IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/uto/labeco/201504.html

International Careers of Researchers in Biomedical Sciences: A Comparison of the US and the UK

Author

Listed:
  • Lawson, Cornelia

  • Geuna, Aldo

  • Ana Fernández-Zubieta

  • Toselli, Manuel

  • Kataishi, Rodrigo

    (University of Turin)

Abstract

This chapter analyses the mobility of academic biomedical researchers in the US and the UK. Both countries are at the forefront of research in biomedicine, and able to attract promising researchers from other countries as well as fostering mobility between the US and the UK. Using a database of 292 UK based academics and 327 US based academics covering the period 1956 to 2012, the descriptive analysis shows a high level of international mobility at education level (BA, PhD and Postdoc) with small, but significant transatlantic exchanges, and shows high levels of cross-border mobility amongst senior academics based in the UK. There is a high level of career mobility with 50% of the sample having changed jobs at least once, and 40% having moved within academia. There is no significant difference in job-job mobility between the two countries although there are some interesting institutional differences concerning international and cross-sector mobility. The empirical analysis focuses on the importance of postdoctoral training in the US and the UK. The results indicate that working in the US is correlated to higher researcher performance in terms of both publication numbers and impact/quality adjusted publications (in top journals and average impact). The publications of researchers with postdoctoral experience are generally of a higher average impact. This applies especially to postdoc experience at top-quality US institutions although a postdoc at a UK top institution is associated with higher top journal publications and higher average impact. In relation to the UK sample, we find that a US postdoc (especially in a top institution) is correlated to subsequent performance in the UK academic market. Finally, we see that US postdocs that stay in the US publish more and publications with higher impact/quality than those that move to the UK; however, these effects are stronger for those who studied for their PhD degree outside the US. Therefore, we find some evidence that the US is able to retain high performing incoming PhD graduates.

Suggested Citation

  • Lawson, Cornelia & Geuna, Aldo & Ana Fernández-Zubieta & Toselli, Manuel & Kataishi, Rodrigo, 2015. "International Careers of Researchers in Biomedical Sciences: A Comparison of the US and the UK," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis LEI & BRICK - Laboratory of Economics of Innovation "Franco Momigliano", Bureau of Research in Innovation, Complexity and Knowledge, Collegio 201504, University of Turin.
  • Handle: RePEc:uto:labeco:201504
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.est.unito.it/do/home.pl/Download?doc=/allegati/wp2015dip/wp_14_2015.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Roman Jurowetzki, 2015. "Unpacking Big Systems - Natural Language Processing meets Network Analysis. A Study of Smart Grid Development in Denmark," SPRU Working Paper Series 2015-15, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    2. Loet Leydesdorff & Gaston Heimeriks & Daniele Rotolo, 2016. "Journal portfolio analysis for countries, cities, and organizations: Maps and comparisons," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 67(3), pages 741-748, March.
    3. Janaina Pamplona da Costa, 2015. "Network (Mis)Alignment, Technology Policy and Innovation: The Tale of Two Brazilian Cities," SPRU Working Paper Series 2015-14, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    4. repec:plo:pone00:0172338 is not listed on IDEAS

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
    • I23 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Higher Education; Research Institutions
    • J24 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demand and Supply of Labor - - - Human Capital; Skills; Occupational Choice; Labor Productivity

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:uto:labeco:201504. 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: Laura Ballestra or Cinzia Carlevaris (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/leifrit.html .

    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.