “The Drain” Do Foreign PhD Graduates Remain in The Host Country? It is estimated that of the 400,000 Chinese students who studied abroad (between 1978 and 1999), 300,000 went to study science and engineering. Upon graduation, many foreign PhD students remain in the host country. The decision to remain, like the decision to emigrate from the country of origin, depends on a variety of factors. S. A. Soliman, 2002.

20. In addition to many other economic, political and social factors in country of origin, laws and regulations in most host countries allow foreign PhD graduates to change migration status while remaining in host country. These opportunities influence the propensity to stay. It was true that in many OECD countries students are not allowed to change their status at graduation and must leave before reapplying under a different category; however, this situation is changing. S. A. Soliman, 2002.

21. On average, 50% of all foreign-born S&E PhD graduates remain in the USA. There are striking differences among them, however, PhD students fro East and South Asia receive the highest number of doctoral degrees by far and are the most likely to stay in the US. S. A. Soliman, 2002.

22. The Average % Stay Rates of EAST & South Asian Students Receiving PhD in S&E in the USA (1990-1999) (Source: NSF, 2002) 87 82 57 39 % Stay Rates S. A. Soliman, 2002.

23. The % Stay rate of Latin American S&E-PhD Students in the USA,1999 57.1 33.0 30.6 % Stay Rate (Source: NSF, 2002) S. A. Soliman, 2002.

24. UK data show that 59% of the foreign PhD students leave the country after degree completion (NSF, 2002). However, nearly all PhD graduates from Malaysia and Turkey in the UK returned to their country. S. A. Soliman, 2002.

25. Mobility Trends of Chinese S&E Students in the USA The number of Chinese students earning PhD in S&E from US universities increased from only 200 in 1986 to almost 3000 in 1996. In terms of the stock of foreign-born students with degrees at higher levels in 1999, China ranks second as country of origin (135,300 individuals), after India (164,600). S. A. Soliman, 2002.

26. Learning the Lesson: China’s Policy for S&T China General Goal for the tenth five-year plan (2001-2003) was: “revitalizing the nation through science and education”. “revitalizing the nation through science and education”. S. A. Soliman, 2002.

27. Since 1999 China’s S&T policy focuses primarily on achieving three policy objectives: * Enhancing technology * Enhancing technology innovation. innovation. * Developing high technology. * Developing high technology. * Supporting industrialization of * Supporting industrialization of the Chinese economy. the Chinese economy. S. A. Soliman, 2002.

28. To achieve these objectives, the Chinese set strategic priorities for S&T as to: * promote the technological * promote the technological of industry; and of industry; and * increase scientific and technological innovation capability. * increase scientific and technological innovation capability. S. A. Soliman, 2002.

29. The first priority involves making the enterprise the main source of technological innovation. The second requires strengthening the role of universities in scientific research. S. A. Soliman, 2002.

30. The Chinese government pursues three sets of policy to reach the goal, these are: * To improve enterprise-sector R&D * To improve enterprise-sector R&D and develop high-technology and develop high-technology industries. industries. * To deepen the reform of the S&T * To deepen the reform of the S&T system system and optimize resource allocation for and optimize resource allocation for R&D. R&D. * To strength R&D financing. * To strength R&D financing. S. A. Soliman, 2002.

31. The Miracle After less than two years of the China’s tenth five-year plan, no one can deny how they are achieving their objectives. They have a goal, they set the strategic plan priorities to reach it and they act with their well to have it. They have a goal, they set the strategic plan priorities to reach it and they act with their well to have it. S. A. Soliman, 2002.