Comments

Ryan, Apart from having fuelled years of commentary, and even some policy, brain drain is a thing, where thing neatly captures class prejudice, as if some humans use their brains to labour and others do not. Having performed both agricultural and academic labour, I can assure you that both used these capacities. The descriptions, unskilled-not trained for the specific task in which employed, semi-skilled-received on the job training, and skilled-formally trained, as in medical training for a doctor, are preferable. Secondly, demand should never be separated from supply, except in the fantasies of some. They are a unity of and for accumulation. In a capitalist world, both are produced, subject to capital. In Richard Curtain's often cited PhD thesis on under-development in the Sepik of PNG, migration of male workers out of the region for waged and other employment, mainly agriculutural crops for international markets occurred at the same moment as consumer goods produced globally were transported into their villages and households. Demand for these goods assisted in the production of the supply of male migrants leaving and also denuding households and villages of their presence. With males absent, females from the households and others, usually the elderly of the extended families, had to lengthen their working days to compensate for the lack of domestic support. Thus was the next generation of workers produced. Parts of the region became labour reserves, the effects of which are still obvious today in one of PNG's poorest areas.

Hi Stephen P, Your accusation that we argue for Pacific subservience is ridiculous, as is the argument that Pacific islands should not embrace the labour mobility opportunities available to them. But we welcome a range of views on the Devpolicy Blog. We've published 13 by you. Regards, Stephen H

Scott, Thanks for reading our blog, and for your interest in our research. Most evidence suggests brain drain isn't actually a thing, as I've explained elsewhere on the blog. In health care, for example, this often leads to more domestic production of nurses or other professions in demand abroad, boosting domestic supply. And in the Pacific, the issue is not a lack of workers or skills. It is a lack of jobs (demand). For a worker, a job abroad is better than a job domestically (pays more, workers preferences clearly reveal this and should be respected) and a job domestically is better than no job. Outmigration also tends to spur positive impacts for those "left behind". Migrating is the simplest way for someone to lift their living standards and the most powerful poverty reduction tool we have, so I welcome it playing a greater role in development policy. For Devpol research on human capital in PNG, see our large project on rural health and education facilities under our PNG Promoting Effective Public Expenditure Project which we aim to replicate in the coming years if possible. https://devpolicy.crawford.anu.edu.au/png-project/png-expenditure-project We also published a report last year on PNG health. https://devpolicy.org/publications/reports/PNGs-Primary-Health-Care-System_Wiltshire-Watson-Lokinap-Currie-December-2020.pdf A lot of our ongoing and planned research, including that on labour mobility, is focused on health, education, and child development. You’ll see more of that on the blog in the coming months and years. In the meantime, if you use the search function on the blog there is already a lot there on human capital and we have plenty of discussion papers and other publications on related issues. https://devpolicy.crawford.anu.edu.au/publications/discussion-papers Warmest wishes, Ryan

Scott, I fully agree with you. The DevPolicy blogs on the Pacific Labour Scheme all seem to be arguing that the needs of the Pacific Island Countries must be subservient to the needs of Australia (and New Zealand). This is part of a larger development picture that also needs to be better understood, as David Abbott and I argue in the following blogs: https://devpolicy.org/mired-in-mirab-migration-and-remittances-20200302/ and https://devpolicy.org/mired-in-mirab-aid-and-bureaucracy-20200303/

Stephen, we already have an inherently racist system. That is why 417 and 462 holders are encouraged to work in agriculture but have total freedom of movement and why those from the Pacific, PNG, and T-L are forced onto SWP visas and tied to employers.

So the myopia continues: `Australia needs more Pacific mid-skill migration'. And the needs of South Pacific countries? Certainly not economists funded by DFAT. Couldn't possibly be these needed in SP countries either: `Sustained economic growth requires highly educated workers, who in turn require fundamental workers to do their jobs. In a hospital room, for example, the surgeon works together with a nurse’s assistant, a building cleaner, a food service worker, and an electrician to bring the patient back to health. No hospital room could function without the labour of all of these, and other, workers.' Try telling this to Goroka hospital and others in PNG battling an epidemic clearly out of control. When will the DevPolicy Centre turn its analytic skills to investigating the human capital conditions in SP countries, including what part international policy has played in the non-development that has reigned over the last forty or so years in the region? Does development policy mean litle more than advocating out-migration to Australia and New Zealand?

Very important point. As a Pacific Islander, the impacts in temporary loss of human capital to PLS and related schemes are immense. For example, in rural villages, traditional laborious activities such as gardening and small livestock rearing normally for men, is now being left to women and the elderly, as the menfolk are away from home for lengthy periods of time, especially now in this COVID19 era. As to your question of unemployment in PICs, this may be a question of countries not investing enough in job creation particularly in the informal rural sector. I also reiterate the need for more research into this topic. Tankio tumas.

Thanks for this Desmond; lovely to hear this description of such an interesting part of POM. I did some work at Sabama market 2014-2015, and all the things you say about transformation ring true. The presence of able mediators and a well functioning village court, and to some extent the leadership of the Badili police, all contributed, it seems. So too, many people told me, did the presence of Highlands families and some business people, who together seem to have suppressed previous gang activity. The pastor of a mainstream church there related stories of how Highlands families rallied to protect him and his family, and reportedly displaced some of the local gang folk who had come in earlier waves of migration from locations including Gulf and elsewhere. But it is also true of course that the original gang leaders - who were heavily involved with politics in the time of Bill Skate - grew older, and established families and businesses of their own. The gangs failed to institutionalise, and reproduce themselves across generations. Troublemakers were chased out (some, it was said, only as far as Badili!!). Youth, as you say, were involved by churches and sports and work. I would be very interested to hear more of your perspective on this.

Thanks Mike and Brendan and devpolicy for this. Mike is one of the global health thinkers and actors I admire most. But I do have to offer my honest reflections. It is a useful report but it unfortunately a bit anodyne and measured. There was an opportunity to be bolder and to call out the status quo systems that led to this global inequity. And while calling for more money and some useful approaches, it is not nearly as bold as it could be. For example, the call for Australia to support vaccine production in the region is a bit bland: supporting WHO efforts on vaccine technology transfer. Australia is trying to build its own mRNA capacity with large investments and states jockeying for position and funding. What if we were to commit to a beyond-aid partnership with Indonesia or Vietnam that twinned Australian mRNA production capacity with the equivalent in one of those two countries. It would be about scientific partnership, technology transfer, economic development, soft power - not just about aid and giving money. It would represent an ASEAN partnership - one more impactful than submarines. It is a bolder vision than requesting the Australian government give more money or work with WHO. The report is useful as a political nudge but it is a missed opportunity to advance the agenda for global equity and partnership.

COVID 19 and Cancer on this past 2 years of pandemic... Its flagship programs include cervical and breast cancer screening trainings for rural health units, mass cervical and breast cancer screening, cancer treatment patient assistance, and establishment of cancer patient support groups. In 2019, the center trained 17 rural health units and screened 6,210 patients. A total of 94 patients were given financial assistance for their cancer treatment. https://rafi.org.ph/focus-areas/rafi-eduardo-j-aboitiz-cancer-center-rafi-ejacc/

Mauritius will soon be another Fiji as the minority ethnic groups are doing their best to take over the majority ethnic group and to put their laws and way of living. And all this backed by some living room media and some toilet activists as if peace wasn't good for them.

For aid to be most effective, Australia must focus its development efforts in areas where it has a clear, unique value proposition. Financing physical infrastructure is far from unique to Australia; a multitude of donors finance physical infrastructure, while very few provide high-quality technical assistance in specialized areas.