Several studies have shown that immigrants marrying natives experience better economic outcomes than those marrying other immigrants, but we know less about partner choice and the economic outcomes of the children of immigrants and among those forming cohabiting unions. Utilizing Norwegian register data from all cohabiting and marital unions formed between 2006 and 2018 involving second-generation and childhood immigrants (N = 49,692 couples, 65% cohabiting), we explored how partner choice relates to employment status, individual income, and household income for up to 14 years after union formation. Overall, children of immigrants with native partners were more frequently employed and earned higher incomes than those who chose partners from migrant-backgrounds. Fixed effects model results confirmed that children of immigrants who partnered endogamously experienced less favorable employment and individual income trajectories compared to those partnering with natives. We discovered similar negative impacts on the likelihood of employment and on the individual incomes of men who partnered exogamously with migrant-background women. However, when ignoring initial selection and shifting focus solely to changes post-union formation, we found that partnering endogamously had a positive effect on household income. In general, we observed the strongest effects among women and those married, and we noticed important differences across global regions of origin.
AlbaR.2005. “Bright vs. Blurred Boundaries: Second-Generation Assimilation and Exclusion in France, Germany, and the United States.” Ethnic and Racial Studies28 (1): 20–49. https://doi.org/10.1080/0141987042000280003.
2.
AlbaR.FonerN.. 2015. “Mixed Unions and Immigrant-Group Integration in North America and Western Europe.” The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science662 (1): 38–56. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716215594611.
3.
AradhyaS.BrandénM.DrefdalS.ObućinaO.AnderssonG.RostilaM.MussinoE.JuárezS. P.. 2021. “Intermarriage and COVID-19 Mortality among Immigrants. A Population-Based Cohort Study from Sweden.” BMJ Open11: e048952. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-048952.
4.
AstoneN. M.NathansonC. A.SchoenR.KimY. J.. 1999. “Family Demography, Social Theory, and Investments in Social Capital.” Population and Development Review25 (1): 1–31. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1728-4457.1999.00001.x.
5.
BergsvikJ.KitterødR. H.WiikK. Aa.. 2020. “Parenthood and Couples’ Relative Earnings in Norway.” European Sociological Review36 (2): 218–35. https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcz062.
6.
BernhardtE.GoldscheiderF.GoldscheiderC.BjerénG.. 2007. Immigration, Gender and Family Transitions to Adulthood in Sweden. Lanham: University Press of America.
7.
BirkelundG.-E.LillehagenM.EkreV. P.UgreninovE.. 2014. “From Education to Employment. An Event-History Analysis of Second-Generation Immigrants of Indian and Pakistani Origin.” Tidsskrift for Samfunnsforskning55 (4): 385–414. https://doi.org/10.18261/ISSN1504-291X-2014-04-01.
8.
BjugstadH. K.HolseterA. M. R.. 2016. “Med utdanning i bagasjen [With Education in The Luggage].” Samfunnsspeilet, 4/2016. Oslo/Kongsvinger, Norway: Statistics Norway.
9.
BlekesauneM.2020. “The Fertility of Female Immigrants to Europe from Christian and Muslim Countries.” Journal of Religion and Demography7 (2): 222–37. https://doi.org/10.1163/2589742X-12347109.
10.
BratsbergB.RaaumO.RoedK.. 2017. “Immigrant Labor Market Integration across Admission Classes.” IZA Discussion paper No.10513, Institute of Labor Economics.
11.
BrekkeI.2013. “How Do Husbands Affect the Labour Market Participation of Majority and Immigrant Women?” Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies39 (10): 1639–57. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2013.833693.
12.
BrekkeI.RogstadJ.. 2011. “Godt gift? Betydningen av ektefellens landbakgrunn for kvinnelige etterkommeres arbeidsdeltakelse.” Søkelys på Arbeidslivet28 (1): 107–23. https://doi.org/10.18261/ISSN1504-7989-2011-01-02-07.
13.
BrochmannG.KjeldstadliK.. 2008. A History of Immigration:The Case of Norway 900-2000. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.
14.
BrovoldH. C.2020. “Økonomisk integrering for innvandrere over tid. [Economic Integration among Immigrants Over Time].” Report 2020/20. Statistics Norway.
15.
ÇelikaksoyA.2007. “A Wage Premium or Penalty: An Analysis of Endogamous Marriage Effects among the Children of Immigrants.” Danish Journal of Economics145 (1): 288–311.
16.
De ValkH. A. G.MilewskiN.. 2011. “Family Life Transitions among Children of Immigrants: An Introduction.” Advances in Life Course Research16 (4): 145–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.alcr.2011.10.001.
17.
DribeM.LundhC.. 2008. “Intermarriage and Immigrant Integration in Sweden: An Exploratory Analysis.” Acta Sociologica51 (4): 329–54. https://doi.org/10.1177/0001699308097377.
18.
DribeM.LundhC.. 2011. “Cultural Dissimilarity and Intermarriage. A Longitudinal Study of Immigrants in Sweden 1990-2005.” International Migration Review45 (2): 297–324. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-7379.2011.00849.x.
19.
DribeM.NystedtP.. 2015. “Is There an Intermarriage Premium for Male Immigrants? Exogamy and Earnings in Sweden 1990–2009.” International Migration Review49 (1): 3–35. https://doi.org/10.1111/imre.12081.
20.
DrouhotL. G.NeeV.. 2019. “Assimilation and the Second Generation in Europe and America: Blending and Segregating Social Dynamics between Immigrants and Natives.” Annual Review of Sociology45: 177–99. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-soc-073117-041335.
21.
DzamarijaM. T.2014. “Oversikt over personer med ulik grad av innvandringsbakgrunn. [An Overview of People with Different Degrees of Immigration Background].” Report 2014/16. Statistics Norway.
22.
EdinP.-A.FredrikssonP.ÅslundO.. 2003. “Ethnic Enclaves and the Economic Success of Immigrants: Evidence from a Natural Experiment.” Quarterly Journal of Economics118 (1): 329–57. https://doi.org/10.1162/00335530360535225.
23.
EeckhoutM. C. W.StanforsM. A.. 2021. “Educational Assortative Mating, Gender Equality, and Income Differentiation Across Europe: A Simulation Study.” Acta Sociologica64 (1): 48–69. https://doi.org/10.1177/0001699319877925.
24.
EggebøH.BrekkeJ.-P.. 2019. “Family Migration and Integration: The Need for a New Research Agenda.” Nordic Journal of Migration Research9 (4): 425–44. https://doi.org/10.2478/njmr-2019-00030.
25.
ElwertA.2020. “Opposites Attract: Assortative Mating and Immigrant–Native Intermarriage in Contemporary Sweden.” European Journal of Population36 (4): 675–709. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10680-019-09546-9.
26.
ElwertA.TegunimatakaA.. 2016. “Cohabitation Premiums in Denmark: Income Effects in Immigrant–Native Partnerships.” European Sociological Review32 (3): 383–402. https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcw018.
Falnes-DalheimA.2009. “Dokumentasjon av registerbasert familie- og husholdningsstatistikk. [A Documentation Report of Register-Based Family and Household Statitistics].” Documents 2009/54. Statistics Norway.
30.
FribergJ. H.SterriE. B.. 2021. “Decline, Revival, Change? Religious Adaptations among Muslim and Non-Muslim Immigrant Origin Youth in Norway.” International Migration Review55 (3): 718–45. https://doi.org/10.1177/0197918320986767.
31.
FurtadoD.SongT.. 2015. “Intermarriage and Socioeconomic Integration: Trends in Earnings Premiums Among U.S. Immigrants Who Marry Natives.” The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science662 (1): 207–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716215594629.
32.
FurtadoD.TheodoropoulosN.. 2009. “I’ll Marry You If You Get Me a Job: Marital Assimilation and Immigrant Employment Rates.” International Journal of Manpower30 (1/2): 116–26. https://doi.org/10.1108/01437720910948438.
33.
GraciaP.Vázquez-QuesadaL.Van de WerfhorstH. G.. 2016. “Ethnic Penalties? The Role of Human Capital and Social Origins in Labour Market Outcomes of Second-Generation Moroccans and Turks in the Netherlands.” Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies42 (1): 69–87. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2015.1085800.
34.
GranovetterM.1973. “The Strength of Weak Ties.” American Journal of Sociology78 (6): 1360–80.
35.
HansenM. N.1997. “Sosiale nettverk, rekrutteringskanaler og lønn i det norske arbeidsmarkedet [Social Networks, Recruitment Channels and Earnings in the Norwegian Labor Market].” Tidsskrift for Samfunnsforskning38 (2): 171–94.
36.
HeathA. F.RothonC.KilpiE.. 2008. “The Second Generation in Western Europe: Education, Unemployment, and Occupational Attainment.” Annual Review of Sociology34: 211–34. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.34.040507.134728.
37.
HermansenA. S.2013. “Occupational Attainment among Children of Immigrants in Norway: Bottlenecks into Employment––Equal Access to Advantaged Positions?” European Sociological Review29 (3): 517–34. https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcr094.
HollandJ. A.De ValkH. A. G.. 2013. “Ideal Ages for Family Formation among Immigrants in Europe.” Advances in Life Course Research18 (4): 257–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.alcr.2013.08.002.
40.
HuschekD.De ValkH. A. G.LiefbroerA.. 2010. “Timing of First Union among Second-Generation Turks in Europe: The Role of Parents, Peers and Institutional Context.” Demographic Research22 (16): 473–504. https://doi.org/10.4054/DemRes.2010.22.16.
41.
JakobsenV.LiversageA.. 2017. “From Work to Welfare: Institutional Arrangements Shaping Turkish Marriage Migrants’ Gendered Trajectories into a New Society.” International Migration Review51 (4): 964–98. https://doi.org/10.1111/imre.12264.
42.
JustinianoM. A. C.ValentovaM.. 2023. “The Effects of Intermarriage on Wages for Immigrant Women in Italy.” Journal of Family Issues44 (1): 264–85. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192513X211046262.
43.
KalmijnM.2010. “Consequences of Racial Intermarriage for Children’s Social Integration.” Sociological Perspectives53 (2): 271–86. https://doi.org/10.1525/sop.2010.53.2.271.
44.
KalmijnM.Van TubergenF.,. 2010. “A Comparative Perspective on Intermarriage: Explaining Differences among National-Origin Groups in the United States.” Demography47 (2): 459–79. https://doi.org/10.1353/dem.0.0103.
45.
KansasA.MüllerK.. 2021. “Immigrant Women’s Economic Outcomes in Europe: The Importance of Religion and Traditional Gender Roles.” International Migration Review55 (4): 1231–64. https://doi.org/10.1177/01979183211008867.
46.
KavliH. C.2015. “Adapting to the Dual Earner Family Norm? The Case of Immigrants and Immigrant Descendants in Norway.” Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies41 (5): 835–56. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2014.975190.
47.
KitterødR. H.NadimM.. 2020. “Embracing Gender Equality: Gender-Role Attitudes among Second-Generation Immigrants in Norway.” Demographic Research42 (14): 411–40. https://doi.org/10.4054/DemRes.2020.42.14.
48.
KreidlM.ŽilinčíkováZ.. 2021. “How Does Cohabitation Change People’s Attitudes Toward Family Dissolution?” European Sociological Review37 (4): 541–54. https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcaa073.
49.
KuluH.MilewskiN.HannemannT.MikolaiJ.. 2019. “A Decade of Life-Course Research on Fertility of Immigrants and Their Descendants in Europe.” Demographic Research40 (46): 1345–74. https://doi.org/10.4054/DemRes.2019.40.46.
50.
LarsenE. N.RogneA. F.BirkelundG.-E.. 2018. “Perfect for the Job? Overqualification of Immigrants and Their Descendants in the Norwegian Labor Market.” Social Inclusion6 (3): 78–103. https://doi.org/10.17645/si.v6i3.1451.
51.
LichterD.QianZ.. 2019. “The Study of Assortative Mating: Theory, Data, and Analysis.” In In Analytical Family Demography, edited by SchoenR., 303–37. Dordrecht: Springer.
52.
MengX.GregoryR.. 2005. “Intermarriage and Economic Assimilation of Immigrants.” Journal of Labor Economics23 (1): 135–74. https://doi.org/10.1086/425436.
53.
MengX.MeursD.. 2009. “Intermarriage, Language, and Economic Assimilation Process. A Case Study of France.” International Journal of Manpower30 (1/2): 127–44. https://doi.org/10.1108/01437720910948447.
54.
MidtbøenA. H.2016. “Discrimination of the Second Generation: Evidence from a Field Experiment in Norway.” Journal of International Migration and Integration17 (1): 253–72. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12134-014-0406-9.
55.
MidtbøenA. H.KitterødR. H.. 2019. “Does Assimilation Protect Against Discrimination? Experiences of Labour Market Discrimination among Immigrants and Descendants of Immigrants in Norway.” Norwegian Journal of Sociology3 (5): 353–71. https://doi.org/10.18261/issn.2535-2512-2019-05-04.
56.
MidtbøenA. H.NadimM.. 2019. “Ethnic Niche Formation at the Top? Second-Generation Immigrants in Norwegian High-Status Occupations.” Ethnic and Racial Studies42 (16): 177–95. https://doi.org/10.1080/01419870.2019.1638954.
57.
MilewskiN.HamelC.. 2010. “Union Formation and Partner Choice in a Transnational Context: The Case of Descendants of Turkish Immigrants in France.” International Migration Review44 (3): 615–58. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-7379.2010.00820.x.
58.
MohnF. A.2020. “Marriage Migration and the Economic Trajectories of First- And Second-Generation Immigrants in Norway.” Acta Sociologica63 (3): 249–66. https://doi.org/10.1177/0001699319841668.
59.
MussinoE.OrtensiL. E.. 2018. “The Same Fertility Ideals as in the Country of Origin? A Study of the Personal Ideal Family Size among Immigrant Women in Italy.” Comparative Population Studies43 (2018): 243–74. https://doi.org/10.12765/CPoS-2019-03en.
60.
MuttarakR.2011. “Occupational Mobility in the Life Course of Intermarried Ethnic Minorities.” In In a Life-Course Perspective on Migration and Integration, edited by WingensM.WindzioM.De ValkH. A. G.AybekC., 211–38. Dordrecht: Springer.
61.
NadimM.2014. “Transnational Marriages and Second-Generation Women’s Employment.” Nordic Journal of Migration Research4 (3): 99–107. https://doi.org/10.2478/njmr-2014-0019.
62.
NielsenH. S.RosholmM.SmithN.HustedL.. 2003. “The School-To-Work Transition of 2nd Generation Immigrants in Denmark.” Journal of Population Economics16 (4): 755–86. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00148-003-0164-z.
63.
NielsenH. S.SmithN.ÇelikaksoyA.. 2009. “The Effect of Marriage on Education of Immigrants: Evidence from a Policy Reform Restricting Marriage Migration.” Scandinavian Journal of Economics111 (3): 457–86. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9442.2009.01572.x.
PetersenT.SaportaI.SeidelM.-D. L.. 2000. “Offering a Job: Meritocracy and Social Networks.” American Journal of Sociology106 (3): 763–816. https://doi.org/10.1086/318961.
PortesA.ZhouM.. 1993. “The New Second Generation: Segmented Assimilation and Its Variants.” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences530 (1): 74–96. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716293530001006.
68.
PuurA.RahnuL.TammaruT.. 2022. “What Is the Association Between the Ethnic Composition of Neighbourhoods, Workplaces and Schools and the Formation of Mixed-Ethnic Unions?” Population, Space and Place28: e2504. https://doi.org/10.1002/psp.2504.
69.
QianZ.LichterD.. 2007. “Social Boundaries and Marital Assimilation: Interpreting Trends in Racial and Ethnic Intermarriage.” American Sociological Review72 (1): 68–94. https://doi.org/10.1177/000312240707200104.
SmockP. J.2000. “Cohabitation in the United States: An Appraisal of Research Themes, Findings, and Implications.” Annual Review of Sociology26: 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.26.1.1.
Statistics Norway. 2023d. “Monthly earnings, by measuring method, occupation, sector, industry (SIC2007), sex, contractual/usual working hours per week, contents and year.” https://www.ssb.no/en/statbank/table/11419/. Accessed June 16, 2023.
ThomsonE.2014. “Family Complexity in Europe.” The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science654 (1): 245–58. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716214531384.
79.
UgrninovE.TurnerL. M.. 2023. “Next to Nothing: The Impact of the Norwegian Introduction Programme on Female Immigrants’ Labour Market Inclusion.” Journal of Social Policy52 (1): 107–28. https://doi.org/10.1017/S004727942100043X.
80.
Van BavelJ.2012. “The Reversal of Gender Inequality in Education, Union Formation and Fertility in Europe.” Vienna Yearbook of Population Research10 (1): 127–54. https://doi.org/10.1553/populationyearbook2012s127.
81.
Van den BergL.NeelsK.WoodJ.. 2021. “Socioeconomic Preconditions to Union Formation: Exploring Variation by Migrant Background.” Demographic Research45 (32): 973–1010. https://doi.org/10.4054/DemRes.2021.45.32.
82.
WiikK. Aa.2022. “First Union Formation among the Children of Immigrants: A Population-Wide Study in Norway.” Advances in Life Course Research52: 100480. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.alcr.2022.100480.
83.
WiikK. Aa.DommermuthL.HollandJ. A.. 2021. “Partnership Transitions among the Children of Immigrants in Norway: The Role of Partner Choice.” Population Studies75 (1): 133–52. https://doi.org/10.1080/00324728.2020.1851749.
ZwysenW.DemirevaN.. 2020. “Ethnic and Migrant Penalties in Job Quality in the UK: The Role of Residential Concentration and Occupational Clustering.” Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies46 (1): 200–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2018.1498777.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
