Elite Recruitment and the Duality of the Chinese Party-state: The Mobility of Western-educated Returnee Elites in China, 1978-2008 (original) (raw)
Related papers
CHINA'S BRAIN DRAIN AT THE HIGH END
Asian Population Studies, 2008
Between 1978 and 2007, more than 1.21 million Chinese went abroad for study and research, of whom only about a quarter have returned. The Chinese government's policies of attracting firstrate overseas academics back have yielded mixed results at best. This article discusses why overseas Chinese academics hesitate to return at a time when China is in desperate need of talent to turn itself into an innovation-oriented society. Common reasons relate to low salaries, problems of education for children and jobs for spouses, and problems of separation if some family members still reside abroad. More important are institutional factors. Guanxi still matters. The opportunity costs in career development are too high. In social science research, there are still taboos. Rampant misconduct has also tainted the Chinese scientific community. The article concludes that unless the research culture becomes conducive to doing first-rate work and meritocracy is rewarded, China is unlikely to witness the return migration of first-rate academics.
Overseas Students, Returnees, and the Diffusion of International Norms into Post-Mao China
International Studies Review, 2014
This paper applies the model of diffusion outlined by Solingen (International Studies Quarterly, 56, 2012, 631) to the case of Chinese who studied abroad after 1978. It assesses the ability of those who have not returned to pressure the state to introduce Western academic, scientific, and business norms. It looks at the role of the returnees and national leaders in introducing these norms, particularly as a means to create world-class universities, scientific research centers, and modern private firms. It demonstrates the power of firewalls (including institutional leaders, the Chinese marketplace, and administrators who lose under reform) to block the diffusionary process.
Between 1978 and 2007, more than 1.21 million Chinese went abroad for study and research, of whom only about a quarter have returned. The Chinese government's policies of attracting first- rate overseas academics back have yielded mixed results at best. This article discusses why overseas Chinese academics hesitate to return at a time when China is in desperate need of talent to turn itself into an innovation-oriented society. Common reasons relate to low salaries, problems of education for children and jobs for spouses, and problems of separation if some family members still reside abroad. More important are institutional factors. Guanxi still matters. The opportunity costs in career development are too high. In social science research, there are still taboos. Rampant misconduct has also tainted the Chinese scientific community. The article concludes that unless the research culture becomes conducive to doing first-rate work and meritocracy is rewarded, China is unlikely to wi...
Rethinking the study abroad movement and its impact on modern China
2023
From the mid-19th to the mid-20th century, over 200,000 young Chinese went to study abroad and subsequently returned to China to apply the knowledge they had acquired overseas in the service of their country. This workshop aims to revisit this foundational brain migration from a long-term, comparative perspective. In the light of novel sources and methodologies, the eight participants from Europe, China, Taiwan, Hong Kong, and the United States, will reexamine its impact on modern China as well as the host countries.
Returnees and Diaspora as Sources of Innovation in Chinese Higher Education
Frontiers of Education in China
This paper highlights how returnees and knowledge diaspora are important sources for China’s human resources development, identifying push and pull factors that also contribute significantly to innovation in the higher education sector. By outlining China’s key projects and schemes for recruiting international professional workers, the paper argues that bringing advanced knowledge and skills back to a country of origin through international education and experiences is neither new, nor limited to China. At the same time, the rise of a large, worldwide Chinese knowledge diaspora is now of global importance in promoting transnational scientific and business networks that underpin both research and development, and the quest for world-class universities. China’s size and weight, its determination to boost development and improve its higher education system, as well as the willingness of both diaspora and returnees to contribute, constitute its advantages. However, there remain limitati...
Returnees and Diaspora as Source of Innovation in Chinese Higher Education
Frontiers of Education in China
This paper highlights how returnees and knowledge diaspora are important sources for China's human resources development, identifying push and pull factors that also contribute significantly to innovation in the higher education sector. By outlining China's key projects and schemes for recruiting international professional workers, the paper argues that bringing advanced knowledge and skills back to a country of origin through international education and experiences is neither new, nor limited to China. At the same time, the rise of a large, worldwide Chinese knowledge diaspora is now of global importance in promoting transnational scientific and business networks that underpin both research and development, and the quest for world-class universities. China's size and weight, its determination to boost development and improve its higher education system, as well as the willingness of both diaspora and returnees to contribute, constitute its advantages. However, there remain limitations to its success, notably a lack of high-quality research, reservations regarding new ideas, low awareness of international collaborations, too much attention given to material rewards and quick results, corruption, and too many administrative controls and government regulations.
Diaspora and Returnees. Twin Sources of Innovation in Chinese Higher Education
Frontiers of Chinese Education., 2012
This paper highlights returnees and knowledge diaspora as important sources for China's human resources development, with identification of the push and pull factors that also contribute significantly to the innovation of the higher education sector. By outlining China's key projects and schemes on recruiting international professional workers, the paper argues that bringing advanced knowledge and skills back to the country of origin through international education and experiences is not new, nor limited, to China. At the same time, the rise of worldwide Chinese knowledge diaspora is now of global importance as they promote trans-national scientific and business networks that underpin both R&D, and the quest for world-class universities. While China's size and weight, its determination to boost development, and improve its higher education system, as well as the willingness of both diaspora and returnees to contribute, constitute its advantages, there are also limitations to its success, notably a lack of high-quality research, reservations regarding new ideas, low awareness of international collaborations, too much attention on material rewards and quick results, corruption, and burdensome administrative controls and government regulations.
International student migration and social stratification in China
International Journal of Educational Development, 2009
1 An important exception is the so-called ''princelings'' who capitalized on the parents' political power to seek commercial profit. This type of capital conversion was confined to a very small group of population and is regarded as outright corruption. This essay is concerned with more routinized, socially acceptable, and institutionalized capital conversion.
Chinese Political and Cultural Elites: Twentieth Century Transformations
The Chinese experienced dynamic changes in the twentieth century and few groups were as transitional as Chinese intellectuals. Grappling with new roles within the world of education and politics, there was an explosion of creative and diverse responses. This study will utilize data on 197 Chinese students who matriculated at four European universities,