This paper focuses on intra-European partnership formation in three European countries: Belgium, the Netherlands and Switzerland. Intra‐European mobility has been actively promoted and stimulated by the European Commission (e.g., free movement of persons, the Erasmus student exchange program). One of the reasons for this promotion is that exchanges and relationships between Europeans of different descent are seen as a core indicator of the success of the European project. In this paper, we address the question to what extent intra-European mobility fosters partnerships between Europeans of different descent. Intra-European mobility can create opportunities both to meet partners from other European countries and to accumulate the necessary capital (economic, cultural, linguistic, mobility) to engage in a relationship with a foreign European. We use original data on European (binational) couples, collected in 2012 in the three countries (EUMARR survey), to study the choice of native men and women to engage in a relationship with either a foreign-born European partner or a partner from the own native country. We apply a broader life course perspective that captures migration and mobility experiences prior to the relationship as causal antecedents leading to an intra-European partnership. Results based on logistic regression models suggest that there is an individual effect of long stays abroad and short mobility experiences in (early) adulthood on having an intra-European partner (in comparison with a native partner).
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
It is noteworthy that in discussions on free movement of EU citizens, the positively connoted term ‘mobility’ is often preferred over ‘migration,’ with the first also referring to a wider range of relocations including non-permanent types of migration such as seasonal work and cross-border commuting for employment (e.g., Favell 2008; Santacreu et al. 2009).
In that respect, a central point for our argumentation is the adoption of free movement for EU citizens in Switzerland, which has been in force since June 2002 (for more details cf. EDA 2014). This not only includes the freedom to move to and work in Switzerland (with only minor qualifications) but also easier access for those who commute across borders to work in Switzerland. In February 2014, a referendum of the Swiss electorate decided to restrict the freedom of movement also for EU citizens. The constitution demands that the referendum has to be implemented within three years (EDA 2014), but how it will be implemented has to be awaited.
These are marriages between partners born in different countries.
The overall response rates are 32.2 % for Belgium, 37.1 % for the Netherlands and 40.5 % for Switzerland.
The vast majority of the foreign-born partners come from (other) EU-27 countries.
The question was followed by an annotation indicating that by ‘speaking a language’ we mean that one can have a long conversation with native speakers of that language.
Originally, we also included the number of travels additionally to the diversity of travels, but this variable did not add to the quality of the clusters.
For continuous variables, the marginal effect indicates to what extent the probability of Y = 1 increases if x increases one unit. For dichotomous variables, the marginal effect indicates the average effect of x at a discrete change from 0 to 1.
This result is rather unexpected as intermarriage is usually found to be more likely among native women than among native men (e.g. Kalmijn 1998, p. 412). An explanation might lie in the composition of our sample with respect to the involved nationalities as well as to the average high level of education and the urban context.
However, we did not account for the kind of the trips, which could matter, too. Vacations in resorts isolated from the everyday life of the native residents might be less influential than firsthand experiences.
Baldoni, E. (2003). The free movement of persons in the European Union: A legal-historical overview. State of the Art Report. PIONEUR Working Paper No. 2. http://www.aip.pt/irj/go/km/docs/aip/documentos/estudos%20publicacoes/centro%20documentacao/Capital%20Humano/I.Livre_Circulacao_Trabalhadores/A3.Projecto_Pioneur/Free_Movement.pdf. Accessed 20 Aug 2014
Benton, M., & Petrovic, M. (2012). The state of research on intra-EU mobility: Trends, drivers, and impact. http://www.migrationpolicy.org/research/how-free-free-movement-dynamics-and-drivers-mobility-within-european-union. Accessed 20 Aug 2014.
Blau, P. M. (1994). Structural contexts of opportunities. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Blau, P. M., Blum, T. C., & Schwartz, J. (1982). Homogeneity and intermarriage. American Sociological Review, 47, 45–62.
Blau, P. M., & Schwartz, J. E. (1984). Crosscutting social circles. Orlando: Academic Press.
Bozon, M., & Héran, F. (1989). Finding a spouse: A survey of how French couples meet. Population, 44(1), 91–121.
Braun, M., & Recchi, E. (2008). Interethnic partnerships of Western Europeans: Between preferences and opportunities. OBETS, Revista de Ciencias Sociales, 1, 73–89. http://publicaciones.ua.es/filespubli/pdf/19891385RD12894926.pdf Accessed 20 Aug 2014.
Breugelmans, S. M. (2004). Antecedents and components of majority attitudes toward multiculturalism in the Netherlands. Applied Psychology, 53(3), 400–422.
Cameron, A. C., & Trivedi, P. K. (2010). Microeconomics using Stata (2nd ed.). College Station: Stata Press.
Carlson, S. (2011). Just a matter of choice? Student mobility as a social and biographical process. SCMR-working Paper No. 68. East Sussex: University of Sussex: Sussex Centre for Migration Research.
de Valk, H. A. G., Koelet, S., & Sanctobin, S. (2013). Codebook of the EUMARR websurvey in Belgium.
Deutsch, K., Burrel, S. A., Kann, R. A., Lee, M., Lichterman, M., Lindgren, R. E., et al. (1957). Political Community and the North Atlantic area. International organization in the light of historical experience. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Díez Medrano, J. (2014). The socio-economic returns of fluency in English as a foreign language. In J. Gerhards, S. Hans, & S. Carlson (Eds.), Globalisierung, Bildung und grenzüberschreitende Mobilität (pp. 239–258). Wiesbaden: Springer VS.
EDA. (2014). Die Bilateralen Abkommen Schweiz—Europäische Union. Ausgabe 2014: https://www.eda.admin.ch/content/dam/eda/de/documents/publications/EuropaeischeAngelegenheiten/FS-Bilaterale_de.pdf. Accessed 8 Jan 2015.
European Commission. (1997). Second report on citizenship of the union. Bruxelles: European Commission.
European Commission. (2010). Geographical and labour market mobility report. Special Eurobarometer 337. http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/ebs/ebs_337_en.pdf. Accessed 20 Aug 2014.
European Commission. (2012). Europeans and their languages. Special Eurobarometer 386. http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/ebs/ebs_386_en.pdf. Accessed 20 Aug 2014.
European Commission. (2013a). European social statistics. 2013 edition. http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/documents/3930297/5968986/KS-FP-13-001-EN.PDF. Accessed 23 Dec 2014.
European Commission. (2013b). Public opinion in the European Union. Standard Eurobarometer 80. http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/eb/eb80/eb80_first_en.pdf. Accessed 20 Aug 2014.
European Commission. (2014). Preferences of Europeans towards tourism. Flash Eurobarometer 392. http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/flash/fl_392_en.pdf. Accessed 20 Aug 2014.
Favell, A. (2008). Eurostars and eurocities: Free movement and mobility in an integrating Europe. Oxford: Blackwell.
Feld, S. L. (1981). The focused organization of social ties. American Journal of Sociology, 86(5), 1015–1035.
Feld, S. L. (1982). Social structural determinants of similarity among associates. American Sociological Review, 47, 797–801.
Fligstein, N. (2008). Euro-Clash: The EU, European identity, and the future of Europe. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Gaspar, S. (2008). Towards a definition of European intra-marriage as a new social phenomenon. CIES E-Working Paper, 46. http://www.cies.iscte.pt/destaques/documents/CIES-WP46_Gaspar_.pdf. Accessed 20 Aug 2014.
Gaspar, S. (2012). Patterns of bi-national couples across five EU countries. Sociologia, Problemas e Práticas, 70, 71–89.
Gerhards, J. (2012). From Babel to Brussels. European Integration and the importance of transnational linguistic capital. Berlin Studies on the Sociology of Europe (BSSE) No. 28. Berlin: Freie Universität Berlin.
Greven, M. T. (2000). Can the European Union finally become a democracy? In M. T. Greven & L. W. Pauly (Eds.), Democracy beyond the State? The European Dilemma and the emerging global order (pp. 35–60). Maryland/Oxford: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers Inc.
Heering, L., van Solinge, H., & van Wissen, L. (2013). Codebook of EUMARR websurvey in Netherlands.
Hjerm, M. (2001). Education, xenophobia and nationalism: A comparative analysis. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 27(1), 37–60.
Igarashi, H., & Saito, H. (2014). Cosmopolitanism as cultural capital: Exploring the intersection of globalization, education and stratification. Cultural Sociology, 8(3), 222–239. doi:10.1177/1749975514523935.
Kalmijn, M. (1998). Intermarriage and homogamy: Causes, patterns, trends. Annual Review of Sociology, 24, 395–421.
Kalmijn, M., & Flap, H. D. (2001). Assortative meeting and mating: Unintended consequences of organized settings for partner choices. Social Forces, 79(4), 1289–1312.
Kaufmann, V., Bergman, M. M., & Joye, D. (2004). Motility: Mobility as capital. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 28(4), 745–756. doi:10.1111/j.0309-1317.2004.00549.x.
Koelet, S. M., Schroedter, J. H., Cortina, C., de Valk, H. A. G., & de Busser, C. (2012). Bi-national marriages between European citizens: From intermarriage to intramarriage. In D.-S. Kim (Ed.), Cross-border marriage: Global trends and diversity (pp. 123–162). Seoul: Kihasa.
Koikkalainen, S. (2013). Making it abroad: Experiences of highly skilled Finns in the European Union labour markets. Rovaniemi: University of Lapland.
Kuhn, T. (2011). Individual transnationalism, globalisation and euroscepticism: An empirical test of Deutsch’s transactionalist theory. European Journal of Political Research, 50(6), 811–837. doi:10.1111/j.1475-6765.2011.01987.x.
Lanzieri, G. (2012). Mixed marriages in Europe 1990–2010. In D.-S. Kim (Ed.), Cross-border marriage. Global trends and diversity (pp. 81–122). Seoul: Kihasa.
Licata, L., & Klein, O. (2002). Does European citizenship breed xenophobia? European identification as a predictor of intolerance towards immigrants. Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology, 12, 1–15.
Lindenberg, S. (1989). Social production functions, deficits and social revolution: Prerevolutionary France and Russia. Rationality and Society, 1, 51–77.
Martinovic, B., van Tubergen, F., & Maas, I. (2009). Dynamics of interethnic contact: A panel study of immigrants in the Netherlands. European Sociological Review, 25(3), 303–318.
Mau, S., & Büttner, S. (2010). Transnationality. In S. Immerfall & G. Therborn (Eds.), Handbook of European Societies (pp. 537–570). New York: Springer.
Mau, S., Mewes, J., & Zimmermann, A. (2008). Cosmopolitan attitudes through transnational social practices? Global Networks, 8(1), 1–24. doi:10.1111/j.1471-0374.2008.00183.x.
Murphy-Lejeune, E. (2002). Student mobility and narrative in Europe: The new strangers. London, New York: Routledge.
Ormel, J., Lindenberg, S., Steverink, N., & Verbrugge, L. M. (1999). Subjective well-being and social production functions. Social Indicators Research, 46(1), 61–90.
Pascouau, Y. (2013). Intra-EU mobility of third-country nationals—State of play and prospects. European Policy Centre. Working Paper Apr 2013. http://www.epc.eu/documents/uploads/pub_3496_intra-eu_mobility_of_third-country_nationals.pdf. Accessed 20 Aug 2014.
Recchi, E., & Favell, A. (Eds.). (2009). Pioneers of European integration: Citizenship and mobility in the EU. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Roeder, A. (2011). Does mobility matter for attitudes to Europe? A multi-level analysis of immigrants’ attitudes to European unification. Political Studies, 59(2), 458–471. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9248.2010.00871.x.
Rosenfeld, M. J., & Thomas, R. J. (2012). Searching for a mate. The rise of the internet as a social intermediary. American Sociological Review, 77(4), 523–547.
Rössel, J., & Schroedter, J. H. (2014). Der Erwerb linguistischen Kapitals. Transnationales und Schweiz-spezifisches linguistisches Kapital im Vergleich. In J. Gerhards, S. Hans, & S. Carlson (Eds.), Globalisierung, Bildung und grenzüberschreitende Mobilität (pp. 153–183). Wiesbaden: Springer.
Rössel, J. & Schroedter, J. H. (2015). Cosmopolitan cultural consumption. Preferences and practices in an heterogenous, urban population in Switzerland. Forthcoming in Poetics.
Rother, N., & Nebe, T. (2009). More mobile, more European? Free movement and EU identity. In E. Recchi & A. Favell (Eds.), Pioneers of European integration—Citizenship and mobility in the EU (pp. 120–155). Cheltenham: Elgar.
Santacreu, O., Baldoni, E., & Albert, M. C. (2009). Deciding to move: migration projects in an integrating Europe. In E. Recchi & A. Favell (Eds.), Pioneers of European integration—Citizenship and mobility in the EU (pp. 52–71). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Schaeffer, M. (2013). Inter-ethnic neighbourhood acquaintanceships between migrants and natives in Germany. On the brokering roles of inter-ethnic partners and children. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 39(8), 1219–1240.
Schroedter, J. H. & Rössel, J. (2013). Codebook of the EUMARR Survey: Switzerland. http://www.suz.uzh.ch/schroedter/forschung.html. Accessed 20 Aug 2014.
Schroedter, J. H., & Rössel, J. (2014). Europeanisation without the European Union? The case of bi-national marriages in Switzerland. Population, Space and Place, 20(2), 139–156.
Simmel, G. (2009). Sociology: Inquiries into the construction of social forms. Leiden, Boston: Brill.
Spannring, R., Wallace, C., & Datler, G. (2008). What leads young people to identify with Europe? An exploration of the impact of exposure to Europe and political engagement on European identity among young Europeans. Perspectives on European Politics and Society, 9(4), 480–498.
Weenink, D. (2008). Cosmopolitanism as a form of capital: Parents preparing their children for a globalizing world. Sociology, 42(6), 1089–1106. doi:10.1177/0038038508096935.
The paper is part of the framework of the European EUMARR project ‘Toward a European Society: Single Market, Binational Marriages, and Social Group Formation in Europe (EUMARR),’ supported by the European Science Foundation (EUI2010-04221). The Swiss EUMARR project was funded by the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF), the Belgian EUMARR project was funded by the Research Foundation Flanders (FWO) (09-ECRP-044, FWO finance number G.0994.10N), and the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NWO) funded the project in the Netherlands. We are grateful to all the country research teams in the EUMARR project and would also like to thank the guest editors and the anonymous referees for their valuable comments that helped to improve the paper. All the remaining errors are ours.
About this article
Cite this article
Schroedter, J.H., De Winter, T. & Koelet, S. Beyond l’Auberge Espagnole: The Effect of Individual Mobility on the Formation of Intra-European Couples. Eur J Population 31, 181–206 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10680-015-9343-3
- Mobility experiences
- Partner choice
- Mobility capital