Absence of conflict of interest.
Citation
Highlights
- The study examined the impact of the American Competitiveness in the 21st Century Act (AC21) which removed H-1B visa quotas for employment in certain industries on foreign-born PhD graduates seeking jobs in academia and industry.
- The study used a difference-in-differences design to compare changes in outcomes before and after the implementation of AC21. The authors used the Survey of Earned Doctorates (SED) and statistical models to compare differences between treatment and comparison group members.
- The study found that after the passage of AC21, foreign-born PhD graduates were more likely to pursue a job in academia and less likely to pursue a job in industry.
- This study receives a moderate evidence rating. This means we are somewhat confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the American Competitiveness in the 21st Century Act (AC21), but other factors might also have contributed.
Features of the Study
The H-1B visa program started in the 1990s to allow highly skilled immigrants trained in the U.S. to work full time. For recent graduates from other countries, the H-1B visa is the only way to legally enter the U.S. job market. Usually, there is a limit on how many H-1B visas can be granted each year. In 2000, Congress passed the American Competitiveness in the 21st Century Act (AC21) which eliminated the H-1B visa quota for applicants employed by institutions of higher education and nonprofit and government research organizations.
The study used a difference-in-differences design to compare the outcomes of foreign-born PhD graduates and US-born PhD graduates, before and after implementation of AC21. The study sample was selected from the Survey of Earned Doctorates, which is administered annually to graduating PhD students in the U.S. Data were obtained on PhD students who graduated in the six years before and the six years after the passage of AC21. Foreign-born PhD graduates were assigned to the treatment group while US-born PhD graduates were assigned to the comparison group. There were 82,136 foreign-born PhD graduates, with 67.9% planning to work in the U.S. after finishing their studies. Of these graduates, 72% were male, 92% were aged 26 to 40 (92%), 67% were Asian, and 28% earned degrees in engineering. In contrast, there were 293,386 US-born PhD graduates, with 72.1% also intending to work in the U.S. after graduation. Among these graduates, 51% were male, 69% were aged 26 to 40, 83% were White, and 28% earned degrees in education.
The outcomes of interest were working in academia and working in industry. Working in academia was defined as being employed at a four-year college or university, a medical school, a research institute linked to a university, or a community college. The study authors used statistical models to compare the differences in outcomes between treatment and comparison group members.
Findings
Employment
- The study found that after the passage of AC21, foreign-born PhD graduates were significantly more likely than US-born PhD graduates to pursue work in academia.
- However, the study also found that after the passage of AC21, foreign-born PhD graduates were significantly less likely than US-born PhD graduates to choose a job in industry.
Considerations for Interpreting the Findings
The study authors used fixed effects for field or study/major in their difference-in-difference analysis to determine how AC21 impacts the likelihood of PhD graduates finding jobs in academia and industry.
Causal Evidence Rating
The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is moderate because it was based on a well implemented nonexperimental design. This means we are somewhat confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the AC21, but other factors might also have contributed.