Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Are Mixed-Ethnic Unions More Likely to Dissolve Than Co-Ethnic Unions? New Evidence from Britain

Les unions mixtes sont-elles plus fragiles que les unions entre partenaires de même origine ethnique? Nouveaux résultats pour la Grande-Bretagne

  • Published:
European Journal of Population / Revue européenne de Démographie Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The increasing proportion of ethnic minorities in Britain has been paralleled by an increase in the occurrence of mixed-ethnic marriages between one White partner and an ethnic minority partner. Such marriages are thought to be at higher risk of divorce, but empirical studies so far have been inconclusive. This paper uses the Office for National Statistics longitudinal study for England and Wales to investigate whether mixed-ethnic unions are more likely to end in divorce than co-ethnic unions. We followed married couples in 1991–2001 and examined their risks of divorce. We found evidence that mixed-ethnic unions have a higher risk of dissolution than co-ethnic unions. However, after controlling for partners’ characteristics, most importantly the younger ages of people in mixed-ethnic unions, the risk of divorce for mixed-ethnic unions was no longer elevated, but lay close to the higher risk found for the two constituent co-ethnic unions.

Résumé

Alors que la présence des minorités ethniques en Grande-Bretagne augmente, on observe un accroissement des mariages mixtes entre un(e) partenaire blanc(he) et un(e) partenaire d’une minorité ethnique. Ces mariages sont réputés plus fragiles, mais les études empiriques menées jusqu’à présent ne sont pas concluantes. A partir des données de l’enquête longitudinale de l’Office national de statistiques pour l’Angleterre et le Pays de Galles, cet article examine si les unions mixtes présentent un risque de divorce plus important que les unions entre partenaires de même origine ethnique. Des couples mariés en 1991 sont suivis jusqu’en 2001 afin d’étudier les risques de divorce. On constate que les unions mixtes présentent des risques de rupture plus élevés que les unions entre partenaires de même origine ethnique. Cependant, une fois contrôlées les autres caractéristiques des partenaires, et plus particulièrement les âges plus jeunes des personnes en union mixte, les risques de divorce pour les unions mixtes ne paraîssent plus si élevés et se rapprochent du risque le plus élevé observé pour les deux types d’union entre partenaires de même origine ethnique étudiés dans cet article.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ballard, R. (1997). Negotiating race and ethnicity: Exploring the implications of the 1991 Census. Patterns of Prejudice, 30, 3–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Becker, G. S. (1981). A treatise on the family. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benson, S. (1981). Ambiguous ethnicity: Interracial families in London. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berrington, A. (1996). Marriage patterns and inter-ethnic unions. In D. Coleman & J. Salt (Eds.), Ethnicity in 1991 census (Vol. 1, pp. 178–212)., Demographic characteristics of the ethnic minority populations London: HMSO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berthoud, R. (2000). Family formation in multi-cultural Britain: Three patterns of diversity. Institute for Social and Economic Research Working Paper 2000-34. University of Essex.

  • Blau, P. M., & Schwartz, J. E. (1984). Crosscutting social circles: Testing a macrostructural theory of intergroup relations. Orlando: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bratter, J. F., & King, R. B. (2008). But will it last?: Marital instability among interracial and same-race couples. Family Relations, 57(2), 160–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bumpass, L. L., & Sweet, J. A. (1972). Differentials in marital instability: 1970. American Sociological Review, 37(6), 754–766.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chan, T. W., & Halpin, B. (2003). Union dissolution in the United Kingdom. International Journal of Sociology, 32(4), 76–93.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coleman, D. (1985). Ethnic intermarriage in Great Britain. Population Trends, 40, 4–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coleman, D. (2004). Partner choice and the growth of ethnic minority populations. Bevolking en Gezin, 33(2), 7–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coleman, D. (2009). Divergent patterns in the ethnic transformation of societies. Population and Development Review, 35(3), 449–478.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cuningham, S. A. (1990). Interracial marriage and divorce for Blacks and Whites in the United States. Papers presented at the Annual Meeting of the Southern Demographic Association, Louisville, Kentucky, 18–20 October.

  • Data Management and Analysis Group Update. (2005). Inter-ethnic unions, DMAG.

  • Dribe, M., & Lundh, C. (2011). Intermarriage, value context and union dissolution: Sweden 1990–2005. European Journal of Population. doi:10.1007/s10680-011-9253-y.

  • Ellis, M., Wright, R., & Parks, V. (2004). Work together, live Apart? Geographies of racial and ethnic segregation at home and at work. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 94(3), 620–637.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feng, Z., Boyle, P., van Ham, M., & Raab, G. (2010). Neighbourhood ethnic mix and the formation of mixed ethnic unions in Britain. In J. Stillwell & M. van Ham (Eds.), Ethnicity and integration, Understanding population trends and processes 3 (pp. 83–104). Heidelberg: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finney, N., & Simpson, L. (2003). ‘Sleepwalking to segregation’? Challenging myths about race and migration. Bristol: The Policy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fu, X. (2006). Impact of socioeconomic status on inter-racial mate selection and divorce. The Social Science Journal, 43(2), 239–258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gaines, S. O, Jr, Gurung, R. A. R., Lin, Y. Y., & Pouli, N. (2006). Interethnic relationships. In J. Feeney & P. Noller (Eds.), Close relationships: Functions, forms, and processes (pp. 171–187). New York: Psychology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hattersley, L., & Creeser, R. (1995). The longitudinal study, 1971-1991: History, organisation and quality of data. London: Office of Population Censuses and Surveys.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heaton, T. B. (2002). Factors contributing to increasing marital stability in the United States. Journal of Family and Issues, 23(3), 392–409.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heaton, T. B., & Albrecht, S. L. (1991). Stable unhappy marriages. Journal of Marriage and Family, 53(3), 747–758.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holdsworth, C., & Dale, A. (1997). Issues in the analysis of ethnicity in the 1991 British census. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 20(1), 160–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Houston, S., Wright, R., Ellis, M., Holloway, S. R., & Hudson, M. (2005). Places of possibility: Where mixed race partners meet. Progress in Human Geography, 29(6), 700–717.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Janssen, J. P. G. (2002). Do opposites attract divorce? Dimensions of mixed marriage and the risk of divorce in The Netherlands. Doctoral Dissertation. Department of Sociology, University of Nijmegen, The Netherlands.

  • Johnston, R., Poulsen, M., & Forrest, J. (2006). Ethnic residential segregation and assimilation in British towns and cities: A comparison of those claiming single and dual ethnic identities. Migration Letters, 3(1), 11–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, F. L. (1994). Are marriages that cross ethnic boundaries more likely to end in divorce? Journal of Population Research, 11(2), 115–132.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, F. L. (1996). Convergence and divergence in ethnic divorce patterns: A research note. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 58(1), 213–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kalmijn, M. (1991). Shifting boundaries: Trends in religious and educational homogamy. American Sociological Review, 56(6), 786–800.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kalmijn, M. (1998). Intermarriage and homogamy: Causes, patterns, trends. Annual Review of Sociology, 24, 395–421.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kalmijn, M., de Graaf, P. M., & Janssen, P. G. (2005). Intermarriage and the risk of divorce in the Netherlands: The effects of differences in religion and in nationality, 1974–94. Population Studies, 59(1), 71–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kiernan, K., & Mueller, G. (1999). Who divorces? In S. McRae (Ed.), Changing Britain: Families and household in the 1990 s (pp. 377–403). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maneker, J. S., & Rankin, R. P. (1988). Correlates of marital duration and Black-White intermarriage in California. Journal of Divorce, 11(2), 51–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Model, S., & Fisher, G. (2002). Unions between blacks and whites: England and the US compared. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 25(2), 728–754.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Monahan, T. P. (1970). Are interracial marriages really less stable? Social Forces, 48(4), 461–473.

    Google Scholar 

  • Muttarak, R. (2003). Who intermarries in Britain? MSc Thesis, Department of Sociology, University of Oxford.

  • Muttarak, R. (2004). Marital assimilation: Interethnic marriage in Britain, Population and society: Issues, research, policy. In 12th Biennial Conference of Australian Population Association, 15–17 September 2004, Canberra, Australia.

  • Orbuch, T. L., Veroff, J., Hassan, H., & Horrocks, J. (2002). Who will divorce: A 14-year longitudinal study of black and white couples. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 19(2), 179–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rees, P., & Butt, F. (2004). Ethnic change and diversity in England, 1981–2001. Area, 36(2), 174–186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schoen, R., & Cohen, L. E. (1980). Ethnic endogamy among Mexican American grooms: A reanalysis of generational and occupational effects. American Journal of Sociology, 86(2), 359–366.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schoen, R., & Weinick, R. M. (1993). Partner choice in marriages and cohabitations. Journal of Marriage and Family, 55(2), 408–414.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwertfeger, M. M. (1982). Interethnic marriage and divorce in Hawaii: A panel study of 1968 first marriages. Marriage and Family Review, 5(1), 49–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stata Corp. (2005). Stata statistical software: Release 9.0. College Station, TX: Stata Corporation.

  • Svarer, M., & Verner, M. (2008). Do children stabilize relationships in Denmark? Journal of Population Economics, 21(2), 395–417.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teachman, J. D. (2002). Stability across cohorts in divorce risk factors. Demography, 39(2), 331–351.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thornton, A. (1989). Changing attitudes toward family issues in the United States. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 51(4), 873–893.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tolsma, J., Lubbers, M., & Coenders, M. (2008). Ethnic competition and opposition to ethnic intermarriage in the Netherlands: A multi-level approach. European Sociological Review, 24(2), 215–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trent, K., & South, S. J. (1989). Structural determinants of the divorce rate: A cross-societal analysis. Journal of Marriage and Family, 51(2), 391–404.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tribalat, M. (1987). Divorce des couples mixtes in RFA. Population, 42(1), 161–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Ham, M., & Tammaru, T. (2011). Ethnic Minority–Majority Unions in Estonia. European Journal of Population, 27(2), 313–335.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, Y., & van Hook, J. (2009). Marital dissolution among interracial couples. Journal of Marriage and Family, 71(1), 95–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research is funded by the ESRC under the Understanding Population Trends and Processes (UPTAP) programme (Award Ref: RES-163-25-0045). The permission of the Office for National Statistics to use the Longitudinal Study is gratefully acknowledged, as is the help provided by the Centre for Longitudinal Study Information & User Support (CeLSIUS), particularly Rachel Stuchbury and Julian Buxton. CeLSIUS is supported by the ESRC Census of Population Programme (Award Ref: RES-348-25-0004). The data from ONS is Crown copyright and reproduced with the permission of the controller of HMSO and Queen’s Printer for Scotland. This study uses research datasets which may not exactly reproduce National Statistics aggregates. The authors alone are responsible for the interpretation of the data.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Longitudinal Studies Centre–Scotland (LSCS), School of Geography & Geosciences, University of St Andrews, St Andrews, KY16 9AL, UK

    Zhiqiang Feng, Paul Boyle & Gillian M. Raab

  2. OTB Research Institute for the Built Environment, Delft University of Technology, P.O. Box 5030, 2600 GA, Delft, The Netherlands

    Maarten van Ham

Authors
  1. Zhiqiang Feng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Paul Boyle
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Maarten van Ham
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Gillian M. Raab
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Zhiqiang Feng.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Feng, Z., Boyle, P., van Ham, M. et al. Are Mixed-Ethnic Unions More Likely to Dissolve Than Co-Ethnic Unions? New Evidence from Britain. Eur J Population 28, 159–176 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10680-012-9259-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10680-012-9259-0

Keywords

Mots-clés

Search

Navigation