======================================== Questions not addressed during the class ======================================== ## Some of the questions below may not be exactly what you asked, for I summarized similar questions. ## Some questions may be skipped. This happens (1) when answering the question needed some clarification or contexts behind the question, (2) when a similar question was asked in the class, or (3) when the presentation essentially answered the question. ## If you find your questions unanswered or if you have follow-up questions, please let me know. Q. In the cases of non-completed questionaires (drop-outs), were the given answers taken into account for the total statistics? A. Basically, we use all the available data. Even if some answers are missing, we use respondents as long as they answered focal questions. Also, in some models, imputation is used. Q. How does the investigation would be if you include the data of China? A. It is hard to tell. As mentioned in the class, the Internet survey was heavily blocked. Judging from other observations, it might be similar to India, though. Q. The report mentioned the policy lever as a important reason for scientists to emigrate. So will the author suggest governments monitor the mobility of their researchers and make future policy based on the result? A. Yes. That is pretty much the idea of evidence-based policy making. Q. Can a parallel be considered or established between the mobility of these researchers and more generally the mobility of highly trained workforce (i.e.: not only scientist, but also very capable engineers, businessmen,c). A. It is not that simple. THe policy design should be different from sector to sector; results and implications would differ for other highly trained workforce. Most previous studies about the mobility of highly skilled workforce have limited implications because their data are aggregated; unlike our study, they are not based on individual data. With that sense, too, our survey is unique. Q. If another similar survey as the GlobSci survey from 2011 is conducted in 10, 20 or even 50 years from now, would you expect a shifting focus of countries? A. This is just a guess, but perhaps, I expect to see Asian countries become more important as destination and source countries. Q. How did you decide all of the questinnaire items (e.g.," How important was each of the following factors behind your choice to take a postdoc, employment or academic job in a country different from the one where you lived when you were 18?")? A. We followed the standard procedure; i.e., based on literature review, particularly on prior studies done by one of our coauthors, P. Stephan. Q. Is globalisation a threat to the mover's advantage? A. I don't think so. Relative advantage may decrease as everybody starts to move internationally. It does not mean one can be non-mobile, at least for the time being.