Global Talent Flows

  • Uncategorized

GlobalTalent Flows

Migrationof individuals in an attempt to seek employment in other countries,where they were not born, is an issue that has been experienced for along time. Both high-skilled and low-skilled employees have migratedinto countries in order to provide labor. The purpose of this reportis to discuss the patterns that are portrayed in the global talentflow and strengths and weaknesses of points-based system.


Accordingto the trends that are indicated in global talent flows, around 3% ofthe world’s population resides in a nation different from thecountry that they were born in. The pattern portrayed in the articleshows a large number of highly-skilled and a low number oflow-skilled migrants moving from non-OECD countries to OECD nations.According to Kerr et al. (2016), in 2010, there were approximately 28million high-skilled migrants living in OECD countries, whichrepresented around 130% since 1990. Comparing the migration oflow-skilled migrants to the OECD to that of highly-skilled onesduring the same period, there was only 40% increase in the number oflow-skilled migrants (Kerr et al., 2016). The rise in the number ofhigh-skilled migrants to OECD nations has been associated withdifferent forces, including drops in transportation and communicationcosts, increased pursuit of foreign education by young individuals,increased efforts to attract the migrants through policymakers, andpositive spillovers produced by skill agglomeration. Although themigration of low-skilled employees chiefly offsets the decrease inlow-skilled native workforces in developed countries, high-skilledmigration usually complements the expansion of skill levels for thenative workforces. The distribution of talent among the OECDdestinations remains skewed. In 2010, United States, Canada,Australia, and the United Kingdom comprised the destination forapproximately 70% of high-skilled workers to the OECD nations. Thehigh-skilled members of the next generation appear to be less tied toany particular location or national identity, but instead havementalities and connections that are much more global in nature thanthose of their predecessors. Over time, it can be indicated that thepatterns of migration have increased since the number of individualsmigrating to the OECD countries.


Thelabor migration models that were discussed in class can explain thepatterns of migration discussed in the above question. From theHeckscher-Ohlin model, it was apparent that where there are twofactors and two goods, a rise in the amount of a factor in an economywill result in an increase in the output of the industry utilizingthat factor intensively and decline the output of the other industry.This is the case in the migration patterns in the globe, wherecapital and labor can be used as factors. Countries have benefitedfrom the migration of high-skilled labor since productivity in theirindustries has increased. According to factor price insensitivitytheorem, in the Heckscher-Ohlin model, having two commodities and twofactors, a rise in the amount of a factor in an economy can beabsorbed through adjusting the outputs of industries, without makingany modifications in the factor price. This theorem is arepresentative of what is happening in the global talent flow thisis because it is possible to consider labor and capital as the twofactors in the generation of any two commodities. An increase in thelevel of labor can be absorbed through making modifications to theoutputs being produce without necessarily adjusting the price oflabor. Therefore, it can be argued that the labor migration modelsthat were discussed in class can explain the patterns of migration inthe global talent flow.


Points-basedsystem emphasizes on screening of single applicants for admission.This system has merits and weaknesses compared to the demand-drivensystem. One of the strengths associated with the point-based systemis that it is in a position to provide an explicit statement ofmigration priorities for the engagement of public debate, whichresults in stable immigration processes with time. Also, points-basedsystem selects individuals based on the existing employmentarrangements this can help in getting the right individuals for therequired employment positions. Furthermore, it can be argued thatpoints-based system is in a position to emphasize on flexibility andtransparency. This is because the system selects immigrants based onsome valued attributes that the individuals possess. However, thereare disadvantages linked to the system since developing and adjustingan optimal weighing arrangement over time is difficult and multiyearqueues for applicants are feasible. Furthermore, talented migrantsmay find themselves underemployed following their arrival to thedestination points because of lack of their skills in certain areas(Kerr et al., 2016). The system does not necessarily ensure thatimmigrants become employed at an appropriate skill level followingtheir entry to the destination countries. Overall, the features ofthe two systems do not generate a clear absolute winner, and mostreal-world regimes combine different features of points-based andemployment-driven systems.

Inconclusion, it can be argued that a large number of highly-skilledand a low number of low-skilled migrants move from non-OECD countriesto OECD nations. In 2010, there were around 28 million high-skilledimmigrants residing in OECD nations, which characterizedapproximately 130% since 1990. Point-based system is in a position toprovide an explicit statement of migration priorities for theengagement of public debate, which results in stable immigrationprocesses with time. Alternatively, talented immigrants can becomeunderemployed in the case of points-based system.


Kerr,P.S., Kerr, W. Ozden, C. &amp Parsons, C. (2016). Global TalentFlows. Journalof Economic Perspectives,Vol. 30(4) 83-106.