Brain drain
The brain drain, brain drain or highly qualified migration (MAC) is the emigration of professionals and scientists with university education in their home country to other nations. It occurs mainly due to the lack of development opportunities in their research areas, for economic reasons or for political conflicts in their native country. Generally, this brain drain occurs without return. Although the phenomenon is accentuated in developing countries, this is not exclusive, and on many occasions it also occurs in industrially developed countries, due to salary or tax differences. In a similar way, one speaks of disinvestment of financial capital in a country.
The brain drain causes the country of origin to lose the investment in higher education of these professionals and, in the same way, the social capital of which the individual was a part is reduced by their departure. In short, the people who have reached their goal want to continue succeeding, but since their country does not offer opportunities for professional development, they emigrate.
Historical examples
Academy of Neoplatonic Philosophers
After Justinian's closure of the Academy in 529, according to the historian Agathias, its former members sought refuge at the Sasanian court of King Chosroes I, taking with them numerous scrolls of literary, philosophical, and, possibly, knowledge. to a lesser extent, scientists. After the peace treaty between the Persian and Byzantine empires in 532 guaranteed their personal safety, some members found refuge in the pagan fortress of Harran, near Edessa. One of the leading figures in this group was Simplicius, a pupil of Damascius, the last head of the Athenian school. From there, the exiled Academy students may have survived into the 9th century, long enough to trigger the Arab revival of Neoplatonism in Baghdad.
Fall of Byzantium
With the fall of the Byzantine Empire at the hands of the Turks, a considerable number of scholars from the metropolis appeared on the Greek and Mediterranean coasts, especially in Italy, where they revived interest in knowledge of the classical world, contributing to a large extent to the European Renaissance process.
Spanish expulsion of Jews and Moors
After the Reconquest of Spain, the Catholic Monarchs sought a religiously unified kingdom. The Jews were expelled from the country in 1492, and forced to convert to Catholicism. To the extent that they dominated the country's finances, their expulsion was a key cause of the subsequent economic decline, which required the service of foreign bankers, such as the Fugger family and others from the Republic of Genoa. On January 7, 1492, the king ordered the expulsion of all Jews from Spain, then made up of the Crown of Castile, which included the Kingdom of Galicia, the Kingdom of León, the Kingdom of Granada, and the recently conquered Islas Canary Islands; the crown of Aragon, which included the principality of Catalonia, the kingdom of Aragon, the kingdom of Valencia, the kingdom of Majorca, Naples and Sicily. Later, the queen would expel them from Andalusia. The expulsion of the still independent kingdom of Navarre occurred in 1498, so between the two dates there was some Jewish migration to Navarrese territories. More information available in the Jewish History Sourcebook.
The war against the Turks, the Arabs and the Berbers of southern Africa affected internal politics in the so-called Alpujarras Rising (1568–1571), which led to the expulsion of the Moors in 1609. Despite being a ethnic minority, were a fundamental part of the agricultural and craft sector. His departure contributed to the economic decline in some regions of Spain. In this way, the conservative aristocracy increased its power at the expense of the more economically developed provinces.
Anti-Semitism in the interwar period (1933-1943)
Anti-Semitic sentiments and laws in Europe during the 1930s and 1940s, culminating in the Holocaust, caused many scientists, artists, and intellectuals to emigrate to the Americas. Notorious examples are:
- Albert Einstein (permanently emigrated to the United States in 1933)
- Enrico Fermi (1938; although he himself was not a Jew, his wife Laura was.)
- Niels Bohr (1943; Jewish mother)
- Theodore von Kármán
- John von Neumann
- Theodor Adorno
- Friedrich Wilhelm Karl Berg, emigrated to Argentina
- Karl Hermann Konrad Burmeister, migrated to Argentina
- Kurt Gödel (not Jewish)
- Ludwig von Mises
In addition to anti-Semitic conditions, Nazi persecution of liberals and socialists in Germany contributed to another type of emigration. The Bauhaus was forced to close in Nazi Germany due to its liberal and socialist thinking, which the Nazis considered degenerate. The school had already been closed during the Weimar Republic due to its political affiliations, but was moved to Dessau before the closure. Following this abandonment, two of the three pioneers of modern architecture, Ludwig Mies van der Rohe and Walter Gropius, left Germany for America (while Le Corbusier remained in France). They brought the modernist movement to the American public and created the so-called International Style in architecture and design.
Brain Drain Crisis in Eastern Europe (1922-1961)
By 1922, the Soviet Union had restricted the emigration of its citizens to other countries, making it almost impossible for them to leave. Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev later stated: "We were scared, really we we were scared. We were afraid of unleashing a flow that we could not control and that could have drowned us". After the Soviet occupation of Eastern Europe after World War II, a large part of the population of those areas aspired to independence and wanted that the Soviets withdrew. In the mid-1950s, the Soviet Union's decision to restrict emigration was emulated by most of the Eastern Bloc, including East Germany.
Even with the official closure of the German border in 1952, the borders between East Berlin and West Berlin remained considerably more accessible than the rest due to being administered by four powers. The Berlin sector was a "hole" through which many citizens of the East were still able to emigrate. The 3.5 million East Germans, called Republikflüchtlinge, who left the country equal about 20% of the local population. emigrants tended to be young and well educated, leading to the brain drain feared by East German officials. In 1958, Yuri Andropov, then the director of Relations with Communist and Workers' Parties of Socialist Countries, a body belonging to the Soviet government, wrote an urgent report to the Central Committee to inform them that among the refugees the German intelligentsia had increased by 50%.
Template:1990
Historically, the brain drain has mainly affected developing countries or countries in war, because scientists trained in institutions in the country of origin emigrate abroad in search of better job and economic opportunities, wasting resources in training from the countries of origin. However, after the global economic crisis that mainly affected the so-called First World, economic conditions reversed, and many of the developing countries have recently received a significant flow of researchers.
Portugal, Ireland, Italy, Greece and Spain
The citizens of the countries most affected by the crisis in Europe have headed mainly for flourishing economies in the southern hemisphere, such as Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Colombia, Chile, Mexico, Angola, Australia and the US.
The case of Mexico
Current situation
In 2011, the Bank of Mexico estimated that there were 400,000 Mexican professionals (qualified as talented) residing in the United States alone, this nation being the first in Latin America to export highly qualified personnel and the fourth worldwide.
Although the economy plays a determining factor at the time of emigration of Mexicans, it is not the only one. Camelia Tigau, a researcher at the UNAM North American Research Center (CISAN), affirms that the insecurity and violence that exists in the country constitute a notable cause. These, together with the lack of adequate infrastructure and the lack of interest on the part of the bulk of the population in areas of science and technology, contribute to the increasing problem. The research that led to these conclusions is part of the book by Tigau titled Risks of brain drain in Mexico.
Mexico loses large amounts of money due to this problem. A study carried out by the Ministry of Public Education estimated that 900 million pesos are lost annually.[citation required]
Current repatriation policies and alternatives
CONACYT Withholdings and Repatriations is a program that has been operating for more than 20 years[how many?][citation required ] and is aimed at researchers with a PhD degree. Its objective is to encourage researchers abroad to join and carry out scientific research within the country's institutions.
This program is the only one established for repatriation. However, there are other alternatives to the problem of brain drain in Mexico.
The Mexican Talent Network was created in 2005 as a project of CONACYT and the Institute of Mexicans Abroad. The fundamental purpose is to create a worldwide network that allows qualified Mexicans and highly qualified personnel residing abroad to communicate with their counterparts to develop new projects with the aim of contributing to the development of the country.
Chile
The country experienced a traditional brain drain, especially during the military dictatorship of Augusto Pinochet. To reverse this trend during the first government of Michelle Bachelet (2006-2010), a specialization program called Becas Chile was implemented, administered by the National Commission for Scientific and Technological Research (Conicyt).
The case of Venezuela
Current situation
After the crisis that Venezuela has been facing since 2013, the number of Venezuelans residing abroad has grown.
Although the economy plays a determining factor, violence, citizen insecurity, the disappearance of 40% of the industrial park and 11% of the business park also play a notable role. According to a sociologist and analyst, the Most of the people who make the decision to emigrate are professionals who could not find the opportunity to develop their careers in their native country. The analyst Álamo points out that this wave of Venezuelan professional graduates are qualified people who are leaving important gaps in labor Venezuela. A study published in 2015 by the Central University of Venezuela (UCV) details that 883,000 certified professionals emigrated to 22 countries, of which 260,000 chose the United States, 250,000 chose Colombia, followed by Spain with 200,000 and Portugal with 110,000.
The general manager of the National Migration Superintendence of Peru, Roxana del Águila Tuesta, said in April 2018 that 90% of Venezuelan immigrants between the ages of 25 and 45 who arrive in the country are professionals and technicians.
The case of Argentina
Historical situation
Throughout the years the country has been characterized by its historically high capacity of human resources. However, it has also been characterized by low investment in science and technology with respect to the international level. According to data from 2005, science and technology verified a strong dependence on public financing, which provided 65% of the investment. This was distributed 43% in the government sector and 22% in public universities. In relation to GDP, the public sector contributed 0.30% while the private sector contributed 0.16% in 2002, although the participation of the private sector in scientific and technological activities has increased since then.
Paradigm shift at the beginning of the 21st century (and culmination)
This historical trend has been reversed in recent years. In 1997 —with the creation of the National Agency for Scientific and Technological Promotion— a virtuous cycle began in Argentine science and technology. Said impulse was reinforced, from the year 2003, by the execution of a state policy that has increased the number of resources allocated to the execution of scientific projects, the incorporation of new researchers, the creation of new research centers, the improvement in the salaries of researchers and the repatriation of Argentine scientists living abroad, based on the Raíces program, through which it was possible to repatriate more than a thousand Argentine scientists for the year 2014, at a rate of 1 scientist every 3 days.
Through CONICET, the Argentine State financed —from the arrival of Néstor Kirchner to the presidency in 2003 and until the year 2015— more than 16,000 scientists among researchers, scholarship holders and support personnel, compared to the 8,000 who funded in 2003. On October 7, 2013, the 1,000th female scientist was repatriated.
Presidency of Macri
The new government administration, which began towards the end of 2015, marked a shift in policy towards scientists. The national budget allocated to science went from 0.75 to 0.59% of the gross domestic product between 2015 and 2018. By 2017, the incorporation of new scientists into CONICET was reduced by 60%, reversing the trend expansion registered consecutively since 2004. By 2018, the number of scholarships awarded by the organization was reduced by half compared to 2015. In 2019 the science and technology sector was in crisis with massive layoffs at INTI and at the Conicet, the decrease in salaries, the cuts in the quotas of scholarships and of the research career, together with the budgetary situation of the institutes that barely have money to operate, there are no funds to acquire supplies or financing for exchanges with scientists from other countries. At the same time, according to specialized organizations, since 2017 Argentina became a pole of emigration and one of the largest emigration countries in the region, with many Argentines emigrating highly qualified professionals, caused among other reasons by the budget cut in science and technology applied since 2016 that ranged between 40 and 60%. In just two years of the new government, the salaries of researchers and academics became the lowest in the region, leading to a new exodus of highly trained scientists who sent to the 'brain drain' that took place at the end of the 1990s. This situation led more than 1,200 members of the scientific community from around the world to sign a harsh letter addressed to the Argentine president, Mauricio Macri, in which they denounced the criticism situation that the Argentine science and technology system was going through due to adjustment policies.