Skip to main content
Log in

Brain drain and technological relationship between skilled and unskilled labor: brain gain or brain loss?

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Population Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study analyzes the effect of an increase in the foreign skilled wage rate on the emigration and education decisions of individuals in the home economy. An increase in the foreign skilled wage rate encourages emigration of skilled workers out of the home country, while possible increase in the supply of skilled labor in the home depends on the technological relationship between skilled and unskilled labor in production. Although the average education level will rise when they are complements, the average education level may not necessarily be raised when they are substitutes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Acemoglu (1998) among others asserted that the introduction of IT technology raises the demand for skilled labor and thereby their relative wage rate, while Ohtake (2005) conjectured that IT technology enables capable workers to display their higher abilities.

  2. Bhagwati and Hamada (1974) distinguished labor markets into skilled and unskilled types, but they assumed that the two types of labor are independent technologically in output production. For example, Johnson (1997) empirically suggests the close, albeit imperfect substitutability in the production process.

  3. Galor and Stark (1991) made a similar assumption.

  4. Piketty (1997) showed that due to imperfect substitutability between skilled and unskilled, brain drain exerts negative externalities on home workers, although he did not endogenize skilled/unskilled choice of individuals.

  5. For simplicity, we specify the relationship as di/dj = − a < 0 in the following.

  6. In reality, there can be individuals whose utility costs of acquiring the skills are high although the emigrating costs are sufficiently low. For those individuals, it may be worth while acquiring skills only contingent on emigration. Andersen (2005) takes such individuals into consideration, but we rule out the case for analytical convenience.

  7. The immigration from developing economies is sufficiently small relative to the stock of skilled labor in the recipient economy, so that its effect on the wage rate in the recipient economy will be negligible (e.g., Grubel and Scott 1966).

  8. It is known that when skilled and unskilled labors are imperfect substitutes, we will not have complete brain drain.

  9. Since \(\hat{i}\) is the i index of the individual who has \(j=\hat{j}\), in order to have skilled workers in the home, we must have \(\frac{w^{s}}{1+r}-e\big( {\hat{j}} \,\big)>\frac{w^{ s^\ast }}{1+r}-e\big( {\hat{j}} \,\big)-c\big( {\hat{i}} \,\big)\). The present study considers this case and rules out the case in which an individual has indices ( i,j ) such that \(\frac{w^{s}}{1+r}-e( j )<w^u+\frac{w^u}{1+r}<\frac{w^{ s^\ast }}{1+r}-e( j )-c( i )\). See also footnote 6 for the implications of this assumption.

  10. The (semi-)indirect utility function implicitly postulates optimal consumption-saving choices of individuals, that is, individuals choose savings for given wage and interest rates. In a small open economy, the difference between capital investment and savings is covered by foreign borrowing or lending. By definition, the foreign borrowing or lending remains constant in a steady state.

  11. We evaluate all the variables at the original equilibrium in the following part of this paper.

  12. It should be recalled that we are concerned with comparative statics for a small open economy.

  13. In interpreting the results, it should be recalled that the effect of an increase in the foreign skilled wage rate also includes the indirect effect through changes in capital stock.

  14. As Galor (1986) showed in his model, it is reasonable to expect that the emigration rate is positively affected by the foreign skilled wage rate.

  15. We assume that condition \(\tilde{i}>\hat{i}\) still holds.

  16. Poutvaara (2008) showed that region-specific shocks may affect human capital formation negatively. However, his result assuming identical individuals depends on the shape of production function, presented by the third derivative, while we are concerned with technological relationship between skilled and unskilled labor in production.

  17. In the literature on public investment, Burgess (2006) and others envisaged a case in which the cross derivatives with respect to two factors are negative.

References

  • Acemoglu D (1998) Why do new technologies complement skills? Directed technical change and wage inequality. Q J Econ 113(8):1055–1090

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alburo F, Abella DI (2002) Skilled labour migration from developing countries: study on the Philippines. International Migration Papers 51, International Labour Office (ILO), Geneva, Switzerland

  • Andersen TM (2005) Migration, taxation and educational incentives. Econ Lett 87(3):399–405

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beine M, Docquier F, Rapoport H (2001) Brain drain and economic growth: theory and evidence. J Dev Econ 64(1):275–289

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beine M, Docquier F, Rapoport H (2008) Brain drain and human capital formation in developing countries: winners and losers. Econ J 118(528):631–652

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bhagwati J, Hamada K (1974) The brain drain, international integration of markets for professionals and unemployment: a theoretical analysis. J Dev Econ 1(1):19–44

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burgess D (2006) Public investment criteria in overlapping generations models of open economies. Int Tax Public Financ 13(1):59–78

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Docquier F, Lobest O, Marfouk A (2007) Brain drain in developing countries. World Bank Rev 21(2):193–218

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galor O (1986) Time preference and international labor migration. J Econ Theory 38(1):1–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galor O, Stark O (1991) The impact of differences in the levels of technology on international labor migration. J Popul Econ 4(1):1–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galor O, Tsiddon D (1997) The distribution of human capital and economic growth. J Econ Growth 2(1):93–124

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grubel HB, Scott AD (1966) The immigration of scientists and engineers to the United States, 1949–1961. J Polit Econ 74(8):368–378

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson GE (1997) Changes in earning inequality: the role of demand shifts. J Econ Perspect 11(2):41–54

    Google Scholar 

  • Miyagiwa K (1991) Scale economies in education and the brain drain problem. Int Econ Rev 32(3):743–759

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mountford A (1997) Can a brain drain be good for growth in the source economy? J Dev Econ 53(2):287–303

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ohtake F (2005) Nihon no Hu-byodo (Inequality in Japan). Nihon-keizai Shinbun-sha, Tokyo (in Japanese)

    Google Scholar 

  • Piketty T (1997) Immigration et justice sociale. Rev Econ 48(9):1291–1309

    Google Scholar 

  • Poutvaara P (2008) On human capital formation with exit options: comment and new results. J Popul Econ 21(3):679–684

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schiff M (2005) Brain drain: claims about its size and impact on welfare and growth are greatly exaggerated. IZA Discussion Paper No 1599, Institute for the Study of Labor

  • Stark O, Helmenstein C, Prskawetz A (1997) A brain drain with a brain gain. Econ Lett 55(2):227–234

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to thank two anonymous referees for their insightful comments and suggestions. They are also indebted to the seminar participants at the Nagoya Macroeconomics Workshop for their helpful comments.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Akira Yakita.

Additional information

Responsible editor: Alessandro Cigno

Appendix: Production sector

Appendix: Production sector

As the interest rate is fixed at the world level, we have from Eq. 2a

$$ \label{Equ20} {d}K=\left( {-F_{L^{u}K} /F_{KK} } \right){d}L^{u}+\left( {-F_{L^{s}K} /F_{KK} } \right){d}L^{s} $$
(20)

Substituting Eq. 20 into the following equations

$$ \label{Equ21} {d}w^{s}=F_{KL^{s}} {d}K+F_{L^{s}L^{s}} {d}L^{s}+F_{L^{u}L^{s}} {d}L^{u} $$
(21)
$$ \label{Equ22} {d}w^{u}=F_{KL^{u}} {d}K+F_{L^{s}L^{u}} {d}L^{s}+F_{L^{u}L^{u}} {d}L^{u} $$
(22)

which are obtained from Eqs. 2b and 2c, we have

$$ \label{Equ23} {d}w^{s}=SS{d}L^{s}+SU{d}L^{u} $$
(23)
$$ \label{Equ24} {d}w^{u}=US{d}L^{s}+UU{d}L^{u} $$
(24)

where

$$ \label{Equ25} SS=F_{L^{s}L^{s}} -F_{KL^{s}} \left( {{F_{L^{s}K} } \mathord{\left/ {\vphantom {{F_{L^{s}K} } {F_{KK} }}} \right. \kern-\nulldelimiterspace} {F_{KK} }} \right)\\ $$
(25)
$$ \label{Equ26} SU=F_{L^{u}L^{s}} -F_{KL^{s}} (F_{L^{u}K} /F_{KK} ) $$
(26)
$$ \label{Equ27} US=F_{L^{s}L^{u}} -F_{KL^{u}} \left( {F_{L^{s}K} /F_{KK} } \right) $$
(27)
$$ \label{Equ28} UU=F_{L^{u}L^{u}} -F_{KL^{u}} (F_{L^{u}K} /F_{KK} ) $$
(28)

From Eqs. 23 and 24 we obtain

$$ \label{Equ29} {d}L^{u}=\left( {UU-SU\frac{US}{SS}} \right)^{-1}\left( {{d}w^{u}-\frac{US}{SS}{d}w^{s}} \right) $$
(29)
$$ \label{Equ30} {d}L^{s}=\left( {UU-SU\frac{US}{SS}} \right)^{-1}\left( {\frac{UU}{SS}{d}w^{s}-\frac{SU}{SS}{d}w^{u}} \right). $$
(30)

Assuming monotonicity of the labor demand functions with respect to the wage rates, we obtain the labor demand functions of a small open economy Eqs. 2b and 2c in the text. From Eqs. 29 and 30, we have \(L_{s}^{u} [ {\equiv \partial L^{u}/\partial w^{s}} ]=\big( {UU-SU\frac{US}{SS}} \big)^{-1}\big( {-\frac{US}{SS}} \big)\), where \(UU-SU\frac{US}{SS}<0\) from the assumption. When ∣ F jj  ∣ is sufficiently great and \(F_{L^{s}L^{u}} \) is positive (negative) and sufficiently great (small), we may have \(L_{s}^{u} <0\) (\(L_{s}^{u} >0\), respectively).Footnote 17

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Fan, X., Yakita, A. Brain drain and technological relationship between skilled and unskilled labor: brain gain or brain loss?. J Popul Econ 24, 1359–1368 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00148-010-0321-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00148-010-0321-0

Keywords

JEL Classification

Navigation