(I) Símbolo del elemento yodo.

The contribution of this thesis is to provide better understanding of migration’s impact on development, and the perspective narrows down to the return stage of migration and returnees’ experiences of knowledge transfer in the workplace. It focuses on a relatively under-researched

phenomenon and adds to the small body of literature that is already acting as a comparative template for research. Return migration is an important part of the discussion on international migration, although understanding of the issue remains underdeveloped. Many studies discuss why people return, but not what happens to the knowledge they hold when they return and have the opportunity to share it in the workplace. The chapter began with a broad introduction to return migration before narrowing the focus to a specific focus on knowledge transfer during the return stage of the migration cycle.4 _{From the literature, eight hypotheses have been}

described and will be tested in subsequent chapters using the survey results and interviews. There is also expectation of substantial hypothesis generation, which is a valuable element of the analytical process.

Equally relevant are the macro-level debates on the role of globalisation and knowledge-based economies, both of which are closely interwoven with the discussion on highly skilled migration (Hargreaves et al. 2007: 49; Yoruk and von Tunzelmann 2006). This thesis also includes the structural determinants of knowledge in the country at one level, and the interaction of the individual with their work environment at another level (Massey et al. 1993: 456). In terms of focus, when conceiving migration, the key actor is the individual, not only in terms of decision- making but also in transferring knowledge. The decision to migrate is complex, varies across countries and migrant groups, and is driven by diverse factors beyond the state and global processes. In addition to the economic motivations stressed in early theoretical literature, any research must acknowledge that the decision to relocate, whether as an individual or a family, is often as much an issue of social determinants, such as quality of life, as income maximisation. While the literatures on knowledge management and knowledge-based economies deal with issues concerning the nature of knowledge, its generation and transfer, migration research (particularly quantitative studies) has yet to incorporate the formers’ conceptual innovations in defining the different types of knowledge. An approach that incorporates the role of governments and other actors in the recruitment of highly skilled migrants, i.e. in the setting of policies that guide restrictions, guidelines and standards of recruitment (Goss and Lindqvist 1995), provides stronger contextual basis for understanding the diversity of migration processes. As political scientists argue, in order to understand migration policy we must

4 _{Or potential ‘cycle’. The research is not longitudinal and so cannot assess future migration trajectories according the}

acknowledge the divergent interest groups involved in the policy-making process (Hollifield 2008: 192). Markets are embedded in socio-political systems that determine the purpose and direction of the economy, as well as set the boundaries within which they operate. Likewise, the international economy is also embedded in international regimes and agreements. This chapter has specified the main question of the thesis, discussed linkages between relevant literatures and specified the hypotheses to be tested. The layout of the thesis follows the structure of this chapter. Firstly, the methodology and data collection are described before moving to a description of Serbian highly skilled migration in Chapter 3. Chapter 4 is a discussion of the national and global influences on migration, highlighting the relative isolation of the Serbian economy from international markets, which it is argued influences the reception and transfer of knowledge in the workplace. Subsequent chapters focus on the knowledge that return migrations acquire abroad and their motivations for returning. Two chapters (7 and 8) concentrate on the workplace, using the theoretical conditions for knowledge transfer to draw out key conditions from the interviews and surveys that are then tested using QCA.

Chapter 2 addresses the methodology of the research the as well as the design of the data collection protocol. It provides an overview of the most relevant disciplinary methodological approaches, drawing out theory and method as they relate to the research questions. The chapter describes the research design, the data collection methodology, and a description of the data sample (interviewees and survey participants).

Chapter 3focuses on the migration from Serbia of highly skilled people since the 1990s, against the background of political, economic and social problems. Though statistics are difficult to come by, it evaluates available sources to construct a picture of migration in Serbia according to the dimensions used in migration literature. This chapter demonstrates that Serbia has experienced severe outward migration of the highly skilled.

Chapter 4 provides the structural context for knowledge acquisition and highly skilled migration, including the rise of knowledge-based economies, and deficiencies within the domestic education and training sectors to provide people with the competences required by labour markets in knowledge-based economies. The chapter is relevant because of the argument in migration literature that migration should be approached from a multi-level perspective and that

national and global factors impact upon the experiences of return migrants in terms of knowledge recognition and transfer. The chapter uses a variety of sources to determine Serbia’s economic integration with foreign markets, including reports on innovation, entrepreneurship, education, training and employment produced by the Serbian government.

Chapter 5 focuses on the individual and motivations to go abroad and to return and the interaction between ‘push’ and ‘pull’ factors. It explores disincentives for return and intentions to stay in Serbia and analyses whether aspects of the international experience affect individual perceptions of life and work in Serbia during the return period. It analyses push and pull factors for migration and return and tests Hypothesis 1 concerning the impact of length of time and post-return levels of satisfaction with life and work in Serbia. The chapter presents results on the aspects of life and work in Serbia that keep people abroad for longer periods.

Chapter 6 analyses the types of knowledge acquired by individuals over the migration period. It discusses knowledge in terms of uniqueness, transferability and applicability using data drawn from the interviews and surveys.

Chapter 7 focuses on the interaction of knowledge and organisations. The discussion centres on analysis of the survey and interviews with individuals working in Serbia. Respondents are asked about knowledge sharing and transfer in the workplace.

Chapter 8 follows on from the previous chapter in focusing on the workplace but uses qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) to explore the conditions that are associated with knowledge sharing at two levels; with colleagues and at the organisational level. The selection of factors is directed by the theoretical literature and elaborated upon by survey and interview responses.

Chapter 9 summarises the findings of the research, commenting on the contribution to the existing literature and evaluating the overall design and data. It also points out shortfalls and limitations of the research and recommends future avenues of work in this field.