Sir

In your Editorial “In praise of the 'brain drain'” (Nature 446, 231; doi:10.1038/446231a 2007), you ask how UK science flourishes despite the continual brain drain to California and elsewhere. One answer is the compensating in-drain from the Commonwealth, the rest of Europe and elsewhere.

Many universities in mainland Europe are dysfunctional in terms of the career ladder for young academics, influences in appointment, departmental management structure, research funding or senior management structure.

Two comments from people in my field: “I could never get an academic position in my country because my PhD supervisor is not good at academic politics”; and “In my [different] country, research funding is spread equally among all groups without regard to quality, and those doing outstanding work cannot get any more.” Both these individuals have good positions in the United Kingdom and one was promoted rapidly to a personal chair at Cambridge University. There are many other examples.

Instead of complaining about the brain drain out, we should be encouraging the brain drain in. All PhD research studentships could be open equally to anyone in the world. Even those who then go back to their home country make a contribution in addition to the work they have done here: in a few years' time they start sending us their best output as PhD students or young postdocs, and the cycle repeats itself, with some of the new crop staying on.

I agree with your Editorial that the situation is good for the home countries, in the sense that there is a pool of people at the world forefront, available to be enticed back for senior appointments, and there is a pipeline for training the new students. If all the New Zealanders with good scientific jobs around the world tried to return to New Zealand, the country would burst!