Brain drain, however, comes in many shapes and sizes and exists in many parts of the world. The effects are just as complex, in both pernicious and beneficial ways, in regions that one does not usually think of in the context of brain drain. In Russia's North Caucasus region brain drain has had a devastating effect on the development of educational, cultural and political life as well as local economies. Tragically, the region had experienced the loss of educated elites once already during the 20th century, when they were "purged" by Stalin or driven into exile. The recent brain drain is different, but no less deplorable.

The North Caucasus, a mountainous and largely rural area located between the Black and Caspian Seas in the south of Russia, exhibits many of the dysfunctions of an old empire's periphery. It is inhabited by small indigenous nations and a declining number of Russia's majority population. Endemic instability and corruption make it is less attractive for business investments, so it suffers from disproportionally high unemployment rates and low income levels, problems that are exacerbated by high birthrates. The quality of education at all levels lags behind the Russian average. Overall, the impact of the post-Soviet transition has been more disruptive, and reform processes more half-hearted, than in the rest of Russia. And of course, the region's prospects have long been overshadowed by the two wars in Chechnya and their disastrous consequences.

A first wave of massive and rapid brain drain hit the North Caucasus right after the end of the Soviet Union. Educated and professional elites who were not indigenous to the region, primarily ethnic Russians, but also Ukrainians, Armenians and others, left in anticipation of, or as a reaction to, incidents of hostility and threats against them. Armed conflict, first in North Ossetia in 1992 and then in Chechnya in 1994, drove out many more who had tried to hold on to their lives in communities that had been home, sometimes for generations. Neither local nor Russian federal authorities were willing or indeed able to protect these citizens to allow them to stay. Out of Chechnya's Soviet-era population of around one million, some 250,000 non-locals, mostly teachers, doctors, civil servants and engineers and their families, left within just a few short years. Although less dramatic, a similar outmigration took place in many of the other republics of the North Caucasus.

In addition to the many non-locals who were leaving, many of the most talented, skilled and influential locals moved away in the course of the past 15 years, severely diminishing any prospects of successful stabilization of Chechnya and the neighboring republics for decades to come. Most of these professionals ended up in Moscow, the historic cultural center of the country and the hub of its economic and social activity. Since the 1990s, tens of thousands of Chechens left for Europe in the hope of obtaining asylum there, and, as always with migration flows, the better educated and more resourceful ones left first and in greater numbers.

Once the majority of professionals had left the North Caucasus, the region's perspectives for peace, innovation and growth floundered. Shortages of qualified experts and managers in education, health care and other areas of public services led to a drop in education and living standards. These systemic problems were exacerbated by poverty and - ultimately and tragically - armed conflict in Chechnya and emerging political violence in the surrounding republics. The departure of the elites added to the bitterness and pessimism felt by the public, which discourages potential new leaders from taking charge. Brain drain has stymied the development and implementation of policies addressing the many interconnected problems of the region. The absence of capable experts has clearly fueled the frustration felt by the region's inhabitants and thus contributed to the escalation of armed violence. The dearth of respected leadership has led, among others, to the fragmentation and weakening of civil society.

There are, however, some positive effects of brain drain for the region. Most of the qualified migrants left for good, and they are unlikely to come back any time soon to share their expertise with their communities. But they do send back remittances and gradually introduce their communities to new ideas from "outside the box". In theory, the vacancies and "blank slate" created by brain drain should open up the field to new talent and could replace Soviet-era policies and their proponents with more modern ones. Unfortunately, there is no conclusive evidence that this is happening, or that it is having the desired effect, anyway.

Reversing the brain drain will prove challenging: the older generation among the migrants fears the insecurity in the region, their children enjoy the excitement of booming Moscow or is already well-integrated in their country of refuge to consider returning to the North Caucasus. However, there is a pool of migrants who are willing to return. They may want to do so because they never adapted fully to their new surroundings or failed to rebuild their former careers and lifestyle, or because they still have family back home, or because they cannot envision a future for their children in their new place of residence. Others may have been successful in exile, but feel a strong pull to share their newly-acquired knowledge with people in their homeland.

Yet even those eager to return often find they are unable to do so. The region is still plagued by armed violence, the economic situation is less than promising and local politics are deeply unappealing. Like all migrants, potential returnees are concerned that they may no longer fit in back home and that home is indeed no longer what it used to be. They cannot be certain that they will find interesting and rewarding work and might be afraid that those who stayed behind will be jealous or even hostile towards returnees. Since such a large number of professionals left, many prospective returnees have no professional networks in the North Caucasus anymore.

Therefore, the key to reversing brain drain must be ensuring the safety, comfort and professional integration of returnees. Such assistance can be provided by employers, professional networks, communities and ultimately the government. Elsewhere, similar programs have been introduced by international organizations, like the World Bank and UNDP. In Russia, with its booming economy and large fiscal reserves, the government should take the lead, but civil society and professional organizations should have a role as well. The main challenge will lie in the program's equitable, transparent and flexible execution, an expectation that will be rejected as naпve by those familiar with the political realities of the region.

Ultimately, however, we need to look beyond "reversing the brain drain" and think up ways to attract new generations of skilled professionals from all over Russia. Those who left did so as long as 15 years ago, so many of them are by now middle-aged, if not retired, or too well-established elsewhere to start over yet again. To complement returnee programs, there should be recruitment initiatives aimed at young professionals and recent graduates. A model for such a program could be a variation of "Teach for America", which recruits bright young graduates to teach in underperforming US schools. Such a program would have the wonderful side effect of bringing young Russian citizens into contact with their compatriots in the North Caucasus, whom they have come to view as "terrorists" and "bandits" after years of biased media coverage and statements by politicians.

Although both programs for returnees and newcomers present logistical, financial and political challenges, there is no doubt that they are well worth the effort. The North Caucasus cannot recover and thrive without a substantial corps of educated and motivated individuals and will continue to fall behind. After years of increasing ethnic homogenization and isolation, communities across the region are ready to welcome and celebrate diversity and innovation.