“It’s About Brains…”

849 views
787 views

Published on

Dr Nikolai Genov, Freie Universität Berlin, Germany, Towards Lisbon 2.1, September 28, 2007, Ljubljana

Published in: Economy & Finance, Education
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
849
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
26
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

“It’s About Brains…”

  1. 1. TOWARDS LISBON 2.1 Ljubljana, 28.09.2007 <ul><li>IT’S ABOUT BRAINS… </li></ul><ul><li>Nikolai Genov </li></ul><ul><li>Free University Berlin </li></ul><ul><li>[email_address] </li></ul>
  2. 2. TWO CONTRADICTORY SITUATIONS <ul><li>-Science is getting more and more globalized , but: </li></ul><ul><li>-The educational and economic effects of R&D are </li></ul><ul><li>measured in local terms (in competitiveness of companies and nations) </li></ul><ul><li>- International migration of scientists is normality </li></ul><ul><li>in science, but: </li></ul><ul><li>- Who profits from the discoveries and inventions? </li></ul><ul><li>IT‘S ABOUT THE VALUE OF BRAINS </li></ul>
  3. 3. THE EU-LISBON STRATEGY AND EU-REALITIES <ul><li>a) Decreasing native population; </li></ul><ul><li>b) Decreasing interest among EU-students to choose professional career in the natural sciences and engineering; </li></ul><ul><li>c) Growing competition on the international R&D labour market (competition for brains); </li></ul><ul><li>d) Seven of ten EU-born doctorate recipients in the USA use to stay there after graduation. </li></ul><ul><li>EU-countries need immigration of HQ in R&D </li></ul>
  4. 4. CURRENT DEBATES <ul><li>EC VP Franco Frattini in September 2007: </li></ul><ul><li>-EU should facilitate the immigration </li></ul><ul><li> of HQ in R&D </li></ul><ul><li>German politicians - other priorities: </li></ul><ul><li>-To stop brain-drain from EU ; </li></ul><ul><li>-To integrate immigrants; </li></ul><ul><li>-To keep competences of member-states </li></ul><ul><li>and EU clearly defined and separated . </li></ul>
  5. 5. THE BACKGROUND OF THE DEBATE: Unemployment in the European Union by skill level
  6. 6. CAN GERMANY BE CONSISTENT IN RESTRICTING IMMIGRATION OF HQ IN R&D? <ul><li>OBVIOUSLY NO: </li></ul><ul><li>-In 2000:„Green Card“ initiative (IT HQ) for 20000 </li></ul><ul><li>-Till the end of 2001: some 10000 </li></ul><ul><li>-Till December 2004: some 18000 </li></ul><ul><li>Reasons: - Limitation of the stay </li></ul><ul><li> - High threshold of salary </li></ul><ul><li> - Family members </li></ul><ul><li>USA, Canada, Australia, UK: more successful </li></ul><ul><li>So: Competition for brains is a matter of policy </li></ul>
  7. 7. WHAT COULD EU INITIATIVES ACTUALLY ACHIEVE? (1: INTERNALLY) <ul><li>TRANSFER AND EU-GENERALIZATION </li></ul><ul><li>OF “BEST PRACTICES” FROM VARIOUS SOURCES </li></ul><ul><li>To facilitate the real opening of academic and R&D positions in the EU to world-wide competition (US American style of open academic market) </li></ul><ul><li>To facilitate the real search for “best and brightest” worldwide (EU-wide “anti-trust” policies); </li></ul><ul><li>To press on supportive national legal regulations for inflow of HQ in R&D; </li></ul><ul><li>To foster flexicurity in academic and R&D institutions </li></ul><ul><li>(more project based structures) </li></ul>
  8. 8. WHAT COULD EU INITIATIVES ACTUALLY ACHIEVE? (2: EXTERNALLY) <ul><li>OPEN THE EU R&D INSTITUTIONS TO </li></ul><ul><li>INTERNATIONAL COMPETITION AND COOPERATION </li></ul><ul><li>-FP7 is on the right track in funding broad joint projects; </li></ul><ul><li>-Strengthening cooperation with traditional partners; </li></ul><ul><li>-Readiness to innovate in developing the relationships </li></ul><ul><li>with new neighbours; </li></ul><ul><li> -Russia and Ukraine as special (and different) cases </li></ul><ul><li> -The German experience with immigrants from the </li></ul><ul><li>former Soviet Union </li></ul>
  9. 9. RUSSIA AND UKRAINE AS DONOR COUNTRIES? <ul><li>Reasons for emigration of researchers and </li></ul><ul><li>university teachers at Moscow universities (2004) </li></ul><ul><li>_______________________________________________________________________________________________ </li></ul><ul><li>Reason % </li></ul><ul><li>_________________________________________________________ </li></ul><ul><li>Low wages 76 </li></ul><ul><li>Decline of prestige of intellectual labour 53 </li></ul><ul><li>Lack of opportunities to realize the scientific potential 50 </li></ul><ul><li>Threat of social outbursts 40 </li></ul><ul><li>Anxiety about the future of the children 35 </li></ul><ul><li>Economic instability, threat of unemployment 35 </li></ul><ul><li>Vague prospects concerning the professional carrier 19 </li></ul><ul><li>_______________________________________________________________________ </li></ul>
  10. 10. Research personnel at the National Academy of Science of Ukraine ■ Number of researchers (thousands) ■ Number of researchers with academic degrees (Dr, Dr. sc.)
  11. 11. MOBILITY OF HQ IN R&D IS A MATTER OF DOUBLE CONTINGENCY Desires for : PAa:Institutional support PBa:Knowledge &status in R&D acquisition PCa: Personal capacities PDa: Support from the personal environment Career in or outside R&D PA: Institutional environment PB: Professional education PC: Professional aspirations PD: Personal c ircumstances Experience as scientist Assessments of : PAb: Institutional constraints PBb: Value of knowledge & status acquisition PCb: Personal capacities PDb: Personal circumstances Career in or outside the home country
  12. 12. THE PROSPECTS? <ul><li>Brain-drain? </li></ul><ul><li>Brain-gain? </li></ul><ul><li>Brain-waste? </li></ul><ul><li>Brain circulation? </li></ul><ul><li>IT‘S VERY MUCH MATTER OF POLICIES – </li></ul><ul><li>POLICIES OF EU MEMBER STATES </li></ul><ul><li>AND INCREASINGLY EU POLICIES </li></ul><ul><li>TO BE INCORPORATED IN LISBON 2 </li></ul>

×