<p>Focusing on diasporic Chinese academicians of the Chinese Academy of Sciences and Academia Sinica, this study revisits the everchanging roles of overseas scholars and academic exchanges in higher education and research system. Specific attentions are paid to three themes: (a) the long-run evolution of diaspora academics’ involvement in China, (b) the geographical network of academic communities; and (c) the distribution of academicians across different academic disciplines. As revealed by the analysis, divergent systems of inclusion, citizenship rules, and localization policies reflect each side’s balance between internationalization, national diplomacy, and domestic academic identity within academic brain circulation and resistance. Conclusion further highlights a shift from the earlier diaspora option, where overseas Chinese academics facilitated international exchange, to a rising returnee option driven by China’s talent policies and global geopolitical tensions. Further implications would not only benefit our conceptual understanding of the ‘academic community’ from an East Asian perspective, but also offer valuable lessons for transnational (dis-)mobility in higher education.</p>

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

Pivoting academic Communities, piloting ‘Diaspora options’: diaspora academicians of Chinese Mainland and Taiwan region

  • Jianan Huang

摘要

Focusing on diasporic Chinese academicians of the Chinese Academy of Sciences and Academia Sinica, this study revisits the everchanging roles of overseas scholars and academic exchanges in higher education and research system. Specific attentions are paid to three themes: (a) the long-run evolution of diaspora academics’ involvement in China, (b) the geographical network of academic communities; and (c) the distribution of academicians across different academic disciplines. As revealed by the analysis, divergent systems of inclusion, citizenship rules, and localization policies reflect each side’s balance between internationalization, national diplomacy, and domestic academic identity within academic brain circulation and resistance. Conclusion further highlights a shift from the earlier diaspora option, where overseas Chinese academics facilitated international exchange, to a rising returnee option driven by China’s talent policies and global geopolitical tensions. Further implications would not only benefit our conceptual understanding of the ‘academic community’ from an East Asian perspective, but also offer valuable lessons for transnational (dis-)mobility in higher education.