Sponsorship of Relatives for Migration and Immigrant Settlement Intention
| Author | Siew‐Ean Khoo |
| Date | 01 December 2003 |
| Published date | 01 December 2003 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/j.0020-7985.2003.00265.x |
Published by Blackwell Publishing Ltd.,
9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK, and
350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA.
© 2003 IOM
International Migration Vol. 41 (5) 2003
ISSN 0020-7985
* Australian Centre for Population Research, Demography and Sociology Program, Research
School of Social Sciences, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australia.
Sponsorship of Relatives for Migration
and Immigrant Settlement Intention
1
Siew-Ean Khoo*
ABSTRACT
The paper examines how important family reunification is in immigrants’ deci-
sion to settle permanently in their country of destination. Using longitudinal
data for a cohort of recent immigrants to Australia, it examines whether mi-
grants’ permanent settlement intention reported soon after arrival is related to
their family sponsorship patterns and intention to sponsor, and whether family
sponsorship patterns and intention in turn have an effect on immigrants’ permanent
settlement/return migration decision.
The results show that a significant relation exists between sponsorship of close
family members for migration and immigrants’ permanent settlement intention
and that the relation is particularly strong among skilled migrants. The study
demonstrates the importance of kinship ties in permanent settlement and return
migration decisions and suggests that liberal policies on family reunion migration
may minimize settle loss, especially among skilled immigrants.
INTRODUCTION
Many immigrants, once they are settled in their new country of residence, seek to
sponsor the migration of other family members to join them. Most countries allow
their permanent residents or naturalized citizens to sponsor the migration of rela-
tives, although differences exist among countries in terms of criteria for family
reunion migration. In the United States, there are no restrictions on the number of
visas for the immigration of spouses, dependent children, and parents of US citi-
zens, but permanent residents face a numerical limitation in the number of spouse
and children visas issued. In Australia and Canada, there is no difference between
178 Khoo
citizens and permanent residents in terms of sponsorship of immediate relatives
for migration. There is also no required length of residence before immigrants to
Australia can apply to sponsor the migration of close relatives. The immigration
of spouses and dependent children is numerically unrestricted but there is a cap on
the number of parent visas issued annually while adult children and siblings have
to meet English language and skills criteria similar to skilled migrants. Parents
also have a meet a balance of family test – the majority of their children must be
living in Australia – to be granted an immigrant visa. This is not the case in Canada.
These differences in family reunification migration criteria in the various coun-
tries mean that immigrants in different countries face different situations in rela-
tion to the sponsorship of family members such as parents, siblings, and other
extended family members.
How important is the sponsorship of relatives such as parents and adult siblings to
immigrants’ decision on migration and permanent settlement? In the context of
the current debate on the role of immigration as a means of meeting the demands
of advanced countries for skilled labour and to offset slowing population and labour
force growth, does it have an impact on the migrant’s choice of destination coun-
try and settlement intentions? In the global competition for skilled migrants, the
question of how countries can attract and retain skilled immigrants is becoming an
important policy issue. If the sponsorship of relatives is an important issue for
immigrants, then it can be argued that they will be more likely to be attracted to
and settle in countries that facilitate family reunion by not restricting the sponsor-
ship of relatives. It may also be hypothesized that immigrants who intend to spon-
sor other family members to join them will be more likely to settle permanently.
If this is the case, then it will have important implications for a country’s com-
petitiveness in attracting and retaining migrants, particularly those with skills in
demand. People may be more likely to migrate to a country and to settle there
permanently if it is easier for their relatives to migrate to join them later.
This paper presents a conceptual and empirical analysis of the relationship
between immigrants’ sponsorship of family members for immigration and their
permanent settlement decision. Using longitudinal data for a cohort of recent immi-
grants to Australia, it examines whether their permanent settlement intention re-
ported soon after arrival is related to the sponsorship of family members and
intention to sponsor in future, and whether family sponsorship patterns in turn
have an effect on immigrants’ permanent settlement/return migration decisions.
FACTORS INFLUENCING PERMANENT SETTLEMENT
OR RETURN MIGRATION
A number of recent studies have examined the factors and migrant attributes asso-
ciated with permanent settlement or return migration (e.g. Borjas and Bratsberg,
To continue reading
Request your trial