The Gift of Global Talent: Innovation Policy and the Economy

1 A Capsule Summary of the Book Named by The Economist as a Book of the Year of 2012, the book "The Immigrant Exodus: Why America Is Losing the Global Race to Capture Entrepreneurial Talent" directs our attention to an important topic of global talent management and immigrant entrepreneurial policy. The book traces the changing trajectory of immigrant entrepreneurs in the US. Although the American Dream has inspired thousands of talented entrepreneurs from all over the world to found their ventures in the past, the talented immigrants are now turning away from this territory, reluctantly or purposefully. The authors highlighted the changing trend and urged US policymakers to modify immigration policy, in order to retain the best and brightest talents. Essentially, these immigrant talents can enormously contribute to the economy and nation's competitiveness. This timely book adds valuable and important stock of knowledge in claiming American immigration policy has to be modified to compete against other countries in the "War for Talent". Many vivid examples illustrate the authors' argument that the America is losing the global competition to capture entrepreneurial talent, largely due to unfavourable immigrant policy. However, emerging economies, such as China and India, currently put strong emphasis on attracting talents to return their home country (Saxenian 2007; Wadhwa et al. 2011). This sharp contrast invites readers to evaluate the US immigration policy and consequences amid global talent mobility. What are the reasons that might lead US to lose the battle for competing talents? How should policy makers better address the reversed brain drain phenomenon? This book aims to answer these interesting questions. 2 Objective and Target Audience This book suits to any audience who is interested in talent management, immigrant entrepreneur and entrepreneurial policy. The objective of this book is to systematically summarise the entrepreneurial development landscape in the US and the significant contributions made by immigrant entrepreneurs. Through a comparative lens, the book highlighted the potential danger encountered by developed economies that entrepreneurial talents might not sustain due to various immigration policy obstacles. Furthermore, it directs scholars' and policymakers' attention to the interesting phenomenon, immigrant entrepreneurs and their continuous influences on both the host country and global economy. This book may be used as reading material for entrepreneurship course for undergraduates and MBAs. Although the book has a focus on the US, it also echoes some contemporary policy practices in many European countries. For instance, Ursula von der Leyen, Germany's minister for labour and social affairs, recently urged that attracting more skilled migrant workers might help to fill the worker shortage faced by Germany in the future (FT 2013). Unfortunately, the current immigrant policy might obstruct the immigrant talent who wants to found innovative technology ventures, as illustrated by the struggle for obtaining visa for a Chinese and Indian entrepreneurial team in Munich (Wirtschaftswoche 2012). Hence, this timely book might invite policymakers to reflect how to successfully attract talents in competing with the unfolding "War for Talent" on the global scale. 3 Structure and Contents The book is structured into 6 chapters associated with introduction and conclusion, addressing a variety of aspects of skilled immigrants. Chapter 1 articulates the reason why US future depends on skilled immigrants. The historical evidence illustrated that in 2005 immigrant entrepreneurs launched 52 % of all start-ups in Silicon Valley. Chapter 2 indicates the decreasing trend of immigrant entrepreneurs by showing the number of immigrant-founded start-ups has dropped to 44 % today. Chapter 3 juxtaposes the dilemma of immigrant entrepreneurs, "To stay, or not to stay is a question! …

Executive SummaryTalent is the most precious resource for today’s knowledge-based economy, and a significant share of the US skilled workforce in technology fields is foreign born. The United State...

Detroit and Windsor as Transnational Spaces: A Case Study of Asian Indian Migrants by Vibha Bhalla A recent book, Permeable Border The Great hakes Basin as Transnational Region, 1650-1990, has drawn attention to the Great Lakes region as a transnational space. Emphasizing the economic and social linkages across this area, the authors examine the artificial nature of the border, stating: "The border also has been a principal mechanism for articulating and implementing immigration, economic development, and nation building policies while it has become, on a symbolic level, the embodiment of national sovereignty."1 Highlighting the regional economic linkages that have, since the seventeenth century, spanned what is now the Canadian and U.S. border, the authors also discuss the symbiotic relationship between nation building and capitalist interests. The nation state, they argue, played a central role in encouraging economic developments?it eliminated tariffs to promote economic development and it also created immigration policies to ease labor shortages in key industries by allowing selective migration. Finally, the authors demonstrate the ways inwhich people interacted with economic and political developments because of their individual or family needs. The book's authors call for future writers to look beyond the nation state narrative and focus on regions that transcend borders.2 This article follows the themes discussed in Permeable Border into recent decades. Using the migration of Asian Indians/East Indians3 within the Great Lakes region, especially between Detroit and Iwould like to thank Nora Fakes for her help in revising this article. Thanks also go to Christine Drennan. 1 John J. Bukowczyk et al., Permeable Border. The Great Lakes Basin as Transnational Region, 1650-1990 (Calgary and Pittsburgh: University of Calgary Press, University of Pittsburgh Press, 2005), 3. 2 Ibid. 3 Canada and the United States categorize migrants from India differently. In Canada they are defined as East Indians, while the United States characterizes them as Asian Indians. For this article Iwill use the terms Asian Indians and Indian immigrants. Michigan Historical Review 34:2 (Fall 2008): 99-116 ?2008 by Central Michigan University. ISSN 0890-1686 All Rights Reserved. 100 Michigan Historical Review Windsor from 1960-2000, the article highlights the new regional economic relationships that have developed since the 1960s, and emphasizes the extensive economic integration of the regional economy during those years, especially in the auto industries. Furthermore, this article will demonstrate that national economic and immigration policies introduced after the 1960s continued to accommodate the dynamic transnational economic needs of the region centered on Windsor and Detroit. The economic opportunities offered by these centers, coupled with the fact that both permitted (if only temporarily) easy access for each others' residents fostered regional networks within the Indian diaspora. Information transmitted through these networks enabled individuals to understand the intricacies of immigration policies and acquire new skills to suit both regional labor needs and national immigration policies. To illustrate this process, the present article draws upon migration narratives of five Indian immigrants to Canada who became involved in these regional economies and subsequendy moved to the United States. As their stories illustrate, Asian Indians inDetroit andWindsor have continued to make the border a permeable space. Large-scale Asian Indian migrations from India to mainland North America began in the 1960s with the passage of new immigration legislation by both Canada and the United States that overturned their anti-Asian immigration policies.4 Canadian immigration laws passed in 1962 and 1967 established a point-based immigration system that allowed Indians once again to immigrate to Canada. Similarly, in 1965 passage of the Immigration and Naturalization Act in the United States overturned an immigration policy that had until then been based on the national origins quota system. The new policy established hemispheric quotas and emphasized the importance of reuniting families as well as economic development.5 The liberalization of Canadian and U.S. immigration policies coincided with Great Britain's decision to restrict immigration. 4Trinidad and Guyana already had large Indian diaspora populations. See Ninette Kelley and Michael J. Trebilcock, The Making of the Mosaic: A History of Canadian Immigration Policy (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1998), for information on Canadian immigration policies. See David M. Reimers, Still the Golden Door...

Global Talent and U.S. Immigration Policy

Policy Points There is growing attention to the role of immigration and immigrant policies in shaping the health and well-being of immigrants of color. The early 21st century in the United States has seen several important achievements in inclusionary policies, practices, and ideologies toward immigrants, largely at subnational levels (e.g., states, counties, cities/towns). National policies or practices that are inclusionary toward immigrants are often at the discretion of the political parties in power. Early in the 21st century, the United States has implemented several exclusionary immigration and immigrant policies, contributing to record deportations and detentions and worsening inequities in the social drivers of health.

This paper introduces a special collection of 15 papers that chart a course for long-term reform of the US immigration system. The papers look beyond recent legislative debates and the current era of rising nationalism and restrictionism to outline the elements of a forward-looking immigration policy that would serve the nation's interests, honor its liberal democratic ideals, promote the full participation of immigrants in the nation's life, and exploit the opportunities offered by the increasingly interdependent world. This paper highlights several overarching themes from the collection, as well as dozens of proposals for reform. Together, the papers in the collection make the case that: • Immigration policymaking should be embedded in a larger set of partnerships, processes, and commitments that respond to the conditions that force persons to migrate. • The US immigration system should reflect liberal democratic values and an inclusive vision of national identity. • It is incumbent on policy and opinion makers to publicize the broad national interests served by US immigration policies. • Policymakers should, in turn, evaluate and adjust US immigration policies based on their success in furthering the nation's interests. • The United States should prioritize the gathering and dissemination of the best available evidence on migration and on the nation's migration-related needs and programs, and should use this information to respond flexibly to changing migration patterns and new economic developments. • Immigrant integration strengthens communities and represents an important, overarching metric for US immigration policies. • The successful integration of the United States' 43 million foreign-born residents and their progeny should be a national priority. • An immigration federalism agenda should prioritize cooperation on shared federal, state, and local priorities. • An immigration federalism agenda should recognize the federal government's enforcement obligations; the interests of local communities in the safety, well-being and participation of their residents; the importance of federal leadership in resolving the challenges posed by the US undocumented population; and the need for civil society institutions to serve as mediators of immigrant integration. • Immigration reform should be coupled with strong, well-enforced labor standards in order to promote fair wages and safe and healthy working conditions for all US workers. • Fairness and due process should characterize US admission, custody, and removal decisions. • Family unity should remain a central goal of US immigration policy and a pillar of the US immigration system. • The United States should seek to craft “win-win” immigration policies that serve its own interests and that benefit migrant-sending states. • US immigration law and policy should be coherent and consistent, and the United States should create legal migration opportunities for persons uprooted by US foreign interventions, trade policies, and immigration laws. • The United States should reduce the size of its undocumented population through a substantial legalization program and seek to ensure that this population never again approximates its current size.

Although the Statue of Liberty, one of the premier symbols of the United States, welcomes “your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,” America’s relationship with its immigrants has long been ambivalent. Throughout the United States’ history, there have been persistent and charged debates over the nature and consequences of immigration. At times, America has greatly restricted the number and characteristics of newcomers, despite its aspiration to be identified as a “nation of immigrants” and a “melting pot.” The heated, contentious debate over who should be included in the United States, and how they should be included, persists in the halls of Congress, the judiciary, the executive branch, and at the state and local levels. The literature related to history and contemporary debates regarding immigration politics and policy in the United States is expansive. This article addresses scholarship on a number of specific policy debates, as well as popular reactions to these polemics. The works below focus on three overarching themes. First, we discuss scholarship about the policies themselves. This research includes a historical perspective, looking back at early immigration policies that were characterized by a quota system and the exclusion of Asian immigrants, as well as a view on contemporary policy debates emerging since the 1965 Immigration and Naturalization Act. This significant piece of legislation overturned the system of national origin restrictions and led to the development of the current immigration policy regime. The second broad theme explores the immigrants themselves, including demographic trends, political and economic incorporation, and political participation. The final major theme includes reactions to contemporary policy debates by both the public and the press. Works in this area focus on public opinion about immigration policy, social movements emerging in response to the immigration debate, the anti-immigrant backlash, and media coverage of immigration politics. The end of this article also highlights key data sources for those wishing to conduct additional research in this area.

1HE LITERATURE MAKING USE of quantitative data in the comparative analysis of policy outputs across the American states has largely been dependent upon public expenditure levels as indicators of policy efforts. One of the few potential altematives has been measurements of policy innovativeness, most recently reintroduced for political analysis by Jack L. Walker.' While policy innovation might be measured in a number of ways, Walker has been especially concemed with a general tendency toward innovativeness of state govemments, or as rural sociologists refer to it, adoptionproneness.2 Certainly, American political folklore is rich in suggesting that some states are innovators while others are laggards. Findings by others in later research, however, cast some doubt upon not only the adequacy of the quantitative measures devised

Immigration and refugees are sets of global flows of people who are seeking information, technology, economic stability, and military, political, and social asylum. Immigrants and refugees, which is one of the categories of migrants, represent only one of many global exchanges in an increasingly independent world. As the number of immigrants increases, the national, demographic, and socio-economic composition of the foreign residents in a host country are impacted by the immigration and immigrant policies of the receiving country. Immigration is inseparably part of the American national identity and always will be, and the United States would not continue to grow without immigration. In setting immigration policy in the United States, policymakers must be sensitive to both the U.S. vulnerabilities and the effects of American policies on the countries of origin. Since the post 9/11 period in the United States, immigration, immigration policy and implementation have been debated issues. Especially after Donald Trump was elected, the debate about migrants and immigration issues has increased even more. The purpose of this study is to show the development of immigration in American history, the positive and negative effects of immigrants on American economy and social life, and the question of the effects of social inclusion policies on the immigrant problem.

Immigration and refugees are sets of global flows of people who are seeking information, technology, economic stability, and military, political, and social asylum. Immigrants and refugees, which is one of the categories of migrants, represent only one of many global exchanges in an increasingly independent world. As the number of immigrants increases, the national, demographic, and socio-economic composition of the foreign residents in a host country are impacted by the immigration and immigrant policies of the receiving country. Immigration is inseparably part of the American national identity and always will be, and the United States would not continue to grow without immigration. In setting immigration policy in the United States, policymakers must be sensitive to both the U.S. vulnerabilities and the effects of American policies on the countries of origin. Since the post 9/11 period in the United States, immigration, immigration policy and implementation have been debated issues. Especially after Donald Trump was elected, the debate about migrants and immigration issues has increased even more. The purpose of this study is to show the development of immigration in American history, the positive and negative effects of immigrants on American economy and social life, and the question of the effects of social inclusion policies on the immigrant problem.

This special issue of Innovation: Management, Policy & Practice (also released as a book: ISBN 978-1-921348-31-0) will explore some empirical and analytic connections between creative industries and innovation policy. Seven papers are presented. The first four are empirical, providing analysis of large and/or detailed data sets on creative industries businesses and occupations to discern their contribution to innovation. The next three papers focus on comparative and historical policy analysis, connecting creative industries policy (broadly considered, including media, arts and cultural policy) and innovation policy. To introduce this special issue I want to review the arguments connecting the statistical, conceptual and policy neologism of 'creative industries' to: (1) the elements of a national innovation system; and (2) to innovation policy. In approaching this connection, two overarching issues arise.The first relates to the rise of the creative industries. What are they, what special significance do they have, if any, and furthermore, why now? Much of the answer turns on several ongoing apparent transformations in the technological and industrial composition of modern economies. This is the rise of the 'post-industrial society' (Bell 1973) and the 'knowledge-based economy' (OECD 1996), the systematic growth of the service sector, the rise of what Richard Florida (2002) calls the 'creative class', and so forth. And amidst this we also have the rise of the 'creative industries', an industrial re-classification first introduced by the UK government's Department of Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS 1998). These trends all point in the same direction of a shifting knowledge-base of modern economies. In this view more and greater value issues from businesses and markets in the media, arts, cultural and experience industries. Recent decades have witnessed a period of global structural change in economic systems marked by the sustained rise of the creative industries as a source of employment, exports and value added (DCMS 2006). Proponents of 'creative industries' argue that this rise in economic significance should map to a rise in policy significance. Despite economists lining up to declaim this non sequitur, the issue has gathered a considerable policy traction, as many regions and nations seek to develop a 'creative industries strategy' and to build 'creative industries policy'.A second issue follows, because it is then argued that this creative industries policy should not represent a scaled-up version of extant arts, cultural or media policy, with its implicit welfaretheoretic foundations (see e.g. Peacock 2006), but is beginning to be seen as an underdeveloped element of services innovation in the context of the broader debate about successive generations of innovation policy (Rothwell 1994; Metcalfe & Miles 2000; Dodsgon et al. 2005; Cunningham et al. 2005). And while still a minority position, there is growing recognition that this implies a policy approach based on the 'Schumpeterian' or 'evolutionary economic' approach of innovation policy (Pelikan & Wegner 2003; Witt 2003; Cunningham 2009). What is seemingly occurring, then, is a reformation of industry policy as innovation policy (Morrison & Potts 2008) allied with a reconstruction of a new industrial grouping - creative industries - toward a modified conception of the innovation process.What, then, is the basis of this alleged connection between creative industries and innovation policy? There are many studies on innovation processes within the creative industries. For example, Castaner and Campos (2002), drawing on the theory of organizational innovation, examined the role of micro and organizational variables in the process of artistic innovation. Handke (2006, 2007) analyses innovation surveys to identify the factors contributing to innovation in the media industries, an approach also pursued by Tether (2003), who explicitly seeks comparison of innovation performance with other sectors. …

When it comes to immigration policy, nation-states generally have the power to exclude, admit, or expel noncitizens from their territories. On the other hand, subnational jurisdictions have more often been given the task of formulating and implementing immigrant policy, which entails the incorporation of immigrants into local communities. This division of labor has recently come under intense scrutiny. The local and state politics of immigration and immigrant integration in the United States has been documented in the scholarly literature, focusing on topics such as California’s Proposition 187, the disparity between the national benefits and local costs of immigration, and the increasing role played by nongovernmental organizations and other nonstate actors in the integration of immigrants at the local scale. Four categories of local immigrant and immigration policy have been studied: policies that arise from the devolution of select powers over noncitizens; grassroots policies on areas such as education and human trafficking; policies that are more explicitly about a politics of immigration control; and policies that engage with a politics of immigrant integration. However, there are still avenues that require further investigation so as to better understand the growing involvement of subnational governments in the formulation and implementation of immigrant and immigration policy. For example, more research is needed in which policy outcome is taken as the dependent variable and to document and understand the dynamics of local immigrant integration and immigration policy formation in developing countries.

166 SAISREVIEW encouraged to retaliate, thus choking off one of America's main sources of prosperity. Perhaps a broader perspective could help. Through the 1960s, foreign direct investment was a distinctly American phenomenon, as U.S. companies went abroad, mainly to Europe, to conquer markets with their (then) superior managerial techniques. But as Japanese and European firms have grown more sophisticated (with the help of technology transfers from U.S. companies!), they have now turned the tables and come to America to try their luck. A natural balancing has occurred. What about the Japan "problem"? Japan has recycled its current account surpluses by buying assets abroad at an impressive rate, moving from the seventh largest foreign investor in 1980 to the number three position behind the U.S. and the U.K. by 1987. But foreign companies in Japan account for only one percent of that country's gross sales. Julius is optimistic about the prospects for opening up the Japanese economy to foreign investment. It took fifteen years ( 1965-1979) for the United States to move from being a major source of outward investment to becoming a source of inward investment. So, according to Julius, "if we date Japan's emergence as a major international investor from 1981, and if the U.S. pattern is an appropriate guide, then we may expect strong inflows into Japan to begin in the latter half of the 1990s." Let us hope that Julius is right. The Gatekeepers: Comparative Immigration Policy. Edited by Michael C. LeMay. New York: Praeger, 1989. 232pp. $39.95/Cloth. Reviewed by Richard A. Holtzapple, M.A. Candidate, SAIS. Immigration policy represents one of the most intriguing and complex junctures of a nation's foreign and domestic policies. As the six essays collected in this volume aptly demonstrate, domestic pressures are the principle determinant of most countries' attitudes towards immigration. The domestic interests involved, however, vary dramatically, and The Gatekeepers provides a useful sample ofthe diverse perspectives which contribute to immigration policy. The author examines the historical experience of six nations, each of which has a distinctive immigration policy. The countries studied include the United States, Australia, and Venezuela, all major recipients of immigrants; Britain, historically a country of emigration which has been increasingly exposed to immigration in the post-colonial era; West Germany, which officially proclaims itself a "non-immigrant" nation but which nonetheless has a large immigrant population; and Israel, an immigrant nation where religious considerations determine immigration policy. The essays are linked by their historical perspective. Many of the authors spend a significant amount of time presenting the reader with an overview of each country's historic immigration patterns and policies. Beyond this, however, the essays diverge in focus to a distracting, and at times aggravating, degree. The essays on the U.S. and Australia concentrate on policy- BOOK REVIEWS 167 makers' efforts to regulate immigration by either encouraging or restricting the flow—the traditional "gatekeeper" role. The essays concerning West Germany and Britain largely ignore the gatekeeper role and instead focus on policies directed at what one author calls the "reconciling of non-nationals into the host society." In the essay on Israel the focus shifts again to a discussion of the qualifications which make an immigrant a national. While the diverse views may be defended as representative of the principle concerns ofthe specific countries, the diffuse result greatly weakens the volume's value as a comparative study. It is difficult to discover common themes in the essays, much less draw any general conclusions about immigration policy. The one common theme that does emerge throughout is the truism that domestic interests count for a great deal. In part, this is due to a lack of a common theoretical perspective. The reader is provided no lens through which to view immigration policy. For example, LeMay's essay on American immigration policy, while including a useful discussion of historical trends, deteriorates into an excessively detailed and confusing consideration of the 1986 Immigration Reform Act. Moreover, it ends with an incongruous and weakly supported attack on employer sanctions. Whether his arguments regarding the effectiveness of these sanctions are correct or not, they are definitely out of place in...

Since the turn of the twenty-first century, developed countries have engaged in a race for the best and the brightest. States have been lowering barriers to entry and actively recruiting talent from abroad as the premium on human capital has increased in today’s knowledge economies and as demographic problems due to aging and low fertility are becoming a reality. What is interesting is that formerly immigration-adverse, non-traditional immigration states are now opening their doors to this pool of highly skilled migrants. From permanent residency to temporary visas not requiring employer sponsorship, states attempt to sweeten their offers to global talent so the latter would come to their shores. Even more interestingly, notwithstanding the current global economic turmoil, states continue to invite and retain well-educated migrants, while low-skilled migrant labor is turned away. This paper analyses immigration policies since the beginning of the global financial crisis in 2008. Based on this background, the paper presents a non-linear dynamic model where the attraction of global talent is influenced by both countries’ immigration policies and the stock of highly-educated migrants. The model is used to simulate the effects of loosened immigration restrictions on the accumulation of global talent.

The United States immigration and intercountry adoption policies and practice are compared with those of Canada and New Zealand. In the post World War II period, both the United States and Canada have been significant as receiving countries for intercountry adoptees, while New Zealand has proportionately been one of the least significant receiving countries in the West. Intercountry adoptions were addressed in legislation and incorporated into immigration criteria and procedures in the immediate post war period in response to the displaced children of Europe. The early immigration legislation for the migration of children for adoption tended to be reactive and temporary. By the 1970s, there was an increased demand for intercountry adoption, and permanent provisions were established in immigration legislation and criteria. Despite the endorsement of this practice through immigration policy, no national policy corollary that addressed the welfare of these children emerged in the United States or Canada. In contrast, in New Zealand, immigration policy and criteria has been shaped by a national policy on intercountry adoption as a practice since the 1960s. This article traces the development of immigration policy and intercountry adoption policy and practice in all three countries. It is argued that ultimately, with respect to policy priorities and practice, all three countries have prioritized national needs and well being over the ‘needs and welfare’ of child migrants for adoption.