Advertisement

Conclusion

Chapter
  • 129 Downloads
Part of the Palgrave Macmillan Studies in Family and Intimate Life book series (PSFL)

Abstract

In this concluding chapter, we provide an overview of some of the main research findings from the marriage migration project. We situate these in relation to the conceptual model of processes of integration outlined in Chapter  2, showing how the findings demonstrate the varying relationships between processes in different domains of integration; that processes of integration may fluctuate over time and the lifecourse; and that the ‘effectors’ impacting on these processes are multiple and interacting. The approach to researching integration taken in this volume has produced a more nuanced understanding of relationships between British South Asian transnational marriages and processes of integration, undermining the simplistic temporal tropes of ‘a first generation in every generation’ which dominate policy discourse, and pointing to concrete recommendations for policy makers.

References

  1. Anderson, B. (1983). Imagined communities: Reflections on the origins and spread of nationalism. London: Verson.Google Scholar
  2. Bonjour, S., & Kraler, A. (2015). Family migration as an integration issue? Policy perspectives and academic insights. Journal of Family Issues, 36(11), 1407–1432.Google Scholar
  3. Brown, P., & Scase, R. (Eds.). (1991). Poor work: Disadvantage and the division of labour. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Casey, L. (2016). The Casey review: A review into opportunity and integration. London: Department for Communities and Local Government.Google Scholar
  5. Charsley, K. (2013). Transnational Pakistani connections: Marrying ‘back home’. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  6. Charsley, K., & Wray, H. (2015). Introduction: The invisible (migrant) man. Men and Masculinities, 18(4), 403–423.Google Scholar
  7. Dustin, M., & Phillips, A. (2008). Whose agenda is it?: Abuses of women and abuses of ‘culture’. Britain Ethnicities, 8(3), 405–424.Google Scholar
  8. Eaves. (2015). Settling in: Experiences of women on spousal visas in the UK. http://i2.cmsfiles.com/eaves/2015/06/Settling-In-research-report-9795c1.pdf. Accessed 14 April 2020.
  9. Eggebø, H., & Brekke, J. P. (2018). Family migration and integration: A literature review. Nordland Research Institute. http://www.nordlandsforskning.no/publikasjoner/family-migration-and-integration-a-literature-review-article5504-152.html. Accessed 5 July 2019.
  10. Elder, G. H., Johnson, M. K., & Crosnoe, R. (2003). The emergence and development of life course theory. In J. T. Mortimer & M. J. Shanahan (Eds.), Handbook of the life course (pp. 3–19). Boston: Springer.Google Scholar
  11. Fog Olwig, K. (2011). ‘Integration’: Migrants and refugees between Scandinavian welfare societies and family relations. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 37(2), 179–196.Google Scholar
  12. Fokkema, T., & De Haas, H. (2015). Pre‐ and post‐migration determinants of socio‐cultural integration of African immigrants in Italy and Spain. International Migration, 53(6), 3–26.Google Scholar
  13. Gonzalez-Ferrer, A. (2006). Who do immigrants marry? Partner choice among single immigrants in Germany. European Sociological Review, 22(2), 171–185.Google Scholar
  14. Goodhart, D. (2013). The British dream: Successes and failure of post-war immigration. London: Atlantic Books.Google Scholar
  15. Griffiths, M. B. (2014). Out of time: The temporal uncertainties of refused asylum seekers and immigration detainees. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 40(12), 1991–2009.Google Scholar
  16. Griffiths, M. B., Rogers, A., & Anderson, B. (2013). Migration, time and temporalities: Review and prospect (COMPAS Research Resources Paper) (pp. 199–217).Google Scholar
  17. Golden, D. (2002). Belonging through time: Nurturing national identity among newcomers to Israel from the former Soviet Union. Time and Society, 11(1), 5–24.Google Scholar
  18. Heath, A. (2013). Understanding political change: The British voter 1964–1987. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  19. Hobsbawm, T., & Ranger, E. (1983). The invention of tradition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Hooghiemstra, E. (2001). Migrants, partner selection and integration: Crossing borders. Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 32(4), 601–626.Google Scholar
  21. Jamieson, L. (1999). Intimacy transformed? A critical look at the ‘pure relationship’. Sociology, 33(3), 477–494.Google Scholar
  22. Kang, N. (2016). Intergenerational tensions and cultural reproduction in a Punjabi community in England. In S. I. Rajan, V. J. Varghese & A. K. Nanda (Eds.), Migration, mobility and multiple affiliations: Punjabis in a transnational world (pp. 360–374). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  23. King, R., Warnes, T., & Williams, A. (2000). Sunset lives: British retirement migration to the Mediterranean. Oxford: Berg.Google Scholar
  24. Kofman, E., & Raghuram, P., (2006). Gender and global labour migrations: Incorporating skilled workers. Antipode, 38(2), 282–303.Google Scholar
  25. Kofman, E., Saharso, S., & Vacchelli, E. (2015). Gendered perspectives on integration discourses and measures. International Migration, 53(4), 77–89.Google Scholar
  26. Lievens, J. (1999). Family-forming migration from Turkey and Morocco to Belgium: The demand for marriage partners from the countries of origin. International Migration Review, 33(3), 717–744.Google Scholar
  27. Liversage, A. (2009). Vital conjunctures, shifting horizons: High-skilled female immigrants looking for work. Work, Employment and Society, 23(1), 120–141.Google Scholar
  28. Mohn, F. A. (2019). Marriage migration and the economic trajectories of first-and second-generation immigrants in Norway. Acta Sociologica (early online view).  https://doi.org/10.1177/0001699319841668. Accessed 25 July 2019.
  29. Neveu Kringelbach, H. (2013). ‘Mixed marriage’, citizenship and the policing of intimacy in contemporary France (IMI Oxford Working Papers Paper 77). http://neveukringelbach.org/papers/IMI_NeveuKringelbach2013.pdf. Accessed 25 July 2019.
  30. Oliver, C. (2013). The impact of restrictions and entitlements on the integration of family migrants. Oxford: COMPAS. https://www.compas.ox.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/PR-2013-IMPACIM_Comparative.pdf. Accessed 25 July 2019.
  31. Osella, F., & Osella, C. (2000). Migration, money and masculinity in Kerala. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 6(1), 117–133.Google Scholar
  32. Parreñas, R. S. (2005). Children of global migration: Transnational families and gendered woes. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  33. Rytter, M. (2010). ‘The family of Denmark’ and ‘the Aliens’: Kinship images in Danish integration politics. Ethnos, 75(3), 301–322.Google Scholar
  34. Rytter, M. (2012a). Semi-legal family life: Pakistani couples in the borderlands of Denmark and Sweden. Global Networks, 12(1), 91–108.Google Scholar
  35. Rytter, M. (2012b). Between preferences: Marriage and mobility among Danish Pakistani youth. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 18(3), 572–590.Google Scholar
  36. Rytter, M. (2018). Writing against integration: Danish imaginaries of culture, race and belonging. Ethnos, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/00141844.2018.1458745.
  37. Schinkel, W. (2018). Against ‘immigrant integration’: For an end to neocolonial knowledge production. Comparative migration studies, 6(1), 31.Google Scholar
  38. Spencer, S., & Charsley, K. (2016). Conceptualising integration: A framework for empirical research, taking marriage migration as a case study. Comparative Migration Studies, 4(1), 1–19.Google Scholar
  39. Tolsma, J., Lubbers, M., & Gijsberts, M. (2012). Education and cultural integration among ethnic minorities and natives in the Netherlands: A test of the integration paradox. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 38(5), 793–813.Google Scholar
  40. Wingens, M., Windzio, M., de Valk, H., & Aybek, C. (Eds.). (2011). A life-course perspective on migration and integration. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  41. Yuval-Davis, N. (2006). Belonging and the politics of belonging. Patterns of Prejudice, 40(3), 197–214.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Sociology, Politics and International StudiesUniversity of BristolBristolUK
  2. 2.BristolUK
  3. 3.Department of Political ScienceUniversity of AmsterdamAmsterdamThe Netherlands
  4. 4.Centre on Migration, Policy and SocietyUniversity of OxfordOxfordUK

Personalised recommendations