IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/anname/v690y2020i1p36-60.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Integration Paradox: Asian Immigrants in Australia and the United States

Author

Listed:
  • Van C. Tran
  • Fei Guo
  • Tiffany J. Huang

Abstract

Whereas Australia has pursued a skills-based migration policy, the United States has privileged family-based migration. The key contrast between these migration regimes provides a rare test of how national immigration policy shapes immigrant selection and integration. Does a skills-based immigration regime result in a more select group of Asian immigrants in Australia compared to their counterparts in the United States? Are Asian immigrants more integrated into their host society in Australia compared to the United States? Focusing on four groups of Asian immigrants in both countries (Chinese, Indians, Filipinos, and Vietnamese), this article addresses these questions using a transpacific comparison. Despite Australia’s skills-based immigration policy, we find that Asian immigrants in Australia are less hyper-selected than their counterparts in the United States. Asian immigrants in Australia also report worse labor market outcomes than those in the United States, with the exception of Vietnamese—a refugee group. Altogether, these findings challenge the conventional wisdom that skills-based immigration policy not only results in more selected immigrants, but also positively influences their integration into the host society.

Suggested Citation

  • Van C. Tran & Fei Guo & Tiffany J. Huang, 2020. "The Integration Paradox: Asian Immigrants in Australia and the United States," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 690(1), pages 36-60, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:anname:v:690:y:2020:i:1:p:36-60
    DOI: 10.1177/0002716220926974
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0002716220926974
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0002716220926974?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:anname:v:690:y:2020:i:1:p:36-60. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.