Migration and marriage in Asian contexts

ABSTRACT

This article reviews literature on migration and marriage and highlights contributions of the papers in this special issue. The papers show that Asian marriage migrants’ experience of integration and assimilation are complex, nuanced, and heterogeneous across migrants’ sociodemographic backgrounds, ethnic profiles, and political contexts. The heterogeneities in Asian marriage migrants’ assimilation trajectories challenge the classic assimilation theory which assumes an unilinear integration trajectory in all relevant aspects. This issue diversifies the academic discourses on migration and marriage by going beyond marriage migration to include how other types of migration shape family formation processes including divorce and remarriage. It also examines the mechanisms underlying the migration-marriage link. Finally, this special issue widens methodological repertoires in the field of marriage and migration by using quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-method analyses to divulge the complexity of the relationships. Topics examined in these papers include variations in economic well-being, cultural assimilation, gender inequality vis-à-vis marriages, migrants’ subjective well-being, and how policies pertinent to cross-cultural marriages affect migrants. Unlike in the western societies where race/ethnic integration is a dominant concern, in Asia, the extended families of marriage migrants and their spouses, patriarchy, religion, and caste also play a big role in Asian migrants’ family formation behaviours.

KEYWORDS:

• Marriage migration
• integration
• internal migration
• remarriage
• marital dissolution
• assortative mating
• psychological well-being

Introduction

Although most migration is motivated by better economic opportunities in the receiving communities, migrants’ social lives are also greatly shaped by their migration experience because migration often occurs around the life stage of emerging adulthood and could last for an extended period of time (Juárez et al. 2013; Lee and Pol 1993; Liang 2001; Zenteno, Giorguli, and Gutiérrez 2013). An important but under-investigated aspect is how migration affects marriage, one of the major markers of transitioning to adulthood (Choi and Peng 2016; Kulu and Milewski 2008). Migrants’ family formation behaviour has profound implications for their emotional well-being, lifestyle choices, as well as their socioeconomic prospects (Mu and Yeung 2018). This special issue aims to gain a better understanding of the relationship between migration and marriage through both qualitative and quantitative studies.

Asia has witnessed tremendous increase and change in both international and internal migration in recent decades. In 2017, of the 258 million international migrants worldwide, 106 million (41%) were born in Asia and 80 million (31%) currently live there (United Nations 2017). An increasing number of Asians have moved to other continents, most notably to North America and Europe, as well as across Asia.

With the surge in transnational marriages in Asia, countries such as Singapore, South Korea (hereafter, Korea), and Taiwan have seen a rise in local men tying the knot with women from countries such as Vietnam, Indonesia, and China (Jongwilaiwan and Thompson 2013). Constable (2005) uses the term ‘global imagination’ to suggest that in a transnational marriage, people imagine themselves as being in a different social geographical location. This imagined social geographical location facilitates the emergence of transnational ‘marriage-scapes’ which are driven by one’s social imagination of gender, sexuality, and modernity. This is particularly true for women (Hondagneu-Sotelo 2011; Kim 2010). Studies have shown that migrant women negotiate their gender roles in both the sending and receiving communities (Jones and Shen 2008; Toyota 2008). They choose to enter an international marriage and marry up in order to improve their economic status back home, and to attain greater social status and increased autonomy in decision making, although research has documented both negative and positive impacts for those involved in cross-border marriages (Ehrenreich and Hochschild 2003; Huang, Yeoh, and Lam 2008). While they are motivated to pursue upward mobilities and productively contribute to both the sending and the receiving societies, they are often vulnerable and face economic, cultural, and legal constraints (Constable 2009; Yeoh et al. 2013). As a result, they are often in a continuum between being a ‘victim’ and ‘agent’, negotiating and strategising between the constraints and opportunities they face (Constable 2009; Ehrenreich and Hochschild 2003; Huang and Yeoh 2003; Lutz 2010; Quah 2020).

In addition to cross-border marriages, many countries experience rapid urbanisation during which large numbers of rural migrants move to urban areas (Jacka 2005; Lee and Pol 1993; Liang 2001). Disparities between the sending and receiving cities uniquely influence marital choices and lifestyles (Kulu and Milewski 2008; Mu and Yeung 2018). Such massive internal migration takes place in countries such as China, India, Indonesia, Vietnam, and Thailand (Dang, Goldstein, and McNally 1997; Desai and Banerji 2008; Liang 2001; Lucas 1997).

Migrants across Asia encounter a wide array of institutional, policy, and cultural contexts that shape their marriage behaviours, and the contextual heterogeneities have added nuances beyond the ‘victim versus agent’ binary (Constable 2009; Quah 2020). Not only has migration in Asia involved more ethnicities and countries of origin, it has also occurred in more diverse political and socioeconomic contexts with complex trajectories. As characterised by Vertovec (2007), this can be described as a situation of ‘super-diversity.’ For example, Singapore has a very high proportion of cross-national marriages with about 40% of all marriages per year involving a foreigner (Yeung and Hu 2018), and the foreign spouses often face substantial cultural and policy challenges (Huang, Yeoh, and Lam 2008; Quah 2020; Yeoh et al. 2013); in China, the residential registration system (Hukou system) greatly constrains internal migrants’ family formation behaviours (Fan 2008; Mu and Yeung 2018, 2020); Mainland China’s unique administrative relationship and economic interactions with Hong Kong has added complications to the marriage markets in both regions (Chen and Yip 2020; Chiu and Choi 2020); in India, cultural norms of marriage in different regions and for different castes largely shape one’s marital choices and behaviours expected after marriage (Bloch, Rao, and Desai 2004; Chatterjee and Desai 2020); in Indonesia, its diverse ethnic background has made patterns of assortative mating particularly complex across migration status and ethnicity (Utomo and McDonald 2016; Utomo 2020); in Korea and Taiwan, the diverse countries of origin of foreign brides create potential sources of tension and challenges for integration in an originally homogeneous society (Chang 2020; Choi, Kim, and Ryu 2020; Li and Yang 2020).

More recently, the changing distribution of Asian migrants’ skills qualifications have led to more heterogeneous motivations for migration and more dynamic assimilation processes. Compared to earlier migrants who were predominantly low- or semi-skilled, more recent migrants have relatively higher level of skills and are more likely to stay longer in the receiving communities and assimilate there (Ishii 2016; Mu and Yeung 2018). They tend to seek new lifestyles beyond economic improvement, which include finding a spouse, starting a family and settling permanently in the receiving communities (Fan and Li 2002; Gaetano and Jacka 2013; Palriwala and Uberoi 2008). Consequently, migrants’ marriage patterns are more diverse in terms of marriage timing, assortative mating choices, integration, and power relations between genders (Ishii 2016; Choi and Peng 2016). Particularly, given the rising transnational marriages and multiculturalism in many Asian countries, migration has profoundly shaped patterns of interethnic marriages (Utomo 2020). Some Asian migrants have also crossed continental boundaries to settle in countries with very different social and cultural backgrounds, such as North America (Qian and Qian 2020). This migration experience uniquely shapes their marriage patterns (Choi and Tienda 2018; Qian, Lichter, and Tumin 2018).

Earlier research on migration and marriage in Asia is largely qualitative in nature (Constable 2005, 2009; Yeoh et al. 2013; Fan 2003, 2008). Exceptions include articles in Kim (2008, 2012). This special collection includes articles based on quantitative (Chatterjee and Desai 2020; Chen and Yip 2020; Choi, Kim, and Ryu 2020; Qian and Qian 2020; Li and Yang 2020), qualitative (Chiu and Choi 2020; Quah 2020), and mixed-method analysis (Chang 2020; Mu and Yeung 2020; Utomo 2020). The papers systematically examine how the experience of migration has influenced individuals’ family formation behaviours and related outcomes in assimilation and well-being, under diverse policy and cultural contexts across Asia. Collectively, this special issue seeks to better understand the patterns, mechanisms and issues underlying the migration-marriage link. Topics examined in the papers include variations in economic well-being, cultural assimilation, subjective well-being, gender inequality vis-à-vis marriages, marriage trajectories, and individuals’ adaptation to policies pertinent to cross-cultural marriages.

Most of these papers were first presented in an international conference ‘Migration and Marriage in Asia’ on July 26-27, 2016, at the Asia Research Institute of the National University of Singapore convened by the guest editors. It is our hope that this collection will stimulate new theoretical development on migration and marriage and that scholars of migration, family studies, social demography, population studies, social work, and policy researchers, particularly those interested in Asian contexts, will find new insights from them.

Contextualising the migration and marriage experience in Asia

Each article in this issue contextualises the marriage migration experience in a particular society. Research on the link between marriage and migration often focuses on the assimilation, adaptation, and integration experiences of marriage migrants, particularly those who move across national boundaries (Constable 2005, 2009). It has been established in the literature that marriage migration is often driven by migrant women’s motivations to alleviate their economic status back home and to attain greater socioeconomic status and an increased authority in decision-making (Ishii 2016). They tend to migrate from the Global South to the Global North to enter into an international marriage. Within the developmental hierarchies between the sending and the receiving countries, these marriages are often hypergamous in which the wives marry up in socioeconomic status (Jones and Shen 2008; Mu and Hu 2018). Constable (2005) uses the term ‘global marriage-scapes’ to describe this unique migration flow. This notion is consistent with the classic assimilation theory, which portrays the decision of migration as a rational process of the migrant to maximise their own and their families’ well-being (Massey et al. 1993; Yinger 1981).

As a result, marriage migrants have often been portrayed within the continuum between ‘victim’ and ‘agent’ in recent literature. At one end, some studies have established that female marriage migrants, moving from less developed countries, are vulnerable and powerless in fully integrating into the receiving societies and achieving equality within the public and the domestic spheres with their local counterparts (Charsley 2005, 2006; Stephnitz 2009; Kim 2011). At the other end of the spectrum, other studies have argued that due to the hypergamous nature of cross-border marriages, marriage migrants have often managed to manoeuvre agency, realise upward mobility, and make contributions to both the sending and the receiving societies, which makes the portrayal of them as victims inaccurate (Brennan 2004; Cheng 2005; Chong 2014; Kempadoo 2005; Parker 2005; Yeoh et al. 2013). In reality, most marriage migrants move between the two extremes of ‘victim’ and ‘agent’, manoeuvring their lives through complex trajectories toward integration, empowerment, and achievements (Faier 2007; Constable 2009; Ehrenreich and Hochschild 2003; Quah 2020). As summarised by Portes (2007), the actual pattern and level of assimilation can be highly ‘segmented,’ depending on the specific mode of migration and the contexts in which they occur. Marriage migrants are faced with both constraints and opportunities. They resort to various resources and channels available to them in the political, economic, and cultural contexts to cope strategically and creatively with the problems they encounter in the hope of achieving survival, and even mobility and success.

Even though global hypergamy has been common, there are other patterns beyond the ‘marriage-scapes’ perspective in marriage migration that have started to receive academic attention (Ishii 2016). Some researchers reveal the heterogeneous directions of marriage migration (Kudo 2016; Sakai 2016; Lumayag 2016). That is, aside from the conventional move from the Global South to the Global North, increasingly more marriage migrants move from wealthier countries to poorer ones or move within the two regions, which add to the diversity in migrants’ socioeconomic status, cultural assimilation and legal issues.

Aside from the direction of migration, trajectories of marriage migration have also become increasingly diverse, involving a combination of reversed, return and circular migration, due to the dynamic interactions between the migrants, the spouses, the receiving society and the sending societies (Tokoro 2016; Dealwis 2016). These migration trajectories have increased uncertainties in migrants’ economic, legal, and cultural experiences, which makes it increasingly important for the migrants to resort to more dynamic and flexible coping strategies.

While cross-border marriages are influenced by differences in countries’ economic development, legal systems, and cultural backgrounds (Constable 2005), complexities and unique patterns of social inequalities within a country also influence marital choices and lifestyles of internal migrants (Fan and Huang 1998).

Findings in this issue show that heterogeneities in Asian marriage migrants’ life trajectories and contextual factors challenge the applicability of the classic assimilation theory. The classic assimilation theory often assumes a unilineal integration trajectory when marriage migrants assimilate to receiving societies in all relevant aspects – socially, culturally, legally and so on (Massey et al. 1993). However, in reality, the migration experience can be highly complex, and the nature of migration may change contingent on specific contexts. Migrants may strategically arrange the sequence and aspects of assimilation. Several papers in this special issue jointly show that marriage migrants both struggle and strategise under the diverse and unequal legal, economic, and cultural landscapes between the sending and the receiving societies, both across and within national boundaries.

Chiu and Choi (2020) show that legal and spatial migration may not always go hand in hand. Rather, female marriage migrants from mainland China to Hong Kong have creatively decoupled the two types of migration into various combinations so as to strike a balance between their marriage life, social adaptation, and career development. Chang (2020) finds that Vietnamese marriage migrants in Taiwan and Korea have responsively adjusted their social and cultural integration in both the private and domestic spheres based on the perceived differences of gender systems in the sending and the receiving societies. Chatterjee and Desai’s research (2020) demonstrate how India’s internal female marriage migrants pursue autonomy in the public sphere through proactively constructing their sense of community based on both the geographical community where they reside and the imagined communities, that is, the mindset of the communities where their natal families belong. In Quah’s (2020) study, she finds that divorced low-income marriage migrant women in Singapore use diverse approaches and strategies to cope with difficulties and problems both during and after divorce.

Diversifying the academic discourses in migration and marriage

Research on the link between migration and marriage has mainly focused on the adaption and upward mobility patterns of marriage migrants (Constable 2005, 2009; Yeoh et al. 2013). That is, most of the previous literature has looked at how marriage, as the main cause of migration, has shaped migrants’ well-being and life choices. Studies that have examined the impact of migration often focus on outcomes such as socioeconomic profiles (Liang and Ma 2004; Massey et al. 1993; Portes 2007; Zhang and Ye 2018) and intergenerational relations (Dreby 2007; Huang and Yeoh 2005; Huang, Yeoh, and Lam 2008; Zhou 2009). However, given the rising prevalence of migration, the heterogeneous migration trajectories and motivations, and the elongated migration spells, the literature on migration and marriage should focus more on how different types of migration (e.g. labour migration) shape individuals’ marriage formation process. The literature should also examine other phases of family formation such as marriage dissolution and remarriages (Mazzucato and Schans 2011).

In this special issue, three articles examine how migration, intertwined with other mechanisms such as citizenship, ethnicity, and urban/rural divide, shape individuals’ marriage timing and assortative mating patterns. Specifically, Qian and Qian (2020) investigate how different generations of Asian immigrants in the United States marry across generations of immigration and across racial groups. Utomo (2020) discusses how internal migration has added to the complexities in the patterns of ethnic intermarriages in Jakarta, a main destination for internal migrants across the ethnically diverse Indonesia. Mu and Yeung (2020) demonstrate how migration, interacts with gender, the urban/rural origin, and parental and individual socioeconomic status, to influence individuals’ marriage timing and their likelihood of marrying someone of different social origins.

This collection also expands on the existing literature on migration and marriage by examining the various phases related to family formation, including to marital dissolution (Choi, Kim, and Ryu 2020; Quah 2020) and reformation (Chen and Yip 2020) as Mazzucato and Schans (2011) suggest family scholarship on transnational families should explore. This helps deepen our understanding of the dynamic relationships between migration experiences and family formation trajectories.

Widening methodological repertoires in the field of migration and marriage

Previous literature on migration and marriage tends to be ethnographic and narrative-oriented, lacking quantitative documentation and systematic explanations. While qualitative findings help detail motivations, attitudes and feelings of the migrants, quantitative estimates of distributions and relationships among multiple factors help capture trends and patterns more accurately and disentangle complex causal relationships. Articles in this special collection use multiple methods, including quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-method analyses to examine the complex and nuanced experiences of migrants in their marital choices, social integration, and mobility trajectories. For example, based on statistical models including measures of female marriage migrants’ life satisfaction and its potential determinants in Taiwan (Li and Yang 2020), we gain a more accurate understanding about how the experiences of marriage migration have shaped individuals’ subjective well-being, and what the most relevant and significant determinants of marriage migrants’ integration process in the receiving societies are. Relying on representative and longitudinal marriage and divorce registration data in Korea (Choi, Kim, and Ryu 2020) and Hong Kong (Chen and Yip 2020), the authors disentangle the mechanisms of how and why marriage migrants are subject to martial instabilities, and when divorce happens, how they make decisions about remarriage in the receiving societies.

Contributions of articles in this special issue

In addition to the joint contributions discussed above, each paper in this collection is a valuable addition to studies on the relationship between migration and marriage. They are all theoretically informed empirical studies investigating Asian migrants’ marriage patterns in China, Hong Kong, India, Indonesia, Korea, Singapore, Taiwan, as well as in the United States. The papers touch on how migration influences Asian migrants’ marriage timing and assortative mating patterns, how heterogeneous migration experiences shape Asian migrants’ social integration process and subjective well-being, and how migration, legally and spatially, has introduced instabilities in Asian migrants’ marital lives. The papers are broadly grouped under three themes: (1) Migration, Marriage Partners and Timing, (2) Migration, Gender, and Subjective Well-being, and (3) Law, Identity, and Marital Instabilities.

Migration, marriage partners and timing

There has been an increasing number of Asians migrating and settling in other countries, particularly North America. A substantial number of these migrants are in interracial marriages which has implications for Asian migrants’ integration in America. Qian and Qian (2020) use data from the Current Population Survey to examine how different generations of Asian immigrants in the United States marry across generations of immigration and across racial groups. They apply the new assimilation theory (Alba and Nee 2009) that posits that assimilation may take diverse paths for different subpopulations. The authors hypothesise that educational attainment may play an important role in shaping marriage behaviour among different generations of Asian migrants. They first examine whether a larger marriage pool of Asian immigrants reinforces cultural identities and strengthens intergroup boundaries. Second, the authors examine how educational attainment plays a role in patterns of intergenerational marriage and interracial marriage. Finally, they examine whether there is retreat from intermarriage among Asian Americans of the second generation.

They find that generational endogamy became stronger between 1994–2004 and 2005–2015 among second generation men and third-plus generation men. Over time, the proportion of Asian immigrants marrying whites declined for all three generations. Meanwhile, there has been an increase in first-generation Asian men marrying second-generation Asian women, and a declining number of third-plus-generation Asian men marrying first-generation Asian women. Education indeed shapes race/generation assortative mating, seen in the divergent paths of integration between highly educated and less educated second-generation Asians. These results provide support for the new assimilation theory and offer new insights on migrants’ integration process through marriage.

In Asia, some countries are very ethnically diverse. One such example is Indonesia where interethnic marriages occur at a high rate, especially in the metropolitan areas. With a mixed-method approach, Utomo (2020) investigates how migration has shaped patterns of ethnic intermarriages in Jakarta, which has long been a prime destination for internal migrants across the ethnically diverse country. Based on the 2010 Census data, she examines intermarriage patterns across 1,340 ethnic sub-groups, such as the Betawi, Sundanese, Batak, Minang, Chinese, Malays, and Bugis. She then supplements these analyses with insights from qualitative data from sources such as newspapers, online media (e.g. blogs), online dating sites, magazines, books and movies about norms for ethnic assortative mating among major ethnic groups particularly among young adults aged 20-39.

The census data show that about one-third of co-residing married couples in Jakarta were in an interethnic marriage in 2010. The Chinese, Madurese, and Batak sub-groups have high rates of endogamy despite their small relative size in Jakarta. Those with higher education are more likely to marry someone from other ethnic groups, and the youngest group are most likely to be in an interethnic marriage. Migration status is an important factor, in that more recent migrants are less likely to marry someone from other ethnic groups than those who had migrated earlier. The author also conducted in-depth interviews with 14 respondents in 2014 and 2015. Data from both popular media and in-depth interviews indicate that although crossing ethnic boundaries is not as challenging as it used to be, crossing the religious boundary is largely shunned by both parents and families, and by the respondents themselves. Educational homogamy was important for all the female respondents interviewed, but did not come through as such for the male respondents.

The qualitative data suggest that increased migration has changed the norm and behaviour in family formation in Indonesia. Although arranged marriage has declined, parents and kinship network continue to play an important role in migrants’ choice of spouse. In addition, in Indonesia, religious authorities and states also have an interest in shaping norms in the marriage market. Identifying the role of these third parties contributes to ethnic assortative mating theories. These results shed nuanced insights on ethnic assortative mating perspectives that are often based on western or developed countries. The author challenges Kalmijn’s framework (1998) by arguing that it is difficult to disentangle migrants’ own preferences from that of the third party, be it their parents’ wishes, the broader cultural networks, or religious communities in considering one’s decisions and attitudes towards interethnic marriages.

Mu and Yeung (2020) examine how internal migration of both high-skilled and low- and semi-skilled migrants in China influences their family formation behaviours, including when and whom they marry, and how gender, education, and family background moderate the relationship. A mixed-method approach, based on data from the 2012 Chinese Family Panel Studies (CFPS) and 127 in-depth interviews conducted in Beijing in 2015, helps to triangulate findings about the relationship between migration, marriage timing, and assortative mating by family origins.

Findings show that both female and male rural migrants tend to enter first marriage later than local residents, though the ‘delaying’ effect of migration is stronger for men, suggesting that men bear greater economic pressures of household establishment in China where housing prices are skyrocketing in many cities. A further look into individual and parental education shows that only rural migrant women who did not attend college or whose parents did not attend college marry earlier. The authors suggest that these patterns likely reflect the gendered impact of education and family background on the timing of marriage. Whereas having lower education indicates higher acceptance of early marriage for women, it means lower financial ability for men, which makes them less attractive in the marriage market. Regarding patterns of assortative mating by family origins, rural migrants with higher education and better family SES background are less likely to marry someone from the same province, and more likely to marry an urban spouse or a rural migrant than a rural local. These results highlight the significance of structural and financial barriers as well as the strong role of parents and patriarchy in shaping marriage behaviours of the rural-to-urban migrants in China.

Migration, gender, and subjective well-being

Chang (2020) examines how the perceived gaps of the gender system between the sending and receiving societies affect female Vietnamese marriage migrants’ (VMM) integration experiences in Taiwan and Korea. She uses qualitative interviews with VMMs during two waves of multi-sited fieldwork in Taiwan and Korea between 2011 and 2017, and survey data that capture relevant gender-related attitudes in Vietnam, Taiwan, and Korea. Overall, Chang observes that the gender system in Taiwan is relatively more equitable than that in Vietnam in two aspects: married women are protected by domestic violence laws in Taiwan but not in Vietnam, and married women in Taiwan have more autonomy and power although women from abroad are treated less equally than local women. In contrast, the gender system in Korea is more rigid than that in Vietnam, especially due to the ‘mother-in-law’ culture. Marriage migrant women’s participation in the public sphere often improves their social status at home. This study adds to the literature on gender and immigrant integration by showing the heterogeneity in intra-Asia marriage migrants’ integration experiences and the importance of gender system in the destination country in mediating the relationship between migration and gender relations within a marriage.

Marriage immigrants currently account for more than 2% of the national population in Taiwan with many having children. Their well-being is crucial for themselves, their children and to society as a whole. Li and Yang (2020) use a valuable national database to examine the under-studied area of the psychological well-being of foreign brides in cross-border marriages in Taiwan from the economic and acculturative perspectives. In Taiwan, marriage immigration has been overwhelmingly female, with women accounting for 92.0% of marriage migrants, mainly Chinese (67.1%) from China, Hong Kong and Macau and one third from mostly Southeast Asian countries. The authors use data from a national survey on marriage immigrants conducted by the National Immigration Agency in 2013 to examine factors of the acculturative process, including the length of stay in host society, access to social networks, perceived discrimination, and acculturative difficulties associated with migrants’ psychological well-being.

Results show that a majority of the marriage immigrants (92%) feel happy about their lives in Taiwan, and two thirds of them feel unwelcome. Data reveal that family income is the most influential factor in the happiness of female marriage immigrants, being positively associated with it. The families of immigrant brides in Taiwan have on average a lower family income than the general population. About 60% of the immigrant brides are employed, and they earn significantly lower income than locals. Those employed are less happy because they often encounter discrimination and feel burdened with a second shift at home after work. More than half of the immigrant brides have stayed for more than 10 years. Those with longer residency report lower psychological well-being than the newcomers who had arrived in Taiwan within the past two years. The authors argue that this may be due to unexpected hardships and barriers from the system later into marriage. Compared to those who access professional organisations, such as legal institutions, governmental agents, and religious organisations, immigrant brides who mainly access primary social networks in Taiwan are happier. Data also show that when immigrant brides perceive local residents around them as friendly, they are more likely to feel accepted, and such perceived friendliness mediates the impacts of some covariates on their happiness. Most of the findings support the acculturation and emotional stress theories when controlling for economic resources. However, some findings such as those regarding the length of stay and employment status of the immigrant brides challenge extant literature and underscore the value of accounting for the unique Asian gender norms and institutional barriers.

An Asian country that has the largest and an increasing group of marriage migrants is India, although most of these are internal migrants within India. It has been estimated that 48% of women in rural India in 2008 were internal migrants, a majority of them marriage migrants. However, systematic research on marriage migrants in India is rare thus far. Chatterjee and Desai (2020) seek to understand whether Indian marriage migrant women’s sense of belonging to the sending and receiving communities shape their autonomy in the public sphere with respect to physical autonomy, economic autonomy and civic participation.

Using data from the 2012 India Human Development Survey (IHDS), a nationally representative dataset, the authors note that while marriage migration is part of the accepted kinship system in India, there is a complex set of social norms and structures that defines the relationship of a woman with her marital family and community. They argue that these norms need to be distinguished from the physical environment. They show that being a migrant in a community or growing up in one’s own community of residence are both positively associated with women’s participation in wage labour, but they have no impact on women’s physical autonomy in terms of going out of the house alone or participating in civic activities. Women who belong to communities which allow for marriage within their natal villages are far more likely to have autonomy in all three aspects. Moreover, being a long-time resident in a community offers women greater knowledge about the community and the available infrastructure, and such knowledge helps them improve their social networks, although it is not sufficient to improve their autonomy. In contrast, marriage patterns that are oriented towards village endogamy develop norms and ideologies that permit far greater autonomy than those that are oriented towards village exogamy. The findings also suggest that belonging to a caste that allows endogamous marriages increases women’s participation in civic activities. These results help reconcile some of the existing literature that find divergent results in different areas in India. The authors conclude that norms of marriage migration in a woman’s caste are more important than the physical community she migrates to. The study is a valuable contribution that demonstrates that culture and geography are closely linked and that distinguishing their various impacts can provide a more nuanced understanding of the demographic process of migration.

Law, identity, and marital instabilities

The legal systems in the destination have strong implications for cross-border marriage migrants. Most research assumes that migrants undergo legal and spatial migration simultaneously. However, in Hong Kong, marriage migrants’ legal and spatial migration often do not coincide. Chiu and Choi (2020) use ethnographic data to illustrate the complications and instabilities introduced by the decoupling of legal migration and the actual spatial migration in cross-border marriages between Mainland Chinese and Hong Kongers. The authors posit that such inconsistency underscores the gendered power relations of marriage migration and propose a conceptual framework that decouples marriage migrants’ legal and spatial migration to untangle the intricate nexus of relations between gender, power, and space. They examine the causes and consequences of two forms of decoupling of legal and spatial migration among female marriage migrants – (1) wife migrates spatially before her legal status changes and (2) wife’s change in legal status is not accompanied by spatial migration. They argue that these two forms of decoupling have their origin in state policies, economic constraints and personal choices, and that their impact on the intimate and household dynamics of cross-border families is gendered.

The main reason for the first type of decoupling is the proliferation of government restrictions on migration and granting of residency and citizenship, and the second form relates to the economic and family circumstances of cross-border families and the personal preferences of female marriage migrants. Some women would like to migrate spatially in order to benefit from spatial hypergamy but end up being trapped in their region of origin because of financial and familial constraints. On the other hand, legal migration that happens without spatial migration reveals the formidable structural obstacles faced by female marriage migrants when striving to create a normative family, which force some of them to be in a long-term split household arrangement. In some cases, it can represent marriage migrants’ agency to strive for autonomy or to achieve personal goals. The social effects of the decoupling of legal and spatial migration that are regularised by the state have implications for similar situations in neighbouring societies such as Taiwan, Macau and Singapore.

The number of transnational marriages in Korea, mostly between a Korean husband and a foreign wife, has increased rapidly. This trend has caused concerns over the quality of marriage, how multi-ethnic children fare, and citizenship status of marriage immigrants. Choi, Kim, and Ryu (2020), drawing on marriage and divorce registration data, examine the risk of transnational divorce in Korea, and the socio-demographic factors influencing the risk. This study provides the most complete description of transnational marital dissolution to date. The authors raise questions about whether transnational marriages are at a higher risk of marital dissolution and how the socio-demographic characteristics of a transnational couple affect the probability of a marital dissolution.

They find that transnational marriages have an extremely high risk of divorce within the first 48 months of marriage, when controlling for spouses’ socio-demographic characteristics and spousal dissimilarities. About 19% of marriages between a Korean husband and a foreign wife were dissolved and 6% of marriages between Korean nationals ended within 48 months. Both Chinese husbands and wives have the highest risk of divorce, and foreign wives from Southeast Asian countries also have a high risk of divorce. In addition, they find that foreign wives who have a lower education have a significantly higher probability of divorce than those with a higher education. Lastly, foreign wives who have acquired citizenship status have lower risks of divorce. These patterns do not fully support the heterogamy hypothesis as spouses’ compositional traits such as their unique socioeconomic and demographic characteristics, as hypothesised by the selectivity perspective, partly explain the high divorce rates. The authors argue that the different motivations for transnational marriage and its processes in Western and Korean contexts explain these differences.

Given the higher divorce rates for transnational marriages, it is important to examine how marriage migrants cope after a divorce. To date, this topic has been rarely investigated. Quah (2020) provides a detailed depiction of the lives of low-income marriage migrant women in Singapore who had dissolved their marriages with their Singaporean citizen ex-husbands. Through in-depth interviews with 47 transnational divorcees, Quah finds that, first, to cope with divorce proceedings and to obtain legal representation, the foreign spouse builds the savvy to turn to local community organisations for information and support such as legal aid from non-profit organisations for migrants in Singapore. Second, Quah shows that gendered asymmetric relations persist through the divorce proceedings and into the women’s post-divorce interactions with their ex-spouses. Marriage migrant women are often immediately thrust into ‘visa limbo’ after divorce, and burdened with visa issues and the uncertainty of remaining in Singapore. Singaporean ex-husbands, for instance, have the power to exclude non-resident mothers from claiming child custody and making other divorce claims by withdrawing sponsorship of their ex-wives’ visit pass. Some marriage migrant women obtain joint child custody with their Singaporean ex-husbands and get to care for and control their children, but those who lack the permit to remain in the country could be coerced into giving up custody of their children. Third, marriage migrants often find themselves with little bargaining power during divorce proceedings. They struggle to find means to remain in Singapore and to juggle other livelihood challenges and strategically negotiate with their ex-husbands over post-divorce co-parenting arrangements.

Quah’s paper challenges the literature that conceptualises female marriage migrants from low-income countries in a ‘victim versus agent’ binary and shows that they struggle as well as strategise under the conditions of asymmetric global economic restructuring. From a transnational, intersectional feminist perspective, Quah argues that these foreign brides’ life trajectories are non-linear and non-standardised.

Beyond migrants’ marital instability and divorce experience, Chen and Yip (2020) examine the likelihood and assortative mating patterns of remarriage among marriage migrants in Hong Kong and their policy implications. Based on data from the Hong Kong Marriage Registry during the period of 1995-2012, they find that the age difference between partners is smaller in first marriages than in remarriages. However, for educational selection between marriage partners, homogamy is dominant in both first marriages and remarriages, but with notable differences between local marriages and transnational marriages. Multivariate analysis further shows that both Hong Kong men and women with low education and in low-skilled occupations are more likely to remarry Mainland Chinese as choice of spouse is limited for them due to their low SES, and Hong Kongers of high socioeconomic status are more likely to remarry spouses from western countries. There are also gender differences. For Hong Kong men, remarriage with Mainland brides tends to be more age and education hypergamous, while remarriage with western brides are more age and education hypogamous. In contrast, hypogamy is more likely to be practised by Hong Kong women who remarry Mainland men, while hypergamy is more likely to be practised by Hong Kong women who remarry western men.

Conclusion

Marriage migration has become an increasingly prevalent phenomenon in Asia. Migrants mainly from China and a few Southeast Asian countries such as Vietnam, the Philippines, and Indonesia migrate to destinations such as Hong Kong, Korea, Singapore, and Taiwan. Thus, marriage migrants comprise an increasing share of the population in Asia. In addition, the trajectories of such migration have become more diverse, and the duration has become longer, spanning over multiple life stages. Compared to labour migration, marriage migration can potentially have a wider and longer-term impact on the well-being of individuals and the society as it involves marriage partners and potentially children and other family members.

Aside from marriage migration, other types of migration in Asia have also become more diverse in terms of migrants’ socio-demographic characteristics and motivations. In particular, labour migrants with higher skills are more likely to stay longer and to seek new lives beyond economic improvement, including finding a spouse, starting a family, and settling permanently in the receiving communities. There is a need to diversify academic discourses in the field of migration and marriage beyond marriage migrants. In addition to intra-Asia migration, immigration from Asia to the West also continues to increase. Hence, migrants’ marriage patterns are more heterogeneous in terms of assortative mating choices, marriage timing, integration, and power relations between genders. Given the rapid globalisation and urbanisation occurring in Asia, these trends will only be on the rise and their implications for society will become more vital.

The studies in this special issue use good quality data and methodologies to advance our knowledge about the motivations, patterns, and consequences of these new demographic and social trends in Asia. We have moved beyond the ‘marriage-scapes’ perspective and the classic assimilation theory to enrich understanding by showing migrants’ complex strategising processes between difficulties and opportunities in specific social, legal, and cultural contexts in Asia. We have also broadened the understanding of the relationship between migration and marriage by examining how different types of migration influence the family formation process, from entry into marriage, to marital dissolution and remarriages. The multi-methods used in this issue, including qualitative, quantitative, and mixed-method approaches, have enabled both systematic overview of the patterns and determinants of migrants’ well-being and marital outcomes, and an in-depth understanding of the underlying decision-making mechanisms.

The unique Asian contexts push the boundaries of many existing theories. The studies in this special issue provide nuanced evidence that shows how the integration process of Asian migrants is fraught with formal and informal inequalities in legal systems, labour markets, social networks, and private spheres that are different from patterns more frequently seen in western literature. Consistent with the neo-assimilation models developed in the Western context, assimilation takes place within racially and economically heterogeneous Asian contexts. Social barriers created across national boundaries and sometimes within a country make marriages of migrants unstable and vulnerable, which is detrimental to the migrants and to the society. Lingering discrimination and institutional barriers to citizenship, employment and other opportunities often block complete assimilation for some migrants while those more advantaged migrants assimilate more easily. It is important to consider both the political and cultural contexts in the origin and destination countries, in particular the gender norms, developmental policies, and socioeconomic and demographic contexts when examining migrants’ subjective well-being, the assimilation and integration process, and their implications for their families and society at large.

The papers in this special issue show how migration modifies ethnic homogeneity and the socioeconomic mix in the receiving communities. Unlike literature in the western contexts where race/ethnic integration is a key concern, the papers show that, in Asia, spouses and the extended families of migrants, patriarchy, institutional and socioeconomic backgrounds, religion, caste, and ethnicity all play a big role in Asian migrants’ marriage behaviours and marital relations. Taken together, this special issue makes valuable empirical and theoretical contributions to the fields of migration, race/ethnicity, family, and gender studies. Future studies should investigate in greater detail the well-being and identity of marriage migrants and the long-term consequences of these geographic moves to the family system, the social fabric, and a wide range of institutions in both the origin and destination.

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to the Asia Research Institute at the National University of Singapore for the financial support of the international conference ‘Migration and Marriage in Asia’ on July 26–27, 2016. Most papers in this special issue were first presented in that conference. We also thank Saharah Abubakar for her capable editorial help.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.