In order to improve the quality of systematic researches, various tools have been developed by well-known scientific institutes sporadically. Dr. Nader Ale Ebrahim has collected these sporadic tools under one roof in a collection named “Research Tool Box”. The toolbox contains over 720 tools so far, classified in 4 main categories: Literature-review, Writing a paper, Targeting suitable journals, as well as Enhancing visibility and impact factor.
Monday, 14 January 2019
Vast set of public CVs reveals the world’s most migratory scientists
Scientists are migratory beasts. It's just the nature of the
job: You spend your days at the border of human knowledge. Depending on
the topic, only a dozen people may deeply understand your research—let
alone help you push it further—and they are scattered across the world.
For many, completing a Ph.D., doing postdoctoral research, and landing a
permanent job all in one country is impossible. And so you wander.
Consider Rimantas Kodzius, possibly the most migratory
scientist alive. Since leaving his home country of Lithuania in 1995 for
graduate school in Austria, Kodzius, 42, has crossed 10 national
borders. "I arrived in China just a week ago," the synthetic biologist
wrote in an email in March. "My home is wherever I work, where I live."
Kodzius has built an impressive career, including prestigious
research positions in Germany, Japan, Sweden, and Saudi Arabia, where he
started a biotech company and held a faculty position at King Abdullah
University of Science and Technology in Thuwal. But last year he was
invited to lead a well-funded new lab at Shanghai University in China.
He couldn't resist, he says: "Life without activity and adventures is
not fulfilling."
Social scientists are eager to
study the wanderings of nomads like Kodzius to understand how the global
scientific enterprise is evolving. You might expect that to be an easy
task, because scientists log and publish every milestone of their
research. But the lives of the scientists themselves are outside the
frame. Surveys and government reports yield some information, but no
data set comprehensively tracks scientific migration worldwide. And
surveys keep people's identifying information confidential, so
individual migrations are impossible to track.
To find Kodzius and his fellow globetrotters, Science analyzed data from a new source: ORCID, the nonprofit organization that assigns unique identity codes to researchers (see full data set).
ORCID wasn't designed for that purpose, but its database of 3 million
scientists—by far the largest public data set of academic CVs ever
released—may become a vital tool for charting their flow around the
world.
65,000
5000
Did not migrate
Number of peoplewho earned Ph.D.
United Kingdom (32.3%)United States (19.0%)Australia and Oceania (16.7%)European Union except U.K. (16.3%)Non-EU Europe (16.1%)Non-U.S. Americas (13.0%)Asia (9.6%)Africa (5.7%)
ORCID "is a big step forward," says Paula Stephan, an economist
at Georgia State University in Atlanta. She led a global email-based
survey of scientific mobility—the largest ever at 17,000
people—published in Nature Biotechnology in 2012. However, she
cautions that ORCID is an incomplete and biased sample of the world's
scientists. Until researchers account for those quirks, or enough
scientists fill out their ORCID profiles, it can't be relied on as a
definitive picture of scientific migration. Even so, it reveals some
surprising patterns and highlights individual stories, like Kodzius's,
that otherwise would have remained hidden.
Even the basics about the global scientific workforce are
surprisingly hard to nail down. Many countries do share data about their
scientists, and the United Nations pulls those streams together into
semiannual reports on global science. As of 2015, the global head count
comes to 8 million scientists. One in five is in an EU country, and 17%
and 19% are in the United States and China, respectively.
How many of each country's research workforce are immigrants? In the
United States, more than a third of doctoral degrees in the sciences and
engineering are awarded to foreigners on temporary visas, according to a
report last year by the National Science Foundation. But after the
Ph.D., that data trail goes cold, Stephan says.
The global picture of migration has been even more elusive. Building
it requires information about all scientists around the world year after
year. Yet that's just what ORCID could eventually offer.
ORCID's original purpose was simply to help scientists with
common names—such as Michael Roberts or Wei Wang—get credit for all
their publications by giving them unique identity codes, says Laurel
Haak, ORCID's executive director, who is based in Bethesda, Maryland.
The organization maintains a website through which users can add
information to their profile, including education and employment
history. Since its launch in 2012, the number of ORCID profiles has
grown explosively. So far, 741,867 of the 3 million ORCID users have
chosen to use their online profile as a public CV that chronicles their
education and work history, and spans up to several decades for the most
senior researchers.
Tracing ORCID users' countries of residence over time makes it
possible to retrospectively trace each person's migration pattern.
Supermigrators like Kodzius stand out in the data. (See the cover of this issue
for a map of the paths that Kodzius and other globe-trotters have
taken.) With roughly 10% of the world's scientists geographically
tracked in ORCID, interesting patterns emerge that no other data set can
capture.
For example, the data suggest that about 30% of the scientists who
got their Ph.D. in the United Kingdom now live elsewhere, whereas the
same is true for only about 15% of scientists who received their Ph.D.s
in other EU countries.
Quirky sampling
ORCID is not a random sample of the
world’s scientists. Countries are not equally represented, as revealed
by a comparison with 2013 figures from the UNESCO Science Report.
DATA: JOHN BOHANNON (SCIENCE)/ORCID
G. GRULLÓN AND J. YOU/SCIENCE
The data also suggest an effect of the 11 September 2001
terrorist attacks: a slump in the migration of foreign scientists to the
United States. Overall, the ORCID data show that the number of foreign
researchers studying or working in the United States has grown smoothly
since 1990, because the global pool of ORCID researchers has grown
steadily. But there's one glaring exception: The number of foreign
researchers immigrating to the United States plateaus in 2002. Further
analysis reveals that the annual rate of immigration to the United
States dropped by about 15% and did not recover until 2008. Was that
slump due to post-9/11 chaos in U.S. immigration and tougher visa
requirements? If so, that could be one of the attack's longest-lasting
costs: thousands of the most highly skilled workers avoiding the United
States for years.
Causation will be hard to pin down, however, says Kirk Doran, an
economist at the University of Notre Dame in South Bend, Indiana. In
addition to global economic forces that cause labor markets to ebb and
flow, ORCID itself "has many confounding factors," he says. For example,
Spain and Portugal are overrepresented in ORCID because their funding
institutes require scientists to use the system. Also, the people most
motivated to sign up with ORCID are academic researchers who publish,
Stephan notes, whereas industry scientists may be largely missing.
However, the ORCID data do reproduce many of the same broad patterns of scientific migration seen in the United Nations reports.
Youthful picture
People with more recent Ph.D.s are
overrepresented in the data set, reflecting its recent growth and the
fact that younger researchers are signing up for ORCID more quickly than
older ones.
DATA: JOHN BOHANNON (SCIENCE)/ORCID
GRAPHIC: G. GRULLÓN AND J. YOU/SCIENCE
As ORCID grows into a more comprehensive sample, policymakers
will likely use it to track the impact of their efforts to entice
research talent. Meanwhile, the data offer a unique glimpse into the
migratory lives of the world's knowledge producers.
Consider Danny van Noort, age 54, a biotechnology engineer who
studied in Sweden and the Netherlands but is based in Singapore—for now.
"After 4 months in Cambodia, I packed my bags again and went back to
Sweden in 2014," he recalls. "I got an offer from a former colleague to
join him in Australia a few months later as a research fellow." Each
move offered a chance to push his research to a higher level by working
with top experts or at cutting-edge facilities, he says. "I am ready to
settle down somewhere nice, but my career doesn't let me."
Then there's Delanyo Dovlo, a public health researcher for the World
Health Organization (WHO) based in Brazzaville. "My first major
migration was from Ghana to Namibia in 1999," he says. By then, he had
already studied in the United Kingdom and the United States. Then came
"political interference" in Namibia, followed by "an opportunity to be
well paid for once" at WHO. So he kept roving, migrating three more
times between Europe and Africa.
The enticements—a bigger paycheck or access to top researchers—had
better be good because there's often a personal cost, Van Noort says.
Migration "uproots you. It is a lonely existence, as friends are hard to
come by and maintain. And there is no stability and security." Kodzius
echoes that sentiment: "I am still single," he says bluntly.
Others see migrations as an end in themselves. "I only wish I could
secure funding for more," says Helena Pinheiro, 56, a biological
engineer at the Superior Technical Institute in Lisbon, who has crossed
national borders five times so far. "Living and working in another
country … makes you more humane and understanding, provides happiness in
so many unsuspected ways." Then again, she notes, "crossing borders has
always left me with the wish that borders would cease to exist."
No comments:
Post a Comment