Main menu >>
I. MIGRATION FROM UKRAINE FOR EMPLOYMENT WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF GLOBAL MIGRATION PROCESSES
3. GLOBAL PROBLEM OF MIGRATION OF HIGHLY SKILLED LABOR AND THE BRAIN DRAIN FROM UKRAINE
The loss of highly skilled labor, above all scientific workers of the highest professional qualification, is one of the consequences of migration for employment.
The process of migration for employment, which includes the migration of highly skilled workers, is more or less in evidence in every country. But it can gain dangerous dimensions, if the share of skilled migrant workers in the overall size of the population grows out of proportion.
According to International Monetary Fund data, despite a substantial number of skilled workers leaving every year for good such countries as India, China, the Philippines and South Korea, they account for a relatively small percentage of the population (India and China – up to 1%, the Philippines and South Korea – 6%) and therefore do not bring much harm to the economies of these countries.
But for a number of countries, above all the ones that are small in terms of territory and population, this problem may gain the dimensions of a national catastrophe. For example, 60% of the citizens of Jamaica, Trinidad and Tobago with a higher education are currently living in the US. Hawaii lost 70% of graduates of higher educational establishments, Iran 15%, Mexico 13%, and Taiwan 8%.
This is the result of a purposeful policy of the developed nations in attracting skilled labor. To this end flexible and favorable programs have been put into effect. Experts estimate that the loss of one specialist with a higher education costs about US $20,000, while the arrival of a skilled migrant worker enriches his new country of residence by exactly such an amount, impoverishing his country of origin by the same amount.
The US can serve as a unique example of pragmatism in creating favorable conditions for the work of scientists. It is a truly scientific Mecca of the world. Apart from investing in scientific research more than any other country (3% of GDP), the US government gives scientists unbounded freedom for the self-fulfillment of their creative potential. Small wonder that the US is a leader in many branches of science. From 1920 medical scientists residing in the US were awarded one-third of all Nobel prizes. Effective scientific performance in the US is determined by the following factors: publications in leading scientific journals; entry in the list of 250 authors who gained outstanding results; membership of the National Academy of Sciences and technical academies; and implementation of innovations. In physics and mathematics almost two-third of scientists of the highest qualification are not of US origin, while in medicine and biology the rate is 30%. Over a long period of time the US has been gaining substantial profits from investment in education made by other countries, thereby causing them damages.
According to the Brooking Institution, the scientific work of foreign specialists in the US in the period from 1950s to 1975 was gaining an annual profit of US $8.6 billion. The seriousness of the approach to supplying the country with highly skilled personnel is confirmed by the fact that throughout the 1990s the US government adopted laws to issue 65,000 visas to qualified foreign specialists. In early 1998 this quota was increased and the Senate gave its permission to accept an additional 30,000 foreign specialists. In the period from 1999 to 2003, the annual quota of foreign specialists was 115,000. The main motive of such a decision was the urgent need of the US economy in specialists engaged in information technologies, computer technologies, medicine and biology.
For example, the number of foreign specialists who gained scientific degrees in the US (in percent to the total of scientists originating from a definite country) was as follows: China – 85.5%, India – 79.1%, the UK – 69.3%, Germany – 55.7%, Canada – 55.4%, and South Korea – 36.1%. Several decades ago the emigration of highly skilled specialists to the US was viewed only as a single-ended movement that involved the best and most talented. Today this movement is viewed as a “circulation of brains,” i.e. the possibility of scientists returning to their homeland where they will enjoy preferential terms of employment.
In Germany and the UK investment in science amounts to 2.4% and 1.8% of GDP respectively. By 2004 the government of Germany intends to increase budgetary appropriations for science and thereby avoid the emigration of scientists from the country, and the UK wants to follow suit before the year 2008, because the brain drain in these countries is quite marked.
It is worthwhile taking a look at the experience of some post-socialist countries, such as Poland and Hungary in dealing with the brain drain. Poland, in particular, expends a lot of effort to keep its skilled labor at home, especially specialists working in leading areas of research. Besides, it tries as much as possible to engage scientists who had earlier left the country. The first exodus began in 1970. The government views the establishment of working contacts with Polish scientists/emigrants as a promising effort to reduce the negative consequences of the brain drain. According to a survey, 93% of the interviewed emigrants maintain professional contacts with the scientific community in Poland. Polish experts arrived at the conclusion that the problem of the brain drain is bound up with a substantial improvement not only of the conditions of scientific work, but also of the system of science and education as a whole.
Some radical changes are taking place in the official policy of Hungary relative to science. Here the brain drain is held back by the creation of necessary conditions for the work of scientists and their involvement in international programs. In the period from 1986 to 1992, the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, jointly with international organizations, took part in about 800 different international programs, 33% of them carried out in Hungary. For instance, by joining the EUREKA programs in 1992, Hungary “internationalized” the scientific process and intensified its scientific cooperation with the EU countries.
Belarus has also gained certain experience in government regulation of the process of intellectual migration. It put in place a corresponding legal framework and infrastructure. For this purpose a State Committee for Science and Technologies and the State Migration Service (currently the Committee for Migration under the Ministry of Labor) were established and a State Migration Program for 1998-2000 and Subsequent Years adopted.
Now it is suggested to set up a forecasting system for keeping track of these processes in order to assess the movement of scientific personnel, of migrant scientists included. The Belarus Academy of Sciences (BAS) has been effecting cooperation with scientific centers and organizations of other countries under agreements between academies and research institutes of 64 countries. In 1998 the BAS institutes performed 235 agreements and contracts with foreign scientific institutions, firms and organizations. Of the 110 international projects involving Belarus and foreign scientists within the framework of the INTAS program, the BAS members perform 63 projects. In 1998 a special competition for Belarus was conducted for the first time within INTAS. A survey conducted by the BAS and higher educational establishments of Belarus in the period from 1996 to 1998 revealed that the country had over 2,200 scientists who were traveling abroad in the performance of commitments under contracts and foreign grants.
International practice proves that the outflow of skilled scientists from Ukraine can be successfully dealt with. Given the widely acknowledged scientific, technical and intellectual potential in Ukraine, a lot of socioeconomic problems could be resolved quickly, thereby promoting better safeguards for the economic, social and cultural rights of Ukrainian citizens.
According to the State Statistics Committee, the country’s economy at October 1, 2002 employed 73,700 highly skilled specialists, which was 3.4% more than in the same period the year before. Of this number 11,000 held D.Sc. and 62,700 M.Sc. degrees. Women accounted only for one third of the specialists, including 15.9% of doctors and 36.3% masters of science.
Most of the specialists with scientific degrees are concentrated in the economically developed regions that have a substantial number of scientific institutions and higher educational establishments. The city of Kyiv had 28.5% of all doctors and masters of science, Kharkiv oblast 15.4%, Dnipropetrovsk oblast 7.1%, Lviv oblast 7.0%, and Donetsk oblast 6.6%. On the whole, the regions employed over 70% specialists with D.Sc. and M.Sc. degrees.
Regrettably, this potential is not used effectively. As the most intellectual part of the workforce disappears from the real economy, the country incurs substantial losses. Experts estimate that over one million engineers, technologists, economists and other specialists with a higher education cardinally changed their jobs to engage in something else that by its nature does not add anything to the national wealth. Instead, up to 30% of Ukrainian scientists are working abroad for the benefit of the science and economy of other countries.
The high demand in Ukrainian specialists is mostly met on the unofficial market, which causes direct damage to Ukraine. Experts believe that the damage amounts to more than US $1 billion annually. It’s not difficult to make this estimation, but what’s much more difficult is to evaluate the country’s losses from the uncontrolled outflow of specialists and scientific workers. In the US alone, Ukrainian scientists patented dozens of inventions they had developed in their home country. For Ukraine these inventions are lost forever, since they won’t be even registered in this country.
During the past 15 years Ukraine provided intellectual assistance to practically all developed countries, finding itself in a situation when it had to work out organizational measures to mobilize human and financial resources for its own science.
The brain drain is experienced practically by all countries undergoing economic reform, especially when the economy cannot ensure jobs for specialists with a higher education. Experts concede that the main reasons why scientists are forced to leave their jobs are: first, low pay; second, impaired prestige of scientific work in society; and third, worsened conditions for normal scientific work or no prospects for self-fulfillment.
So not only economic factors, but also the impossibility to achieve a professional career are behind the reasons of the brain drain.
Ukrainian researchers studied the scientific-social orientation of senior university students and young NAS scientists as to their desire to go abroad to work, since the annual outflow of young scientists and promising specialists with a university education considerably worsens the composition of the scientific community and makes the scientific community and faculty much younger.
The purpose of departure abroad among the students is in most cases related to financial interests and this group accounts for 63%, professional interests are pursued only by 37%, while 7% of the students are willing to take up any jobs for the sake of high pay.
Young scientists, however, want to achieve an absolutely different purpose: 63% intend to raise their skills abroad, gain new experience, engage in advanced research, and, finally, earn prestige in the international scientific community. Only 30% of the scientists are guided by financial considerations.
Also interesting is the attitude of the interviewed managers of scientific institutions to the problems of migration. In particular, they hold in high regard the development of Ukrainian science (8.5 points of 10 by world standards). In their opinion, the prestige of Ukrainian scientific institutions is rather high – 76% of them are known worldwide, and 16% are leaders in their respective fields. The international activity of Ukrainian scientists is extensive as well: 800 scientists took part in scientific programs abroad in 2000, i.e. an average of 32 per scientific institution. Therefore, the managers of scientific institutions (93% of those interviewed) believe that better financial and material support of science can to a considerable extent check the outflow of young scientists abroad.
Listed below are the measures that are proposed to check the departure of young scientists from and their return to Ukraine:
Source: Results of interviews with managers of the NAS and the Ministry of Education and Science with the assistance of the Ukrainian International Committee for Science and Culture
The emigration of scientists occurred in several phases.
1988–1991 – the first wave was headed to the West. As a rule, these were “dissidents” and young scientists who were awarded scholarships for study or performance of scientific research programs.
1991–1993 – emergence of an independent scientific and technical domain that coincided with the economic crisis when funding of science and its prestige declined and more attractive areas of activity were offered on the market. This phase saw the largest internal and external outflow of scientists. For instance, in 1992 the Ukrainian scientific community lost one sixth of its members.
1994–1999 – new wave of emigration and natural ageing of scientific personnel caused by a deepening economic crisis and stagnation of transformation processes in science.
According to government statistical reports, in 2002 Ukrainian agencies and institutions lost 4,610 specialists with scientific degrees, of which 19.3% went into retirement, 10.4% passed away, and 3.4% went abroad. Out of the total number of specialists who went abroad that year, 29% were scientists under 40 years of age and one-third were from 41 to 50 years old.
According to SSC data, 89,777 Ukrainian citizens with a higher education, almost 8,000 with an incomplete higher education, and 122,522 with a secondary special education left the country in the period from 1977 to 2001.
Almost 40% of the specialists who emigrated had the highest professional ranks in their areas of research: seven professors, 32 assistant professors, and 21 senior scientific research associates. The NAS institutions lost 54 doctors and masters of science, the Ministry of Education and Science 49, and the Ministry of Health Care 19. The largest number of doctors and masters of sciences departed for the US (32), Russia (23), and Germany (29).
In 2001, according to SSC data, the average annual number of personnel engaged in science amounted to 183,000 persons, while in the 1990s it was 553,000 persons. During the past ten years the largest decline in scientific personnel was registered in the NAS and academic research sectors – by 2.5 times and 1.7 times respectively.
Within ten years the number of specialists engaged in research decreased by a half. 30% of the scientists that are still employed actually perform research for foreign clients.
In his report On the Activity of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine in 2001 and the Main Areas of its Further Work, the NAS President Boris Paton pointed out that the provision of personnel remains a critical problem for the Academy. In 2001 alone, 500 scientists at the average age of 35 years quit the Academy. The Academy did not manage to overcome the negative consequences in the dynamics of training scientific personnel. In 2001 only 260 employees of the NAS institutes managed to defend their M.Sc. theses against the 330 in 2000, while only 77 and 78 respectively defended their D.Sc. theses.
At the 2nd All-Ukraine Congress of Educationists in 2001, the Minister of Education Vasyl Kremen said: “We are observing the reluctance of young people to work in secondary schools, and for this reason the latter employ an unjustifiably high percentage of teachers of pension age. We also observe a serious outflow of personnel from higher educational establishments – in the last two years alone (1999–2000), almost 1,7000 doctors and masters of science from 25 to 50 years of age quit higher educational establishments of III-IV level of accreditation.”
In 2001, different sectors of the economy employed 71,250 personnel with D.Sc. and M.Sc. degrees (15% of D.Sc. and 85% of M.Sc.).
The number of scientists engaged in research in 2001 amounted to 113,300, including 21,400 doctors and masters of science. By comparison, more than 313,000 scientists, including 32,500 doctors and masters of science were involved in research in 1990, i.e. the total number decreased almost threefold, while the number of scientists of the highest qualification (doctors and masters of science) went down to 11,100 or by one-third (34.2%).
Quite a few of the scientists are forced to hold more than one job. During the past ten years the number of scientific workers combining jobs, primarily in education, increased half as much again and now amounts to 48,000 persons. According to SSC figures, 55,400 persons (36,000 in 1990) are now carrying out research as a second job; of this number 24,500 (24,000 in 1990) hold D.Sc. and M.Sc. degrees. Over a half of the D.Sc. and M.Sc. degree holders (54%) are engaged in research and teach at institutions of higher education, almost one third (28%) work in the NAS institutes, and the remaining 18% are employed in scientific organizations of specific industries or enterprises.
The inadequate operation of scientific institutions is the main reason why specialists engaged in scientific research leave Ukraine, thereby causing widespread hidden unemployment, such as half-time working week or day, administrative leaves, and the like.
Lately, such unemployment rates have been going down. From 1999 on a number of important measures were taken and laws adopted to change government policy in the field of science. Judging from SSC data, forced part-time employment in science caused by administrative leaves in percent to all the employed accounted for 24.1% in 1999, 16.3% in 2000, and 4.4% in 2001; those employed part-time accounted for 29.8% in 1999, 22.9% in 2000, and 17.6% in 2001.
Analysts point out the negative changes that have occurred in the qualitative composition of scientific personnel, namely: a) reduction in the share of scientists with scientific degrees taking a direct part in research and development; b) unjustified numerical growth of specialized scientific councils (about 700) that hardly promote the quality of awarded scientific ranks and titles; c) substantial reduction in the personnel involved in sectoral science, which hinders the innovational development of the economy; d) critical status of the age structure of personnel.
At January 1, 2000 the mean age of scientists with a D.Sc. degree was 59 years (55 years in 1991) and with a M.Sc. degree 51 years (47 years in 1991).
During the past five years the mean age of Masters of Science almost did not change and in 2002 was 51 years, including women – 48 years, and men 53 years. The mean age of D.Sc. holders went up by one year and was more than 60 years (58 years for women and 60 years for men, see tables 1.3 and 1.4).
Table 1.3. Scientific personnel of the highest qualification (persons)*
Table 1.4. Breakdown of scientific personnel of the highest qualification by age (persons)*
*Source: Statistical Yearbook of Ukraine for 2001 published by the State Statistics Committee of Ukraine (as of October 1 by age)
Although the overall number of D.Sc. holders increased by 844 in 2001 as compared with 1995 and M.Sc. holders by 3,037, they had aged considerably within this period. While in 1995 scientists with a D.Sc. degree of pension and senior age accounted for 36.9% relative to all age categories, in 2001 this rate was 51.8%.
B.Malytsky, D.Sc.(Econ.), Director of the Center for the Study of the Scientific and Technical Potential and the History of Science under the NAS of Ukraine, maintains that the numerous reorganizations of the government agencies administering science had a negative effect on the status of science and scientific personnel. In 1991-1992 the Committee for Scientific Progress was set up, in 1992–1995 it was modified into the State Committee for Science and Technologies, in 1995–1996 it was converted into the State Committee for Science, Engineering and Industrial Policy, in 1996-1998 it was transformed into the Ministry of Science and Technologies, which again, in 1998–2000, was restructured into the State Committee for Science and Intellectual Property, and, finally, it was liquidated as an independent central agency for the administration of science and subordinated to the Ministry of Education, called from then on the Ministry of Education and Science.
Such a strange metamorphosis caused the degradation of the government’s responsibility for the operation of the country’s key sectors. It affected negatively not only science as a whole, but practically every scientist as well. Small wonder that in the period from 1991 to 2002, as SSC data confirm, 574 holders of D.Sc. degrees emigrated, while from 1996 to 2002 an additional 907 M.Sc. degree holders followed suit – almost one-third of them promising specialists under 40 years of age and another one-third from 41 to 50 years of age.
According to the figures of the NAS Presidium, in the period from 1994 to 2001 the NAS institutes alone lost 3,838 scientific workers, including 3,399 who left to seek temporary jobs or become interns, 842 of them Doctors of Science and 2,358 Masters of Science. In 1992-2001 a total of 439 scientists (101 Doctors of Science and 275 Masters of Science) departed for permanent residence abroad. Besides, within this period 3,544 scientific workers, including 778 Doctors of Science and 2,226 Masters of Sciences, were temporarily employed abroad.
Individual invitations for employment mostly for young skilled scientists present yet another threat to our national security. In 2001 alone, 162 scientists with D.Sc. and M.Sc. degrees, i.e. 11% more than the year before, left the country for more attractive jobs.
In view of such a situation in Ukrainian science, the Commissioner considers as opportune the recommendations of the European Commission on how to deal with this problem, namely by:
§ setting up networks of international scientific centers in Europe and virtual centers with modern interactive communication systems. The best scientists and engineers will thus bring to light their talent and receive high pay for what they do;
§ concentrating such scientists in these centers and making the latter attractive for young talented scientists, since for scientists of middle and senior age the availability of the best conditions for work and self-fulfillment as well the opportunity to acquire a merited reputation in the world’s scientific community are the decisive factors of employment abroad;
§ introducing legal (preferential/taxation) measures for private companies and enterprises that are interested in investing capital in the advanced developments of such centers;
§ coordinating national and European research to avoid their duplication;
§ promoting investment in improvement of production methods;
§ enhancing the mobility of research and introducing a uniform “European standard” for scientific careers;
§ unifying the scientific and professional associations of Eastern and Western Europe.
In the opinion of the Commissioner for Human Rights, Ukraine has turned into a supplier of cheap skilled labor for the rest of the world. From 1994 on Ukraine has an unfavorable migration balance. Every year emigration reduces the population size by an average of 90,000 people from among the economically active, enterprising and educated citizens.
A monitoring of the status of migration processes in the scientific community conducted by the Commissioner proves that emigration of scientific workers of the highest skills is a phenomenon that can be observed in every country with a developed economy. In Ukraine this process is, regrettably, beyond any control and, the main thing, is not used for either the interests of the state and society or the interests of the citizens. A reasonable use of the country’s intellectual potential could promote its preservation and growth and also become a source of revenues derived from countries where our specialists are employed on a contractual basis. The government, but not dubious limited liability companies, should be the intermediary in effecting such contracts. When signing a contract with a worker for his employment abroad, the government should undertake his protection and control over the performance of the contract by his employers in other countries and their compliance with his rights.
The Commissioner’s monitoring also proves that, except for occasional researchers, nobody in the government is really studying the reasons and causes of the outflow of specialists from scientific institutions. Neither does the State Statistics Committee of Ukraine keep any proper statistical records of this outflow.
Also disappointing is the fact that the outflow of scientists has not merited the attention of either the Central Committee of the Trade Union of Educational and Scientific Workers or the Central Committee of the NAS Trade Union.
<< Back
Home ^^
