{"id":{"repo_id":"rgu","oai_identifier":"oai:rgu-repository.worktribe.com:3463543"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/rgu/oai:rgu-repository.worktribe.com:3463543","repository":{"repo_id":"rgu","name":"Robert Gordon University","base_url":"https://rgu-repository.worktribe.com/oaiprovider"},"display":{"title":"Sponsored brain drain? Examining the lived experiences of Ghanaian scholarship recipients and administrators' perspectives through capitals and a postcolonial lens.","abstract":"While many studies on brain drain have examined its impact on migrant-sending countries, few have explored its implications for government-sponsored education. This study introduces the concept of \"sponsored brain drain\" to describe situations where students funded by state scholarships do not return home after studying abroad. Using Ghana's scholarship programme to the United Kingdom as a case study, the research investigates why this occurs and how existing return arrangements operate in practice. Drawing on postcolonial theory and human capital theory, the study analysed government policy documents and conducted interviews with 40 participants, including 10 scholarship administrators and 30 beneficiaries. A qualitative design and Critical Discourse Analysis were used to examine how policies, expectations, and experiences are shaped by history, power, and ideology. The findings show that the Ghanaian government frames overseas education as an investment in human capital for national development, yet this investment is shaped by postcolonial legacies that position the United Kingdom as a superior and desirable site of knowledge. The study also found that while the government expects beneficiaries to return, the return obligation operates largely as an informal and administrative practice rather than a clearly articulated policy. It relies on legally binding bonds but suffers from weak enforcement, unclear procedures, limited monitoring systems, and a disconnect between return expectations and local labour market realities. These weaknesses contribute to high non-return rates and reinforce patterns of sponsored brain drain. The study also revealed that even when beneficiaries do not physically return, many maintain transnational ties through remittances, professional networks, and knowledge exchange. This highlights the need for a broader understanding of \"return\" that includes non-physical forms of contribution. Overall, the study adds to the literature by showing how sponsored brain drain is shaped by both economic logic and postcolonial structures. It offers evidence based recommendations for reforming Ghana's scholarship system, including clearer and more realistic return frameworks, stronger monitoring and reintegration mechanisms, alignment of scholarships with national priorities, and the creation of pathways for transnational collaboration. These reforms would help ensure that overseas education contributes more directly to national development.","abstract_html":"While many studies on brain drain have examined its impact on migrant-sending countries, few have explored its implications for government-sponsored education. This study introduces the concept of "sponsored brain drain" to describe situations where students funded by state scholarships do not return home after studying abroad. Using Ghana's scholarship programme to the United Kingdom as a case study, the research investigates why this occurs and how existing return arrangements operate in practice. Drawing on postcolonial theory and human capital theory, the study analysed government policy documents and conducted interviews with 40 participants, including 10 scholarship administrators and 30 beneficiaries. A qualitative design and Critical Discourse Analysis were used to examine how policies, expectations, and experiences are shaped by history, power, and ideology. The findings show that the Ghanaian government frames overseas education as an investment in human capital for national development, yet this investment is shaped by postcolonial legacies that position the United Kingdom as a superior and desirable site of knowledge. The study also found that while the government expects beneficiaries to return, the return obligation operates largely as an informal and administrative practice rather than a clearly articulated policy. It relies on legally binding bonds but suffers from weak enforcement, unclear procedures, limited monitoring systems, and a disconnect between return expectations and local labour market realities. These weaknesses contribute to high non-return rates and reinforce patterns of sponsored brain drain. The study also revealed that even when beneficiaries do not physically return, many maintain transnational ties through remittances, professional networks, and knowledge exchange. This highlights the need for a broader understanding of "return" that includes non-physical forms of contribution. Overall, the study adds to the literature by showing how sponsored brain drain is shaped by both economic logic and postcolonial structures. It offers evidence based recommendations for reforming Ghana's scholarship system, including clearer and more realistic return frameworks, stronger monitoring and reintegration mechanisms, alignment of scholarships with national priorities, and the creation of pathways for transnational collaboration. These reforms would help ensure that overseas education contributes more directly to national development.","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Boakye, Abigail Fremah"],"institution":null,"degree_name":null,"degree_level":null,"degree_discipline":null,"degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":[],"advisors":["N. Mueller-Hirth and S. Vertigans"],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2026,"date_issued":"2026","date_published":"2026","updated_at":"2026-07-24T04:10:14Z","subjects":["Capitals theory","Sponsored brain drain","Postcolonial theory","Government-sponsored scholarships","Ghana","International student mobility","United Kingdom","Transnational contribution."],"languages":["en"],"rights":[],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["oai:rgu-repository.worktribe.com:3463543","https://doi.org/10.48526/rgu-wt-3463543"],"render_values":[{"text":"oai:rgu-repository.worktribe.com:3463543","href":null,"code":true},{"text":"https://doi.org/10.48526/rgu-wt-3463543","href":"https://doi.org/10.48526/rgu-wt-3463543","code":true}]},{"key":"dc:creator.authoridentifier","label":"Author Identifier","values":["0000-0001-9872-3300"],"render_values":[{"text":"0000-0001-9872-3300","href":"https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9872-3300","code":true}]}]},"links":{"outbound_url":"https://rgu-repository.worktribe.com/3463543/1/BOAKYE%202026%20Sponsored%20brain%20drain","outbound_label":"Repository record","outbound_source":"dc:identifier.uri"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor.advisor","label":"Advisor","values":["N. Mueller-Hirth and S. Vertigans"]},{"key":"dc:contributor.sponsor","label":"Sponsor","values":["No Funder Acknowledged (Outputs)"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Boakye, Abigail Fremah"]},{"key":"dc:creator.authoridentifier","label":"Author Identifier","values":["0000-0001-9872-3300"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date","label":"Dc Date","values":["2026-05-31"]},{"key":"dc:date.issued","label":"Date","values":["2026"]},{"key":"dc:relation.isreferencedby","label":"Dc Relation Isreferencedby","values":["https://rgu-repository.worktribe.com/output/3463543"]},{"key":"dc:type","label":"Dc Type","values":["Thesis"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["Capitals theory","Sponsored brain drain","Postcolonial theory","Government-sponsored scholarships","Ghana","International student mobility","United Kingdom","Transnational contribution."]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:language","label":"Dc Language","values":["en"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["oai:rgu-repository.worktribe.com:3463543","https://doi.org/10.48526/rgu-wt-3463543"]},{"key":"dc:identifier.uri","label":"Identifier URI","values":["https://rgu-repository.worktribe.com/3463543/1/BOAKYE%202026%20Sponsored%20brain%20drain"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["While many studies on brain drain have examined its impact on migrant-sending countries, few have explored its implications for government-sponsored education. This study introduces the concept of \"sponsored brain drain\" to describe situations where students funded by state scholarships do not return home after studying abroad. Using Ghana's scholarship programme to the United Kingdom as a case study, the research investigates why this occurs and how existing return arrangements operate in practice. Drawing on postcolonial theory and human capital theory, the study analysed government policy documents and conducted interviews with 40 participants, including 10 scholarship administrators and 30 beneficiaries. A qualitative design and Critical Discourse Analysis were used to examine how policies, expectations, and experiences are shaped by history, power, and ideology. The findings show that the Ghanaian government frames overseas education as an investment in human capital for national development, yet this investment is shaped by postcolonial legacies that position the United Kingdom as a superior and desirable site of knowledge. The study also found that while the government expects beneficiaries to return, the return obligation operates largely as an informal and administrative practice rather than a clearly articulated policy. It relies on legally binding bonds but suffers from weak enforcement, unclear procedures, limited monitoring systems, and a disconnect between return expectations and local labour market realities. These weaknesses contribute to high non-return rates and reinforce patterns of sponsored brain drain. The study also revealed that even when beneficiaries do not physically return, many maintain transnational ties through remittances, professional networks, and knowledge exchange. This highlights the need for a broader understanding of \"return\" that includes non-physical forms of contribution. Overall, the study adds to the literature by showing how sponsored brain drain is shaped by both economic logic and postcolonial structures. It offers evidence based recommendations for reforming Ghana's scholarship system, including clearer and more realistic return frameworks, stronger monitoring and reintegration mechanisms, alignment of scholarships with national priorities, and the creation of pathways for transnational collaboration. These reforms would help ensure that overseas education contributes more directly to national development."]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["Sponsored brain drain? Examining the lived experiences of Ghanaian scholarship recipients and administrators' perspectives through capitals and a postcolonial lens."]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor.advisor":["N. Mueller-Hirth and S. Vertigans"],"dc:contributor.sponsor":["No Funder Acknowledged (Outputs)"],"dc:creator":["Boakye, Abigail Fremah"],"dc:creator.authoridentifier":["0000-0001-9872-3300"],"dc:date":["2026-05-31"],"dc:date.issued":["2026"],"dc:description.abstract":["While many studies on brain drain have examined its impact on migrant-sending countries, few have explored its implications for government-sponsored education. This study introduces the concept of \"sponsored brain drain\" to describe situations where students funded by state scholarships do not return home after studying abroad. Using Ghana's scholarship programme to the United Kingdom as a case study, the research investigates why this occurs and how existing return arrangements operate in practice. Drawing on postcolonial theory and human capital theory, the study analysed government policy documents and conducted interviews with 40 participants, including 10 scholarship administrators and 30 beneficiaries. A qualitative design and Critical Discourse Analysis were used to examine how policies, expectations, and experiences are shaped by history, power, and ideology. The findings show that the Ghanaian government frames overseas education as an investment in human capital for national development, yet this investment is shaped by postcolonial legacies that position the United Kingdom as a superior and desirable site of knowledge. The study also found that while the government expects beneficiaries to return, the return obligation operates largely as an informal and administrative practice rather than a clearly articulated policy. It relies on legally binding bonds but suffers from weak enforcement, unclear procedures, limited monitoring systems, and a disconnect between return expectations and local labour market realities. These weaknesses contribute to high non-return rates and reinforce patterns of sponsored brain drain. The study also revealed that even when beneficiaries do not physically return, many maintain transnational ties through remittances, professional networks, and knowledge exchange. This highlights the need for a broader understanding of \"return\" that includes non-physical forms of contribution. Overall, the study adds to the literature by showing how sponsored brain drain is shaped by both economic logic and postcolonial structures. It offers evidence based recommendations for reforming Ghana's scholarship system, including clearer and more realistic return frameworks, stronger monitoring and reintegration mechanisms, alignment of scholarships with national priorities, and the creation of pathways for transnational collaboration. These reforms would help ensure that overseas education contributes more directly to national development."],"dc:identifier":["oai:rgu-repository.worktribe.com:3463543","https://doi.org/10.48526/rgu-wt-3463543"],"dc:identifier.uri":["https://rgu-repository.worktribe.com/3463543/1/BOAKYE%202026%20Sponsored%20brain%20drain"],"dc:language":["en"],"dc:relation.isreferencedby":["https://rgu-repository.worktribe.com/output/3463543"],"dc:subject":["Capitals theory","Sponsored brain drain","Postcolonial theory","Government-sponsored scholarships","Ghana","International student mobility","United Kingdom","Transnational contribution."],"dc:title":["Sponsored brain drain? Examining the lived experiences of Ghanaian scholarship recipients and administrators' perspectives through capitals and a postcolonial lens."],"dc:type":["Thesis"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-24T04:10:14Z"}