Paper review: migration? just studying?

 International Student Mobility: Growth and Dispersion

by Neeraj Kaushal & Mauro Lanati, 2019. NBER Working Papers

Personally, I found the paper difficult to read. This was because the paper didn't use identification strategy such as IV and DiD. Also, the main purpose of this paper was not to identify rigorous causal effects. Rather, the author tried to assess which of two competing models was more plausible. The paper felt unfamiliar to me, as well as theoretically heavy in its derivation of the regression equations. The process to connect the theory to the variable choice was a little bit uncomfortable for me. But, very fun! If I do my own research, I think I can refer the way the paper constructs regression equations.

The paper proposes two competitive models. One is 'migration model', representing permanent migration through the tertiary education, and the other one is the 'human capital model', representing  skills acquisition through studying abroad. The paper then compares the fit of two models using large-scale panel data and rigorous fixed effect. The result is interesting. For OECD English-speaking countries, the human capital model provides a better explanation. And, for OECD Non-Enlish speaking countries, the migration model fits better.

I think I have quite a lot of international student acquaintances at my university, especially by Korean standards. I don't think many Korean students usually mingle with international students. (I'm not sure about the exact reasons. Maybe language barriers, or unfamiliarity?) But current statistic shows that over time, more international students are coming to Korea. In fact, I hadn't understood why the students who are good at English would choose to come to Korea. They have a lot options not only English-speaking countries such as the US (which, these days, may not seem very attractive), the UK and Australia, but also English-friendly countries such as Germany, Switzerland, and so on. So I started to find the reason and mechanism why more students have been heading to Korea.

Well, definitely most of students have come from Asian countries such as Vietnam, Uzbekistan, Nepal, and so on, even excluding Japan and China. To choose same Asian country may have lowered the psychological cost of coming Korea compared with the English-speaking countries. Also I've heard that the size of immigrants diaspora communities from Nepal, Uzbekistan, and so on is quite larger than most of Korean think. Even though the students may not receive direct help from the diaspora networks since they are students rather than workers, they may feel more secure. Also, they may expect to find a job in Korea through these networks.

I think the result of the paper fit with Korea context quite well. Korean tertiary education is usually conducted in Korean rather than English. In other words, the international students must learn academic-level Korean at least one year. It is almost impossible. But, if the purpose of studying in Korea is just initiate migration, this may not be bad for them. In fact, aside from a few exceptions and students from China and Japan, most of international students attend low-ranked universities. If their primary goal were really academic education, they likely would not have chosen the universities. But if their true goal were migration, it seems to make sense.