Diaspora Knowledge Transfer as a Development Strategy for Capturing the Gains of Skilled Migration

Asian and Pacific Migration Journal, Vol. 23, No. 3, 2014 299

Diaspora Knowledge Transfer as a Development Strategy for

Capturing the Gains of Skilled Migration

Sheila Siar

Philippine Institute for Development Studies

Diaspora knowledge transfer views skilled migration as a process that does not necessarily lead to the loss of skills and knowledge for sending countries. Rather, it sees skilled migration as contributing to the intellectual, social, and economic capital of migrants, for which home countries gain through knowledge transfer. The paper revisits the concept to address conflicting views of its viability by analyzing how it works and the factors and condi-tions that affect its application. The paper discusses diaspora, home country, and host country factors and conditions that influence this complex process. The policy implications are discussed in the conclusion.

Introduction

In the late 1990s, amid issues of the continuing depletion of skilled work-ers in many developing countries, a more optimistic view of international migration emerged which proposed that it can enhance development not just through economic remittances but through the knowledge and skills that migrants can transfer to their home countries. This paradigm shift from brain drain to brain gain appeared in various terms, such as ‘knowl-edge transfer,’ ‘knowledge exchange,’ ‘knowledge circulation,’ and ‘brain circulation.’

Proponents of this concept argue that the outflow of knowledge and skills resulting from the migration and mobility of highly skilled people

300 ASIAN AND PACIFIC MIGRATION JOURNAL

may not necessarily mean a loss for their home countries because their skills and knowledge can be channelled back through a variety of processes (Meyer et al., 1997; Meyer and Brown, 1999; Saxenian, 2002a, 2002b; Hun-ger, 2004). These processes refer to activities that fall under two models. The first model is the return option or the repatriation of the highly skilled diaspora to the home country. The other is the diaspora model that does not require any physical or permanent return of the diaspora. Rather, it promotes tapping the diaspora’s embodied knowledge through social and professional networks and linking the diaspora to the home country through these networks (Meyer and Brown, 1999).

A clearer and more straightforward description of knowledge transfer is offered by Castles and Miller (2009:65-66) in their book, the Age of Migration:

The brain circulation argument goes as follows. If highly skilled people cannot be employed at home, they are not damaging the economy by leaving. Qualified personnel emigrate not only because salaries are higher in the North, but also because working and living conditions in the South are poor and opportunities for professional development are lacking. Indeed, training people to work abroad may be seen as a rational strategy, because in the short run, it will increase remittance flows, and in the long run, it may lead to return of experienced personnel and transfer of technology.

In other words, the migration of skilled professionals may not be det-rimental to home countries as their skills can be put to good use overseas. Moreover, their migration could generate resources for development through the monies and ideas that they can transfer to their home countries (Castles and Miller, 2009). Knowledge as a type of remittance was first suggested by Peggy Levitt in her term “social remittance” which she used to refer to “ideas, behaviours, identities and social capital that flow from receiving to sending countries” (Levitt, 1998:927). Skilled workers are effective agents of knowledge circulation and innovation because they can enhance knowl-edge exchange and learning that contribute to development (Vinodrai and Gertler, 2006). This is facilitated by their circulation between firms, projects and regions, and their involvement in knowledge sharing and learning through communities of practice or networks of similar occupations.

Knowledge transfer basically supports Harry Johnson’s internationalist view of skilled migration wherein international migration is simultaneously seen as the right of individuals and a means to utilize the untapped or undervalued human resources in countries of origin (Johnson, 1968). Skilled migration has both positive and negative consequences to countries of origin

DIASPORA KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER 301

but overall, the positive consequences outweigh the negative ones. The lat-ter are cancelled out by direct forms of compensation, such as private and collective financial remittances sent by migrants, and by indirect forms of compensation, such as foreign aid programs and the knowledge and skills brought back by returning migrants.

In recent years, however, the concept of knowledge transfer has come under criticism for being too optimistic with little evidence of its viability and actual benefits (Lowell and Gerova, 2004; Lucas, 2004; Parthasarathi, 2006). Parthasarathi (2006) claimed that brain circulation remains asymmetric as the reverse flows are actually less than the outward flows. Mouton et al. (2007) questioned the evidence of knowledge transfer in the literature, as these have mostly been experiences of developed countries or members of the Organisation of Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). For example, Australia, New Zealand, and Canada have succeeded in re-plenishing their skilled workers who have moved overseas by attracting their skilled counterparts from both developed and developing countries through the relaxation of their immigration policies. South Korea also suc-ceeded in luring its expatriate professionals to return.

Only a few examples can be found among non-OECD countries. The success of Taiwan, India and China in tapping the knowledge and skills of expatriate professionals has received much attention both in the academic and policy spheres (Hunger, 2004; Saxenian, 2005; Zweig et al., 2008).

Meyer and Brown (1999) argued that the return option was effectively realized in Singapore, Korea, India, and China due to their structural and institutional readiness to absorb and utilize their diasporas’ skills through the research, technical, and industrial networks their governments have gradually built. Parthasarathi (2006:1) called such readiness ‘absorptive capacity’ which he regarded as a ‘necessary condition for significant reverse migration.’ This view is also shared by Dawson (2008) who noted that South Korea and Taiwan had been successful in their efforts because they were already well advanced and thus had the capacity to absorb the high-level skills of their expatriate scientists. Meanwhile, Lucas (2004) expressed ap-prehension over the feasibility of the return option for countries such as the Philippines, Vietnam, and Albania due to their unattractive pay structures for local workers. In a similar vein, Hunger (2004) argued that the potential of the Philippines and Mexico to achieve brain gain is challenged by their


low levels of attractiveness to investments due to their volatile economic and political climate.

The mixed perceptions about the usefulness of knowledge transfer and the lack of agreement among scholars on its viability may be attributed to a lack of clarity of how it works. When knowledge transfer was introduced in the context of migration, it was silent on how it works in specific con-texts. It therefore came across as a seamless model that is devoid of issues and challenges. But as empirical studies emerged, it became clear that the concept is a complex process that works under certain conditions.

This paper revisits the concept of knowledge transfer to understand it better, particularly its effective operationalization and application by home countries as a development strategy. Although successful cases are limited in the literature, the fact that it has worked in some countries suggests that it is a feasible concept. This paper examines the factors and conditions that affect its viability and application through an analysis of country cases and experiences.

The Complex Process of Knowledge Transfer

Defining Knowledge Transfer

The following definition of knowledge transfer is proposed based on a review of theoretical and practical arguments of the concept:

it refers to the flows of knowledge or skills on, but not limited to, science and technology, business and trade, economics, culture and the arts, and others, through informal or formal activities that may include, but are not limited to, meetings, email information/data exchanges, training, informal advice, research projects, ex-pert consulting, and study tours (Meyer and Brown, 1999), setting up business ventures or investing in the home country (Hunger, 2004; Zweig, 2006; Zweig et al., 2008), and creative works such as literature and performances about culture and life in the home and host countries (Addison, 2008; Siar, 2013).

Due to its clear focus on migration, this paper initially referred to Jean Baptiste Meyer and his studies on scientific diasporas and diaspora knowledge networks (Meyer and Brown, 1999; Meyer, 2001; Meyer et al., 2001). Meyer’s works were a good starting point because he investigated the concept of knowledge transfer in the context of high-skilled mobility.

Meyer and Brown’s seminal paper on scientific diasporas gave exam-ples of possible knowledge transfer activities that could take place between expatriate scientists and professionals and their home country (or what they


called “national community” in their paper), such as “scientific meetings, email information/data exchanges, training sessions, informal advisory opinion,” as well as cooperative undertakings in the form of “research projects, technology transfer and expert consulting” (Meyer and Brown, 1999:14-15).

These examples can be adopted for other types of knowledge. Meetings, email information/data exchanges, training, informal advisory, research project and expert consulting—whether conducted informally or formally — can be used to describe knowledge transfers that involve other kinds of knowledge such as business and trade knowledge and even cultural knowledge and creative skills, all of which are as important as those in the scientific and technological fields.

The intrinsic worth of knowledge flows of information and commu-nications technology (ICT), in tandem with business, trade and economic knowledge, has been extensively documented in the contribution of the Indian ICT diasporas in the US toward the development of the ICT sector in India (Saxenian, 2002a, 2002b; Hunger, 2004; Saxenian, 2004, 2005) and how this process has facilitated knowledge circulation. Meanwhile, several studies on the Chinese highly skilled diaspora have shown the growing flows of business and trade knowledge and financial investments as exhibited by the increasing number of businesses and companies set up or financed by overseas Chinese businessmen (Zweig, 2006; Zweig et al., 2008). Not to be missed is the technology that is transferred in the process, either in terms of new methods and procedures or more technologically advanced equipment, which could benefit home countries in many positive ways. Hu and Jaffe (2003) noted how the industrializing economies of Korea and Taiwan benefited from the more advanced economies of the US and Japan by means of technology diffusion either through the capital goods they import, embodying new technology, and consequently encouraging the development of new local technologies, or through the direct and indirect exchange of ideas among their researchers.

However, knowledge flows and transfers involving other types of know-ledge such as cultural knowledge, creative arts and others—or what Siar (2013) termed as ‘soft knowledge’—should not be dismissed. A discussion of knowledge transfer in the context of development would be incomplete if soft knowledge would be neglected because scientific, technological, and economic knowledge are not the only types of knowledge that drive development. Innovation has conventionally been conceived to occur in the scientific, technology, and economic fields but increasingly there has been a growing recognition of images, symbols and messages as sites and drivers of innovation (Vinodrai and Gertler, 2006). Cultural and creative workers encompassing designers, performing artists and writers are not


only a source of creative ideas and inputs. The products and services such as those rendered by designers also contribute to the creation of a unique image and identity in form and function making a particular brand stand out in the local and global markets (Vinodrai and Gertler, 2006). Addison (2008) described how the experience of artists living in another culture al-lows them to write and interpret the experience of their fellow immigrants, giving those in the home country an informed panorama of what it is really like to be there. In her study of highly skilled Filipino migrants in Australia and New Zealand, Siar (2013) noted the role of expatriate professionals working in the academia as brokers of knowledge for development. One example is a migrant Filipino lecturer in an Australian university who fa-cilitated study tours and internships in the Philippines for his university’s international studies program. He connected his university to Philippine universities and vice-versa and in so doing, has helped linked up his host and home countries and their resources. These types of knowledge may not bring about tangible outcomes compared to scientific, technological, and economic knowledge that may result in a new product, a scientific discovery that may help in treating people, or a business venture that will provide incomes and jobs. Yet soft knowledge has valuable intangible outcomes that also promote economic and social development. This is why the proposed definition of knowledge transfer acknowledges that knowledge comes in different types and they all contribute to development in different ways.

Factors Affecting the Viability of Knowledge Transfer

Having defined knowledge transfer, the next step is to look at the factors that affect its viability and application. It is important to conceive knowl-edge transfer as a transnational process that is influenced by several factors operating in a complex, intertwined manner. This paper proposes three main factors that affect the production of diasporic knowledge transfer: diaspora, host country, and home country factors.

Diaspora factors: The main actor in the knowledge transfer process is the diaspora. The use of ‘diaspora’ rather than ‘migrant’ is to emphasize knowl-edge transfer as a particular activity carried out by a group of migrants in connection with their sentimental and material links with their country of origin. ‘Diaspora’ is a subset of transnationalism (Patel, 2006). It is a form of transnational organization that is specifically related to the country of origin (Wahbeck, 2002 as cited in Braziel and Mannur, 2003). It is what Faist (2000) called “bounded” transnational communities in the sense that their members have a particular interest in a specific place, which is their home country, and thus their actions are also influenced in one way or another by the policies of the home country as well as of the host country. The concept


of diaspora emphasizes the long-term nature of commitment to the home country (Cohen, 1997 and Hardill and Raghuram, 1998 as cited in Bailey, 2001). Diaspora also connotes a dedication to the maintenance of identities as a cultural or ethnic group.

Traditionally, the concept of diaspora was once confined to groups of people residing outside their homeland in exile due to forced displacement. The Jewish, Greek, and Armenian diasporas are often cited as examples of the classic types of diaspora (Safran, 1991). Over time, the use of ‘diaspora’ has been extended to encompass ethnic or national groups of migrant origin that are not necessarily displaced by force. This broader definition includes the contemporary (modern) diaspora groups, particularly economic migrants.

There are two diaspora factors that facilitate knowledge transfer, namely, motivation and social capital. Motivation may be defined as the inner drive to execute actions. Cultural and sentimental links are the primary motivating factor for the diaspora to engage in knowledge transfer to the country of origin. Along with cultural attachment is the emotional bond that the migrants have with their home country that evokes in them a sense of responsibil-ity to contribute to its welfare and prosperity (Safran, 2004; Sheffer, 1986). This is evident in the motivation of many Filipino expatriate profession-als who were involved in science and technology knowledge transfer for the Philippines through actual visits to give lectures and training, medical and surgical missions, and setting up of agricultural technology-based livelihood activities (Siar, 2011). Altruism was their strongest motivation as manifested by their desire to help the Philippines and feeling account-able to the home country. When asked of his reason for participating in the Balik [Return] Scientist Program (BSP) of the Philippine government, a restoration ecologist who migrated to Australia when he was 17 said he felt he “should give and return something to the Philippines.” Another exam-ple is a medical doctor in Australia who returned to the Philippines three times between 2008 and 2011 to conduct medical missions in remote areas of the country. She said she wanted to make life better for other Filipinos because she also experienced how it was to be poor in the Philippines. Other cases of diaspora philanthropy among Filipino migrants (for example, see Opiniano and Castro, 2006; Alayon, 2009; Siar, 2014) also reflect migrants’ deep commitment to contribute to the development of their home country.

Not all motivations are altruistic; some can be self-seeking in nature. One example is an associate professor in Australia who participated in the BSP by mentoring students in the Philippines through co-supervisorship to enhance his research and increase his publications. Another example is a food scientist in Australia who also availed of the BSP so he could return to the Philippines to reunite with his aging parents even for a brief period. These self-interest motives reveal the realities of human behavior that people


are drawn to act not only for altruistic reasons. Albeit self-seeking, these motivations can benefit the home country as they can entice migrants to engage in knowledge transfer.

Social capital. There is a vast literature on social capital, most especially the works of Pierre Bourdieu, James Coleman and Robert Putnam who have greatly contributed to the understanding of this theory (Bourdieu, 1977; Coleman, 1994; Putnam, 1995). John Field, in Social Capital (2008), provided an excellent summary of the debates surrounding the topic through a closer look at its theoretical underpinnings. According to him, “the central idea of social capital is that social networks are a valuable asset. Networks provide a basis for social cohesion because they enable people to cooperate with one another — and not just with people they know directly — for mutual advantage” (Field, 2008:14).

Social capital is an important diaspora factor because social networks stimulate people to work with others, to be involved in knowledge transfer. According to Sorenson (2005), social networks facilitate access to resources, such as financial capital, human capital, and knowledge capital. The close social ties that people have to regions where they have contacts bind them to these areas, even if other locations appear to be more attractive — a point which largely relates to the concept of ‘diaspora’ and how people’s sentimental ties with their home country can be a strong motivation to engage in knowledge transfer. Taube (2005) pointed out that ethnicity and culture provide a high degree of trust or social capital, which arises from similar sociocultural backgrounds, language, customs, and norms, and may even substitute for the trust that can be built in face-to-face contacts. This helps explain how non-resident Indians (NRIs) in the US contributed to the development of India’s software industry. The concentration of India’s software industry in the south, particularly in Bangalore, Hyderabad, and Chennai, can be linked to the strong transnational network ties between South India and the NRIs located in Silicon Valley. Educated Indians migrat-ing abroad mostly come from South India, where there is a concentration of high-quality learning institutions, such as some of the institutes compris-ing the prestigious Indian Institutes of Technology (IITs). Being graduates of the IITs is a uniting force and their links are further strengthened by alumni associations. It is typical for Indians to get their bachelor’s degree, and even their master’s, in India, and pursue further studies abroad, which suggests that the “process of network building already begins in India” (Taube, 2005:103).

AnnaLee Saxenian, an economic geographer who has written extensively about the Indian (and Chinese) entrepreneurs in Silicon Valley, also noted how common ethnicity has served to bind these entrepreneurs together and support their activities. Seeing themselves marginalized in the mainstream


technology community, they established social and professional networks among themselves, with shared language, culture, and educational and professional experience forming the foundation of their social capital. These networks served as their vehicle for tapping each other’s assistance and accessing information, skills, and capital to start their enterprises. Two of these Indian associations — the Silicon Indian Professional Association (SIPA) and the Indus Entrepreneurs (TiE)—were both formed in the 1990s and helped institutionalize the Indian social networks in the US (Saxenian, 2004). Mohan Trika, head of the Xerox spin-off inXight shared how organi-zations like the TiE has fostered self confidence in the community by acting as some sort of role model and confidence builder (Saxenian, 2002b).

Their network ties and the flows of knowledge and capital, however, were not confined in the US as they also began to build ties with their home countries, promoting the low-cost, high-quality software expertise in India. Among others, they assumed the role of a ‘middleman,’ linking US companies with software programming skills in India (Saxenian, 2004). Indians occupying well-placed positions in big corporations such as IBM, General Electric and American Express had the opportunity to influence their companies’ decision to outsource software work in India (Pandey et al., 2006). Many in the Indian ICT diaspora working in US companies were also instrumental in convincing their own companies to hire Indian ICT professionals.

Host country factors. The role of host country in diasporic knowledge transfer is seldom acknowledged in the literature. A careful scrutiny of how knowledge transfer works shows that there are host country factors that facilitate knowledge transfer.

According to Siar (2012), one of these factors is the host country’s ac-ceptance of the diaspora’s qualifications in the labor market. She measured this by looking at a migrant’s initial employment experiences, specifically whether or not he or she immediately found a job upon arrival and whether or not the job was relevant to his or her level of education and qualifica-tion. The knowledge transfer of Philippine-born highly skilled migrants in Australia and New Zealand was found to have been facilitated by the host country’s ease of acceptance of their qualifications. Migrants who got a job that was commensurate to their education and training were involved in knowledge transfer sooner than those who experienced employment difficulties. Issues of unemployment and deskilling, or being relegated to lower status and lower paying jobs, affected their economic and profes-sional stability. The lack of stability made them less capable to be involved in knowledge transfer because it requires not just intellectual capital but also social and economic capital.


For example, eight of the 13 participants in the study who were involved in science and technology knowledge transfer (e.g., facilitating scientific link-ages, brokering of expertise, linking Filipinos to science and technology or S&T opportunities abroad, advising thesis students, lecturing in Philippine universities under the return scientist program of the Philippine govern-ment) had a first job that was commensurate to their qualifications. They did not have employment difficulties on their arrival in the host country. Five of them had an early onset of knowledge transfer of between one and three years after their migration in the host country. This may be linked to their easy settlement in the host country because it was highly receptive to their human capital as demonstrated by the offer of employment they received which was commensurate to their level of education and skills. However, Siar (2012) noted that such receptiveness may also be attributed to the fact that most of these migrants arrived in the 2000s, a period when both the Australian and New Zealand labor markets became more open to highly skilled people from non-traditional source countries such as those in the Asian region. This reflects the influence of other host country factors as discussed below.

Immigration and labor policies that are less restrictive to skilled mi-grants facilitate knowledge transfer for both the host country and the home country. Skilled migration helps to replenish the skills lost by host countries when their own professional workers migrate elsewhere. It provides the needed manpower for host countries to meet their short- and long-term labour needs which are aligned with their overall development strategy. For example, both Australia and New Zealand traditionally had a prefer-ence for European migrants. Through the years, there was a progressive liberalization in their immigration policies which was initially due to the growing advocacy in the international community in the 1950s against racial inequality (Brawley, 1993). Later on, the motivation went beyond ethical reasons, as the need to embrace more open and liberal economic and social policies became apparent with globalization. Between the two countries, New Zealand was ahead of Australia and is the first in the world to have pursued explicit neoliberal economic development policies (Kelsey, 1995). Between 1984 and the early 1990s, reforms were made in the welfare system and in the financial and labor markets, along with the privatization of many functions performed by the government that allowed for the opening up of the local industry to competition. These included changes in the immigration policies that took a more liberal stance to attract Asian capital and skills. According to Spoonley (2006), this was New Zealand’s strategy to exploit the economic and geo-political opportunities that a closer relationship with a rapidly developing Asia could bring. Accepting immigrants from non-traditional source countries such as the Asian region was a way for New


Zealand to tap into Asia’s capital and skilled labour and to consolidate its connections with the region (Spoonley, 2006).

In the 2000s, Australia and New Zealand adopted the two-step migra-tion model –the work-to-residence pathway (New Zealand) and the study-migration pathway (Australia) – to facilitate skilled migration (Hawthorne, 2011). Under the work-to-residence pathway, migrant professionals can work temporarily for two years in the host country through which they will have the chance to obtain local experience and training and find a skilled job where they are suitably qualified. Meanwhile, international students are considered prospective skilled migrants in the student-migration pathway. Bonus points are awarded for host-country qualifications especially for master’s and doctorates. Graduates who opt to stay and settle are awarded graduate search permits from six to 12 months during which time they can transition into professional workers. An assessment of the two-step migra-tion model revealed that it has not only attracted more skilled professionals to migrate to Australia and New Zealand but has also improved the labor market outcomes of new migrants and their integration and settlement in the host country (Hawthorne, 2011).

Additionally, trade agreements that promote labor mobility also promote knowledge transfer. International agreements facilitated by the World Trade Organization (WTO) such as Mode 4 of the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) contribute to the greater mobility of skilled workers. Mode 4, or the ‘presence of natural persons’ (World Trade Organization, n.d.), consists of the movement of individuals of one member-country to another to supply a service (e.g., accountants, doctors, nurses, teachers, consultants).

In Southeast Asia, the 10-member countries comprising the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) signed in December 1995 the ASEAN Framework Agreement on Services (AFAS). Services, in this case, encompass all four modes of supply of services covered in the GATS and not just Mode 4.1 The AFAS is intended to broaden the scope of liberalization beyond those undertaken in the GATS to achieve a free trade area in services in the ASEAN region (Schott et al., 2013). It is one of the policy instruments for advancing the vision of an ASEAN Economic Community which will finally take place in 2015. One of the more recent developments in ASEAN cooperation on trade in services is the mutual recognition agreement (MRA) in seven professional services (engineering, nursing, architecture, land surveying, medical practice, dental practice and accountancy). An MRA “enables the qualifications of services suppliers that are recognized by the

1 Mode 1: cross-border trade; Mode 2: consumption abroad; Mode 3: commercial presence; and Mode 4: movement of natural persons.


relevant authorities in their home country to be mutually recognized by other signatory Member States” (ASEAN Secretariat, 2011). It promotes mutual agreement on standards, licensing, and certification of professional workers among the ASEAN member-countries. It will facilitate freer move-ment and employment of qualified and certified skilled personnel in the region, in accordance with domestic rules and regulations. Greater mobil-ity of skilled personnel will enhance the production of knowledge transfer which will benefit both home and host countries. Host countries gain from the skills transferred by their migrant professionals while home countries benefit from increased remittances and investments, and technology and skills transfer of expatriate professionals through return migration or their professional and social networks.

Another host country factor that facilitates knowledge transfer is the linkage provided by intermediaries. Effective knowledge transfer requires different kinds of intermediaries to move knowledge from one domain to another (Wright et al., 2008; Yusuf, 2008). Intermediation, according to Yusuf (2008), is particularly important when knowledge is the tacit or uncodified type. In her paper, Michaels (2009) called intermediaries ‘brokers’ who perform a variety of brokering roles which include informing, consulting, matchmaking, engaging, collaborating, and building capacity. Although she focused on brokering scientific and technical information between environmental scientists (the source of the information) and policymakers (the prospective users of the information), her framework is also relevant to the international mobility of knowledge workers and their knowledge transfers or exchanges with the home country.

Programs and policies in the host country can help sustain the links of migrants with their home country and serve as intermediaries that facilitate knowledge transfer. For example, dual citizenship encourages the transfer of remittances to home countries and increases migrants’ interest in devel-opment projects, or to invest in their countries of origin (Wayland, 2006). If migrants are allowed to retain their home-country citizenship while being citizens of their host country, they will have ease in doing business with their countries of origin. This could also encourage the return migration of expatriate professionals without having to hurdle immigration rules.

Another host country policy (which also applies to home countries) that can facilitate knowledge transfer is portability of social security rights, such as old-age pension and other entitlements. Emigrants should be permitted to retain their rights to formal social security systems in their country of origin, and should also be entitled to the social security benefits in the country of destination, even after they depart, whether temporarily or permanently. The portability of social security benefits has been extensively analyzed by Sabates-Wheeler (Sabates-Wheeler and Macauslan, 2007; Avato et al., 2010; Sabates-Wheeler and Koettl, 2010) who emphasized its significance in


ensuring the well-being and security of migrants and their families. Colleo and Branca (2008:5) noted that portability is important to “promote labour mobility” and to help foster the role of migrants as “agents of development for their home communities.” Both home and host countries should en-deavor to promote social security portability given its important economic and social implications which have significant positive repercussions to the knowledge transfer argument.

Home country factors. The gains from return migration in terms of knowl-edge transfer and flows of investments and technology are highlighted in the brain circulation argument (Castles and Miller, 2009). The role of expatriate professionals and their contributions to development are exemplified in the experience of China and Taiwan.

As mentioned earlier, a home country’s absorptive capacity is an important factor in the promotion of diasporic knowledge transfer. A good indicator of the absorptive capacity of a home country is its global competitiveness. The global competitiveness index (GCI) released by the World Economic Forum may be used to measure a country’s absorptive capacity. The GCI consists of variables such as the strength and reliability of institutions, overall quality of infrastructure, macroeconomic soundness, health and education, efficiency of markets, business sophistication, and level of innovation. It can be assumed that countries that have a high GCI also have a high capacity to absorb global capital and skills, including those from migrants and returning expatriates.

A look at the global competitiveness rankings in 2013 (Table 1) shows that most of the countries in the ASEAN suffer from low competitiveness,

TABLE 1Global Competitiveness RankinGs of asean membeR-CountRies,

2013 and 2012

Ranking 2013 2012 Country (out of 148 economies) (out of 144 economies)

Brunei Darussalam 26 26 Cambodia 88 86 Indonesia 38 50 Lao PDR 81 n/a Malaysia 24 25 Myanmar 139 n/a Philippines 59 65 Singapore 2 2 Thailand 37 38 Vietnam 70 75

souRCe: Global competitiveness rankings (World Economic Forum, 2013).


particularly Cambodia, Lao PDR, Myanmar, and Vietnam. The ASEAN is a relevant example to consider in view of the ASEAN Economic Community in 2015. On the one hand, skilled migration is likely to increase with the implementation of MRAs; on the other hand, there will be greater competi-tion among the member-countries in attracting skilled talents.

Among the ASEAN countries, only Singapore, Malaysia, and Brunei Darussalam made it to the top 30 of the global competitiveness ranking in 2013. Singapore has maintained its high ranking at second place and is the only Southeast Asian country in the top 10 which is dominated by a number of European countries. Nevertheless, there are bright prospects for the rest of the ASEAN countries given the rise in their rankings in 2013: Indonesia to 38th in 2013 from 50th in 2012; Philippines to 59th from 65th, Thailand to 37th from 38th, and Vietnam to 70th from 75th. The competitiveness of the East Asian countries is evident in their good rankings. Hong Kong and Japan figured in the top 10 while Taiwan, South Korea, and China made it to the top 30 in 2013.

Additionally, the openness of a home country to foreign skills, technol-ogy, capital and business, including those from the diaspora, is a critical factor in promoting knowledge transfer. As seen in the Indian case, the economic liberalization beginning in the 1990s opened up opportunities for the Indian ICT diaspora in the US to take part in the economic processes in their home country. Assistance in the form of incentives and subsidies also spurred interest to invest in India. These economic reforms served as significant ‘pull’ factors for the Indian ICT diaspora to invest in India. A major component of these reforms was the establishment of software technology parks where firms enjoy tax exemptions, are provided with basic infrastructure, duty-free importation of equipment, and 100-percent foreign ownership in exchange for a sizable export obligation (Saxenian, 2002a). The introduction of these software parks facilitated the growth of offshore outsourcing in India particularly in regions such as Bangalore and Hyderabad.

Along with economic liberalization, the ease of doing business in a coun-try is important to attract foreign capital. The World Bank’s East of Doing Business (EDB) ranking is a good measure of a regulatory environment’s conduciveness to local firms. Although the point of reference is local firms, it gives an idea of how friendly and facilitative the regulatory environment is, in general. EDB is measured by looking at a number of factors, namely, starting a business, dealing with construction permits, getting electricity, registering a property, getting credit, protecting investors, paying taxes, trading across borders, enforcing contracts, and resolving insolvency. In the East Asia and Pacific region, Singapore (1st), Hong Kong, China (2nd), Malaysia (6th), Taiwan, China (16th), and Thailand (18th) were included


in the top 20 in the 2013 ranking that covered 183 countries. The other countries were at the far end of the listing (e.g., Vietnam at 99th; Philip-pines at 108th; Indonesia at 120th; Cambodia at 137th; Lao PDR at 159th; Myanmar at 182nd).2

The quality of governance also affects the motivation of foreign inves-tors to invest in a country, and expatriate professionals to return to their country of origin. Good public governance promotes transparency and accountability, the predictability of and consistency in the enforcement of laws, efficiency of procedures, and ensures a high standard of public service—all of which provides a regulatory environment that is attractive for business. In Siar’s study (2012), business and trade knowledge transfer was the most sensitive to home country conditions, particularly govern-ance issues, owing to the significant risk that private investors bear. Among the three types of knowledge transfer the study investigated—science and technology, business and trade, and cultural and social—the least number of cases was in the business and trade type, which was also consistent with the low business presence of Australian and New Zealand companies in the Philippines. The research participants (some of them business persons or working in the trade unit of their companies) also elaborated these is-sues in the interviews, noting that they are discouraged to invest in the Philippines or facilitate investments into the country because of corruption and red tape in government, inefficient infrastructures, unstable political conditions, and weak public order and security.

Looking closely at the Philippines as an example, its weak attractive-ness to foreign investments is reflected in official statistics. Based on the growth of foreign direct investment (FDI) stock for the period 2000-2005 and 2005-2011, the Philippines has one of the lowest and slowest FDI growth in the ASEAN region (Table 2). In 2005-2011, its FDI stock grew by only 11 percent, the second lowest in the region next to Brunei Darus-salam’s five percent, and lower than the regional average of 17 percent. This low inflow of FDI into the Philippines can be attributed to its low global competitiveness, which is manifested by its mediocre GCI ranking as discussed earlier. Governance encompasses most of the variables used in measuring GCI, in particular the strength and reliability of institutions and the efficiency of markets.

Finally, policies and programs by the home country that promote dias-pora engagement may facilitate knowledge transfer. It is important to have a pro-active and comprehensive diaspora engagement program. The nature

2 Doing Business Rankings (http://www.doingbusiness.org/rankings; accessed on 13 June 2014).


of the program will depend on the kind of long-term relationship that a home country wants to have with its diaspora. Gamlen (2007) developed three hypothetical scenarios for envisioning state-diaspora relations based on the works of Levitt and Glick Schiller (2004). While he framed these scenarios in the context of New Zealand which is increasingly becoming a migrant-sending country, his concept is also relevant to other settings. In the first scenario, the home country views itself as a transnational state and thus considers its diaspora a part of it. The government exerts a conscious effort to integrate the diaspora into its formal economic, political and socio-cultural spheres. In the second scenario, the home country is a strategically selective state. “It encourages some form of long-distance economic and political nationalism but tries to selectively manage what emigrants can and cannot do” (Gamlen, 2007:17). In the third scenario, the home country is a disinterested and denouncing state, which ignores the diaspora and does not consider it as part of the homeland. Migrant-sending countries would benefit cultivating a strong relationship with their diaspora where they see themselves as transnational states (first scenario). Having a comprehensive diaspora engagement programme is critical to achieve this. The Chinese model is worth considering given its success in luring expatriate profes-sionals to return to China. A description of this model is given in Box 1.

In the previous section on host country factors, other policies to facili-tate diaspora engagement have been discussed. One such policy is dual citizenship. Another is voting rights. Home country governments should extend to its diaspora the right to retain one’s citizenship and to continue

TABLE 2GRowth of fdi stoCk, 2000-2005 and 2005-2011 (in peRCentaGe)

Economy/region 2000-2005 2005-2011

World 9 10 Developing economies 9 16 ASEAN 9 17 Brunei Darussalam 19 5 Cambodia 9 19 Indonesia 10 27 Lao PDR 3 24 Malaysia -3 17 Myanmar 8 12 Philippines -4 11 Singapore 13 17 Thailand 15 15 Vietnam 9 15

souRCe: UNCTAD FDI database, cited in ASEAN Investment Report, 2012 (p.26)


BOX 1China’s Diaspora Engagement Model

One of the most studied and documented diaspora models is that of China’s (Xiang, 2005; Wescott, 2006; Zweig et al., 2008; Wang, 2012).

China experienced large outflows of highly skilled people totalling almost one million scholars between 1978 and 2006 (Zweig et al. 2008). In the 1980s, with the increasing need for highly skilled talents, the government began a massive campaign to encourage expatriate Chinese to return home. The government started calling on overseas students to return, an invitation particularly directed to students who had left China in the wake of the 1989 Tiananmen incident. In 1993, the government also issued a 12-point slogan on returnee policy with a promise that all returnees are “free to come and go” after they had returned (Zweig et al. 2008). The so-called “Chinese talent strategy” covered all aspects of talents overseas—academics, scientists, and entrepreneurs (Wang, 2012).

Between 1992 and 2002, a number of programs were implemented to entice di-aspora members to return. These include the flagship “Thousands Talents Program” of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, which provided grants to start a laboratory or financial support for proposed research; the establishment of Overseas Study Service Centers to help returnees find jobs; and providing returnees attractive benefits, such as more living space and higher professional titles (Zweig, 2006). By August 2011, the Thousands Talents Program already recruited more than 1,500 leading scientists and entrepreneurs (Pieke and Speelman, 2013). More than 80 percent of them have foreign passports and made significant contributions to China by developing new technologies and high-tech industries (Wang, 2012).

In 2001, the government shifted to temporary return as indicated by the slogan, weiguo fuwu (“serve the motherland”) in contrast to the earlier call of huiguo fuwu (“return and serve the motherland”) (Wescott, 2006:8). The government started to ad-vocate the ‘double base model’ or dumb-bell model with this new policy that allows Chinese expatriates to maintain their affiliations in both China and overseas (Xiang, 2003). Since then, the government has implemented the diaspora model in tandem with the return option, which proved to be a smart move as not all expatriates wish to return permanently. By presenting both options, the government made connecting with the home country appealing for the diaspora members as they could choose the option that suits their preference and need.

For example, the Spring Light Project arranged and funded short-term visits to give lectures or conduct research in Chinese universities (Xiang, 2005). Other diaspora engagement programs implemented include the organization of diaspora members into professional associations (Xiang, 2003). An Overseas Chinese Scholars meeting was also held yearly by the Ministry of Education in which overseas scientists presented their project to local governments and companies.

Attracting the Chinese diaspora to return is part of a long-term strategy that is embedded in China’s national development strategy. In 2010, the government issued the National Medium- and Long-term Talent Development Plan (2010–2020) which involves, as part of its strategy, recruiting highly qualified academics, business people, and entrepreneurs to use their expertise or invest in China (Wang, 2010).


participating in electoral processes (the right to vote and the opportunity to stand as a candidate). These can keep homeland sentiments alive. Citizen-ship gains further significance as economic integration intensifies and this calls for more flexible arrangements that will make cross-border movement and engagement with home countries less burdensome. In Asia, only a few countries recognize dual citizenship — Sri Lanka, Cambodia, Philippines, Bangladesh, Pakistan, and Vietnam. In view of the forthcoming ASEAN Economic Community in 2015, an ASEAN visa — similar to the Schengen visa — whereby travelers can enter any ASEAN member-country for tourism or business—is worth exploring. It can enhance tourism and investments to the region and can promote knowledge transfer.

Conclusion

This paper analyzed knowledge transfer as a development strategy for home countries to tap the knowledge and skills of their expatriate profes-sionals, which consequently can help mitigate the brain drain effects of skilled migration.

The concept of knowledge transfer views skilled migration as a process that does not necessarily lead to a loss of skills and knowledge for sending countries. Instead, skilled migration increases the intellectual, social, and economic capital of migrants, which also benefits home countries through knowledge transfer. By going abroad, migrants accumulate not only new skills; they also build professional and social networks that may have still been possible had they remained in their home countries but probably not as extensive or as substantive.

Knowledge comes in different types — scientific, technological, business, economic, cultural and social, to name a few — and they all contribute to development in different ways. Knowledge transfer therefore does not only refer to the transmission of scientific knowledge but also of business and trade-related knowledge as well as cultural and social. Thus, it is important to recognise that migrants carry and transfer different types of knowledge.

This paper revisited the concept of knowledge transfer to address conflicting views of its viability by analyzing how it works and the fac-tors and conditions that affect its application. Knowledge transfer is not a straightforward process. Its viability rests on diaspora, home and host factors that operate in a complex, intertwined manner.

Diaspora factors include the migrants’ motivation to engage in knowl-edge transfer and could either be altruistic or self-seeking. Social networks are also a potent force because they can stimulate people to work with others in pursuing a common goal or provide access to resources that can facilitate the production of or engagement in knowledge transfer.


When people move overseas, they bring with them their knowledge and skills which they transfer to their host country. In the reverse process—or the knowledge transfer of migrants to their home countries—the role of the host country is less acknowledged in the literature. But there are host country factors that facilitate or hinder knowledge transfer by the diaspora. For instance, knowledge transfer is facilitated by the host country’s accept-ance of the diaspora’s education and training and ease of integration in the labor market. Professional stability capacitates migrants to become involved in diasporic knowledge transfer with ease because it requires not just intel-lectual capital but also economic and social capital. Less restrictive migration and labor policies also facilitate knowledge transfer for both the host and home countries and so do trade agreements that promote the labor mobility of skilled professionals. These factors show that the host country plays a significant part in facilitating knowledge transfer by skilled migrants to their home country. Host countries can view the act of facilitating knowledge transfer as their way of helping sending countries reduce brain drain or to compensate them for the knowledge and skills that sending countries lost but which receiving countries gained from skilled migration.

Lastly, home countries have a critical role in facilitating knowledge transfer by their skilled diaspora. The challenge of diaspora engagement falls primarily on home countries as they need it more than the host countries which already directly benefit from skilled migration. A home country’s capacity to absorb global capital and skills, including those from its expatri-ate professionals, is an essential factor. Being globally competitiveness is important in developing a strong absorptive capacity. Home countries can achieve global competitiveness by cultivating strong and reliable institu-tions, high-quality infrastructure, macroeconomic soundness, an educated and healthy population, and a high level of innovation capacity, among others. Competitiveness is also enhanced by the quality of governance in the home country. It is an important factor that affects the motivation of foreign investors to invest, and the decision of expatriate professionals to return to transfer their skills. Programs and policies by either home or host countries that facilitate the continued ties of migrants with their home countries act as intermediaries that promote diasporic knowledge transfer. Examples of these policies are dual citizenship and the portability of social security rights. Last but not the least, a pro-active and comprehensive di-aspora engagement program by the home country is essential to promote knowledge transfer from the diaspora. It should be a program that cultivates strong and sustainable homeland-diaspora relations and sees the diaspora as a partner in development.


REFERENCES

Addison, Tony 2008 "The International Mobility of Cultural Talent." In The International Mobility of Talent:

Types, Causes and Development Impact. Edited by A. Solimano. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Alayon, John Richard Simon2009 "Migration, Remittances and Development: The Filipino New Zealand Experience."

Masteral thesis, Institute of Public Policy, AUT University, Auckland.

ASEAN Secretariat2013 ASEAN Investment Report 2012: The Changing FDI Landscape. Jakarta.

2011 ASEAN Economic Community Factbook. Jakarta

Avato, Johanna, Johannes Koettl and Rachel Sabates-Wheeler 2010 "Social Security Regimes, Global Estimates and Good Practices: The Status of Social

Protection for International Migrants," World Development, 38(4):455-466.

Bailey, Adrian J. 2001 "Turning Transnational: Notes on the Theorisation of International Migration," Inter-

national Journal of Population Geography, 7(6):413-428.

Bourdieu, Pierre1977 Outline of a Theory of Practice (Esquisse d'une théorie de la pratique, précédé de trois études

d'ethnologie kabyle). Translated by R. Nice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Brawley, Sean1993 "No 'White Policy' in NZ: Fact and Fiction in New Zealand's Asian Immigration

Records, 1946-1978," The New Zealand Journal of History, 27(1):16-36.

Braziel, Jana Evans and Anita Mannur, eds. 2003 Theorizing Diaspora. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.

Castles, Stephen and Mark J. Miller. 2009 The Age of Migration, Fourth Edition: International Population Movements in the Modern

World. New York: The Guilford Press.

Coleman, James1994 Foundations of Social Theory. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Colleo, Anna Lucia and Maria Cristina Perrelli Branca2008 "Portability of Pension Benefits as a Means to Foster Trans-national Labour Mobility:

Critical Recommendations on the Italia-Albania Case." In A Part of the Project Migrant Value. Steering Economic and Social Cohesion in the CADSES Space: Valuing Migration as a Development Tool. Financed by the European Regional Development Fund through the Community Initiative Interreg IIIB CADSES. Bologna, Italy: Regione Emilia-Romagna.


Dawson, Laura Ritchie 2008 "First, Do No Harm:The Role and Responsibility of Canada as a Destination Country

in South-North Migration." In Caribbean Paper No.5. Ontario: Centre for International Governance Innovation.

Faist, Thomas 2000 The Volume and Dynamics of International Migration and Transnational Social Spaces.

Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Field, John2008 Social Capital. 2nd edition. New York: Routledge.

Gamlen, Alan2007 "Making Hay While the Sun Shines: Envisioning New Zealand's State-Diaspora Rela-

tions, " Policy Quarterly, 3(4):12-21.

Hawthorne, Lesleyanne2001 "The Globalisation of the Nursing Workforce: Barriers Confronting Overseas Qualified

Nurses in Australia," Nursing Inquiry, 8(4):213-229.

Hu, Albert G. Z. and Adam B. Jaffe2003 "Patent Citations and International Knowledge Flow: The Cases of Korea and Taiwan,"

International Journal of Industrial Organization, 21(6):849-880.

Hunger, Uwe2004 "Indian IT Entrepreneurs in the US and in India: An Illustration of the ‘Brain Gain

Hypothesis,’" Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice, 6(2):99-109.

Johnson, Harry G.1968 "An 'Internationalist Model.'" In The Brain Drain. Edited by W. Adams. New York:

The Macmillian Company.

Kelsey, Jane1995 The New Zealand Experiment: A World Market for Structural Adjustment? Auckland:

Auckland University Press.

Levitt, Peggy1998 "Social Remittances: Migration Driven Local-Level Forms of Cultural Diffusion,"

International Migration Review, 32(4):926-948.

Levitt, Peggy and Nina Glick Schiller2004 "Conceptualizing Simultaneity: A Transnational Social Field Perspective on Society,"

International Migration Review, 38(3):1002-1039.

Lowell, Lindsay B. and Stefka G. Gerova2004 Diasporas and Economic Development: State of Knowledge. Washington, DC: Institute for

the Study of International Migration, Georgetown University.

Lucas, Robert E.B. 2004 Executive Summary: International Migration Regimes and Economic Development. Stock-

holm: Swedish Ministry for Foreign Affairs.


Meyer, Jean-Baptiste2001 "Network Approach Versus Brain Drain: Lessons from the Diaspora," International

Migration, 39(5):91-110.

Meyer, Jean-Baptiste and Mercy Brown1999 “Scientific Diasporas: A New Approach to the Brain Drain.” Paper presented at the

World Conference on Science. UNESCO-ICSU, Budapest, Hungary, 26 June - 1 July.

Meyer, Jean-Baptiste et al.1997 "Turning Brain Drain into Brain Gain: The Colombian Experience of the Diaspora

Option," Science Technology and Society, 2(2):285-315.

Meyer, Jean-Baptiste, David E. Kaplan and Jorge Charum2001 "Scientific Nomadism and the New Geopolitics of Knowledge," International Social

Science Journal, 53(168):309-321.

Michaels, Sarah2009 "Matching Knowledge Brokering Strategies to Environmental Policy Problems and

Settings," Environmental Science and Policy, 12(2009):994-1011.

Mouton, Johann et al.2007 "Scientific Mobility and the African Diaspora." In James Martin Institute Working

Paper 6. University of Stellenbosch, South Africa: Centre for Research on Science and Technology (CREST).

Opiniano, Jeremaiah M. and Tricia Anne Castro 2006 "Promoting Knowledge Transfer Activities through Diaspora Networks: A Pilot Study

on the Philippines." In Converting Migration Drains into Gains Harnessing the Resources of Overseas Professionals. Manila: Asian Development Bank.

Ouaked, Said 2002 "Transatlantic Roundtable on High-skilled Migration and Sending Countries Issues,"

International Migration, 40(4):153-166.

Pandey, Abhishek et al.2006 "The Indian Diaspora: A Unique Case?" In Diaspora Networks and the International Migra-

tion of Skills: How Countries Can Draw on Their Talents Abroad. Edited by Y. Kuznetsov. Washington, DC: World Bank.

Parthasarathi, Ashok2006 "Turning Brain Drain into Brain Circulation." Science and Development Network 2006.

Available at http://www.scidev.net/global/opinion/turning-brain-drain-into-brain-circulation.html, accessed on 27 October 2010.

Patel, Dhiru2006 "The Maple-Neem Nexus: Transnational Links of South Asian Canadians." In Transna-

tional Identities and Practices in Canada. Edited by V. Satzewich and L. Wong. Vancouver: UBC Press.

Pieke, Frank and Tabitha Speelman 2013 "Chinese Investment Strategies and Migration: Does Diaspora Matter." Report for the

Migration Policy Centre. European University Institute, Florence.


Putnam, Robert 1995 "Bowling Alone: America's Declining Social Capital," Journal of Democracy, 6(1):65-78.

Sabates-Wheeler, Rachel and Johannes Koettl2010 "Social Protection for Migrants: The Challenges of Delivery in the Context of Changing

Migration Flows," International Social Security Review, 63(3-4):115-144.

Sabates-Wheeler, Rachel and Ian Macauslan2007 "Migration and Social Protection: Exposing Problems of Access," Development, 50(4):

26-32.

Safran, Willian2004 "Deconstructing and Comparing Diasporas." In Diaspora, Identity and Religion. New

Directions in Theory and Research. Edited by W. Kokot, K. Tololyan and C. Alfonso. London: Routledge.

1991 "Diasporas in Modern Societies: Myths of Homeland and Return," Diaspora, 1(1):83-99.

Saxenian, AnnaLee2005 "From Brain Drain to Brain Circulation: Transnational Communities and Regional

Upgrading in India and China," Studies in Comparative International Development (SCID), 40 (2/June):35-61.

2004 "The Silicon Valley Connection: Transnational Networks and Regional Development in Taiwan, China and India." In India in the Global Software Industry. Edited by A. P. D'Costa and E. Sridharan. Hampshire and New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

2002a "Bangalore: The Silicon Valley of Asia?" In Economic Policy Reforms and the Indian Economy. Edited by A. O. Krueger. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.

2002b "Silicon Valley's New Immigrant High-Growth Entrepreneurs," Economic Development Quarterly, 16(1):20-31.

Schott, Jeffrey J., Minsoo Lee and Julia Muir2013 "Prospects for Negotiations on Trade in Services." In Developing the Service Sector as

an Engine of Growth for Asia. Edited by Donghyun Park and Marcus Noland. Manila: Asian Development Bank.

Sheffer, Gabriel1986 Modern Diasporas in International Politics. London: Croom Helm.

Siar, Sheila2014 Mainstreaming Migration into Local Development Plans: Naga City in Focus. Manila:

International Organization for Migration.

2013 "The Diaspora as Carrier to the Home Country of 'Soft Knowledge' for Development." Chapter 12. In Global Diasporas and Development. Edited by Sadananda Sahoo and B.K. Pattanaik. India: Springer.


2012 "The Diaspora as Knowledge Carrier: Exploring Knowledge Transfer through the Highly Skilled Filipinos in Australia and New Zealand." PhD thesis (Development Studies).University of Auckland, New Zealand.

2011 "Skilled Migration, Knowledge Transfer, and Development," Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs, 30(3):61-94.

Spoonley, Paul2006 "A Contemporary Political Economy of Labour Migration in New Zealand," Tijdschrift

voor economische en sociale geografie, 97(1):17-25.

Sorenson, Olav2005 "Social Networks, Informational Complexity and Industrial Geography." In The Role

of Labour Mobility and Informal Networks for Knowledge Transfer. Edited by D. Fornahl, C. Zellner and D. Audretsch. Baltimore: Springer Science.

Taube, Florian A.2005 "Transnational Networks and the Evolution of the Indian Software Industry: The

Role of Culture and Ethnicity." In The Role of Labour Mobility and Informal Networks for Knowledge Transfer. Edited by D. Fornahl, C. Zellner and D. Audretsch. Baltimore: Springer Science.

Vinodrai, Tara and Meric S. Gertler2006 "Creativity, Culture and Innovation in the Knowledge-based Economy." Program on

Globalization and Regional Innovation Systems Munk Centre for International Studies & Department of Geography, University of Toronto. Prepared for the Ontario Ministry of Research and Innovation.

Wang, Huiyao2012 Globalizing China: The Influence, Strategies and Successes of Chinese Returnees. UK: Emerald

Group Publishing Ltd.

2010 China’s National Talent Plan: Key Measures and Objectives. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution. Available at http://robohub.org/wpcontent/uploads/2013/07/Brook-ings_China_1000_talent_Plan.pdf, accessed on 15 September 2014.

Wayland, Sarah2006 "The Politics of Transnationalism: Comparative Approaches." In Transnational Identities

and Practices in Canada. Edited by V. Satzewich and L. Wong. Vancouver: UBC Press.

Wescott, Clay G.2006 "Harnessing Knowledge Exchange among Overseas Professionals of Afghanistan,

People's Republic of China, and the Philippines." In UNITAR/UNFPA/IOM/ILO Labour Migration Workshop. New York, USA, 15 March.

World Economic Forum2013 The Global Competitiveness Report 2013-2014. Full Data Edition. Geneva.


Wright, Mike et al.2008 "Mid-range Universities' Linkages with Industry: Knowledge Types and the Role of

Intermediaries," Research Policy, 37(2008):1205-1223.

World Trade Organizationn.d. "Services: Sector by Sector. Movement of Natural Persons." Available at http://www.

wto.org/english/tratop_e/serv_e/mouvement_persons_e/mouvement_persons_e.htm, accessed on 11 September 2014.

Xiang, Biao 2005 "Promoting Knowledge Exchange through Diaspora Networks (The Case of People's

Republic of China)." A report written for the Asian Development Bank. Oxford, UK: ERC Centre on Migration, Policy and Society (COMPAS), University of Oxford.

2003 "Emigration from China: A Sending Country Perspective," International Migration, 41 (3):21-48.

Yusuf, Shahid2008 "Intermediating Knowledge Exchange between Universities and Businesses," Research

Policy, 37(2008):1167-1174.

Zweig, David2006 "Learning to Compete: China's Efforts to Encourage a "Reverse Brain Drain." In Com-

peting for Global Talent. Edited by C. Kuptsch and E. F. Pang. Geneva and Singapore: International Institute for Labour Studies, International Labour Office and Wee Kim Wee Centre, Singapore Management University.

Zweig, David, Siu Fung Chung and Han Donglin2008 "Redefining the Brain Drain: China's 'Diaspora Option'," Science, Technology and Society,

13(1):1-33.

Diaspora Knowledge Transfer as a Development Strategy for Capturing the Gains of Skilled Migration

Documents

Transcript of Diaspora Knowledge Transfer as a Development Strategy for Capturing the Gains of Skilled Migration