Resettlement of China‐born immigrants in Australia: Age, duration of stay and interstate migration

Abstract

Internal migration is an important settlement adjustment process for immigrants. For a high migration country, such as Australia, understanding the internal migration patterns is also needed for studying the demographic dynamics of immigration. With large numbers of immigrants now coming from Asia, little is known about how they move subsequently within Australia and whether they follow similar patterns of European‐origin groups. This paper examines resettlement patterns of the largest non‐European‐origin population in Australia: immigrants born in mainland China. Data from the 1986–2016 Australian Censuses are used to examine the complex relationship between age, duration of stay and interstate migration observed amongst China‐born immigrants in comparison with other major overseas‐born populations. Results show that migration probabilities peak for young and recently arrived immigrants, with an evident age‐on‐arrival effect. Considerable variations in migration patterns are identified across birthplaces, states and territories of residence and arrival cohorts. Interstate migration of China‐born immigrants increased over time, with recent arrivals exhibiting higher migration probabilities than that of the Australia‐born population in 2016. The findings extend our knowledge on immigrants adjustment and (re)settlement in the destination society and provide a basis for examining Australia's regional migration policies.

The role of visa class in the location choices of immigrants in Australia at the regional and neighbourhood scales

“…In this context, a growing body of work focussing on the settlement patterns of the overseas-born has demonstrated a strong preference toward major cities—particular in Sydney and Melbourne—and a preference for residential clustering with members of the same migrant group at a neighbourhood scale. While variations in settlement partners by country of birth and other socio-demographic attributes have been well researched (Guan, 2020 ; Hugo, 2011 ; Raymer et al, 2018 ; Wang et al, 2018 ; Wilson & Charles-Edwards, 2017 ), the role of visa class in shaping these patterns remains unclear. The recent release of ACMID, which links visa class with census data, provides a unique opportunity to address this gap for permanent migrants.…”

“…Today regional visa holders are still required to reside in a designated regional area for a minimum of 2 to 3 years based on a particular visa type. However, after the initial compulsory regional settlement, migrants are free to move anywhere in Australia and thus the efficacy of these schemes is limited (Guan, 2020 ; Hugo, 2008b ; Wulff & Dharmalingam, 2008 ). Over the years, the regional aspect has been incorporated in other visa streams as well.…”

“…This suggests that economic motives may take over social ones as migrants become more established (Glick & Park, 2016 ), although the pace at which spatial assimilation occurs depends also on age at arrival, country of birth and socio-economic status of migrants (Burgess, 1947 ; Park, 1926 ). Empirical evidence from Australia indicates that the settlement patterns of the overseas-born broadly converge to those of natives within a decade (Bell & Cooper, 1995 ; Guan, 2020 ).…”

Location and visa‐category determinants of naturalization in Australia

“…Immigrants usually draw on the resources of their immediate communities to adapt to the host society, and consequently to make their citizenship choices (Aguirre & Saenz, 2002). China‐born immigrants exhibit stronger spatial dispersal and integration since 2001 (Guan, 2019), and increased interstate migration (Guan, 2021). These studies support the assumption that immigrants disperse spatially and dynamically in Australia, increasingly heterogeneous communities.…”