As described in earlier articles, brain drain exists, and it has a significant impact on local economies. There has been recently a detailed analysis on how to counter-act this phenomenon, or how to make use of it.
Basically, there are three ways to counteract brain drain: 1) Creating administrative barriers against migration 2) Charging emigrants for their direct cost to the state (e.g. cost of education) 3. Engaging with the diaspora, by building interactive and strong communication links with the migrants – e.g. invitations to conferences, shared research activity.
The key objective is to increase the know-how of highly qualified people, and than involve them in the local sphere – it is the brand circulation.
The Hungarian Academy of Sciences conducted detailed survey of these emigrants to assess their motivations as well as how to re-integrate them into the home country’s intellectual community. The most trivial obstacle of starting this procedure was communication! They lack an organized way of talking to economic emigrants. It is no miracle. Just talking with them.
Source: http://www.matud.iif.hu/mthome.html
I don’t quite understand your thesis, Balazs. How is brain drain supposed to be useful?
Also, can you provide a direct link to the research results?
In case a country has limited intellectual resources compaired to the potential of the high quality migrants, than they can benefit from the new host country’s sophistication.
However, when connected via various networks to the home country – conferences, shared research, communication – than the home country enjoys its advantage in the sort run. Furthermore, in case the long-distant relationship is turned into return to home, than the former migrant is going home with a higher intellectual value than prior to the leave.