Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Union Formation in a Multicultural Context

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Trajectories and Origins: Survey on the Diversity of the French Population

Part of the book series: INED Population Studies ((INPS,volume 8))

Abstract

How does national origin influence the choice of partner? This chapter examines union formation in relation to migration history. As one might expect, it reveals very low proportions of mixed unions among migrant groups where individuals had already formed a family before migrating (persons of Turkish origin, for example), but high proportions among individuals who arrived in France as young singles (migrants from Spain and Italy). These conditions of arrival strongly influence the way in which migrants' descendants born in France choose their partner: unions are less frequently formed with someone from the mainstream population if the parents' generation already had a family when they arrived in France, as ties with the country and community of origin remain stronger in such cases. However, the models of union formation are changing radically, with direct marriage giving way to cohabitation, and with partners being chosen from among friends or colleagues rather than through the parents' social network. Beyond national origin, social and religious homogamy remain the most structuring components of partner choice, and mixed unions predominantly concern highly educated individuals with no religious affiliation.

A longer version of this text was published on the INED website: Document de travail, no. 189, 2013.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    See glossary in Chap. 2 (Box 2.1) for definitions of the population categories mentioned in this chapter.

  2. 2.

    Persons considered to be “in a union” are those who had already met their partner when they arrived in France. It is the date when they met (and not the date of entry into cohabitation or of legal marriage) that is considered here. When the year of migration and of meeting are the same, the country of meeting (France or abroad) is used to classify individuals.

  3. 3.

    Early unions are often associated with direct marriage and emphasis on virginity at the time of marriage (this information was unfortunately lacking in the survey).

  4. 4.

    All appendices can be viewed at teo.site.ined.fr/annexes

  5. 5.

    See Chap. 16 on residential segregation.

  6. 6.

    See Chap. 12 in this volume.

  7. 7.

    Parents’ occupational category was also tested, and also has no effect on the probability of being in a couple with a member of the mainstream population.

References

  • Alba, R., & Golden, R. (1986). Patterns of ethnic marriage in the United States. Social Forces, 65(1), 202–223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bozon, M., & Héran, F. (1989). Finding a spouse. A survey of how French couples meet. Population, An English Selection, 44, 91–121.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bozon M., & Héran F. (2006). “La découverte du conjoint : II. Les scènes de rencontre dans l’espace social”, in Bozon M., Héran F., 2006, La formation du couple, Paris, La Découverte, coll. “Classiques Grands repères”.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collet, B. (2010). Pluralité contemporaine de la mixité conjugale et position asymétrique entre les sexes. Diasporas, histoire et sociétés, 15, 53–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collet, B., & Santelli, E. (2012a). Couples d’ici, parents d’ailleurs. Parcours de descendants d’immigrés. Paris: Puf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collet, B., & Santelli, E. (2012b). Les couples mixtes franco-algériens en France. D’une génération à l’autre. Hommes et migrations, 1295, 54–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Filhon A., & Varro G. (2005). “Les couples mixtes une catégorie hétérogène”, in Lefèvre C., Filhon A. (eds.), Histoires de familles, histoires familiales : les résultats de l’enquête Famille de 1999, Paris, Ined, coll. “Les Cahiers de l’Ined”, 483–501.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilbertson, G. A., Fitzpa trick, J. P., & Lijun, Y. (1996). Hispanic intermarriage in New York City: new evidence from 1991. International Migration Review, 30(2), 445–459.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gordon, M. (1964). Assimilation in American Life: The Role of Race, Religion and National Origins. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamel, C. (2006). La sexualité entre sexisme et racisme : les descendant-e-s de migrant-e-s originaires du Maghreb et la virginité. Nouvelles questions féministes, 25(1), 41–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hamel, C. (2011). Fewer forced marriages among immigrant women and daughters of immigrants. Population and Societies, 479, 4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamel, C., & Milewski, N. (2010). Union formation and partner choice in a transnational context: the case of descendants of Turkish Immigrants in France. International Migration Review, 44(3), 615–658.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • HUIPS - Hacettepe University Institute of Population Studies. (2004). Turkey. Demographic and health survey. Ankara: HUIPS. http://www.measuredhs.com.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kalmijn, M. (1993). Trends in black/white intermarriage. Sociological Forces, 72, 119–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kalminj, M. (1998). Intermarriage and homogamy: Causes, patterns, trends. Annual Review of Sociology, 24, 395–421.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kalmijn, M., & Van Tubergen, F. (2007). Ethnic intermarriage in the Netherlands: confirmations and refutations of accepted insights. European Journal of Population, 22, 371–397.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levitt, P. (2009). Routes and roots. Understanding the lives of the second generation transnationally. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 35(7), 1225–1242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levitt, P., & Glick Schiller, N. (2004). Conceptualizing simultaneity: a transnational social field perspective on society. International Migration Review, 38(3), 1002–1039.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levitt, P., & Waters, M. (Eds.). (2002). The changing face of home. The transnational lives of the second generation. New York: Russell Sage Publication.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merton, R. K. (1941). Intermarriage and the social structure. Psychiatry, 4, 361–374.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Munoz-Perez, F., & Tribalat, M. (1984). Mariages d’étrangers et mariages mixtes en France. Évolution depuis la Première Guerre. Population, 39(3), 427–462.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neyrand, G., & M’Sili, M. (1997). Les couples mixtes dans la France contemporaine. Mariage, acquisition de la nationalité française et divorce. Population, 52(3), 571–606.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ouadah-Bedidi, Z. (2005a). Liens de parenté entre conjoints en Algérie. In P. Vimard & K. Vignikin (Eds.), Familles au Nord, familles au Sud (pp. 137–155). Louvain-la-Neuve: Bruylant Academia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ouadah-Bedidi, Z. (2005b). Avoir 30 ans et être encore célibataire : une catégorie émergente en Algérie. Autrepart, 34(2), 29–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ouadah-Bedidi, Z., & Vallin, J. (2000). Maghreb: la chute irrésistible de la fécondité. Population et sociétés, 359, 4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parla, A. (2001). The ‘honor’ of the state. Virginity examinations in Turkey. Feminist Studies, 27(1), 65–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Safi, M. (2008). Intermarriage and assimilation: disparities in levels of exogamy among immigrants in France. Population, English Edition, 63(2), 239–268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Santelli, E., & Collet, B. (2012a). De l’endogamie à l’homogamie socio-ethnique. Réinterprétations normatives et réalités conjugales des descendants d’immigrés maghrébins, turcs et africains subsahariens. Sociologie et sociétés, 43(2), 327–352.

    Google Scholar 

  • Santelli, E., & Collet, B. (2012b). Les descendants d’immigrés en couple mixte au prisme de l’enquête Trajectoires et Origines. Enfances, familles, générations, (17), 75–97.

    Google Scholar 

  • Santelli, E., & Collet, B. (2013). Les unions endogames transnationales des descendants d’immigrés en France. Options culturelles et conditions sociales. Diversité urbaine, 13(2), 9–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Song, M. (2010). Is intermarriage a good indicator of integration? Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 35(2), 331–348.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Timmerman, C. (2006). Gender dynamics in the context of Turkish marriage migration: the case of Belgium. Journal of Turkish Studies, 125–143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tribalat, M. (1995). Faire France. Une enquête sur les immigrés et leurs enfants. Paris: La Découverte.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tribalat, M. (1996). De l’immigration à l’assimilation : enquête sur les populations d’origine étrangère en France. Paris: La Découverte/Ined.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vanderschelden, M. (2006). Homogamie socioprofessionnelle et ressemblance en termes de niveau d’études : constat et évolution au fil des cohortes d’unions. Économie et Statistique, 398-399, 33–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institut national d’études démographiques (INED), Paris, France

    Christelle Hamel & Ariane Pailhé

  2. Direction de l’animation de la recherche, des études et des statistiques (DARES), Paris, France

    Bertrand Lhommeau

  3. CNRS, Centre Max-Weber (CMW), Lyon, France

    Emmanuelle Santelli

Authors
  1. Christelle Hamel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Bertrand Lhommeau
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ariane Pailhé
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Emmanuelle Santelli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ariane Pailhé .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Institut national d’études démographiques (INED), Paris, France

    Cris Beauchemin

  2. Institut national d’études démographiques (INED), Paris, France

    Christelle Hamel

  3. Institut national d’études démographiques (INED), Paris, France

    Patrick Simon

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Hamel, C., Lhommeau, B., Pailhé, A., Santelli, E. (2018). Union Formation in a Multicultural Context. In: Beauchemin, C., Hamel, C., Simon, P. (eds) Trajectories and Origins: Survey on the Diversity of the French Population. INED Population Studies, vol 8. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-76638-6_5

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-76638-6_5

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-76637-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-76638-6

  • eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation