adjusting for change of status in international migration: demographic implications

Published by Blackwell Publishers Ltd.,108 Cowley Road, Oxford OX4 1JF, UK, and350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA.

© 2002 IOMInternational Migration Vol. 40 (4) 2002

ISSN 0020-7985

* The Australian National University, Canberra, Australia.

Adjusting for Change of Statusin International Migration:Demographic Implications1

Siew-Ean Khoo and Peter McDonald*

ABSTRACT

The calculation of net immigration for the purpose of estimating the residentpopulation in Australia is based on net permanent and long-term (12 monthsor more) movements into and out of the country. All international movementswith duration of stay in Australia or travel abroad of less than 12 months(defined as short-term) are excluded.

However, changes between short-term and long-term/permanent status canoccur when people extend or shorten their stay or travel. Because netimmigration is a significant component of Australia’s population growth(accounting for 40-50 per cent of annual growth), adjusting for these changesin migration status is thought to result in better estimates of net immigrationand the resident population.

The paper shows that adjusting for change of status can have a large impacton net immigration, particularly when the immigrant intake is small. Failureto adequately adjust for change of status can also lead to misleadingconclusions about the relative contributions of net temporary and permanentmovements to total net immigration. The effect on the resident population,however, is relatively small, being less than 1 per cent of the total population.The paper also addresses the question of how important it is for countriesto adjust for change of migrant status in international migration statistics inthe context of increasing international mobility.

104 Khoo and McDonald

INTRODUCTION

An analysis of international migration flows during the last 30 years of thetwentieth century indicates that the number of international migrants has beengrowing at an increasing rate (Zlotnik, 1996). Although international migrantscomprise only a small percentage – about 2 per cent – of the world’spopulation, the increase in international migration, its pervasiveness in all worldregions, and the complexity of issues relating to its character, causes, andconsequences have made it an issue of global significance. Notwithstandingthis importance, few countries collect data on international migration tomeasure the level of net immigration and assess its impact on their populationgrowth rate and size.

Because Australia has a long history and a formal programme of immig-ration, it has been collecting and analysing statistical data on populationmovements into and out of the country for many years. The data are usedto estimate annual net overseas migration, its contribution to the rate ofpopulation growth, and its impact on population estimates. Although therehas been considerable fluctuation in the level of net overseas migration overthe past 50 years due to changes in the level of the immigrant intake setby government, it has been a significant component of the population growthrate, accounting for 40-50 per cent of annual population growth in the1980s and 1990s. Its contribution to future population growth is projectedto become more important in the forthcoming years as Australia’s naturalincrease declines to zero in the 2030s due to below replacement fertility andan ageing population (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2000; McDonald andKippen, 2002).

Net overseas migration is estimated by the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS)based on the number of permanent and long-term (12 months or more)movements into and out of the country. All international arrivals and departureswith duration of stay in Australia or travel abroad of less than 12 months aredefined as short-term and are excluded from the net overseas migrationestimate. The definitions of short-term and long-term status follow the 1976United Nations (UN) recommendations for international migration statistics andthe differentiation between short-term and long-term migrant status is based ondata on intended or actual duration of stay or travel as suggested by the UNrecommendations (UN, 1980).

Net overseas or international migration as estimated above constitutes onecomponent of population growth (the other being natural increase) and thereforeis a parameter in estimating Australia’s resident population. Visitors to Australiawho stay for at least one year are included in the resident population whileAustralian residents who travel abroad for one year or more are removed fromthe resident population.

105Adjusting for change of status in international migration

However, changes between short-term and long-term/permanent status canoccur when people extend or shorten their stay or travel. For example, anAustralian resident who indicates on departure that he expects to be overseasfor six months on a temporary work contract may receive a permanent job offerand decide to stay abroad indefinitely. Or a permanent migrant may return homeafter only nine months because he has difficulty finding employment and decideshe does not like it in Australia. ABS makes an adjustment in the calculation ofnet overseas migration to take account of these changes – referred to as“category jumping” – on the argument that:

if no adjustments were made … a resident who states on the passenger card thathe/she is departing on a short-term trip but never returned to Australia wouldnot be subtracted from Australia’s population. However, if this residentreturned after an absence of more than a year he/she would be added toAustralia’s population although he/she would not have been subtracted from(the) population on departure. Similarly, a visitor who arrives on a short-term tripbut who never departs would not be added to Australia’s population, or if he/she departs after one year … he/she is subtracted from Australia’s populationalthough he/she would not have been added to (the) population (ABS, 1983).

Because net overseas migration is a significant component of Australia’spopulation growth, it is suggested that this adjustment would result in betterestimates of net overseas migration and consequently the number of peopleresident in the country at any point in time.

The adjustment is based only on intended and actual duration of stay or travelabroad without distinction by visa status or reason for admission or travel abroad.Therefore, visitors who extend their stay from short-term to long-term/permanent include those who overstay their visa (and become illegal or unlawful)as well as those who have changed their visa status or have applied to changetheir visa status from a short-term visitor visa to a long-term or permanentresident visa. The adjustment also includes change of status from long-term/permanent to short-term for which no change in visa status is required. It istherefore different from the “adjustment of status” process that occurs in somecountries. In the United States, for example, adjustment of status is a processwhere a person who arrives on a non-immigrant visa or as a refugee applies forpermanent resident or immigrant status (Keely, 1974).

In its recently revised recommendations on international migration statistics, theUN (1998) acknowledges that changes in status among international migrantsoccur and that to measure international migration flows more accurately thesechanges should be taken into account (paragraph 103). However, the UNrecommendations refer only to changes from short-term to long-term status,discussing the issue in the context of people changing their status from non-immigrant or asylum seeker to immigrant or permanent resident. Mention ismade that there should be “retrospective adjustment of information on long-term


migrants” when migrants change from short-term to long-term or permanentstatus. However, the UN recommendations do not refer to migrants changingtheir status from long-term/permanent to short-term or to citizens or residentsgoing abroad who change their status while away from short-term to long-termor vice versa, as does the ABS in its adjustment for “category jumping”. TheABS adjustment is therefore a more comprehensive adjustment for changes ofstatus in international migration.2

Although ABS has been making this adjustment to its estimate of net overseasmigration since 1983, there has been no assessment of its demographic impact.If it does make a significant difference in net international migration andpopulation estimates, it may be important for other countries to consider makinga similar adjustment to the data they collect on international movements so thatthe impact of international migration on their present and future population canbe more accurately measured.

This paper examines the impact that such an adjustment for change of status ininternational migration can have on the level of net international migration, theannual rate of population growth, and population estimates. Following a briefdiscussion of the methodology and data used to estimate “category jumping” thepaper examines its recent trend and the effects on net temporary and permanentinternational migration flows and resident population estimates in Australia.

DATA AND METHODOLOGY FOR ADJUSTINGFOR CHANGE OF STATUS

To adjust for change of migration status from short-term to long-term orpermanent, information on intended duration of stay in the country for non-resident arrivals and duration of stay abroad for resident departures are needed.Also needed are the actual duration of stay abroad of residents arriving back inthe country and the actual duration of stay in the country of departing non-residents. This information is asked for in the arrival and departure cards usedby many countries and therefore is routinely collected where persons arriving ordeparting are required to complete such cards.

The method used to estimate “category jumping” is described in an ABStechnical paper (ABS, 1983). The category jumping estimate is a net figure basedon two components: a resident component and a visitor component.

The resident component is calculated as the difference between the number ofresidents departing in a reference three month period for an intended duration oftravel abroad of less than 12 months, and the number of residents who returnduring the year following this reference period and who had departed during thereference period. The visitor component is calculated as the difference between


the number of visitors who enter the country during a reference three monthperiod with an intended duration of stay of less than 12 months, and the numberof visitors who depart Australia during the year following the reference periodand who arrived during the reference period (ABS, 1999a).

Category jumping is estimated from the two components by subtracting theresident component from the visitor component. A positive estimate means thatin net terms more visitors are changing from short-term to long-term/permanentstatus while in Australia than Australian residents changing from short-term tolong-term status while overseas. It can also mean more residents than visitorsare changing status from long-term/permanent migration to short-term, althoughthis is a less likely situation. The result is an addition to the level of net immigrationand the resident population. A negative estimate means that in net terms fewervisitors are changing from short-term to long-term/permanent status while inAustralia than Australian residents are changing from short-term to long-term/permanent status while overseas. A negative estimate can also occur when morevisitors than residents change status from long-term/permanent migration toshort-term. The result is a negative effect on the level of net immigration and theresident population.

This approach in calculating the two components implicitly takes account ofcategory jumping from long-term/permanent status to short-term status. This isbecause the effect on the resident population of a person changing from short-term to long-term/permanent status is cancelled out by another person changingstatus from long-term/permanent to short-term status. In the above approach,people who change from long-term/permanent to short-term status are includedamong residents returning and visitors departing within 12 months of thereference three month period. Therefore, the two components measure the neteffect of changing from short-term to long-term/permanent status and viceversa, by residents and visitors. The category jumping estimate is a net figurebased on two components that are also net figures.

Since it is not known whether a change of status has occurred until at least12 months after the commencement of any in- or out-migration during a specificthree month period, the adjustment is made about 15 months after each referenceperiod.3 Because of the large volume of short-term movements, sampling is usedin processing the data on short-term arrivals and departures. Estimates ofcategory jumping are thus subject to sampling error. Before 1998, data onintended and actual duration of stay or travel abroad were based on informationas stated by arriving or departing persons on passenger cards. Since mid-1998,actual duration of stay or travel has been calculated from the dates of travel onarrival and departure cards by computer matching of passport numbers.

As noted above, the calculation of category jumping distinguishes betweenvisitors and Australian residents. This distinction is based on self-identification


on the arrival and departure cards and whether the person intends to stay inAustralia for the next 12 months. Residents include non-citizens and are notfurther differentiated between permanent or temporary residents.

TRENDS IN CHANGE OF STATUS

Annual estimates of category jumping and its two components are shown inFigure 1. As noted before, each component is a measure of the net effect ofchanging status from short-term to long-term/permanent and vice versa. Thepositive estimates for both visitors and residents indicated that the net effect wasthat both residents and visitors were more likely to change from short-term tolong-term/permanent status than vice versa.

The figure shows that category jumping was relatively low during the early1980s, fluctuating between -3,200 and 5,200. It was positive for most yearsduring the 1980s. In the late 1980s, this was due to the visitor component beinghigher than the resident component. It reached a peak of 20,000 during the years1988-1990 before plunging to negative numbers in the early 1990s, reaching atrough of nearly -40,000 in 1992-1993. It then remained negative for most of the1990s with the exception of 1997-1998. For most of the 1990s, the residentcomponent exceeded the visitor component, indicating that on net more residentsthan visitors were changing from short-term to long-term/permanent status.

ABS (1995) has offered some explanations for the peak and trough afterexamining the visitor and resident components. As shown in Figure 1, theincrease in category jumping in the years 1988-1990 was due to a large increasein the visitor component relative to the resident component. Some of the increasein the visitor component was attributed to the Australian Government’s decisionto grant temporary long-term residence to students from the People’s Republicof China after the Tiananmen Square incident in 1989. Many students from Chinawere enrolled in short English language courses and had intended to stay for lessthan a year. Many accepted the Government’s offer of temporary residence andtherefore their status changed from short-term visitors to long-term migrants.Category jumping was estimated at about 10,500 and 20,800 among Chinesenationals for the years 1988-1989 and 1989-1990 (ABS, 1995).

The decline to negative numbers in the early 1990s was thought to be related toeconomic conditions in Australia and elsewhere. Category jumping by Australianresidents rose to more than 76,000 in 1992-1993, greatly exceeding the visitorcomponent, which had fallen to about 44,000. Australia was in recession in theearly 1990s while economic conditions were relatively better overseas,particularly in some Asian and European countries. It was thought that manyresidents, both Australian-born and overseas-born, might have gone abroad forshort-term employment that became long-term or permanent (ABS, 1995).

109Adjusting for change of status in international m

igration

-40,000

-20,000

0

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

1976

-77

1977

-78

1978

-79

1979

-80

1980

-81

1981

-82

1982

-83

1983

-84

1984

-85

1985

-86

1986

-87

1987

-88

1988

-89

1989

-90

1990

-91

1991

-92

1992

-93

1993

-94

1994

-95

1995

-96

1996

-97

1997

-98

1998

-99

1999

-00

Net

cha

nge

in st

atus

Visitors Residents Total

FIGURE 1ADJUSTING FOR CHANGE OF STATUS ANDITS EFFECT ON NET OVERSEAS MIGRATION


During the mid-1990s both visitor and resident components of category jumpingwere about 20,000 per year, with the resident component exceeding the visitorcomponent slightly, except in 1997-1998. Since mid-1998 the resident componenthad been near zero net while visitors fell to negative figures, indicating a netexcess of visitors changing from long-term/permanent to short-term status.

In mid-1998, there was a significant change in the way visitors’ duration of staywas measured. Before that time, visitors departing were asked to state theduration of their stay in Australia in years, months, or days. The response wasused to determine those who had been in Australia for one year or more (long-term status). A new departure card introduced in July 1998 eliminated thequestion on duration of stay. As mentioned earlier, since that date, duration ofstay has been directly calculated by computer matching with the arrival cardinformation. The effect of this change on visitors who state on arrival they intendto stay for exactly 12 months is thought to be the cause of the decline in visitorcategory jumping to negative figures for the years 1998-2000 (McDonald andKippen, 2002). Visitors who arrive with a visa for a stay of exactly 12 months(for example, Working Holiday visas) are likely to say that they intend to stay for12 months. The practice of ABS has been to allocate 25 per cent of these personsto long-term status, the remainder being classed as short-term status. In fact,analysis has shown that most people who state a period of exactly 12 months atarrival stay for less than 12 months. For example, in 1998-1999, 49.5 per cent ofvisitors on Working Holiday visas stated on arrival that they intended to stay for12 months or more, but only 2.8 per cent who were departing had stayed for 12months or more as calculated by matches with arrival cards (Khoo andMcDonald, 2000). Most had departed less than 12 months after arrival. Beforemid-1998, when they themselves would have stated their duration of stay atdeparture, many of those departing close to 12 months might have reported theirduration as 12 months, thus creating a closer balance with the percentageassumed by ABS. The use of the stated intended length for visitor arrivals incombination with the actual length of stay for visitor departures is likely to leadto the large negative category jumping observed after mid-1998.

EFFECT ON NET OVERSEAS MIGRATION

This paper examines the demographic implications of category jumping, that is,what effect adjusting for change of status in international migration statistics hason measures of net international migration, population growth, and residentpopulation estimates. Since the adjustment is made in calculating net internationalmigration, we focus first on the effect on this measure. As mentioned earlier, netoverseas migration to Australia is based on long-term and permanent movementsonly. Adjusting for changes from short-term to long-term/permanent status andvice versa can increase or decrease the level of net international migrationdepending on whether the net effect each year is positive or negative.


Table 1 shows the effect of adjusting for change of status on the estimates of netoverseas migration for Australia. The impact was much greater in the yearssince 1987 and was particularly large in the early 1990s when the immigrantintake was reduced and net overseas migration declined to relatively low levels.Adjusting for change of status had a large impact in 1992-1993 when it reducednet overseas migration by more than half. As noted earlier, the adjustment forthat year was due to the large number of Australian residents changing fromshort-term to long-term/permanent status while overseas, compared withvisitors doing the same while in Australia. This demonstrates the importance ofadjusting for changes in status of residents migrating abroad, which was notreferred to by the UN in its discussion on changes in migration status (UN, 1980).

TABLE 1 ADJUSTING FOR CHANGE OF STATUS

AND ITS EFFECT ON NET OVERSEAS MIGRATION

Net overseas migration

Mid-year Category jumping adjustment

No adjustment Adjustment Effect of adjustment (%)

1977 14,758 43,139 57,897 34.2 1978 6,578 56,137 62,715 11.7 1979 -3,167 58,304 55,137 -5.4 1980 -997 76,938 75,941 -1.3 1981 517 118,658 119,175 0.4 1982 5,159 122,958 128,117 4.2 1983 -2,155 75,450 73,295 -2.9 1984 2,560 46,538 49,098 5.5 1985 5,698 68,010 73,708 8.4 1986 6,425 93,934 100,359 6.8 1987 16,589 109,141 125,730 15.2 1988 6,149 143,192 149,341 4.3 1989 20,195 137,241 157,436 14.7 1990 20,781 103,866 124,647 20.0 1991 -8,325 94,757 86,432 -8.8 1992 -21,308 89,888 68,580 -23.7 1993 -32,629 62,671 30,042 -52.1 1994 -20,832 67,381 46,549 -30.9 1995 -12,917 93,042 80,125 -13.9 1996 -5,524 109,661 104,137 -5.0 1997 -7,317 94,396 87,079 -7.8 1998 7,200 79,200 86,400 9.1 1999 -11,363 96,483 85,120 -11.8 2000 -8,219 107,275 99,056 -7.7


ABS (1999b) has pointed out that “category jumping tended to accentuatefluctuations in net overseas migration causing deeper troughs and higher peaks”(Figure 2). ABS gives as examples, “ in the late 1980s net overseas migrationpeaked at 157,400, but without category jumping the peak would have been137,200. Similarly, the trough of 30,000 in 1992-1993 would have been 62,700without category jumping” (ABS, 1999b).

While the impact on net overseas migration can be quite significant on an annualbasis, it is much less when averaged over the long term because the positiveimpacts of some years were offset by the negative impacts of other years. Netoverseas migration averaged 89,700 per year over the period 1978-1998. If therewas no adjustment for change of status, it would have averaged 90,500, adifference of less than 1 per cent. The greater impact of category jumping on netoverseas migration after 1987 was indicated by that fact that net overseasmigration would have averaged 97,700 a year during the period 1988-1998 if noadjustment was made, but averaged just 92,800 a year with the adjustment, areduction of 5 per cent. This increase in impact may be related to increasedinternational movements and also reflects greater mobility and flexibility inpeople’s migration and duration of residence intentions.

EFFECT ON ESTIMATES OF TEMPORARY MIGRATION ANDITS CONTRIBUTION TO NET OVERSEAS MIGRATION

If the negative visitor component of category jumping after mid-1998 is duelargely to the excess number of visitors initially classed as temporary long-termon arrival changing status to short-term on departure, as discussed earlier, it alsohas implications for the estimate of net temporary migration and its contributionto net overseas migration.

For the year 1998-1999, net temporary long-term migration was nearly as highas net permanent migration and in 1999-2000 it exceeded net permanentmigration (Figure 3, unadjusted figures). This was the first time that nettemporary migration to Australia had exceeded the level of net permanentmigration. If many visitors initially classed as long-term on arrival change statusto short-term on departure, then net temporary migration, rather than netoverseas migration, should be adjusted for their change in status. Making thisadjustment would have reduced the level of net temporary movements by some11,000 for 1998-1999 and 8,000 for 1999-2000 (Figure 3). It would also lead toa different interpretation of the relative contributions of net permanent and nettemporary migration to total net overseas migration. If net temporary migrationhad been adjusted for change of status, then net permanent migrationwould still be higher than net temporary migration in 1999-2000 and itscontribution to net overseas migration would have continued to exceed that of nettemporary migration.

113Adjusting for change of status in international m

igration

0

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

120,000

140,000

160,000

180,00019

77

1979

1981

1983

1985

1987

1989

1991

1993

1995

1997

1999

No adjustment With adjustment

FIGURE 2NET OVERSEAS MIGRATION, WITH AND WITHOUTADJUSTING FOR CHANGE OF STATUS, 1977-2000


0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

1998-99:unadjusted

1998-99:adjusted

1999-2000:unadjusted

1999-2000:adjusted

Net permanent migration Net long-term migration

There is an argument from this analysis that instead of publishing a single numbercalled “category jumping” it may be preferable to produce revised estimates ofnet permanent and temporary long-term migration after adjusting for change ofstatus. This would provide a more accurate assessment of the relativecontributions of permanent and temporary migration to net overseas migration(McDonald and Kippen, 2002). There is also an argument from this analysis forthe adjustment of change of status from long-term to short-term – and not justfrom short-term to long-term as noted in the UN’s discussion (UN, 1998) – toobtain accurate measures of international migration flows.

EFFECT ON THE POPULATION GROWTH RATE

Although net overseas migration is a major component of Australia’s populationgrowth rate, its contribution to annual population growth has fluctuated over theyears. This is mainly because the government sets annual immigrant intakenumbers each year according to prevailing economic conditions and governmentand community views. In the years of high migrant intake, the contribution of netoverseas migration to annual population growth reaches 50 per cent or more; inthe years when the number of immigrants is reduced, its contribution is lower.During the high migration years of 1988-1990, nearly 55 per cent of annualpopulation growth was due to net overseas migration and 45 per cent to naturalincrease. In the early 1990s when there was a recession in Australia, there wasalso a reduction in net overseas migration and its contribution to annual populationgrowth. Since 1996, net overseas migration has accounted for about 45 per cent

FIGURE 3EFFECT OF ADJUSTMENT ON LEVEL OF NET LONG-TERM MIGRATION

AND ITS CONTRIBUTION TO TOTAL NET OVERSEAS MIGRATION


of annual population growth. Current population projections show that naturalincrease will be smaller in the forthcoming years because of Australia’s lowfertility and ageing population. At current levels of immigration, net overseasmigration will account for an increasing share of future population growth.

The effect of adjusting for change of status in international migration on annualpopulation increase and the growth rate is shown in Table 2. With the exceptionof 1992-1993, its impact was about 10 per cent or less. Population increase wasabout 3 per cent higher during the 1980s after adjusting. However, it was about6 per cent lower in the 1990s after adjusting. The average annual rate ofpopulation growth during the 1980s decade would have been 1.46 per centwithout the adjustment. The corresponding figures for the 1990s decade were1.23 without the adjustment and 1.16 per cent with the adjustment.

TABLE 2 POPULATION INCREASE AND POPULATION GROWTH RATE, WITH AND WITHOUT ADJUSTING FOR CHANGE OF STATUS

Population increase (‘000) Population growth rate (%)

Year ended June

As published

Without adjustment

Difference (%)

As published

Without adjustment

Difference (%)

1977 159.2 144.4 10.2 1.13 1.03 9.7 1978 167.0 160.4 4.1 1.18 1.13 4.4 1979 156.5 159.7 -2.0 1.09 1.11 -1.8 1980 179.6 180.6 0.6 1.24 1.24 0.0 1981 227.9 227.4 0.2 1.56 1.55 0.6 1982 261.0 255.8 2.0 1.75 1.71 2.3 1983 209.2 211.4 -1.0 1.38 1.39 -0.7 1984 185.9 183.3 1.4 1.21 1.19 1.7 1985 208.9 203.2 2.8 1.34 1.30 3.1 1986 230.0 223.6 2.9 1.46 1.42 2.8 1987 245.5 228.9 7.3 1.53 1.43 7.0 1988 268.3 262.2 2.3 1.63 1.61 1.2 1989 282.3 262.1 7.7 1.72 1.59 8.2 1990 250.7 229.9 9.0 1.49 1.37 8.8 1991 218.9 227.2 -3.7 1.28 1.33 -3.8 1992 210.6 231.9 -9.2 1.22 1.34 -9.0 1993 172.4 205.0 -15.9 0.99 1.17 -15.4 1994 187.6 208.4 -10.0 1.06 1.18 -10.2 1995 217.0 229.9 -5.6 1.22 1.29 -5.4 1996 239.0 244.5 -2.2 1.32 1.36 -2.9 1997 213.4 220.7 -3.3 1.17 1.21 -3.3 1998 206.2 199.0 3.6 1.11 1.07 3.7 1999 206.8 218.2 -5.2 1.10 1.16 -5.2 2000 219.9 228.1 -3.6 1.16 1.20 -3.3

Source: ABS, 1999, 2001.


EFFECT ON RESIDENT POPULATION ESTIMATES

The effect of adjusting for change of status on the estimated resident populationis much smaller than on net overseas migration and the population growth rate,as expected, and has not been more than 0.6 per cent. The effect is cumulativeover the years, beginning from the first year of adjustment. Because categoryjumping was mostly positive during the 1980s, the adjustment resulted inthe resident population becoming increasingly larger than if no adjustment wasmade (Table 3).

TABLE 3 EFFECT OF ADJUSTING FOR CHNAGES IN STATUS

ON ESTIMATED RESIDENT POPULATION

Estimated resident population (‘000) Difference

Year ended June

As published Without adjustment ‘000 %

1977 14,192.2 14,177.4 14.8 0.10 1978 14,359.3 14,337.8 21.5 0.15 1979 14,515.7 14,497.5 18.2 0.13 1980 14,695.4 14,678.1 17.3 0.12 1981 14,923.3 14,905.5 17.8 0.12 1982 15,184.2 15,161.3 22.9 0.15 1983 15,393.5 15,372.6 20.9 0.14 1984 15,579.4 15,556.0 23.4 0.15 1985 15,788.3 15,759.2 29.1 0.18 1986 16,018.4 15,982.8 35.6 0.22 1987 16,263.9 16,211.7 52.2 0.32 1988 16,532.2 16,473.9 58.3 0.35 1989 16,814.4 16,736.0 78.4 0.47 1990 17,065.1 16,965.9 99.2 0.58 1991 17,284.0 17,193.1 90.9 0.53 1992 17,494.7 17,425.0 69.7 0.40 1993 17,667.1 17,630.0 37.1 0.21 1994 17,854.7 17,838.4 16.3 0.09 1995 18,071.8 18,068.3 3.5 0.02 1996 18,310.7 18,312.8 -2.1 -0.01 1997 18,524.2 18,533.5 -9.3 -0.05 1998 18,730.4 18,732.5 -2.1 -0.01 1999 18,937.2 18,950.7 -13.5 -0.07 2000 19,157.0 19,178.8 -21.8 -0.11


The difference between the adjusted and unadjusted population estimatesreached its maximum in 1989-1990 when the estimated resident population had99,500 more people than if no adjustment had been made. However, this numberwas less than 0.6 per cent of the total population. Since category jumping becamenegative in the early 1990s, this began to reduce the excess that has built up overthe years as the adjustment began to impact negatively on the resident populationinstead of adding to it. By 1996 the cumulative positive impact of the adjustmentsin the 1980s had been cancelled out by the negative effect of the adjustments ofthe early 1990s. As category jumping continued to be negative, the adjustmentsled to a smaller estimated resident population after 1996 than if no adjustmentwas made. By 2000 the resident population was 21,800 fewer than it would havebeen if no adjustment had been made during the previous 22 years – a differenceof 0.1 per cent (Figure 4). This is a small difference after adjusting for changeof status for more than 20 years. The reasons are that first, the net number ofpeople who change status each year is very small relative to the total populationand second, the adjustment can impact positively as well as negatively on theresident population so that over an extended period of time, the positive impactshave been offset by the negative impacts.

DISCUSSION

The above analyses show that adjusting for change of migrant status from short-term to long-term/permanent (and vice versa for both visitors and residents) canhave a significant impact on net international migration when net internationalmigration is based on net permanent/long-term movements only and migrantscan change their status from short-term to permanent/long-term and vice versa.However, its effect on the population growth rate and the resident population ismuch less. This is because net overseas migration accounts for less than half ofAustralia’s annual population growth rate and that rate is only 1-2 per cent. If netoverseas migration accounts for a larger share of population increase – as itundoubtedly will in the future – or the population growth rate is higher, the impacton the resident population will be greater. Also, the impact of the adjustment canbe positive or negative, depending on whether more visitors than residents arechanging status and whether more are changing from short-term to long-term/permanent or vice versa. Since the effect on the resident population is cumulativeover the years, the positive impacts of adjustment in some years have been offsetby the negative impacts of other years. Based on Australia’s experience inadjusting for change of status in its international migration statistics, howimportant is it for other countries to consider a similar adjustment? This willdepend on the volume of international migration flows, the extent that peoplechange their travel intentions or migration status, the magnitude of the net flow,and its contribution to the population growth rate each year. If the volume ofmovements is large and net immigration is an important component of populationincrease, it may be worthwhile to consider adjusting for change of migrant statusto obtain better estimates of net immigration and its demographic impact.

118K

hoo and McD

onald

-0.40%

-0.20%

0.00%

0.20%

0.40%

0.60%

0.80%

1.00%

1977

1978

1979

1980

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

Mid-year

Diff

eren

ce in

resi

dent

pop

ulat

ion

FIGURE 4EFFECT OF ADJUSTING FOR CHANGE OF STATUS ON THE RESIDENT POPULATION


The feasibility of making the adjustment depends, of course, on the availabilityof data on intended and actual duration of residence or absence in the migrationstatistics that are collected. Because Australia has been a country ofimmigration with a formal immigration programme since the mid-1940s, it hasroutinely collected and processed statistical data on overseas arrivals anddepartures in order to provide an indication of the immigration programme’simpact on its population. Other countries, especially if they have not consideredimmigration as an important demographic issue, may not yet have themechanism to monitor international movements across their borders aseffectively, particularly if the volume of movements is massive, as is the casefor many countries with land borders.

The issue of adjustment for change of migrant status arises only for thosecountries that collect and use flow statistics to estimate net internationalmigration following the UN recommendations on defining migrant and residentstatus according to a specific duration of stay or travel. Not many countriescurrently follow this approach. Two countries that use flow statistics to estimatenet international migration are New Zealand and the United Kingdom; however,neither adjusts their international migration statistics for change on migrantstatus. New Zealand estimates net international migration as the differencebetween permanent/long-term arrivals and departures, excluding short-termmovements of less than 12 months duration, an approach similar to Australia’s.Although it does not adjust for change of status, Statistics New Zealandrecognizes that migration category jumping occurs, pointing out that a persondefined as a long-term or permanent migrant on arrival may be a short-termvisitor on departure, and that this may affect the migration statistics it publishes(Statistics New Zealand, various years). The United Kingdom uses three datasources to estimate net international migration. They are the InternationalPassenger Survey, a continuous voluntary sample survey; information providedby the Home Office on people who enter as asylum seekers; and information onmigrants between the UK and the Irish Republic. Migrant status is defined byintended duration of stay or absence of 12 months or more and there isrecognition that measurement errors can arise if those intending to migratesubsequently stay less than 12 months and those not intending to migrate stay fora year or more (Vickers, 1998).

Most other advanced countries rely on population registers and otheradministrative data, instead of international movement statistics, to estimate thenumber of immigrants and emigrants and the resident population. For example,in Canada estimates of immigrant arrivals and emigrants are based onadministrative data and estimates net international migration are made on thebasis of the permanent or temporary residence status of foreigners in Canadaand Canadian citizens abroad (Michalowski, 1999). The US also use variousadministrative data sources to measure the level of legal immigration, refugeeimmigration, Puerto Rican immigration, and emigration of legal residents.


However, there is no reliable data on undocumented immigration and the USCensus Bureau assumes a net migration of 225,000 undocumented migrants inits resident population estimates (US Census Bureau, 1999). Data frompopulation registers and administrative records are likely to be based on actualduration of residence or visa status rather than intended duration of residence andthe issue of adjusting for change of status is less likely to arise.

The preceding discussion indicates that the question of whether to adjust forchange of migrant status arises when: 1) Net international migration is estimatedfrom international movement statistics; 2) Net international migration isestimated not from all movements but only from movements involving a specificduration of stay or travel; and 3) data are available on intended and actualduration of stay or travel abroad.

Although many countries at present do not rely on international migrationstatistics to estimate the impact of international migration on their population, thismay change in the future. If advanced countries experiencing low fertility cometo rely increasingly on immigration as a source of population growth or to stempopulation decline, international movements will have a greater impact on theirpopulation and it may be important to have good estimates of inflows, outflows,net flows, and their effect on the resident population.

NOTES

1. This paper is based in part on a review of category jumping conducted by theauthors for the Department of Immigration and Multicultural Affairs and theAustralian Bureau of Statistics. The support of the Department and its staff fromthe Statistics Section and the Bureau and its Demography Section during theproject is much appreciated.

2. The UN’s discussion of international migration statistics differentiated betweencitizens and foreigners and referred to change of status from short-term to long-term among foreigners immigrating to a country. In contrast, Australia’sinternational migration statistics differentiated between residents and visitors.Residents need not be citizens; they include persons with temporary or permanentresidence status.

3. In practice ABS initially makes a preliminary estimate of category jumping based onless than a full year’s data and assumptions about movement patterns for theremaining period. These preliminary estimates are then replaced by revisedestimates when the full year’s statistics on actual international movements areavailable. In recent years, the preliminary estimates have differed considerablyfrom the revised estimates (ABS, 1999b).


REFERENCES

Australian Bureau of Statistics1995 Migration 1994-1995, catalogue no. 3412.0, Australian Bureau of

Statistics, Canberra.1999a Demographic Estimates and Projections: Concepts, Sources and Methods,

catalogue no. 3228.0, Australian Bureau of Statistics, Canberra.1999b Migration 1997-1998, catalogue no. 3412.0, Australian Bureau of

Statistics, Canberra.2000 Population Projections: Australia 1999-2101, catalogue no. 3222.0,

Australian Bureau of Statistics, Canberra.Keely, C.B.

1974 “Immigration composition and population policy”, Science, 185: 587-593.Khoo, S.E., and P. McDonald

2000 Category Jumping: Trends, Demographic Impact and Measurement Issues,Department of Immigration and Multicultural Affairs and Australian Bureauof Statistics, Canberra.

McDonald, P., and R. Kippen1999 “Impact of immigration on the ageing of Australia’s population”, discussion

paper, Department of Immigration and Multicultural Affairs, Canberra.2002 “The impact of long-term visitor migration on projections of Australia’s

population”, International Migration, 40(4).Michalowski, M.

1999 “Canadians residing temporarily abroad: numbers, characteristics andestimation methods”, discussion paper, Statistics Canada, Ottawa.

Statistics New Zealandvarious years External Migration, Statistics New Zealand, Christchurch.

United Nations1980 “Recommendations on statistics of international migration”, statistical

papers, no. 58, United Nations, New York.1998 “Recommendations on statistics of international migration: revision 1”,

statistical papers series M, no. 58, United Nations, New York.United States Census Bureau

1999 “Resident population estimates of the United States by sex, race andHispanic origin”, Internet release date: June 4, 1999.

Vickers, L.1998 “Trends in migration in the UK”, Population Trends, 94: 25-34.

Zlotnik, H.2000 “Trends of international migration since 1965: what existing data reveal”,

International Migration, 37(1): 21-55.


AJUSTEMENT DES STATISTIQUES POUR TENIRCOMPTE DES VARIATIONS DE STATUT DE LA MIGRATION

INTERNATIONALE: IMPLICATIONS DÉMOGRAPHIQUES

Le calcul de l’immigration nette effectué dans le but d’estimer la populationrésidente en Australie est fondé sur les mouvements d’entrée et de sortie netspermanents et de longue durée (12 mois ou plus). En sont exclus tous lesmouvements internationaux comportant une durée de séjour en Australie ou undéplacement à l’étranger de moins de 12 mois (qui sont définis comme étant decourte durée).

Des variations entre le statut à court terme et celui à long terme/permanentpeuvent toutefois se produire lorsque des personnes prolongent ou écourtent leurséjour ou leur déplacement. Étant donné que l’immigration nette est un élémentimportant de la croissance de la population australienne (comptant pour 40 à50 pour cent de la croissance annuelle), l’ajustement effectué pour tenir comptede ces variations du statut de migrant devrait donner de meilleures estimationsde l’immigration nette et de la population résidente.

La communication montre que l’ajustement tenant compte du changement destatut peut influer fortement sur l’immigration nette, notamment lorsque lesentrées de migrants sont peu nombreuses. Faute de procéder correctement à cesajustements l’on peut aussi arriver à des conclusions trompeuses sur lacontribution respective que les mouvements nets temporaires et permanentsapportent à l’immigration nette totale. L’effet sur la population résidente esttoutefois relativement réduit, inférieur à 1 pour cent de la population totale. Cetteétude aborde aussi la question de l’importance qu’il y a pour les pays d’ajusterleurs statistiques de la migration internationale en fonction du statut des migrantslorsqu’on a affaire à un contexte de mobilité internationale croissante.

ADAPTACIÓN AL CAMBIO DE LA SITUACIÓNEN LA MIGRACIÓN INTERNACIONAL:

REPERCUSIONES DEMOGRÁFICAS

El cálculo de la inmigración neta, con el objeto de estimar la población residenteen Australia, se basa en los desplazamientos netos permanentes y de largaduración (12 meses o más) hacia el país y fuera del mismo. Todos losmovimientos internacionales cuya permanencia en Australia o viaje al extranjerosea inferior a 12 meses (definido como de corta duración) quedan excluidos.

Ello no obstante, pueden producirse cambios entre la permanencia corta y largay la situación permanente cuando las personas extienden o acortan supermanencia o viaje. Habida cuenta de que la inmigración neta es un componente


importante del crecimiento de población en Australia (que representa entre el 40y el 50 por ciento del crecimiento anual), se considera importante adaptar estoscambios en la situación de la migración para contar con mejores estimacionessobre la inmigración neta y sobre la población residente.

Este artículo demuestra que los ajustes en el cambio de situación puedentener repercusiones considerables sobre la inmigración neta, particularmentecuando la aceptación de inmigrantes es reducida. Una falta de adaptaciónadecuada a este cambio de situación puede dar lugar a conclusiones erróneassobre las contribuciones relativas de los movimientos temporales y permanentesnetos a la inmigración neta total. Sin embargo, el efecto en la población residentees relativamente pequeño y representa menos del uno por ciento de la poblacióntotal. Este artículo también aborda la cuestión de cuán importante es paralos países adaptar los cambios de la situación de los migrantes en lasestadísticas internacionales de la migración en el contexto de una crecientemovilidad internacional.

adjusting for change of status in international migration: demographic implications

Documents