Migration and Marital Timing: How Does Leaving Home Affect Forming a Family?

Aree Jampaklay, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

Migration, a reflection of human agency resulting from forward thinking and choice making among options, is consequently influential for other life course events, particularly the transition into marriage. Past studies suggest two competing hypotheses of migration's effect on marital timing. On one hand, migration can reduce the likelihood of getting married, not only because migration relocates individuals outside local marriage markets, but also of a period of adjustment and economic uncertainty. Ideational and normative change perspective, moreover, implies that late marriage as part of modern norms can be exposed through migration. On the other hand, migration might accelerate union formation because of urban earning that helps improve the transition into economic roles, a prerequisite of forming a family. Efforts to make clear of the relationship between migration and marriage are very few, particularly in Thailand, where seasonal migration is prevalent. This study explores marriage, as a single life event in the flows of life experiences, in the context of pre-marital history, of particular interest is pre-marital migration experience. The research examines the extent to which migration affects the timing of marriage, within life course perspective's theoretical framework and the event history analysis method. The findings do not solely support any particular hypothesis. Rather, it points to the need for more complex explanation beyond economic perspective as well as more elaborated theoretical framework based on gender difference. Using the life history dataset collected in Nang Rong, Thailand, no matter of how it is measured and how sample of the analysis is designed, migration stands its positive impact on the likelihood of forming a family. Individuals who have migration experience at two years back are more likely to marry, compared to those who have never moved out. The independent effects of migration show only among women, however. For men, the positive effects of migration on the odds of getting married disappear after other life course events are controlled. Effects of number of time moved and length of stay helps understanding that the more individuals moved out or the longer they stay, the more it supports forming a family. Although the results suggest that it requires some amount of time for migrants to enjoy the positive effect of migration on supporting marriage, moving places of stay too often or staying outside home village too long, however, does not increase the likelihood to marry either. Interacting effects of migration experience with age and with age squared, as well as separating the analyses into two age groups suggest the importance of timing. Effects of migration are not additive, but conditioned by age. Findings reveal that migration's positive effect on entry into marriage first decreases and then increases as individuals age. Separate analyses in two age groups additionally suggests that migration encourages marriage only when individuals age 18-25, whereas migration experience does not affect entry into first marriage before age 18. The positive effects of migration, at first glance, might lead to the conclusion in favor of an economic perspective that puts forward financial readiness in forming a family. The perspective is partly supported in case of men where migration seems to support building a family by helping men get a job and improve financial status. Among women, however, including other life events to detect mechanisms through which migration might operate its effect does not provide evidence to support the economic perspective. Despite that working in non-agricultural sector, an event of which women likely to get through the years with migration experience, disrupts entry into marriage, migration remains encouraging women to marry. The fact that marriage tends to follow rural-urban migration, which is mostly work-related, signifies important sequencing decision in the life course of Thai women. The results do not support ideational and normative change hypothesis, which predicts that rural to urban migrants would have a lower likelihood to marry, relative to nonmigrants. When the frequency of move and length of stay are incorporated to capture an aspect of exposure to life in destination, migration's effects are still positive on entry into marriage. It is notable, however, that measure of exposure to destinations suggests a curvilinear relationship with entry to marriage. The positive impact of the frequency of move and the length of stay on entry into marriage starts to lessen for migrants who are the most mobile or stay for the longest period, though still encourages migrants to marry compared to nonmigrants. This research provides significant insights on the area that has been ignored in social demography. It is able to include several significant aspects of migration, which together can be pieced to explain the relationship between migration and marriage better than one aspect of migration alone. Although the study cannot fully explain why migration encourages individuals, especially women, to marry, it lays out a step towards thinking about through what mechanisms migration works on marriage. The research requires theoretical framework beyond migration's effect on financial aspect and surely requires different explanations for women and for men. Migration does facilitate forming a family among women. But, it does so not because it helps migrants get a better-paid job or a non-agricultural work in destination, thus more ready financially to form a family, as conventionally assumed. Yet, whether migration enhances women's likelihood to marry by providing migrants a better marriage market, is another question that we need more research to confidently give an answer to it.