Promoting Scientific Mobility and Balanced Growth in the European Research Area

This paper focuses on the issue of scientific mobility within the European Research Area (ERA) and its impact on both the regions concerned and the individual scientists. It identifies a fundamental tension implicit within the ERA strategy between regional equality or 'balanced growth' on the one hand, and individual equity on the other. Drawing on the findings of a series of recent research projects,1 1. The research reported on here is drawn mainly from three projects. The first two were funded under the ESRC's Science in Society Programme (RES-151-25-00 and L144250042) with support from the Anglo-German Foundation (1468). The third is an impact assessment of the European Commission's Marie Curie Fellowship Scheme (1994–2002)—see Van de Sande et al. (2005 Van de Sande , D. , Ackers , H. L. & Gill , B. (2005) Impact Assessment of the Marie Curie Fellowships under the 4th and 5th Framework Programmes of Research and Technological Development of the EU (1994–2002): Final Report , European Commission , Brussels . [Google Scholar]). Further details of these projects can be found at www.law.leeds.ac.uk/cslpe. Professor Ackers would like to thank Bryony Gill and Keleigh Groves for their assistance with the paper. The views expressed in this paper are those of the author alone. and with a particular focus on an impact assessment of the European Commission's flagship scientific mobility scheme (the Marie Curie Fellowship Scheme), it considers the nature of scientific mobility in the EU context and the quality of flows. These findings are set within the wider literature around highly skilled migration (HSM) and brain drain/circulation which identifies a number of key variables shaping the impact of mobility: namely the direction and temporal characteristics of flows and their 'quality' in terms of who is moving. It also considers the relationship between HSM and transfers of knowledge. Although knowledge is embedded in individual scientists—and, to that extent, moves with them—the process of knowledge transfer takes place in a variety of ways reflecting not only scientists' employment location but also the quality and extent of their networks and connections. The paper cautions against simplistic interpretations of statistics based on the volume and geography of migration flows. Whilst such findings raise important questions they are not constitutive of 'brain drain' as such. The processes and impacts of HSM defy such simple conclusions and demand a more detailed analysis of the factors shaping migration (and return) and the relationship between these and transfers of knowledge. The paper also raises critical questions about the balance between European interests (and the economic 'trickle down' that derives from these to Member States) and the specific concerns in terms of the science base of individual Member States. Notes 1. The research reported on here is drawn mainly from three projects. The first two were funded under the ESRC's Science in Society Programme (RES-151-25-00 and L144250042) with support from the Anglo-German Foundation (1468). The third is an impact assessment of the European Commission's Marie Curie Fellowship Scheme (1994–2002)—see Van de Sande et al. (2005 Van de Sande , D. , Ackers , H. L. & Gill , B. (2005) Impact Assessment of the Marie Curie Fellowships under the 4th and 5th Framework Programmes of Research and Technological Development of the EU (1994–2002): Final Report , European Commission , Brussels . [Google Scholar]). Further details of these projects can be found at www.law.leeds.ac.uk/cslpe. Professor Ackers would like to thank Bryony Gill and Keleigh Groves for their assistance with the paper. The views expressed in this paper are those of the author alone. 2. This introductory section draws on the author's recent work on theoretical and methodological approaches to the study of highly skilled migration (see Ackers, forthcoming 2005 Ackers , H. L. (2005) 'Moving people and knowledge: the mobility of scientists within the European Union' , International Migration (forthcoming) .[Crossref], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]). 3. The Bologna–Bergen summit took place on 19–20 May 2005. For further information about the event, visit the website at www.bologna-bergen2005.no/ 4. Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, Brussels, COM(2000) 6 final, para. 5. 5. Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament: A Mobility Strategy for the European Research Area, COM(2001), 331 final, p. 6. 6. Their participation was restricted, however, in the sense that a person from a Candidate or Associated State could go to a Member State, but not to another Candidate country or Associated State. 7. A relatively small return grant scheme enables scientists from designated 'less favoured regions' to apply for funding to return home under specific conditions. In addition, a 'Development Host Fellowship Scheme' is aimed specifically at improving the capacities of research groups in Less Favoured Regions. 8. Three research groups have been involved in the impact assessment: the Agency for the Promotion of European Research (Italy), the Centre for the Study of Law and Policy in Europe (UK), and the Hungarian Science and Technology Foundation. 9. Council Resolution on the Profession and the Career of Researchers within the European Research Area (ERA) 14636/03 Rech 194 Brussels, 12 November 2003. The Resolution acknowledges the Commission's Communication Researchers in the European Research Area: One Profession, Multiple Careers, COM(2003) 436, 18 July 2003. 10. Council Recommendation of 11 March 2005 on the European Charter for Researchers and on a Code of Conduct for the Recruitment of Researchers (2005/251/EC), para. 2. 11. The scheme requires fellows to make an international move but permits applications from people who have spent a short period in another country and wish to remain there. 12. The relationship between life-course and mobility is complex and depends on matters such as partner's employment (Ackers, 2004 Ackers, H. L. 2004. 'Managing relationships in peripatetic careers: scientific mobility in the European Union'. Women's Studies International Forum, 27(3): 188–201. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]) and nationality among other things. These issues are developed in Stalford in this issue. 13. Both as part of the MOBEX project and in the evaluation of the European Commission's TMR programme (Ackers, 2001 Ackers, H. L. 2001. The Participation of Women Researchers in the TMR Programme of the European Commission: an Evaluation, Brussels: European Commission (DG Research). [Google Scholar]). 14. Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, Brussels, COM(2000) 6, para. 5. 15. This figure needs to be interpreted with some caution as the response rate from fellows who had left Europe may have been depressed. 16. The Marie Curie Fellowship Association plays an important role in encouraging and sustaining these forms of connections between fellows. 17. Professor Ackers is currently directing a UK Research Council funded project focusing on scientific migration between Bulgaria and Poland and the UK and Germany. The study is concerned to explore the importance of connections to migration decision making and career progression. For details, see www.law.leeds.ac.uk/cslpe 18. In the context of flows away from developing countries, the issue of remittances is also highly relevant. Preliminary findings of the MOBEX study suggest that remittances are not that common or that significant, in terms of the economies of sending regions, in Europe. They may, of course, be critical to the families of migrants in some cases.