Search

U hrvatskom društvenom kontekstu u kojemu je zaposlenost za velik dio stanovništva, a napose za njegov dobno najvitalniji dio, teško dostižan cilj, zabilježena sklonost čak dviju trećina zaposlenih mladih znanstvenika da napuste znanstveni poziv (68,0%) ili zemlju (63,3%), ima posebnu težinu. Potencijalni i stvarni odljev mladih hrvatskih znanstvenika iz znanosti (brain waste) i iz zemlje (brain drain) obilježen je, prije svega, nekim izvanjskim činiocima: (pull) utjecajem znanstvenog područja (veća potražnja za znanstvenicima u tehničkim i prirodnim znanostima te za stručnjacima u tehničkom i biomedicinskom području) i (push) utjecajem društvenog i životnog standarda, izazvanog vrlo niskim ulaganjima i primanjima. Unutar samoga znanstvenog podsustava nisu pronađene komponente radno-profesionalnog položaja koje bi značajnije diferencirale populaciju mladih znanstvenika i iznutra formirale određene profile potencijalnog odljeva. Dijeleći stvarnu razinu odljeva mladih iz hrvatske znanosti od njezine potencijalne dimenzije, uočen je nesrazmjer između želja i mogućnosti. Mladi bi znanstvenici željeli napustiti znanost u većoj mjeri nego su spremni napuštati zemlju. Međutim u stvarnosti, prema našem istraživanju, više ih uspijeva emigrirati nego što ih uspije pronaći drugi posao u Hrvatskoj! Pojedinci koji odlaze u inozemstvo predstavljaju kvalitetniji dio znanstveničkog pomlatka koji, i nakon odlaska, u velikoj mjeri nastavlja sa započetom znanstvenom karijerom. Većina nezadovoljnika koja bi napustila znanstveni poziv, što im zbog visoke nezaposlenosti u zemlji ne polazi za rukom, ostaje i dalje u znanosti. Realna je opasnost da će u marginaliziranoj i slabo vrednovanoj znanosti o(p)stajati sve više zatečenih pojedinaca, a sve manje intrinzično motiviranih znanstvenika., In the Croatian social context where employment for the vast majority of the population, especially its most vital pan, remains a far off goal - a recorded trend of almost two thirds of young employed scientists to abandon their scientific profession (68,0%) or emigrate (63,3%) is of special concern. A potential and actual brain waste and brain drain of young Croatian scientists is marked, above all, by certain external factors: the pull of the scientific field (greater demand for technical and natural scientists as well as a demand for experts in the technical and biomedical fields) and, on the other side, the push of social and living standards caused by extremely low investment and remuneration. Within the scientific subsystem itself, no components of a working-professional position have been found which would significantly differentiate the young scientist population and, from within, form a specific profile of potential waste or drain. In separating the actual level of brain waste of young Croatian scientists from its potential dimension, incompatibility between wishes and possibilities has been observed. The number of young scientists wishing to leave science is far greater than those wanting to emigrate. However, in reality’, based on our survey, more of them succeed in emigrating than finding another job in Croatia! Those individuals who go abroad represent the elite of a scientific new generation and later, to a great extent, continue in their chosen scientific career. Most of those discontented individuals wishing to leave the scientific profession continue to remain there as high unemployment in the country acts as a deterrent. There is a real danger that in a marginalized and poorly rated science, there may be more and more left behind individuals

This research was conducted on a sample of 840 respondents who represent half of the Croatian population of young scientists. There are three main features which define the publication productivity of young scientists. 1) Despite the worsened position of R & D, they publish more scientific papers than the young generations of scientists at the beginning of the nineties. 2) Differences between a highly-productive minority, which produces on average half of all scientific publications, and a low-productive majority is already apparent in young scientists. 3) The productivity of young scientists is formed according to productivity patterns typical of particular scientific fields and disciplines. With regard to the explanation of productivity, the following has been found. a) An expansion of the set of predictors resulted in an improvement in the explanation of the productivity of young scientists compared with previous surveys. b) Among the factors which contribute significantly to the explanation of the quantity of scientific publications, the most powerful predictor is attendance at conferences abroad, followed by scientific qualifications and some gatekeeping variables. c) Besides certain similarities, scientific fields also show a specific structure of determinants of young scientists’ productivity.