IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/akt/journl/v11y2016i3p45-63.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Intellectual Migration in China, India and Russia: Some International Comparisons

Author

Listed:
  • Dmitry Sokolov

    (Russian Research Institute of Economics, Politics and Law in Science and Technology)

Abstract

The article deals with the problem of intellectual migration (exodus of the highlyskilled personnel, especially in the field of science and technology), in relation to the three emerging economies: China, India and Russia. A brief historical outline of policy in relation to the “brain drain” is presented, and the experience of the three above-mentioned countries in the field of intellectual migration management is compared. The basic timeframe of the study is from 1990s to the mid-late 2000s, with some remarks about past decades and future prospects. Among the three examples of migration management the Chinese experience seems more systematical and includes a wide range of instruments for reversing the “brain drain” process. Indian “talent circulation” policy is more fragmented, despite obvious efforts of the government to put it in the strict conceptual framework. In the Russian Federation the “brain drain” policy is yet in the making, and range of appropriate instruments for “circulation of talents” management is to be developed. The final conclusion is that the dynamics of perception of the “brain drain” phenomenon is generally of a similar character in all three cases: an initial negative attitude and attempts to restrict intellectual migration change over time to the recognition of the “brain drain” inevitability and the transition to a “talent circulation” policy begins, i. e., the using of intellectual diaspora resources for development of the national economy and S&T system.

Suggested Citation

  • Dmitry Sokolov, 2016. "Intellectual Migration in China, India and Russia: Some International Comparisons," Science Governance and Scientometrics Journal, Russian Research Institute of Economics, Politics and Law in Science and Technology (RIEPL), vol. 11(3), pages 45-63, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:akt:journl:v:11:y:2016:i:3:p:45-63
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://en.sie-journal.ru/assets/uploads/issues/2016/3(21)_03.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:akt:journl:v:11:y:2016:i:3:p:45-63. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Lubov Pudovkina (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://riep.ru/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.