The Ukrainian Knowledge Diaspora: Pursuing Independence and Security

The Ukrainian knowledge diaspora has been playing an important role in building an independent nation-state after the collapse of the Soviet Union. Free from the totalitarian legacy, many diasporans have been challenging the mindset of post-soviet apparatchiks who remained in charge of institutional policies and knowledge production in the new Ukrainian state. The diasporan contribution to the development of new institutions of higher learning presents a particularly interesting case. Foreign investments in new colleges and universities in Ukraine entailed many intriguing situations where tensions between the diasporan innovative approaches and the post-soviet bureaucracy became grounds for political conundrums. This presentation examines the challenges faced by diasporans through a comparative case study which examines the dilemmas of technical assistance provided to two institutions of higher learning in post-soviet Ukraine: i.e., the Institute of Public Administration and Local Government (later, Ukrainian Academy of Public Administration, and a failed case), and the Ukrainian Catholic University (a private institution, and a case of success), while shedding light on diasporas’ roles and responsibilities in controlling investments and shaping communities of interest and support. This comparative case study draws on multiple sources of qualitative data (interviews, policy documents, institutional narratives) and investigates how leverages of innovation become enabled or thwarted by disparate institutions that cultivate different organizational cultures, networks and support in diverse stakeholder groups. The analysis is guided by a conceptual framework of "boundary objects and social worlds", which elaborates on tensions in stakeholder communities seeking to reconcile divides across local, national and global agendas of research and development (Bamberger, 2022; Oleksiyenko, 2013). The idea of networking as a means to increase brain circulation and novelty adoption is given particular attention in this study in view of opportunities stimulated by the transformative movements that encourage a more intense cross-border exchange and engagement (Welch and Zhen, 2008). Yet, as the war in Ukraine brings in new challenges and urges us to rethink these perspectives in the world of politics, this paper also discusses the new meanings of boundary objects and social worlds in cross-border higher education. The study argues that diasporic knowledge networks continue to play a significant role – however, the focus on the security of these networks and their developments raises a number of strategic questions to be discussed.