Date post: | 26-Dec-2015 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | erica-jacobs |
View: | 219 times |
Download: | 4 times |
Migration of Chinese scientists and their productivity 1998-2006--some preliminary findings
George Mason UniversitySchool of public policyFangmeng (Tim) Tian
10/19/2010
Introduction
A PhD candidate of policy study A student of migration Focus on skilled emigration Target population: Chinese scientists in the
Jiaotong 500 universities
Literature review I- Brain drain’s negative impacts
Lose skilled labor (Bhagwati et al 1974) Reduce economic scale (Miyagiwa1991) Change skill composition (Haque & Kim 1995) Distorting learning incentive (Maria &
Stryszowski, 2009) Hinder human capital accumulation (Wong &
Yip, 1999) Critique: many mathematical models,
unrealistic assumptions, a few empirical studies
Literature review II- Brain circulation’s positive impacts From human-capital approach to network
approach, particularly relevant to S&T At least some emigrants return and bring
back capital and technology (Kapur, et al. 2001; Saxenian, 2005).
The diaspora send back remittance and transfer knowledge (Ratha 2003; Thorn and Nielsen 2006 ).
Critique: more about organizations than individuals; lack of systemic evidence
Research design
Central question: How did migration of scientists affect Chinese researchers’ productivity and China’s science development in the period 1998 – 2006?
Research goals
1. evaluate the benefits of return migration and the scientific diaspora
2. examines the role of international migration on scientists’ productivity and career development
Three data sources
survey + CV + bibliometric data
Selected key questions
What were China’s direct and potential losses due to
emigration of its students and scientists? Were the scientists exchange between the U.S.,
China, and other foreign countries positively or negatively selected?
What kind of emigrant scientists are more likely to collaborate with domestic scholars?
Did returnees experience a productivity loss after they went back to China?
How much did returnees obtain productivity gain by overseas experience in the short and long term?
Dependent variables
Variable Definition
General productivity
Fractionalized number of SCI papers weighted by citation counts in a three-year window
Highest performance
Quality level of a scientist’s single most cited paper
International collaboration
Number of Internationally coauthored papers of overseas scientists
Collaboration with China
Number of an overseas scientist’s papers coauthored only with domestic scientists
Independent variables
Age/cohort (gra-year of BS) Quality of doctoral education (university
ranking of highest degree) Working environment (research ranking of
affiliated university) Professional status (assistant prof.-full prof.) Field: physics, biology, chemstry, math Migration status (stayers, returnees,
emigrants)
Target Population A scientist in the sample is required to be a Chinese
researcher currently employed by a global leading university in the English academia.
Chinese: those who were born in mainland China, and obtained a BS degree (Bachelor of Science) at a Chinese university after 1978.
English academia: United States, United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Hong Kong and Singapore + mainland China
Global leading university: around 250 top universities in the seven English-speaking countries and about 20 Chinese universities
Only four fields: math, physics, chemistry, biology
Data Collection – Survey, CV, and SCI
The population size is about 7000: 5500 domestic scientists and 1500 overseas scientists.
By far I generated a sample of 305 scientists, all of whom got their PhD before 2008.
Collect SCI publication records in 1998, 2002, and 2006
Citation counts of each paper in the following three years
Collaboration with China/foreign partner of each paper
Education background1
BS
Rank
Example %
1 PKU, Tsinghua 9.41
2 Zhejiang,Fudan 25.95
3 Shandong 31.42
4 Tianjin 3.31
5 Rest 29.9
PhD Rank JT 500 rank %
1 1-50 11.66
2 50-100 6.75
3 101-150 3.44
4 151-200 2.7
5* 201-300 32.15
6 301-400 9.94
7 401-500 25.03
8 Not on the list 8.34
* Including CAS
1/3 of the scientists got their highest degree abroad (including Hong Kong).
Education background 2
BS gra-year % PhD gra-year %
1977/1983 16.84 1982/1989 5.79
1984/1989 24.35 1990/1996 20.32
1990/1996 33.81 1997/2002 36.08
1997/2003 25 2003/2008 37.81
Selectivity of doctoral education
BS Rank Domestic PhD (%)
Foreign PhD
(%)
1 5.66 16.42
2 22.27 32.85
3 34.18 26.28
4 2.93 4.01
5 34.96 20.44
Selectivity of employment
PhD Rank Domestic Foreign
1 1.85 31.47
2 1.23 20.26
3 1.65 5.17
4 0.62 5.6
5 36.63 23.71
6 12.35 6.47
7 35.8 7.33
8 9.88 31.47
Migration statusYear Stayer Returnee* Emigrant Brain drain
rate
(%)
Returning rate
(%)
1998(%) 59.1 9.8 31.1 31.1 24.0
2002(%) 56.2 5.4 38.4 38.4 12.2
2006(%) 59.5 8.2 32.3 32.3 20.3
*Returnee: those who got an overseas PhD degree.
If we define returnees as those who stayed abroad for at least two years, then the return rate can be boosted to over 50%.
Affiliation in 2006
Domestic Chinese scientists
UnivRank
JT 500 rank %
5* 201-300 44.65
6 301-400 12.14
7 401-500 40.74
8 Not on the list 2.47
Overseas Chinese scientists
Univ
Rank
JT 500 rank %
1 1-50 28.02
2 50-100 21.55
3 101-150 6.9
4 151-200 5.6
5 201-300 23.28
6 301-400 6.47
7 401-500 2.59
8 Not on the list 5.6
* Including CAS
Research output and average productivity
Research output of Chinese scientists by location
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
1998 2002 2006
Domestic Overseas
Average productivity of Chinese scientists by location
0.01.02.03.04.05.06.07.08.09.0
1998 2002 2006
Domestic Overseas
Individual and team highest performance (75% percentile)
Individual highest performance
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
1998 2002 2006
Domestic Overseas
Team highest performance
0.0
5.0
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0
1998 2002 2006
Domestic Overseas
International collaboration
International collaboration of Chinese scientists
0.0
5.0
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0
30.0
1998 2002 2006
%
domestic with foreign
overseas with domestic
Regression analysis
Using individual general productivity as the dependent variable, I found migration status (stayer, returnee, emigrant) is highly signficant.
The dummy value “returnee” is negative, which might indicate that returnees are negatively selected, after other factors are controlled.
Tentative conclusions
Chinese scientists live in a merit-based world, and the road to a prestigious position is highly selective.
In terms of both quantity and quality, the productivity gap between domestic and overseas Chinese is getting narrower.
International collaboration has grown proportionally between domestic and overseas Chinese.
Returnees contribute a lot to the research activities in China, but they might be negatively selected compared with emigrants.
What I’m going to do next…
Second wave of survey and expand the sample to be 500 observations.
Weigh the sample to be more representative Decompose the change of research output Design a mathematical model and explain the
conditions for an optimal research output Estimate the research output under different
conditions
Thank you!
Questions and comments?
Appendix: policy implication
Policy Sending country Receiving country
Higher education policy
Improve the quality of teaching
Target certain types of students from the sending country
Science
Policy
Provide conducive research environment; merit-based recruitment
Encourage collaboration with the sending country
Migration policy
Target certain types of returnees; mobilize diaspora
Change selection criteria
Foreign policy Enhance relationship with host countries
Facilitate brain circulation; particularly return migration