Beyond Brain Drain: The Dynamics of Geographic Mobility and Educational Attainment of B.C. Young Women and Men
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In recent years, the topic of "brain drain" has gained considerable attention, both in public and intellectual spheres. Despite the media frenzy, few data sets and related studies exist to examine the nature and extent to which brain drain occurs. The purpose of this study is to extend the scope of the way we think about "brain drain," both conceptually and analytically, by examining the geographic migration and mobility patterns over a 10 year period of a large sample of young adults from British Columbia. Through analyses of detailed longitudinal questionnaire data, we examine geographic mobility patterns in relation to (a) B.C. college region of origin, (b) post-secondary educational completion patterns, and (c) gender. Findings reveal that migration patterns are both gendered and geographically complex. Our findings support the claim that brain drain to the U.S. is a mere trickle, not a flood. When examining gender differences of respondents living in the U.S. and outside North America, the vast majority of women who live outside of Canada have earned university credentials, which suggests that global mobility for women appears to be related to university degree completion. These findings challenge the narrow definition of brain drain as simply a Canada - U.S.A. issue where Canada's "best and brightest" are lured from Canada and invite us to consider the implications of intra- and extra-provincial brain drain (and gain), primarily within the confines of Canada.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".