INSTITUTIONAL FIELD OF RETURNING INTELLECTUAL CAPITAL TO UKRAINE: PROBLEMS OF METHODOLOGY
Abstract. This article is about the analysis of the methodological foundations for the scientific substantiation of the institutional field problem of expanding and returning of intellectual capital. Attention is focused on neo-institutionalism as an interdisciplinary toolkit for creating a new direction in migratory studies. The article identifies the interdisciplinary bases for the study of the institutional field of intellectual migration and the theoretical and methodological potential of neo-institutionalism in this area. It is proved that the new institutional economic theory, initiated by the Nobel Prize winner Douglas North, opens up new opportunities for migration research. The phenomenon of the geo-economic institutional field of intellectual and high skilled migration in the interpretation of the representative of the Austrian Economic School, Ludwig von Mises, is analyzed. It is stated that the problem of intellectual migration, the relevance of which in the context of the economy of the intellect is increasing, requires special attention of scientists and managers and the creation of scientifically based state strategy. The institutional factors for the return of IT migrants to Ukraine are determined. It has been proven that intellectual capital and innovation become the core in modern migration discourse. The prospective areas in the study of intellectual migration and the formation of a migration policy strategy are the following ones: an examination of research and business projects; introduction of regular monitoring of migration processes, support for research projects aimed at studying the migration peculiarities of highly skilled specialists and students. It is substantiated that «brain drain» poses a potential threat to the intellectual capital of Ukraine. It is concluded that for the successful implementation of the state policy aimed at “returning the brains”, it is important to take into account several aspects: the programs developed by the government should take into account the scientific and innovation potential of the country; the priority directions for the development of science and technology should be organically combined with the interests and initiatives that come from the scientific diaspora and associations of diaspora scientists.
Keywords: institutional field, intellectual migration, neo-institutionalism, brain drain, interdisciplinary toolkit, intellectual capital.
JEL classification: I21, I23, I28.