Reassessing brain drain

Aid Watch compiles "four ways brain drain out of Africa is a good thing":

1. Gains to migrants themselves. Why is this often ignored in brain drain discussions? Perhaps it reflects a neglect of the rights and well-being of individuals and an overemphasis on the nation-state as the object of development. The migrant is better off with higher living standards, not to mention satisfying her revealed preference to live in a country other than where she was born.

2. Gains to migrants’ families. Remittances is the most obvious and commonly-cited benefit of the brain drain. Even using official figures, which likely far undercount the value of remittances by excluding informal channels, remittances sent back by Africans abroad outweigh the cost of educating them at home. Why pass up a high return opportunity (Africans earning high incomes abroad and remitting) and insist on a low return activity (educated Africans underemployed at home)? Not to mention that families also get satisfaction from seeing their offspring realize their dreams.

3. Brain circulation. Brains don’t just leave Africa, never to return. Africans who have been educated or worked abroad do come back to their home countries to visit, to establish dual residence, to start businesses and universities, and, sometimes, to stay. These people bring back new ideas and skills—crucial ingredients to economic growth. Similar processes brought enormous benefits already to Asia and Latin America, so why would donors want to shut down this motor of opportunity only for Africa?

4. Stimulation of skill accumulation (“brain gain”). The possibility of migration and the example of role models who find success abroad (the Kofi Annan factor) provide incentives for young students to work hard and gain skills that will help them overcome the hurdles to migration. The authors argue that the new human capital created through these incentives offsets the loss of skilled people who do eventually leave.

These are all plausible positives, and I'm unsympathetic to most efforts to keep talented and/or educated residents of poor countries from emigrating. It remains to be shown, though, that these benefits outweigh the shorter-term, acute in-country capacity challenges to which brain drain contributes.

Aid vs. remittances

From Roving Bandit, who also gave us migration vs. microfinance, comes this equally striking chart:


That's right - private remittances outweigh the total of international development aid for a given year.

Is this related to resources? Well, it might be in the sense that the income-generating activities for migrants in developed countries might be less resource-intensive and environmentally unfriendly than in developing countries (I am thinking slash-and-burn agriculture, etc.). I’m not sure, though, and would be interested in any existing analysis of this.

Chart of the Day 2: Migration vs. microfinance

From Roving Bandit (unfortunately the link to the post appears to be broken) comes this chart, making plain this astonishing conclusion:

The potential gains to poor people of being allowed the opportunity to work in a rich country for even a few weeks blow every other conceivable anti-poverty measure completely out of the water.

I once attended a lecture series on globalization featuring Larry Summers and political philosopher Michael Sandel, and week after week Summers pounded Sandel on why free trade/markets/etc. were better for prosperity and happiness. The great turnaround came the week that migration and labor mobility was on the agenda - Sandel couldn't hide his grin as he opened, "So Larry, you think free movement of capital and goods is so important... so why not labor?" Larry mumbled something about massive social dislocations, which isn't a bad answer, but it was a memorable moment. This chart reminded me of it, and makes me wonder whether Sandel might have been on to something after all.

Africans in China

There's a lot of talk about China going to Africa, but the reverse is happening as well:

Based on official statistics, since 2003, the number of Africans in Guangzhou has been growing at 30-40% annually. Based on a report in the Guangzhou Daily, there might already be 100,000 in the community. They come from Nigeria, Guinea, Cameroon, Liberia, and Mali. Amongst these, Africa’s most populous country Nigeria claims first place.

They primarily live in village-districts in the city of Guangdong (like Dongpu, Dengfeng Jie, Yongping Jie). They do their business in a few large-scale China-Africa commerce malls.

Mutual trust has a lot to do with the cohesion of the community:

Africans especially trust, and depend on their fellow people; that’s why we call each other ‘brother’ and ’sister’.” Mall management Chen Lianren told the reporter that every store opened by an African becomes a focal point, and attracts many of his fellow countrymen, increasing the traffic flow for other stores in the mall. For that reason, they lowered the rent for African tenants.

I think anyone who has lived as an expat can relate to this - a compatriot you might not necessarily trust absolutely at home appears in a totally different light in a foreign setting where no one else speaks your language.

Williams and other Africans with an economic foundation all share a “Chinese Dream”. They hope that by struggling for 4-5 years, they will be able to open a trade company or service center, and make large profits from servicing the rapidly growing Chinese-African trade. Based on published research, more than 20,000 Africans are long-term residents in Guangzhou (more than six months).

That the pull is economic is not surprising to me, but the magnitude is. I guess if motivations are economic, totally understandable why one would pick China over Europe or the U.S.

Via MR.