Advertisement

A nation’s foreign and domestic professors: which have better research performance? (the Italian case)

  • Giovanni Abramo
  • Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo
  • Flavia Di Costa
Article

Abstract

This work investigates the research performance of foreign faculty in the Italian academic system. Incoming professors compose l.1% of total faculty across the sciences, although with variations by discipline. Their scientific performance measured over 2010–2014 is on average better than that of their Italian colleagues: the greatest difference is for associate professors. Psychology is the discipline with the greatest concentration of top foreign scientists. However, there are notable shares of unproductive foreign professors or of those with mediocre performance. The findings stimulate reflection on issues of national policy concerning attractiveness of the higher education system to skilled people from abroad, given the ongoing heavy Italian brain drain.

Keywords

Research evaluation International mobility Brain gain Scientometrics 

References

  1. Abramo, G. (2018). Revisiting the scientometric conceptualization of impact and its measurement. Journal of Informetrics, 12(3), 590–597.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Abramo, G., & D’Angelo, C. A. (2014a). How do you define and measure research productivity? Scientometrics, 101(2), 1129–1144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Abramo, G., & D’Angelo, C. A. (2014b). The spin-off of elite universities in non-competitive, undifferentiated higher education systems: an empirical simulation in Italy. Studies in Higher Education, 39(7), 1270–1289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Abramo, G., & D’Angelo, C. A. (2014c). Assessing national strengths and weaknesses in research fields. Journal of Informetrics, 8(3), 766–775.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Abramo, G., Cicero, T., & D’Angelo, C. A. (2011). Assessing the varying level of impact measurement accuracy as a function of the citation window length. Journal of Informetrics, 5(4), 659–667.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Abramo, G., D’Angelo, C. A., & Cicero, T. (2012). What is the appropriate length of the publication period over which to assess research performance? Scientometrics, 93(3), 1005–1017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Abramo, G., Cicero, T., & D’Angelo, C. A. (2012a). The dispersion of research performance within and between universities as a potential indicator of the competitive intensity in higher education systems. Journal of Informetrics, 6(2), 155–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Abramo, G., Cicero, T., & D’Angelo, C. A. (2012b). Revisiting the scaling of citations for research assessment. Journal of Informetrics, 6(4), 470–479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Abramo, G., D’Angelo, C. A., & Rosati, F. (2013). The importance of accounting for the number of co-authors and their order when assessing research performance at the individual level in the life sciences. Journal of Informetrics, 7(1), 198–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Abramo, G., Cicero, T., & D’Angelo, C. A. (2013a). The impact of unproductive and top researchers on overall university research performance. Journal of Informetrics, 7(1), 166–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Abramo, G., Cicero, T., & D’Angelo, C. A. (2013b). Individual research performance: a proposal for comparing apples to oranges. Journal of Informetrics, 7(2), 528–539.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Abramo, G., D’Angelo, C. A., & Rosati, F. (2014). Career advancement and scientific performance in universities. Scientometrics, 98(2), 891–907.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Abramo, G., D’Angelo, C. A., & Rosati, F. (2015). The determinants of academic career advancement: evidence from Italy. Science and Public Policy, 42(6), 761–774.Google Scholar
  14. Abramo, G., D’Angelo, C. A., & Rosati, F. (2016). Gender bias in academic recruitment. Scientometrics, 106(1), 119–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Ackers, H. L., & Gill, B. (2008). Moving people and knowledge: understanding the processes of scientific mobility within an enlarging Europe. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Aiuti, F., Bruni, R., & Leopardi, R. (1994). Impediments of Italian science. Nature, 367(6464), 590–590.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Alfred, M. V. (2010). Transnational migration, social capital and lifelong learning in the USA. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 29(2), 219–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Amadori, S., Bernasconi, C., Boccadoro, M., Glustolisi, R., & Gobbi, M. (1992). Academic promotion in Italy. Nature, 355(6361), 581–581.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. ANVUR (2017). Valutazione della qualità della ricerca 2010–2011. Rapporto finale. Retrieved from http://www.anvur.it/rapporto-2016/, last accessed on June 21, 2018.
  20. Appelt, S., van Beuzekom, B., Galindo-Rueda, F., & de Pinho, R. (2015). Which factors influence the international mobility of research scientists? In A. Geuna (Ed.), Global mobility of research scientists: the economics of who goes where and why (pp. 177–214). New York, NY: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. D’Angelo, C. A., Giuffrida, C., & Abramo, G. (2011). A heuristic approach to author name disambiguation in bibliometrics databases for large-scale research assessments. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(2), 257–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Foderaro, L.W., (2011), More foreign-born scholars lead U.S. universities, New York Times, March 9, www.nytimes.com/2011/03/10/education/10presidents.html, last accessed on June 21, 2018.
  23. Franzoni, C., Scellato, G., & Stephan, P. (2012). Foreign-born scientists: mobility patterns for 16 countries. Nature Biotechnology, 30(12), 1250–1253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gaillard, A. M., & Gaillard, J. (1998). The international circulation of scientists and technologists. Science Communication, 20(1), 106–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Gerosa, M. (2001). Competition for academic promotion in Italy. Lancet, 357(9263), 1208–1208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Giousmpasoglou, C., & Koniordos, S. K. (2017). Brain drain in higher education in Europe: current trends and future perspectives. http://eprints.bournemouth.ac.uk/28702/1/Chapter.ID_47546_6x9-1-edited.pdf, last accessed on June 21, 2018.
  27. Jałowiecki, B., & Gorzelak, G. J. (2004). Brain drain, brain gain, and mobility: theories and prospective methods. Higher Education in Europe, 29(3), 299–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kim, T. (2009). Transnational academic mobility, internationalization and interculturality in higher education. Intercultural Education, 20(5), 395–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Knight, J. (2008). Higher education in turmoil. The changing world of internationalisation. Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  30. Lowell, L. B. (2007). Trends in international migration flows and stocks, 1975–2007, OECD social, employment and migration working papers (58).Google Scholar
  31. Moed, H. F. (2005). Citation analysis in research evaluation. The Netherlands: Springer.Google Scholar
  32. National Science Board. 2016. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation Science and Engineering Indicators 2016 (NSB-2016-1), Immigration and the S&E Workforce Immigration and the S&E Workforce (3–101).Google Scholar
  33. OECD. (2008). Global competition for talent, mobility of the highly skilled. Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
  34. OECD. (2010). The OECD innovation strategy: Getting a head start on tomorrow. Paris: OECD.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Parey, M., & Waldinger, F. (2011). Studying abroad and the effect on international labor market mobility: evidence from the introduction of ERASMUS. The Economic Journal, 121(551), 194–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Perotti, R. (2008). L’università truccata. Einaudi, Torino, Italy. ISBN: 978-8-8061-9360-7.Google Scholar
  37. Sastry, T. (2005). Migration of academic staff to and from the UK: an analysis of the HESA data. Oxford: Higher Education Policy Institute.Google Scholar
  38. She, Q., & Wotherspoon, T. (2013). International student mobility and highly skilled migration: a comparative study of Canada, the United States, and the United Kingdom. SpringerPlus, 2(1), 132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Smetherham, C., Fenton, S., & Modood, T. (2010). How global is the UK academic labour market? Globalisation, Societies and Education, 8(3), 411–428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Sugimoto, C. R., Robinson-Garcia, N., Murray, D. S., Yegros-Yegros, A., Costas, R., & Larivière, V. (2017). Scientists have most impact when they’re free to move. Nature News, 550(7674), 29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Todisco, E., Brandi, M. C., & Tattolo, G. (2003). Skilled migration: a theoretical framework and the case of foreign researchers in Italy. Fulgor, 1(3), 115–130.Google Scholar
  42. Universities UK (2007). Talent wars: the international market for academic staff. https://web.archive.org/web/20120112220251/http://www.universitiesuk.ac.uk/Publications/Documents/Policy%20Brief%20Talent%20Wars.pdf, last accessed on June 21, 2018.
  43. Van Noorden, R. (2012). Science on the move. Nature, 490(7420), 326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Zagaria, C. (2007). Processo all’università. Cronache dagli atenei italiani tra inefficienze e malcostume. Dedalo, Bari, Italy. ISBN: 978-8-8220-5365-7.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Giovanni Abramo
    • 1
  • Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo
    • 2
  • Flavia Di Costa
    • 3
  1. 1.Istituto di Analisi dei Sistemi e InformaticaConsiglio Nazionale delle RicercheRomeItaly
  2. 2.Dipartimento di Ingegneria dell’ImpresaUniversità degli Studi di Roma “Tor Vergata”RomeItaly
  3. 3.Research ValueRomeItaly

Personalised recommendations