Brain drain or brain waste

1
Brain drain or brain waste improving the link
between migration and education skill levels

• Prague, 6 March 2009
• Ummuhan BARDAK
• European Training Foundation

2
What is the ETF?

• A specialised agency of the European Union, based
  in Turin/ Italy and operational since 1994
• Expert advise and support to the EU institutions,
  in particular the Commission, in the context of
  EU external relations policies
• Mission to improving human capital development
  (HCD) in 29 partner countries, with specific
  programmes and projects in education and
  training, VET, lifelong learning, labour market
  and employment, social inclusion etc.
• Regular support provided to three EU instruments
  
• IPA Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance
• ENPI European Neighbourhood Policy Instrument
• DCI Development Co-operation Instrument

3
ETFs partner countries
Candidate countries Croatia, FYR of Macedonia,
Turkey
Eastern Europe and Central Asia Armenia,
Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Kazakhstan,
Kyrgyzstan, Moldova, Russian Federation,
Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, Uzbekistan
South Eastern Europe Albania, Bosnia and
Herzegovina, Serbia and Montenegro, Kosovo
EU Member States
Mediterranean region Algeria, Egypt, Israel,
Jordan, Lebanon, Morocco, Syria, Tunisia, West
Bank and Gaza Strip
4
ETF Migration and Skills Project
2006-2008General objective To investigate the
links between migration and skills Countries
covered Albania, Moldova and Ukraine (new
sending countries) Egypt and Tunisia (old
sending countries)
Research process literature review
fact-finding missions field survey with 2,000
respondents per country 1000 potential and 1000
return migrants face-to-face interviews through
structured questionnaires data collection and
analysis validation with the national
stakeholders validation with the international
community
Tunisia
4
5
Definitions (1)

• POTENTIAL MIGRANT
• Anyone who was aged 1840 years, lived in the
  country at the moment of the interview and said
  he/she was seriously thinking of leaving abroad
  to live and work.
• ? The survey on potential migration was intended
  to be broadly representative of the young adult
  population (1840 years) in each country, in
  order to have a control sample of those in the
  same age group who are not actively seeking to
  migrate.

6
Definitions (2)

• RETURNING MIGRANT
• Someone who
• left the survey country aged 18 or over
• lived and worked abroad continuously for at least
  six months
• returned at least three months before the
  interview and within the previous ten years
• present during the fieldwork and available for
  interview.
• ?Those who returned within the past three months,
  or more than ten years ago, were not included in
  the survey.

7
Sampling (1)

• Two surveys in each country 1000 potential
  migrants and 1000 returning migrants interviewed.
• Face-to-face interviews at respondents
  households with a written questionnaire. Only one
  person from each household was interviewed
  (except if exist one returning migrant and one
  potential migrant in one household).
• 2-stage cluster sample
• first-stage clusters a minimum of 4-6 regions
  chosen to represent the geographical economic
  diversity of the country
• second-stage clusters villages, communes and
  municipalities chosen to represent geographical
  diversity of the selected regions

8
Sampling (2)

• Selection of interviewees
• Potential migrants households selected following
  random routes. Within each household,
  interviewers chose the interviewee through random
  procedures (i.e. by taking the person whose month
  of birth falls next).
• Returning migrants In each selected locality
  region, households selected following a
  snow-ball technique.

9
Representativityof the surveys

• Potential migrants survey was designed to be
  broadly representative of the 18-40 population of
  the country. BUT
• Gender bias Men over-represented in Egypt, in
  Tunisia and, to a lesser extent, in Albania.
• Educational and Age bias Educated people and
  youth over-represented compared to census
  statistics, mainly due to fieldwork problems.
• Returning migrants As snow-ball technique was
  followed, the sample is not random and, thus, not
  representative.

10
Potential migrants intention and likelihood to
migrateLikelihood is calculated based on time
horizon for migration (within 6 months and 2
years), ability to finance move, knowledge of
destination country and its language, have at
least 4 out of 6 necessary documents and no
difficulties to get the others.
Key
Intention
Likelihood
11
What are the main push factors for
migration?Main reasons for going abroad are to
improve standards of living, lack of jobs, and
low salaries in all countries. Beware of family
unification in Albania, and no future answers
in Egypt and Tunisia as third reason.

12
Gender share of male migrantsShare of males are
significantly higher among returning migrants,
and in Egypt, Tunisia and partially Albania.
Female migrants are significant and increasing
among potential migrants in Moldova, Ukraine and
Albania.
Key
Potential
Returning
13
Age groups More than two thirds of potential
migrants are in the 18-29 age group Tunisia
(83), Egypt (76), Albania (71), Moldova (66)
and Ukraine (63).
Key
14
What is the level of education of migrants? In
Albania, Egypt, Moldova and Tunisia
qualifications of migrants are spread across all
levels of education. Most Ukrainian migrants have
medium or high education levels. Beware of around
35 high-skilled migrants in Egypt, Tunisia and
Ukraine, and huge increase in the education
levels of potential migrants compared to
returnees in Tunisia.

Key
Low ISCED 1-2
Medium ISCED 3-4
High ISCED 5-6

15
Destination country EU sharePotential Most
likely destination, Returning Main destination
EU is the main destination for Albanians and
Tunisians (80), around 50 of migration for
Ukrainians and Moldovans, one third of migration
for Egyptians.
Key
Potential
Returning
15
16
Potential migrants most likely destination by
education
Key

16
17
Working status share of employed migrantsFor
potential migrants, having a job does not prevent
migration around half of potential migrants in
Egypt, Moldova and Tunisia, and around 72-75 in
Albania and Ukraine have already a job, but still
think of migrating abroad.Returning migrants
usually find a job upon return, not retired.
Key
Potential
Returning
17
18
Returnees Is there a correlation between
education level and the jobs performed by
migrants abroad?There is particular pattern in
new migration countries (Albania, Moldova and
Ukraine) where almost no correlation exists
between the level of skills and the job performed
abroad. Old migration countries (Egypt and
Tunisia) show another pattern with relatively
better matching between education of migrants and
jobs performed abroad. Host countries can
benefit more if they make the best use of
migrants skills.
Unskilled worker
Skilled worker
Professional/ Mid Manager
High Manager
High Med Low




High Med Low




High Med Low




High Med Low




High Med Low
19
Returning migrants intention to migrate again
and intention to migrate to the same destination
countryTendency to re-migrate among the
returnees is highest in Moldova (51) and Albania
(43), and lower in Ukraine (30), Tunisia (24),
and Egypt (23). Higher level of temporary and/or
seasonal character of migrant movements in new
migration countries.
Key
Plan to migrate again
Plan to migrate to same destination country
20
Returning migrants study or training abroadIt
is not a significant reason, but beware of higher
share in Tunisia (28), Albania (16,5) and
Ukraine (12,4).
Key
Study or training
Yes
No
21
Returning migrants most helpful experience
abroadGeneral experience (being exposed to a
new place and way of doing things) and skills
learned at work are most helpful.
Key
Skills learned at work
Formal education/training
Experience in general
Other
22
To what extent is pre-departure training
used?Pre-departure training is rarely available
and rarely used by migrants, although interest
for such a training is high among potential
migrants (esp. VET and language training).
Key
Returning migrants
Potential migrants (interest)

23
Why did migrants return to their home
country?Main reasons of return are family
reasons (voluntary) and expulsion/ end of work
permit (involuntary). See particularly Tunisia
and Albania sent away by the authorities.
24
Are returning migrants aware of return
schemes?Average time spent abroad is 11.2 years
(Tunisia), 7.7 years (Egypt), 5.2 years
(Albania), 2.5 years (Ukraine), and 2 years
(Moldova). Return schemes are rare and/or use of
these schemes is very limited.
Key
Not aware
Aware
25
Returning migrants social integrationIntegrated
People living in areas with mostly locals/hardly
any immigrant at all and having very frequent
contacts with local people.Not integrated
People living in areas with almost all/mostly
immigrants and having rare/none at all contacts
with local peopleSocial integration is
difficult to measure, but no direct link is seen
with the level of education and work status.
Key
Integrated
Semi-integrated
Not integrated
26
Returning migrants social integration by
education
Key

27
Observations/Conclusions (1)

• The skill levels of migrants are spread across
  all levels, with a recent trend towards medium
  and high skills, yet this does not necessarily
  reflect the quality of education
• There is a double skill mismatch between what the
  education system supplies and the labour market
  demand both domestically but also abroad,
  especially for the new sending countries
• Skill shortages and oversupply as a result of
  migration are difficult to quantify in sending
  countries. Sector analysis should be undertaken
  to study these issues better
• Migration per se is not an incentive to pursue a
  particular type of training/field of education
• The main reasons for going abroad are to improve
  ones living standard, however having education
  and a job does not prevent migration

28
Observations/Conclusions (2)

• Migration project is usually an individual
  initiative. There are few (if any) programmes for
  managed labour migration and where programmes may
  exist, they are not being used
• Skill needs are not systematically considered in
  the migration decision. Little or no training is
  available to migrants prior to departure, but if
  used VET and language training are rated as most
  useful
• Training abroad is rare, and on-the-job training
  is considered most useful, but being exposed to a
  new place is a valuable experience
• Use of return schemes is rare, the learning
  benefits of working and living abroad are not
  systematically captured and capitalised upon
  return in home country.

29
Policy implications

• New versus old sending countries - need for
  policy differentiation use of remittances,
  migrant networks, social integration, education
  etc
• Securing decent jobs at home is essential
  parallel investments in education and labour
  market reforms can help promote economic
  development in the sending countries
• Education/skills dimension is important for
  managed labour migration
• -if the EU wants to join the global hunt for
  talent and stay competitive
• -if the sending countries want to gain and
  not waste brains
• Recognition of qualifications before and after
  migration remains open
• -no direct match between migrants skills
  and the jobs held abroad
• -no system of validation of non-formal
  learning.

29
30

• ETF Synthesis Report on Migration and Skills
• available by April 2009
• www.etf.europa.eu
• uba_at_etf.europa.eu

30