This paper addresses the different interpretations of scientific mobility that derive from two very different sets of economic assumptions: evolutionary economic assumptions and neoclassical economic assumptions. The neoclassical model builds on an understanding of embodied scientific knowledge as ‘human capital’ which underpins a conceptualization of scientific mobility as a knowledge (re)allocation mechanism and therefore as a ‘drain-gain’ dynamics. In contrast, evolutionary economic assumptions lead to a conception of the value of embodied scientific knowledge as necessarily networked, and to understanding scientific mobility as a reconfiguration process transforming economic and science systems in uncertain ways that need to be specifically investigated.