Brains From Abroad: How U.S. Regions Compete for STEM Talent from Asia
For U.S. metro areas aspiring to grow as centers of innovation, the ability to attract highly educated international workers is not a luxury—it’s a necessity. Highly educated professionals from Asia now comprise a substantial share of the STEM workforce in leading American metros. At the Burning Glass Institute, we set out to quantify just how significant these workers are—and to proxy for the quality of the human capital they bring to different parts of the country. No other public source offers this kind of granular view at the national level of talent educated in Asia.
We defined "Asia-educated" workers as individuals whose first bachelor's degree was from one of the 501 Asian universities featured in the QS World University Rankings. We then tracked the profiles of Asia-educated workers who are currently based in the U.S., identifying their locations by metropolitan statistical area (MSA).
To create a measure of talent quality, for each MSA, we computed a weighted average of the Asian universities QS rankings represented. Importantly, we adjusted this metric by controlling for the occupational mix of the Asia-educated workforce in each metro. This allowed us to avoid over-representing MSAs with a high concentration of tech or finance roles—industries that tend to attract graduates from more prestigious institutions in Asia.
Our findings show some clear patterns. In places like San Jose metro area, nearly one in five degree-holders were educated in Asia. Among tech workers, the figure rises above one in three. These professionals are not only numerous, but they are also highly credentialed, with many graduating from top-ranked institutions across Asia. While not to the same extent as Silicon Valley, tech hubs like the Bay Area and Seattle also rely heavily on highly credentialed talent from Asia.
But our data shows that other regions are clearly falling behind. In metros such as Miami—as well as much of the South and the Midwest, the share of STEM workers educated in Asia is lower, and the average ranking of their alma maters lags well behind that seen in coastal tech hubs.
The presence of Asia-educated workers follows clear regional patterns, with significant concentrations in both well-established tech hubs and some less expected manufacturing and academic centers. This uneven distribution reflects—and has the potential to reinforce—wider regional disparities. Areas that can integrate into global talent networks today will extend their lead in innovation and growth in the future. Others risk falling further behind.
Table 1 – Top 20 Asian universities according to QS World University Rankings
Mapping Asia-educated college grads in the U.S.
Asia-educated workers in the U.S. are primarily concentrated in the West and Northeast. Leading the way is Washington State, where 5.7% of all workers with at least a bachelor's degree were educated in Asia. California follows closely at 5.3%, with New Jersey, Massachusetts, Delaware, and New York hovering around 3%. These concentrations reflect regional economies that attract skilled talent in specialized industries. Texas follows with a share of 2.7%.
Figure 1
Asia-educated talent powering U.S. tech hubs
Zooming in from the state to the metro are level, tech-heavy regions stand out as prime destinations for Asia-educated professionals. Silicon Valley leads the pack: in the San Jose–Sunnyvale–Santa Clara metro, 18.7% of degree holders obtained their first BA from an Asian university. Other major tech hubs also rank high—8.3% in San Francisco–Oakland–Fremont and 7.1% in Seattle–Tacoma–Bellevue. A key driver of this pattern is the dominance of computer and mathematical occupations in these regions. Between 21% and 36% of tech workers with a degree in these MSAs were educated in Asia at the undergraduate level, underscoring the talent demands of major technology firms (see Figure 3).
Just as important, the average rank of their alma maters is significantly above average (see Figure 4), underscoring that Silicon Valley is importing not only numbers but top-tier credentials. In the tech centers of New York and Boston, the share of Asia-educated workers in computer and mathematical occupations is less than half that of San Francisco or Seattle, and about one third that of San Jose’s. Similarly, the average rank of the Asian universities attended by workers located in those metros tends to be somewhat lower (see Figure 4). New York and Pittsburgh stand out as the two East Coast’s metro areas with the highest quality scores. Boston, Providence and Baltimore rank lower (see Figure 4).
The South, however, scores even worse on our university attended quality score. While Texan metropolitan areas like Austin, Dallas, and Houston show shares of Asia-educated tech workers on par with that of the East Coast’s hubs—ranging from 2.8% to 3.4% (see Figure 2)— their average quality score is lower. Atlanta fares even worse. Finally, among large metros with a noteworthy tech presence, Miami is the outlier. Only about 1.0% of tech workers in the metro are Asia-educated, and those who tend to have attended lower-ranked Asian universities as well.
The Midwest shows a similar pattern to most of the South, with generally low shares of Asia-educated workers across most states (see Figure 1). Illinois leads the region at 2.2%, but Michigan, Ohio, Indiana, and Minnesota all fall below the national average of 2.3%. While Chicago stands out as a partial exception, most of the region struggles to attract Asia-educated STEM talent—both in numbers and in the average rank of universities they attended. A few places buck the trend—Columbus, IN and college towns like West Lafayette and Ann Arbor—but for much of the Midwest, limited access to global talent could constrain future innovation and growth.
Figure 2
Figure 3
Beyond software: Asia-educated talent in engineering
The picture shifts only slightly when we move away from computer and mathematical occupations and focus on architecture and engineering occupations—a category that includes STEM roles such as architects, aerospace engineers, and industrial engineers. These are professionals who may be involved in actual manufacturing processes but are just as likely to work in R&D, product design, prototyping, or other non-manufacturing functions. Once again, Silicon Valley, the Bay Area, and tech hubs like Austin feature prominently. Asia-educated individuals account for 30.1% of all architecture and engineering workers in the San Jose metro, 16.0% in the San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont area, and 10.6% in Austin (see Figure 3). As highlighted before, while Silicon Valley mainly attracts talent educated in top Asian universities, this is less true for Austin. With a share of only 5.7% Seattle appears much further down the list this time, making it a secondary hub for engineering jobs. The engineers who do move to Seattle though tend to come from highly ranked Asian universities (see Figure 4).
Figure 4
Looking beyond the top three MSAs by share of Asian-educated talent working in architecture and engineering, Portland, Detroit, Sacramento, and Phoenix stand out, with shares of Asia-educated talent making up from 6.8% to 8.7% of the local architecture and engineering workforce (see Figure 3). Of those metros, only Portland fares relatively well also on our quality score—as proxied by the average QS ranking of the universities they attended—performing on par with L.A. or Boston (see Figure 4). The other engineering hubs—namely Detroit, Sacramento, and Phoenix—tend to attract talent coming from lower-ranked Asian universities. This reflects how both traditional and up-and-coming advanced manufacturing hubs rely on technical talent educated in Asia. Portland and Phoenix are now established semiconductor manufacturing hubs, while Phoenix is also home to the headquarters of onsemi (ON Semiconductor Corporation). Detroit, for its part, has long been a national center of automotive engineering and manufacturing. Sacramento, while less industrial, plays a key role in public infrastructure, energy systems, and aerospace.
Beyond large metros: unique regional specializations
While large metros and major tech hubs consistently rely on Asia-educated talent to fill their STEM roles, many smaller metro areas with distinctive economic profiles have also emerged as magnets for this workforce. Columbus, IN is a striking example: graduates of Asian universities make up 8.6% of its college-educated workforce—a higher share than in the Bay Area or Seattle (see Figure 5). What’s driving this? Columbus is home to the global headquarters of Cummins Inc., a major player in engine manufacturing and power technologies. That helps explain the unusually high demand for engineering talent. Nearly half (46.1%) of Asia-educated workers in Columbus are employed in architecture and engineering occupations—the highest concentration across all metro areas. While Columbus punches above its weight when it comes to the share of Asia-educated talent, it scores below average on our quality score.
Figure 5
Figure 6
Another noteworthy pattern emerges in college towns. In metros such as Champaign-Urbana, IL (University of Illinois), Trenton-Princeton, NJ (Princeton University), Lafayette-West Lafayette, IN (Purdue University), Ithaca, NY (Cornell University), College Station-Bryan, TX (Texas A&M), State College, PA (Penn State University), Ann Arbor, MI (University of Michigan) and Ames, IA (Iowa State University) Asia-educated workers make up between 4.1% and 7.5% of the college-educated workforce (see Figure 5). That’s higher than in large metros like New York or Boston, and only slightly below levels seen in Seattle or San Francisco. Unsurprisingly, the presence of world-class academic institutions is a major driver: roughly one in two Asia-educated workers in these college towns are employed in academia. The academic pull is also visible in terms of quality: places like Ithaca, Champaign-Urbana, and Ann Arbor attract Asia-educated workers from top-ranked universities, on par with those found in major tech hubs like San Francisco or Seattle (see Figure 6). This reinforces a broader theme: specialized industries and elite research institutions—even outside traditional tech corridors—can exert a strong gravitational pull on international talent.
Conclusion
For American regions hoping to compete as tech and innovation hubs, attracting highly educated international talent isn’t optional—it’s essential. Professionals who earned their undergraduate degrees at Asian universities now make up a significant share of the STEM workforce in leading metros.
In San Jose, nearly one in five college-educated adults—and over one in three tech workers—earned their first degree in Asia. These workers tend to be also highly credentialed, generally graduating from top-ranked institutions. Similar patterns appear in Seattle and San Francisco, where global talent pipelines have become core to regional competitiveness.
Other regions are falling behind. In places like Miami and across much of the South the share of Asia-educated STEM workers is lower, and the average ranking of their alma maters lags well behind the coasts. Texas metros like Austin and Dallas perform somewhat better on volume, but still trail in quality.
The Midwest follows a similar pattern. While Illinois edges above the national average, most of the region struggles to attract Asia-educated STEM talent at scale—and from top institutions.
In several states, policymakers are pairing global talent pipelines with local inclusion strategies. Recent actions include formally recognizing Lunar New Year, Diwali, and other Asian cultural holidays and hosting public celebrations; directing grant funding to AAPI community-based nonprofits; enacting stronger anti-Asian-hate statutes and reporting systems; appointing Asian Americans to cabinet-level or agency leadership roles; and expanding state scholarships, trade missions, and university partnerships with Asia.
These measures both signal welcome and help sustain the qualified talent described throughout this report. They are also likely to further exacerbate the sorting of Asians in certain metros and states. This uneven distribution reflects—and reinforces—wider disparities in innovation capacity. Regions that build deeper ties to global talent networks will extend their lead. Those that don’t may find it harder to compete in the economy of the future.