Table of Contents

Outcome of the GENERA interview series

previous chapter

3. Mobility, migration and internationalization of science


International cooperation supported by mobility is key to scientific knowledge production in physics

The development of science is attributed by researched physicists to the exchange of ideas that today happens also internationally, within the thematic - formal or informal - networks or groups (see also chapter “Networks”). The need to moving internationally for working with high quality mentors or supervisors, sharing ideas, and equipment is a part of culture of physics as a field. The mobility experiences link researchers to each other and create a net of international connections between them that are important for establishing further institutional or personal cooperation leading to common publications and projects.

The need to use advanced and expensive infrastructure forces physicists from certain sub-disciplines (e.g. nuclear physics, hadron physics) to travel to specific locations. For instance, CERN - the European Organization for Nuclear Research - is mentioned as a remarkable example of necessity to collaborate in science - stressing that physics cannot be funded by one country, but only through joint efforts and financial resources of many countries:

International mobility is perceived as a crucial element of science development. As such, international mobility allows, especially in the narratives of younger respondents (also representing emerging subfields of physics), to exchange knowledge, perspectives, experiences and methods of conducting research:

Some of the senior researchers in contrast have doubts if mobility is essential for science development and instead emphasize the role of internet communication that substitutes mobility at least to some extent. Contrastingly, the internet resources are also indicated as extensive thus impermeable and that through contact one can learn better on the important developments.

Indicating excellence: mobility is a must in a scientific career

Mobility is also a crucial tool for supporting scientists' development - multiple benefits of mobility were mentioned by the physicists. On the one hand, the plausible outcomes concern the expanding of scientific knowledge, learning from the excellent scientists or supervisors abroad, and creating connections. On the other hand, the interviewees underline personal development of a scientist: gaining self-confidence or independence, learning new ways of perceiving the social and professional world, including improving social skills. Travelling is also a way to learn about diverse organizational practices and institutional cultures of working - these experiences are valuable at the leading senior positions.

Many scientists mention the opportunity to widening horizons - stressing the “opening eyes” effect that could happen when visiting foreign institutions or meeting excellent researchers in other countries. The local cultures of science production can be questioned in light of such comparisons:

Mobility is considered as one of core elements of excellence - it constitutes a criterion important in evaluation of scientific performance, and it creates new standards for participation in research. Such understanding of mobility lies in underlined significance of close collaboration with foreign and international research organizations, especially visible in implementation of the project-based studies. Being mobile and having experiences of international cooperation is positively evaluated during applying for research grants or job positions. In some countries, e.g. Germany, it is impossible to progress in a career without mobility experience. In the Netherlands one is supposed to spend a year or more abroad during a post-doc time, while for example in Poland it is not compulsory, but in the studied research institute it is strongly recommended.

Situating mobility in the career path - it's for the young

International mobility is often depicted in the narratives as a crucial factor for the career development, yet its intensity is mostly related with early stages of the career. It is important to notice that mobility means both to short term mobility (e.g. research visits, conference attendance, experiments periods), but also longer periods abroad - here it is mostly linked to PhD or post-doc positions of duration from 1 to 4 years. Another form of geographical mobility is actual migration - here meaning, moving to settle in a different country for a longer fixed position.

It is important to underline that demands for mobility depend on the moment of the career, similarly as the engagement in the mobility - the senior respondents usually stressed that they have other obligations (such as administrative duties) that disallow their engagement in intensive mobility. Thus, young researchers are those who are “on the move” - engaged in short and long-term mobility periods, as well as migrating in search for employment opportunities. The need for visiting other research centers and participation in international forums and research projects is mostly assigned to young scholars and researchers, who are obliged/supposed to travel and cooperate closely with foreign research institutions and teams. The period after completion of PhD, so called post-doc, is considered as very good chance to stay for longer in a foreign institution. These early career experiences, if gained in an excellent institution, favorable environment and under quality supervision, are indicated as decisive for the whole career. In the biographical accounts of researchers the connections created at the start of career tend to last for many years and are often developed into institutionalized forms of collaboration. We could assume that in case of young scientists (especially female) that cannot move after their PhD missing opportunity for a post-doc experience could have a degrading, even if indirect, effect on the career.

Some young scientists notice that mobility “counts for” career only after receiving the PhD (e.g. in the Netherlands you are supposed to spend a year or more abroad during your post doc time).

Reconciling mobility and private life - gendered perspective

The mobility expectation is more difficult to realize for women, as the moment when it is expected to happen (after PhD) coincides with time of family formation and childbearing. In result, the high value of mobility in evaluation may be damaging for those for whom mobility is impossible or challenging. Besides women in their family formation phase, there is a one case of a scientist from outside Europe that could not leave during PhD studies due to lack of passport - she also indicates the importance of mobility for self-development as a scientist at the early stage of the career. Another group that has more difficulties in travelling is those in administrative and leading positions, who point to the burden of daily matters as disallowing frequent mobility and making long term mobility impossible.

Considering short term mobility, the difficulty for travelling lies in family and care duties, especially in relation to care over small children, but also in later stages of career for elderly parents. In fact, the short term mobility is seen often as a challenge by women scientists, who needed to manage family and care duties (also in case of a single father). The support from the partner or other family members is seen as critical. Nevertheless, some female scientists conclude that they limit their travels to those necessary.

The actual challenges linked to mobility, even if they are managed by the female scientists with usage of informal resources, may have adverse effects and bring upon an image of them as inaccessible. A researcher from Switzerland, describes that she almost was not invited to give a lecture, because organizers did not want to cause her trouble in organization of family life. Such “favours” may have a degrading and excluding effect on career of female physicists isolating them from environment and prestigious activities.

In case of long term mobility, the experience of female researchers is more similar to those of male ones, as the representatives of both genders experienced difficulties in mobility for longer periods (or migration decision) when having family rooted in a certain location. This includes especially situation of a partner being employed, children attached to schools, but also challenge in adaptation every time when changing jobs. For some men it is easier to make decision to move to another country if a wife does not work professionally or if her occupation is perceived as less important or valuable. Women often stress that the professional career of a partner disallows them to migrate or leave for longer period. The social expectation of a woman following man career demands, plays in favor of men physicists, nevertheless even some male respondents see impossibility of de-rooting their family through migration abroad or resigned from longer stay when children were small or had health problems.

Dual career couples - a double challenge of mobility

The particular situation concerned dual-career couples, which is quite common in physics (cf. McNeil, Sher 1999). Having a partner also working in the physics field, or being a researcher in the other field, was evaluated in general very positively - such a person understand the way of working in science, has similar interests and can give advice. Nevertheless, for such couples mobility and migration decisions are challenging. The decision of moving depend on how possible it is for both of the partners to benefit from migration. The cultural expectation towards women to follow her partner matters and some women indicated that going abroad in such situations meant to them e.g. a career break or volunteer work. Nevertheless, there were also cases when men decided to move to another country to support partner in her career.

The following account of a man who decided to leave academia puts in question the pressure to move, and describes the difficulties that a couple of two physicists face. In the relationship the wife's career had priority, and ultimately the man dropped out. He questions the sacrifice of one's private life to science, as due to long-distance relationships, certain family decisions are put on hold (e.g. children, house). Possibility to work long-distance was indicated as a partial remedy:

Two scientific careers meant that since September 2012 we have not been living together. (…) As such we are a typical example of the two-body problem. (…) We try to cope to see each other every weekend (meaning that we travel a lot), meaning that we have almost no time for other hobbies or visiting friends and family in our home country. Luckily, my boss (…) was very supportive in our situation and allowed me to work regularly from home (…) As a consequence, we have put many other things (like having children or buying a house) on hold. (…) In the beginning that (working in different countries and long distance relationship) was quite ok, but now I see people around me having moved on in their lives, whereas I now feel we are falling behind. This really makes you wonder if you did anything wrong, made the wrong choices. Is a scientific career worth everything? 52_M

Excessive burden of (forced) mobility - in a search of permanent positions

The new context of scientific career demands high mobility from the young researchers, including not only short term mobility or post-doc research stays. In fact, it is a “scientific labour market” that demands from researchers frequent change locations - young researchers move around Europe in the search of fixed (or at least fixed for few years) job positions. There are cases in our study of those who moved to a foreign country to permanent post, which did not demand from them further moving - this pattern was usually evaluated positively. At the same time, some interviewed scientists are “on the move” for many years - every few years they need to move to a new country and new institution. This brings upon frustration, stress and feeling of instability. The unpredictability of employment and the inability to plan even a country where one would work lower the evaluation of the career and may lead to abandoning of academia. Researchers stress that they cannot stay in the institution they would want to work for. It also causes difficulties in integration in the research teams, so critical for physics. This is discussed more in the chapter “Career paths…”.

The feeling that mobility is “forced” is not received well. Young researchers especially emphasized that it should be possible to stay in the same country after completing one's PhD. There might be no added value of moving between countries for the only reason that scholarships and funding are not available at the current location. This is stressed by the researched physicists in Germany, Switzerland and Spain. Let us stress that this intensive mobility is difficult for those with families and children. In some cases, the instability of career led to postponement of childbearing.

The scientists specify as well difficulties with management of their careers due to different mobility cultures. While it may appear that mobility is embedded in doing physics in European institutions, in fact mobility patterns differ between countries. As underlined in the chapter “Career paths…”, in some countries the interviewees usually stay all their lives in one institution (e.g. Poland, Italy, Romania) experiencing travels, even long term, as “business trips”. In other countries e.g. Germany, France, Switzerland, or Netherlands their paths are much diversified. The age is also an important category, definitely showing the generational differences in being a physicist - those who face the precarious labour market in the recent years, have a different experience of scientific path than those in senior positions. Now the scientific career is often filled with uncertainty over their careers and potential employment.

The integration of mobility within one's career path is a challenge - this demands from a researcher having strategic thinking skills, as well as good supervision (see also chapter on “Work conditions and environment”). There are also different opinions about the best time to do the longer research stay abroad. The strategies differ depending on where one wanted to end up, as it revealed that depending on a country the decision to go abroad or not may be decisive for future employment opportunities. In some countries - the PhD phase is the most suitable, e.g. in Germany, as you are supposed to come back to Germany with foreign experiences, while for example a French-origin researcher claims that in case of France doing PhD outside France puts you at disadvantage. The case of young female scientist illustrates well the confusing employment (written and non-written) regulations:

next chapter