- Email: [email protected]
The migration of knowledge workers: second-generation effects of India’s brain drain
644
Book reviews / Economics of Education Review 21 (2002) 641—648
Yet, in view of the title, readers may come away feeling better able to measure an intervention’s costs than its effects. However, this is a short text, and it cannot legitimately be criticized for not saying everything there is to say about measuring program outcomes. The authors note that they intend only to provide an overview of evaluation techniques and do so clearly and thoughtfully. Moreover, the authors properly refer those interested in learning more about evaluation issues to several definitive works in the field. An accurate assessment of a policy or program’s cost and effects should be of interest to federal and state policymakers, district and school administrators, voters, researchers, and any other individuals or groups concerned with sound fiscal management. Cost-Effectiveness Analysis presents a clear and concise framework for undertaking such analyses. This is a carefully written and much-needed follow-up to the first edition, suitable for self-study or as a supplementary text in an education evaluation, policy analysis, economics, or finance class. I have and will continue to use this book as a required, supplementary text in three of my courses: managing school resources, administrative decision making in higher education, and advanced program evaluation. Given the dearth of cost-analyses in our field, I recommend that others do the same. Brian O. Brent, Warner Graduate School of Education, University of Rochester, Dewey Hall 1-335, Rochester, NY 14627, USA E-mail address: [email protected] PII: S0272-7757(02)00012-2
The migration of knowledge workers: second-generation effects of India’s brain drain Binod Khadria. New Delhi: Sage Publications, 1999. pp. 240. Price: £27.50 (cloth). This book deals with the migration of knowledge workers, defined as “highly qualified, skilled, and experienced professionals,” from India to other parts of the world, especially the US. The author approaches what is commonly known as the brain drain from an unusual perspective, namely, the extent to which out-migrants, from their countries of destination, can and do participate in specific nation-building activities in the fields of education and health of their country of origin. Viewing the outflow of human resources as an inevitable occurrence,
∗
Tel.: +1 305 3348 3290; fax: +1 305 348 1524.
he sets out to explore how India can make the best of the situation. Early in the book, Professor Khadria observes wisely that out-migration results in brain drain only when the exit of workers cannot be compensated by monetary remittances and the “return” of international externalities; obviously if, in the long run, remittances and externalities were to exceed the domestic cost of imbuing workers with skills and experience, the process would be seen as a gain, not a drain. (The meaning of the term “return,” as used by Professor Khadria, transcends a mere physical comeback of migrants or even a faceless dispatch of funds to family and friends; it envisions, somehow naively, the contribution by Indians residing abroad to raising the long-term domestic productivity of Indians who have not migrated.) In addition to financial resource flows in the form of nonresidents-to-residents private transfer payments and portfolio investments, the author suggests that such contributions may accrue from technological resource flows, mainly high-tech equipment and knowhow through direct foreign investments in collaborative and joint ventures, and from human resource flows resulting from skill transfers through exchange visits, home visits, and homecoming of Indians residing abroad. After toying with the concept of globalization of human resources and surveying the presence and condition of Indian knowledge workers in the US, Professor Khadria concludes that although Indian out-migrants have been successful in world labor markets, there is no evidence of a significant trickle-down, first-generation effect on the Indian economy that resembles a gain. So he turns his attention toward the second-generation effect, which is supposed to be the highlight, yet is the weakest portion, of the book. His analysis of human capital formation and its effect on poverty is superficial, his expectations of human resource potential and its impact on growth are unrealistic, and the preconditions which he sets for the essence of human capital to return to India are inconsequential. In an effort to add a touch of rigor to his arguments, Professor Khadria uses a vast array of data from numerous sources and personal interviews with selected Indian out-migrants and returnees who have experienced various aspects of the talent exodus directly. He painstakingly identifies and discusses ten arguments (labeled by him ‘folklores’) which, he claims, have developed contradictory stereotypes in the brain-drain debate. When all is said and done, however, one cannot help but feel a sense of emptiness, for the fundamental issues are never addressed. Nowhere does Professor Khadria acknowledge that in an open, global setting, the international migration of knowledge workers is a purposeful way in which populations respond to their perception of changing socioeconomic opportunities, within the constraints imposed on them by market rigidities and institutional glitches. Indi-
Book reviews / Economics of Education Review 21 (2002) 641—648
ans migrate to the US and elsewhere because they believe that, by doing so, they and their families will be better off, and they will not return to India unless and until they believe, in a subsequent stage of their lives, that it is in their interest to do so. Such belief may arise from real or perceived differentials in real income, availability of job or advancement opportunities, ability to utilize one’s professional skills, family’s flexibility in adapting to another cultural setting, and a myriad of other factors, some easily quantifiable, others not; some affecting specific individuals, others of collective nature; some operating in the short run, others in the long run. A continuous net out-migration flow suggests the permanent presence of employment, technological, and psychological bottlenecks in the integration of knowledge workers into the Indian economy. Simply put, prospects for many knowledge workers are better outside India than at home. Thus, lamenting the loss of humanpower, quantifying it, or conjecturing about what might have happened are topics of peripheral inquiry, largely devoid of relevance to policymaking. Needed here is a comprehensive model that identifies the alternative applications of human capital (i.e., job opportunities) available domestically and estimate their opportunity cost (i.e., their rate of return vis-a`-vis similar and accessible alternatives abroad), as well as the discounted family costs of migration and the investment in physical capital necessary to meet knowledge workers’ reasonable expectations regarding access to infrastructure comparable to what is available in other countries. Only then could the ultimate question be addressed properly: What is more socially desirable and economically feasible for India—continue losing knowledge workers to foreign labor markets, reduce investments in education to boost wages and conform to a much smaller rate of growth of domestic job vacancies, or devise and implement a plan of substantial investments in physical capital designed to increase out-migration opportunity costs and provide knowledge workers in India with an acceptable infrastructure? Insofar as the book fails to address these critical issues, perhaps it can be best summarized in terms of Shakespearian economics: “Much Ado about Nothing.”
Manuel J. Carvajal, Florida International University, USA
PII: S0272-7757(02)00014-6
645
The states and public higher education policy: affordability, access, and accountability Edited by Donald E. Heller. Baltimore, MD: The John Hopkins University Press, 2001. pp. ix+271. Price: $38.00 (cloth). This book consists of nine essays that deal with the issues of affordability, access and accountability in public higher education. The book begins with the issue of affordability and provides an important set of facts: (i) There is clear evidence that the explicit costs of attending college increased dramatically over the last three decades. (ii) College enrollment continued to expand at a rapid pace despite these cost increases. (iii) The relative costs may have increased even more for minorities and the lowest socio-economic groups. (iv) These same groups experienced the most impressive enrollment gains over this period. The bottom line is that college enrollments have continued to increase, especially for low income and minority students, despite rising costs. The general explanation is that the private returns to education were increasing at a higher rate than the increase in private costs. While the essays on affordability present the facts concerning college costs and enrollment, the later discussions sometimes lose sight of these facts. For example, the later essays are critical of trends in education finance (e.g. increased merit aid, higher tuition, smaller appropriations) that are perceived to decrease access for lower income and minority groups. However, the authors fail to fully delve into the factors that have resulted in the enrollment gains experienced among these groups. Reading these chapters in isolation would leave one with the mistaken impression that access and enrollments have declined among these groups. Similarly, much of the book criticizes the trend towards relying more heavily on tuition and student loans. Education has private benefits to the students and public benefits for society. Given the increasing personal rewards to education that are noted throughout the book, the authors should not be surprised that the individual’s share of the total cost has risen. The important issue of balancing public and private costs is never fully addressed. Despite an intelligent discussion of both the importance of controlling college costs and the current lack of incentives to control costs, the authors also fail to relate cost controls to other issues. A failure to control costs may be as significant a barrier to educational access as changes in public financing. The authors focus almost exclusively on the effects of changes in public education finance on access. One potential blow to access for minority students has been the weakening of race based ∗
Tel.: +1 909 621 8000; fax: +1 909 621 8249.
Book reviews / Economics of Education Review 21 (2002) 641—648
Yet, in view of the title, readers may come away feeling better able to measure an intervention’s costs than its effects. However, this is a short text, and it cannot legitimately be criticized for not saying everything there is to say about measuring program outcomes. The authors note that they intend only to provide an overview of evaluation techniques and do so clearly and thoughtfully. Moreover, the authors properly refer those interested in learning more about evaluation issues to several definitive works in the field. An accurate assessment of a policy or program’s cost and effects should be of interest to federal and state policymakers, district and school administrators, voters, researchers, and any other individuals or groups concerned with sound fiscal management. Cost-Effectiveness Analysis presents a clear and concise framework for undertaking such analyses. This is a carefully written and much-needed follow-up to the first edition, suitable for self-study or as a supplementary text in an education evaluation, policy analysis, economics, or finance class. I have and will continue to use this book as a required, supplementary text in three of my courses: managing school resources, administrative decision making in higher education, and advanced program evaluation. Given the dearth of cost-analyses in our field, I recommend that others do the same. Brian O. Brent, Warner Graduate School of Education, University of Rochester, Dewey Hall 1-335, Rochester, NY 14627, USA E-mail address: [email protected] PII: S0272-7757(02)00012-2
The migration of knowledge workers: second-generation effects of India’s brain drain Binod Khadria. New Delhi: Sage Publications, 1999. pp. 240. Price: £27.50 (cloth). This book deals with the migration of knowledge workers, defined as “highly qualified, skilled, and experienced professionals,” from India to other parts of the world, especially the US. The author approaches what is commonly known as the brain drain from an unusual perspective, namely, the extent to which out-migrants, from their countries of destination, can and do participate in specific nation-building activities in the fields of education and health of their country of origin. Viewing the outflow of human resources as an inevitable occurrence,
∗
Tel.: +1 305 3348 3290; fax: +1 305 348 1524.
he sets out to explore how India can make the best of the situation. Early in the book, Professor Khadria observes wisely that out-migration results in brain drain only when the exit of workers cannot be compensated by monetary remittances and the “return” of international externalities; obviously if, in the long run, remittances and externalities were to exceed the domestic cost of imbuing workers with skills and experience, the process would be seen as a gain, not a drain. (The meaning of the term “return,” as used by Professor Khadria, transcends a mere physical comeback of migrants or even a faceless dispatch of funds to family and friends; it envisions, somehow naively, the contribution by Indians residing abroad to raising the long-term domestic productivity of Indians who have not migrated.) In addition to financial resource flows in the form of nonresidents-to-residents private transfer payments and portfolio investments, the author suggests that such contributions may accrue from technological resource flows, mainly high-tech equipment and knowhow through direct foreign investments in collaborative and joint ventures, and from human resource flows resulting from skill transfers through exchange visits, home visits, and homecoming of Indians residing abroad. After toying with the concept of globalization of human resources and surveying the presence and condition of Indian knowledge workers in the US, Professor Khadria concludes that although Indian out-migrants have been successful in world labor markets, there is no evidence of a significant trickle-down, first-generation effect on the Indian economy that resembles a gain. So he turns his attention toward the second-generation effect, which is supposed to be the highlight, yet is the weakest portion, of the book. His analysis of human capital formation and its effect on poverty is superficial, his expectations of human resource potential and its impact on growth are unrealistic, and the preconditions which he sets for the essence of human capital to return to India are inconsequential. In an effort to add a touch of rigor to his arguments, Professor Khadria uses a vast array of data from numerous sources and personal interviews with selected Indian out-migrants and returnees who have experienced various aspects of the talent exodus directly. He painstakingly identifies and discusses ten arguments (labeled by him ‘folklores’) which, he claims, have developed contradictory stereotypes in the brain-drain debate. When all is said and done, however, one cannot help but feel a sense of emptiness, for the fundamental issues are never addressed. Nowhere does Professor Khadria acknowledge that in an open, global setting, the international migration of knowledge workers is a purposeful way in which populations respond to their perception of changing socioeconomic opportunities, within the constraints imposed on them by market rigidities and institutional glitches. Indi-
Book reviews / Economics of Education Review 21 (2002) 641—648
ans migrate to the US and elsewhere because they believe that, by doing so, they and their families will be better off, and they will not return to India unless and until they believe, in a subsequent stage of their lives, that it is in their interest to do so. Such belief may arise from real or perceived differentials in real income, availability of job or advancement opportunities, ability to utilize one’s professional skills, family’s flexibility in adapting to another cultural setting, and a myriad of other factors, some easily quantifiable, others not; some affecting specific individuals, others of collective nature; some operating in the short run, others in the long run. A continuous net out-migration flow suggests the permanent presence of employment, technological, and psychological bottlenecks in the integration of knowledge workers into the Indian economy. Simply put, prospects for many knowledge workers are better outside India than at home. Thus, lamenting the loss of humanpower, quantifying it, or conjecturing about what might have happened are topics of peripheral inquiry, largely devoid of relevance to policymaking. Needed here is a comprehensive model that identifies the alternative applications of human capital (i.e., job opportunities) available domestically and estimate their opportunity cost (i.e., their rate of return vis-a`-vis similar and accessible alternatives abroad), as well as the discounted family costs of migration and the investment in physical capital necessary to meet knowledge workers’ reasonable expectations regarding access to infrastructure comparable to what is available in other countries. Only then could the ultimate question be addressed properly: What is more socially desirable and economically feasible for India—continue losing knowledge workers to foreign labor markets, reduce investments in education to boost wages and conform to a much smaller rate of growth of domestic job vacancies, or devise and implement a plan of substantial investments in physical capital designed to increase out-migration opportunity costs and provide knowledge workers in India with an acceptable infrastructure? Insofar as the book fails to address these critical issues, perhaps it can be best summarized in terms of Shakespearian economics: “Much Ado about Nothing.”
Manuel J. Carvajal, Florida International University, USA
PII: S0272-7757(02)00014-6
645
The states and public higher education policy: affordability, access, and accountability Edited by Donald E. Heller. Baltimore, MD: The John Hopkins University Press, 2001. pp. ix+271. Price: $38.00 (cloth). This book consists of nine essays that deal with the issues of affordability, access and accountability in public higher education. The book begins with the issue of affordability and provides an important set of facts: (i) There is clear evidence that the explicit costs of attending college increased dramatically over the last three decades. (ii) College enrollment continued to expand at a rapid pace despite these cost increases. (iii) The relative costs may have increased even more for minorities and the lowest socio-economic groups. (iv) These same groups experienced the most impressive enrollment gains over this period. The bottom line is that college enrollments have continued to increase, especially for low income and minority students, despite rising costs. The general explanation is that the private returns to education were increasing at a higher rate than the increase in private costs. While the essays on affordability present the facts concerning college costs and enrollment, the later discussions sometimes lose sight of these facts. For example, the later essays are critical of trends in education finance (e.g. increased merit aid, higher tuition, smaller appropriations) that are perceived to decrease access for lower income and minority groups. However, the authors fail to fully delve into the factors that have resulted in the enrollment gains experienced among these groups. Reading these chapters in isolation would leave one with the mistaken impression that access and enrollments have declined among these groups. Similarly, much of the book criticizes the trend towards relying more heavily on tuition and student loans. Education has private benefits to the students and public benefits for society. Given the increasing personal rewards to education that are noted throughout the book, the authors should not be surprised that the individual’s share of the total cost has risen. The important issue of balancing public and private costs is never fully addressed. Despite an intelligent discussion of both the importance of controlling college costs and the current lack of incentives to control costs, the authors also fail to relate cost controls to other issues. A failure to control costs may be as significant a barrier to educational access as changes in public financing. The authors focus almost exclusively on the effects of changes in public education finance on access. One potential blow to access for minority students has been the weakening of race based ∗
Tel.: +1 909 621 8000; fax: +1 909 621 8249.