This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Allsop, J. Articles by Wrede, S. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Encountering Globalization

Professional Groups in an International Context

University of Lincoln, jallsop{at}lincoln.ac.uk

Ivy Lynn Bourgeault

University of Ottawa, ivy.bourgeault{at}uottawa.ca

Julia Evetts

University of Nottingham, julia.evetts{at}nottingham.ac.uk

Thomas Le Bianic

Université de Paris-Dauphine, lebianic{at}dauphine.fr

Kathryn Jones

De Montfort University, kljones{at}dmu.ac.uk

Sirpa Wrede

University of Helsinki, sirpa.wrede{at}helsinki.fi

The market for professional services is increasingly international but comparisons have not been made between different professions nor on how state policies affect opportunities for mobility. This article considers three professions: engineers, physicians and psychologists and explores the similarities and differences in international labour market demand for occupations. It examines how state policies in four countries, Canada, Finland, France and the UK, aim to promote and control professional labour mobility and migration, and the differences across the three professions. Engineering is an international profession and the extent to which states encourage inward migration differs. Medicine is highly regulated in all four countries but inward migration of physicians varies depending on national policy. Psychologists are less mobile, and the extent of state sponsorship and regulation varies across countries. In all three professions, international organizations are a force encouraging global standards. The conclusion is that state policies reflect state interests and have a strong influence on patterns of mobility.

Key Words: cross-country comparison • engineers • globalization • migration • mobility • physicians • professions • psychologists • regulation

Current Sociology, Vol. 57, No. 4, 487-510 (2009)
DOI: 10.1177/0011392109104351


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?