1051 



often freeze movement without recording return flows. Definitions of 

 professional categories differ. Statistics do not express the exactitudes 

 wliich they purport, according to Henderson, but rather indicate gen- 

 eral orders of magnitude and trends. These and many other factors 

 add to the difficulty of interpreting migration statistics. 



Faced with the uncertainties of statistical data some students of 

 the brain drain fall back upon general impressions derived from a 

 variety of sources. Hla Myint thus explained his position : "All we can 

 do is to try to piece together a general picture from the sketchy and 

 impressionistic information available on the subject." ^* Others like 

 George B. Baldwin degrade the value of statistics, deny that there is a 

 brain drain, and argue a case for semantics. "But even good statistics 

 are of little use," he said, "unless one knows what one is trying to 

 measure. And in the brain-drain debate there is much ambiguity as to 

 who is a 'brain' and what is a 'drain.' " ^= 



NEED FOR RESEARCH 



To fill the gaps of information, students of the brain drain have 

 universally stressed the need for more research. Social scientists custo- 

 marily admit ignorance and plead for additional research, wrote 

 Steven Deutsch. "When it comes to the 'brain drain,' " he said, "there 

 is indeed a great deal of ignorance and a real need for research." ^^ 

 "We do need more facts about the brain drain," Dr. Donald F. Hornig, 

 science adviser to President. Johnson, told members of the Senate Im- 

 migration and Naturalization Subcommittee. "It is not so much de- 

 tailed statistics, but a better picture of what the problem is." ^' 



Much has been published in the past decade, improving somewhat 

 on the insufficiency of data. This may have illuminated certain aspects 

 of the problem, but it has not appreciably reduced its complexities. The 

 observations of Dr. Charles Frankel, Assistant Secretary of State in 

 the Johnson Administration and professor of philosophy at Columbia 



"Mylnt, op. cit., p. 233. 



15 Baldwin, op. cit., pp. 359-360. Writing In 1970, Mr. Baldwin declared that "today 

 we know much more about the international migration of professional manpower than 

 we did five, four or even three years ago. But the 'more' we know Is mainly facts, and 

 not all that many ; men still have difficulty saying what the facts mean and deciding 

 whether or not the brain drain constitutes a problem of 'disturbing dimensions' — as the 

 Pearson Commission called it." (p. 358.) 



In Senate hearings on the migration of talent. Senator Hiram L. Fong (D-Hawaii), 

 observing that Americans go abroad for a temporary purpose and then return whereas 

 people coming to America usually remain, asked Under Secretary of State Eugene V. 

 Rostow whether "statistically it has been proven that we have taken too many of these 

 skilled people from these countries." Mr. Rostow replied : "I don't think so. I, haven't 

 seen that case yet, either for the developed countries or for the less developed countries. 

 There is a much bigger bulge from some of the countries than from others, at least in 

 the less developed parts of the world. But I don't think the case can be made that we 

 have taken too many. . . ." (U.S. Congress, Senate, Committee on the Judiciary. Sub- 

 committee on Immigration and Naturalization, International Migration of Talent and 

 Skills, hearings, 90th Cong., 1st sess., 1967, p. 12. (Hereafter cited as Hearings, Senate 

 Judiciary Committee, International Migration of Talent and SkillSj 1967.) 



18 Deutsch, op. cit, p. 31. 



1' Hearings, Senate Judiciary Committee, International Migration of Talent and Skills, 

 1967, p. 110. Dr. Hornig said : "Better information on the international movement of 

 highly trained people is badly needed. It is ironic that we have kept detailed statistics 

 for decades on shipments of coffee, cocoa beans, steel and cotton, but we have only 

 general approximations to the current flows of human beings." He felt that the reason 

 for this paucity of data is the fact that only recently have science and technology been 

 recognized as major factors affecting national development and international trade. Also 

 there has been a corresponding tardy recognition of the significance of scientists and 

 engineers to national well-being. Finally, the significance of the quality of the work force 

 has until recently not been sufficiently recognized by economists, (p. 106.) 



