written by Muzaffer Vatansever printable version send your friend

Thursday, 26 February 2009

Knowledge, being a strong tool of stating conditions and leading the world, has primary importance in our age. Many social scientists have aptly regarded knowledge as one of the sources of structural power. For example, according to Susan Strange, the great British International Political Economist argues that controlling the production and dissemination of knowledge enables the actors to gain competitive advantage over the others. In other words, who controls the knowledge and who determines the conditions to access knowledge, ultimately draws the framework of the intellectual realm.


Claiming superiority over the knowledge structure has turned out to be the major battle grounds among the Great Powers especially in the age of globalization. The US-Europe is at the fore of this rivalry. From this point of view, it is possible to say that an unbalanced situation occurs between the Europe and the US. It is worthwhile, in this context, to touch upon a conference which was held on “Attracting Research Talent” in Ankara. The discussions mostly circled around producing and sharing knowledge in the worldwide. I believe that the context of the conference will contribute to understanding the current situation in terms of the gap between the US and Europe regarding knowledge production.



Conference on “Attracting Research Talent”



The conference was organized by TUBITAK, the scientific and technological council of Turkey, on 12^th of February. It brought many different people from academia to NGO and business sectors together.  The participants touched upon various dimensions of migration of researchers and underlined the necessity of sharing knowledge in the worldwide.



Arguably, the most interesting presentation was made by Prof. Boris Cizelj, chairman of Slovenian Business and Research Association in Brussels. The professor evaluated the trends in brain circulation by mostly focusing on the comparison of the research and development activities in Europe and the US.



Firstly, Prof. Cizelj explained the importance of brain circulation in terms of the current situation in Europe. He stressed that Europe has an insufficient number of Research and Technological Developments (RTD) staff, a low mobility of researchers, an aging research population and a serious brain drain mostly to US. As a consequence of these realities, he mentioned that, knowledge generation is too weak in Europe, the development of new technologies is slow and marketing and branding still remain fledgling.



In the following part of his presentation, Prof. Cizelj showed many thought provoking numbers, concerning the comparison of the European researchers with the US colleagues, which are the following:



- European countries have 1.3 million researchers in total, while US have 1.4 million on its own. Since Europe’s population is double, share of RTD staff in work force in EU is 5.4 per thousand – compared to 9.0 in US. Since 2000 growth was stronger in EU (mostly in business sector) than in US.



- Aging of research population is a concern: 35% of RTD staff is in 45-64 age groups, compared to 31% in 25-34 age groups.



- EU generates twice the number PhD graduates than US, and has higher share of world scientific publications: in 2006 EU had 37% and US had 31% share.



- European researchers are insufficiently mobile: results of a recent survey show that 46% of respondents are currently not mobile and have not been mobile in the past. About 35% would like to be mobile in future, while 12% of youngest researchers expressed no interest in mobility.



- EU universities are strongly behind US universities in excellence: institutional citation index per discipline shows that only 26% of European universities are world leaders in at least one discipline, compared to 81% from US.



- EU still suffers brain drain: 70% of EU PhD students intend to stay in US. Only 13% of all European researchers currently working abroad intend to return home.



- European RTD staff is too static: only 5.7% of RTD staff is nonresidents, in new members it is only symbolic, below 1% (SI-0.3%).



- Reasons for emigration: broader scope of activities 61% in EU; 19% in US. Better access to leading technologies: 51% in EU, and 4% in US.



- European politicians fail to recognize the need for larger immigration – therefore no proactive strategy. Current processes bring educated migrants to US, and 85% of migrants to EU are poorly qualified (only 5% for US).



- Share of US companies in world “power brands”: 52%



- US have also a stronger share in sources from highly quoted scientific publications in EPO patent applications: US 50%, EU only 26%.



- Shares in EPO patent applications: EU 38%, vs. 30% US.





The Factors for Leaving Country of Residence



In addition, Prof. Cizelj showed the data of a recent survey regarding the background of European brain drain (Table 1). As it can be seen from the table, there is a long list of factors which leads the residents leaving from their country. Yet, surprisingly, the main reason is not the wage discrepancy between the Europe and US. As Professor said “European researchers go to the US not only because of the better salaries. In fact, they have nearly same salaries.” The most significant reason is the broader scope of activities in other countries. 61.5 % percent of Europeans departs from their country because of that reason. The same thing also forms the most significant factor for Americans who leaves from their country. However, the rate of Americans is significantly lower than Europeans.


Table 1: Factors for Leaving Country of Residence

Factors for leaving country of residence	EU-25	US
Broader scope of activities	61.5	19.1
Better access to leading technologies	51.3	4.3
Better career advancement opportunities	38.5	8.5
Better access to R&D funding	30.8	2.1
Broader job opportunities	28.2	4.3
Better earning opportunities	25.6	0.0
More favorable tax system	15.4	4.3
Better living conditions	10.3	10.6
Contract/agreement extended	5.1	4.3
Family responsibilities	4.3	4.7

As a result of the abovementioned data, Prof. Cizelj expressed Europeans’ and his serious concerns about the future of research activities in the continent and their contribution to the world development. In order to reverse this trend, Prof. Cizelj strongly emphasized the importance of Brain circulation around Europe and mentioned the EU policies and activities about providing exchange of researchers from different countries in terms of brain circulation. The conference finished with an exciting atmosphere thanks to TUBITAK and all participants.




Conclusion



As it is stated at the beginning, knowledge lies at the heart of the current intellectual debates in today’s world. Thereby, it generates an intense area of competition among different actors. The most significant example of this situation shows itself between the US and Europe comparison. In terms of the figures of knowledge production and of the control of world’s intellectual realm, there is a huge gap between the two sides of the Atlantic. TUBITAK’s conference made a significant contribution in order to reveal this fact and urged the people to participate the process of brain circulation which is of vital importance for the accumulation of knowledge. 




Muzaffer Vatansever

USAK, Center for European Studies

muzaffer.vatansever@gmail.com