Paul Puschmann 1, Per-Olof Grönberg², Reto Schumacher³ & Koen Matthijs ⁴ ¹PhD. Fellow at...
-
Upload
melissa-robinson -
Category
Documents
-
view
215 -
download
0
Transcript of Paul Puschmann 1, Per-Olof Grönberg², Reto Schumacher³ & Koen Matthijs ⁴ ¹PhD. Fellow at...
Marriage and Family Formation Among Urban In-Migrants in Antwerp and Stockholm
A Longitudinal Approach to Social Integration, 1846-1926
Paul Puschmann1, Per-Olof Grönberg², Reto Schumacher³ & Koen Matthijs⁴
¹PhD. Fellow at Research Foundation Flanders (FWO); FaPoS, KU Leuven; Belgium.²Centre for Population Studies, Umeå University; Sweden.
³NCCR Lives and Institute for Demographic and Life Course Studies, University of Geneva; Switzerland.
FaPoS, KU Leuven; Belgium.
To be Presented at the Fourth Urban Demography Network Meeting,Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research (MPIDR)
Rostock , Germany; 2-May 2012
Migration and Integration in Western European Cities, 1850-
1930 Growing numbers of urban in-migrants in Western European cities
Causes of increase in urban in-migration:• Agricultural crisis, population pressure in the countryside, gradual
destruction of putting-out system• Growing demand for laborers in urban environment: industry;
commerce, services• Working and living conditions in cities improve: Industry offers more
permanent employment; more rights for laborers; cities become healthier places.
Fate of Urban Newcomers:• Chicago School of Sociology: Newcomers end up on the edge of society• Scholars who stress selectivity of migration: Integration of specific
groups of newcomers, notably stayers and long-distance migration went rather smoothly.
A Longitudinal Approach to Integration
Major methodological shortcomings in existing literature:• Chicago school of Sociology: Too problem-orientated• Cross-sectional analysis of integration: Biased view toward
stayers.
Advantages of Longitudinal Approach• Integration is a longitudinal process• Majority of migrants can be included• More accurate techniques (event-history, sequence anlaysis,
etc.) to measure demographic events (person years vs. persons)
Access to Marriage and Reproduction as Measures of
Social Integration How did the social integration process of different groups of
migrants evolve?• Did some groups of migrants integrate easier than others?• Are there differences regarding the integration process between Antwerp and
Stockholm?• Which characteristics of migrants stimulated or hampered integration?• Were there differences in societal openness between Antwerp and Stockholm?• Did industrialization encourage integration?
Social Integration: the ability of migrants to find their way in the city
Timing and incidence of marriage as Measures of Social-Integration.
Underlying assumption: time between arrival and marriage and family formation reflects the time it takes for newcomers to find, amongst other things, a good job, a decent living location and a suited marriage partner.
Two Different Types of Growing Port Cities
Communalities• Antwerp and Stockholm experienced considerable population growth,
because of declining mortality and rising in-migration• Both cities were port cities
Differences• Stockholm went through a process of industrialization; in Antwerp
industrialization hardly took root.• In Stockholm the port played only a minor role in the city’s economy. In
Antwerp the port dominated the whole city’s economy.• Stockholm was a capital city, Antwerp was not.
Data & MethodsAntwerp StockholmBased on: Based on:Population registers The ‘Roteman’ registration systemVital registration of births, marriages and deaths
33,583 life-courses Information on all inhabitants
Intra- and intergeneration comparisons Intra- and intergeneration comparisons
Contains information on: Contains information on:Socio-economic and demographic characteristics Socio-economic and demographic characteristicsHousehold composition Household compositionKin inside and outside the household Kin inside the householdMarriage witnesses
Allows to follow moves in the area Allows to follow moves in the area
Disrtete-time event history analysis Failure events: first marriage; first birth
Censoring: death, out migration, end of registration life table estimator and plotted survival curves
Discrete time logit models
Survival Curves Time to Marriage Time to First Birth
Antwerp
adult years since arrival adult years since arrival
Stockholm
adult years since arrival adult years since arrival
Discrete-time survival models of marriage and first observed birth among unmarried migrants
time to marriage time to first birth
OR p-value OR p-value
years since immigration 1.155 0.000 1.345 0.003
years squared 0.992 0.000 0.985 0.001
age at immigration
< 18 1 ref 1 ref
19-24 1.170 0.260 0.901 0.688
25-34 0.901 0.510 0.429 0.006
35+ 0.619 0.026 0.066 0.000
historical period
1846-1869 0.259 0.000 0.263 0.000
1870-1889 1 ref 1 ref
1890-1905 2.150 0.000 0.737 0.217
1906-1922 3.557 0.000 0.319 0.000
gender
male 1 ref 1 ref
female 0.949 0.650 1.336 0.225
region of birth
province of Antwerp 1.113 0.410 1.640 0.063
Flanders 1 ref 1 ref
Brussel area 1.322 0.192 0.300 0.034
Wallonia 1.009 0.969 0.601 0.236
outside Belgium 0.593 0.002 0.534 0.069
unknown 0.467 0.042 0.209 0.180
social class
upper 0.936 0.812 0.655 0.570
middle 0.837 0.254 0.575 0.103
lower 1 ref 1 ref
unknown 1.126 0.377 2.305 0.005
year of immigration not known 0.535 0.000 0.293 0.004
year of outmigration not known 1.571 0.000 1.031 0.900
married 21.76 0.000
intercept -4.247 0.000 -4.875 0.000
random intercept (stdev) 0.003 0.497 1.722 0.000
observed person-years 10508 10062
observed individuals 2010 2038
observed events 374 213
time to marriage time to first birthOR p-value OR p-value
years since immigration 1.483 0.000 1.109 0.000
years squared 0.983 0.000 0.994 0.000
age at immigration
< 18 1 ref 1 ref
19-24 1.534 0.000 1.159 0.043
25-34 2.092 0.000 0.968 0.692
35 + 0.773 0.009 0.376 0.000
historical period
1878-1889 1.199 0.000 1.019 0.800
1890-1905 1 ref 1 ref
1906-1927 0.975 0.450 0.677 0.000
gender
male 1 ref 1 ref
female 0.700 0.000 0.928 0.164
region of birth
Stockholm county 1 ref 1 ref
East central Sweden 0.845 0.005 0.891 0.234
Southern Sweden 0.690 0.000 0.887 0.204
Gothenburg 0.588 0.000 0.729 0.231
Northwest central Sweden 0.671 0.000 0.938 0.524
Northern Sweden 0.552 0.000 0.745 0.041
unknown domestic 0.668 0.047 0.929 0.826
Finland 0.558 0.000 5.767 0.000
Norway 0.824 0.184 8.055 0.000
Russia 2.008 0.000 16.317 0.000
Germany 0.878 0.221 6.413 0.000
other international 0.559 0.000 3.363 0.000
social class
upper 1.396 0.002 0.750 0.109
middle 1.128 0.008 0.825 0.008
lower 1 ref 1 ref
unknown 0.951 0.251 0.964 0.588
married 62.545 0.000
intercept -5.368 0.000 -7.430 0.000
random intercept 1.605 0.000 1.333 0.000
observed person-years 292408 335732
observed individuals 51897 51786
observed events 7820 2941
Antwerp Stockholm
Discussion & Conclusion Higher incidences of marriage and reproduction among migrants in Antwerp. Was Antwerp more open to
newcomers?
Clear connection between age at arrival and Integration: The younger someone arrived the better the chances were for marriage and family formation
Industrialization did not increase access to marriage and reproduction; Industrialization did not facilitate integration. In Antwerp the chances of getting married grew over time in the absence of large-scale industrialization. Notwithstanding, large scale industrialization the chances of marrying among Stockholm’s migrants decreased over time.
No big gender differences: Only better chances for males to get married in Stockholm
In Antwerp and Stockholm the likelihood of getting married was smaller among international migrants (except Russians in Stockholm). International migrants had more trouble in getting integrated. Were they less attractive?
No significant difference in access to reproduction in Antwerp according to the migrants’ region of origin. In the case of Stockholm, international migrants did have a much higher probability of experiencing the birth of a first child.
In the case of Antwerp, no clear relationship between social class and marriage and start of reproduction. In the case of Stockholm: Middle class and upper class migrants had higher chances of getting married, but a lower chances of experiencing a first birth
The timing and incidence of the first marriage might be a better indicator of integration than the onset of reproduction in the period we studied: Decreased chances of experiencing a first birth might say more about birth control practices than about access to reproduction, especially in the case of Stockholm.
Correlation between bad registration of in and out-migration on the one hand and access to marriage and reproduction on the other hand: Statistical artifact or historical reality?