Pathways of aging in migration and their association with the quality of life

Abstract

This study adopted a life course approach in exploring the quality of life of old migrants based on the experiences of Korean Australians aged 60 years and over. Pathways of aging were considered as related to the aging progress in migration, and three different groups were identified: aged with a migrant background (those who migrated when they were younger and had grown old in the destination country), family migrants (those who accompanied/were invited by their children), and retirement migrants (those who chose to migrate in later life independent of their children). The study identified elements of quality of life particularly meaningful to specific groups. The findings of this study may help in broadening the knowledge base of the diverse aging experiences of migrants and to inform policy and the development of programs to support elderly migrants.

Keywords

pathways of aging quality of life life course approach old migrants Korean Australians

Introduction

Migration and aging are important trends in global demographic change. Despite extensive exploration on the life of old migrants, the intersectionality of aging and migration remains an under-explored research topic (Zubair and Norris, 2015). One of the dominant research topics around aging in the context of migration is the difficulty in cultural adaptation. Older migrants, defined as those in the ages 60 and over and particularly those with culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) backgrounds have been identified as one of the population groups that are least socially integrated in their host country (Rowland, 1991). Research has explored older migrants’ identity reconstruction (Lieber et al., 2001) and cultural and structural barriers to the socialization process (Taylor et al., 2005; Yu, 2000; Torres, 2006). A recurring theme to date has been the multidimensionality of the disadvantages, frequently cited as “multiple hazards” which encompasses the combined adverse effects of ethnic minority and the declining social and economic status with age (Dowd and Bengtson, 1978; Martin et al., 2015; Blakemore and Boneham, 1994).

The literature thus far has been guided by a perspective based on the deficit model. Many studies have been dedicated to the examination of the issues of discrimination, exclusion and inequality, which undermine the quality of life among old migrants during their settlement process (De Jong Gierveld et al., 2015; O’Neil and Tienda, 2015; Koehn and Kobayashi, 2011). This adaptation-oriented research trend has hindered the expansion of the knowledge base on the life of old migrants. Findings of studies on the quality of life of old migrants reveal their low state of mental health and disadvantaged access to social services such as care supports (Zubair and Norris, 2015; Lin et al., 2016). Although adaptation and social integration are key elements, they are taken as necessary but not sufficient conditions to promote the quality of life of elderly migrants. Aging research in the migration context has not considered the diverse lived experiences of elderly migrants. In other words, older migrants have been regarded as a homogeneous social category (Torres, 2015). Studies on old migrants have examined their different life experiences by social and demographic variables. Among the key factors that have been investigated in migration studies are whether older migrants come from English or non-English speaking backgrounds (Warburton et al., 2009; Hassett and George, 2002; Mukherjee and Diwan, 2016) and their social and economic status (Dowd and Bengtson, 1978; Radermacher and Feldman, 2015; Lin et al., 2016). However, these factors are static and cross-sectional rather than dynamic and longitudinal. What has been missing is how the life course experience of migrants affects their quality of life.

This article compared the quality of life of different cohorts of old migrants. Focusing on elderly Korean Australians, this study began by recognizing that this population is not monolithic, and then it proceeded to examine and compare the quality of life for three different immigrant groups or cohorts of Korean Australians: Korean migrants who came to Australia in their younger years and grew old in Australia, elderly Koreans who joined their children in Australia, and retirement migrants, i.e., those who migrated to Australia on their own in their later years. Due to their different migration and settlement experiences in Australia, this study sought to examine whether these differences result in varying levels of quality of life.

Life course perspective and pathways of aging in migration

This research aims to explore the quality of life of older migrants through employing the life course perspective. There are diverse pathways of aging for migrants, and these can influence the current and later life quality of life outcomes in different ways (Elder, 1994; Hareven, 2000; Huinink and Feldhaus, 2009). According to this perspective, aging is path-dependent, which means that early life experiences and environmental influences constitute developmental processes of aging (Hanson et al., 2016). The main concepts of the life course perspective include life events, transitions, turning points, trajectories and cohorts (Hutchison, 2019). This perspective assumes that later experiences are the consequences of early transitions and events, and thus the later years of aging can be understood in depth with knowledge of the prior life course (Elder, 1994).

The life course framework has been applied to the study of old migrants because migration is a life event that may be a critical turning point over the course of the life stage. Because the life course perspective focuses on the cumulative experiences of aging, the later life of old migrants is viewed as a continuity of experiences of early-stage migrations. Generally, migrants are exposed to diverse life challenges during the settlement period, and as such, disadvantages occurring in earlier years can have a cumulative effect on later life outcomes. For instance, unequal opportunities for social and economic participation among migrants with culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds may result in financial and social disparity between old migrants and their non-migrant counterparts (Liversage and Jakobsen, 2016; Wingens et al., 2011). Differential access to opportunities and resources can lead to future inequality, and old migrants who were disadvantaged in earlier years are predicted to have a lower level of well-being in old age (Fuller-Iglesias et al., 2009). Other factors such as gender can exacerbate the poor quality of life of elderly migrants. For instance, the quality of life of elderly migrants may differ for women and men (Stypińska and Gordo, 2018).

One of the key contributions of the life course perspective is helping account for variations of the aging experiences among individuals in a population. Although every life trajectory can differ, the life course perspective filters the aging experience by cohort. A cohort is defined as “a group of persons who were born during the same time period and who experience particular social changes within a given culture in the same sequence and at the same age” (Hutchison, 2018: 11). While a cohort usually refers to a birth cohort, the concept can be used to categorize people by shared life events regardless of the age of the members of the group (Altman, 2015). This study assumed that old migrants could be grouped according to the trajectories of aging, which could affect their standard of life and perceived quality of life at the later stage of life.

Due to intra-cohort individual variations and the complexity experienced by migrants, it is difficult to categorize them by their pathway of aging. However, there have been some attempts to categorize older cohorts by their pathway of aging. For example, King (2014) suggested that older migrants may be broadly classified into those who migrated at a younger age and grew old abroad and those who migrated later in life, often for or around retirement. This study identified three major categories or pathways under which the experiences of Koreans who migrated to Australia could be classified, although they might not be exhaustive: (1) those who migrated while they were younger and grew old in Australia, (2) those who accompanied or were invited by their children, which we refer to here as family migrants, and (3) retirement migrants. To further clarify the differences between family and retirement migrants, the former refers to those who migrated to Australia as dependent visa holders to join their children either to be taken care of by their children or to assist in caring for the grandchildren (Baldassar, 2015; Treas, 2008). Family migrants may be reunited with their children at a relatively young age. Retirement migrants usually have a decent retirement income and choose to migrate to enhance their lifestyle (Benson and O'Reilly, 2009), to improve access to social networks at their old age (Casado-Diaz, 2012), or to seek greater economic security (Repetti et al., 2018). They are basically primary visa applicants.

Measurement of the quality of life of old people

Although the term quality of life is widely used, there is no universal definition for it. With no workable definition, the term is interchangeably used with similar concepts such as “happiness,” “life satisfaction” and “well-being” (Kerce, 1992; Andrews and McKennell, 1980). The concept has evolved to include subjective and objective aspects of life, and it has reached a broad agreement that it is a multidimensional term (Felce and Perry, 1995; Schalock, 2000; Walker and Mollenkopf, 2007; Lawton, 1991). Age-specific definitions of quality of life have also been developed (Netuveli and Blane, 2008; Farquhar, 1995), including efforts to measure the quality of life among older ethnic minority migrants (Brockmann, 2002).

Several studies on the quality of life of old people have been carried out, most of which employ exploratory qualitative approaches (Borglin et al., 2005; Grewal et al., 2004). One of the most comprehensive measurements of the quality of life of old people was developed by Bowling et al. (2002). Their Older People’s Quality of Life (OPQOL) scale was developed based on a multidimensional model of the quality of life in older age (Bowling et al., 2002). This measure has been widely used as a reliable and validated measure for quality of life specifically for old people (Bilotta et al., 2011; Bong et al., 2021; Kojima et al., 2016). The OPQOL consists of 31 items that are organized around seven sub-dimensions of quality of life (see Table 1). This study used the OPQOL scale developed by Bowling et al. (2002) to measure the overall the quality of life of elderly migrants and to compare different cohorts. It consists of statements measuring respondents’ agreement on a 5-point scale ranging from 1= “strongly disagree” to 5= “strongly agree.” Higher scores meant higher levels of perceived quality of life.

Table 1.

Measurement of older people’s quality of life.

Dimensions	Items
Health	- I have a lot of physical energy
	- Pain affects my well-being
	- My health restricts me looking after myself or my home
	- I am healthy enough to get out and about
Social relationships	- My family, friends or neighbors would help me if needed
	- I would like more companionship or contact with other people
	- I have someone who gives me love and affection
	- I’d like more people to enjoy life with
	- I have my children around which is important
Independence, control over life, freedom	- I am healthy enough to have my independence
	- I can please myself with what I do
	- The cost of things compared to my pension/income restricts my life
	- I have a lot of control over the important things in my life
Home and neighborhood	- I feel safe where I live
	- The local shops, services and facilities are good overall
	- I get pleasure from my home
	- I find my neighborhood friendly
Psychological and emotional well-being	- I take life as it comes and make the best of things
	- I feel lucky compared to most people
	- I tend to look on the bright side
	- If my health limits social/ leisure activities, then I will compensate and find something else I can do
Financial circumstances	- I have enough money to pay for household bills
	- I have enough money to pay for household repairs or help needed in the house
	- I can afford to buy what I want to
	- I cannot afford to do things I would enjoy
Leisure and activities	- I have social or leisure activities/hobbies that I enjoy doing
	- I try to stay involved with things
	- I do paid or unpaid work or activities that give me a role in life
	- I have responsibilities to others that restrict my social or leisure activities
	- Religion, belief or philosophy is important to my quality of life
	- Cultural/religious events/festivals are important to my quality of life

Source: Bowling et al. (2002).

The internal reliability of the seven sub-dimensions of OPQOL scale was investigated using Cronbach’s alpha. The results showed that the alpha was equal to 0.840, which indicates that the alpha for OPQOL scale was acceptable, and thus there was no need to eliminate individual sub-dimensions to improve the reliability of the measure.

Profile of Korean Australians

As previously mentioned, this study focused on the experiences of elderly Korean Australians. Korean migration and settlement in Australia date back to the mid-1970s, when Australia abolished the White Australia policy (Committee of 50 Year Korean History in Australia, 2008). The reasons for Korean migration to Australia are diverse. Koreans have chosen Australia as a destination country for residence, work, education and the holidays. For example, Korea is Australia’s eighth-largest source of international students (Department of Education Skills and Employment, 2021). Koreans rank as the seventh largest group of working holiday-makers (Department of Home Affairs, 2021c). Some international students and working holiday-makers have chosen to become Australian residents for work and lifestyle reasons. In 2020 to 2021, 89.7 percent of new Korean permanent residents had already been residing in Australia with short-term visas (Department of Home Affairs, 2021a). During the same period, the family stream (i.e., those came to Australia to join family members who were already Australian permanent residents) accounted for approximately 35 percent of new Korean migrants (Department of Home Affairs, 2021a). Children’s education is another key motivation for Korean parents to move to Australia (Jung, 2018). Despite the diversity of migration motivations, 63.6 percent of most recent Korean migrants obtained permanent residency status on work-related visas through skill-based or employer nomination.

According to the most recent available census of the Australian Bureau of Statistics, there were 113,670 persons residing in Australia who identified themselves as Koreans in 2016 (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2022). The paper refers to this population as Korean Australians, which derives from the question on ancestry in the 2016 Census — “What is the person’s ancestry?” Korean Australians refer to those with Korean ethnic background who came to Australia as immigrants or as the descendants of an ethnic Korean born in Australia.

Given the fairly recent history of Korean migration to Australia, Korean Australians have a younger age structure. Those aged over 60 years old accounted for 7.2 percent compared with 21.3 percent of Korean Australians within the total Australian population. Despite a relatively slow population aging, the number of elderly Korean Australians doubled over the last decade. In 2006, there were 3,752 Korean Australians aged 60 and over, which doubled to 8,209 in 2016. In other words, Korean Australians were experiencing “numerical aging,”— an absolute increase in the number of old people, rather than “structural aging,”— a relative increase or growing proportion of old people within the total population (Jung, 2020).

Data and methodology

This study employed a mixed methods research design which included a survey and in-depth interviews. The data collection was conducted from 2018 to 2019. For the survey, purposive sampling was used because there is no sampling frame for old Korean Australians. The survey participants were recruited from major cities of Australia including Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane; 97.8 percent of Korean Australians reside in major urban areas (Jung, 2020). Eligible respondents were those who were at least 60 years old and were living in Australia for 12 months and over as of the survey. This meant that short-term visitors who came to Australia for tourism or family visits were excluded. Potential participants were approached in Korean churches and Korean community gatherings. The survey was conducted by Korean Australians in Korean; all the participants were native Korean speakers. A total of 256 people participated in the survey.

This study also conducted in-depth interviews to obtain qualitative information about the quality of life among the research participants. All the survey participants were asked at the end of the survey if they were willing to participate in the follow-up in-depth interview. Fifteen survey participants agreed to take part in the in-depth interviews. This included eight individuals who grew old in Australia; four who joined their children; and three retired migrants. The in-depth interviews asked the following questions: “what is it that makes your life good or bad,” “what would improve quality of your life” and “what are the positive or negative changes in your life that you have experienced after migration” (Bowling et al., 2003). The qualitative interviews also asked the participants about migration-related questions such as when and why they chose to migrate.

The data collection was approved and guided by the protocols of the Human Research Ethics Committee of the University of New South Wales Australia (Reference Number 155101). The survey and in-depth interview thoroughly complied with the principles of voluntary participation, informed consent and confidentiality. This research ensured that all private information obtained from the participants was not accessible to or shared with others without the participants’ authorization.

Descriptive and mean comparison analyses were employed to analyze the survey data. For qualitative data, a thematic analysis was conducted with the aim of discovering possible common experiences or patterns. The qualitative interview data were organized according to participants’ pathway of aging and major themes were drawn from the interviews.

Results

Profile of survey participants

Table 2 shows the characteristics of the survey participants. There were slightly more female than male participants (54.4 percent vs. 45.6 percent). The mean age of the participants was 70.1 years old, and they had lived in Australia for 24.5 years on average at the time of the survey. Most of the participants were either Australian citizens or permanent residents who were born in South Korea and migrated to Australia. Seventy-one percent of respondents had already acquired Australian citizenship, 21 percent were permanent residents, and the remaining 8 percent were other long-term stayers such as business or investment visa holders.

Table 2.

Characteristics of survey participants.

Variables		Percentage (n = 256)	Mean
Gender	Male	45.6
Gender	Female	54.4
Age	60–64 years old	24.3	70.1
	65–69 years old	24.8
	70–74 years old	27.2
	75 years old and over	23.8
Years in Australia	10 years and below	18.4	24.5
	11–20 years	11.2
	21–30 years	41.3
	31 years and over	29.1
Immigration/Visa status	Australian citizen	70.9
	Permanent resident	20.9
	Other	8.2
Pathways of aging	Migrated at young age, grew old in Australia (aged with a migrant background)	65.0
	Accompanied/invited by children (family migrants)	18.9
	Retirement migrants	16.0

As suggested by Table 2, aging in the destination country was the most typical pathway of aging among Korean Australians. Approximately two-thirds of the participants (65.0 percent) were those who migrated to Australia at a younger age, remained in Australia and experienced aging in the country (hereafter, this cohort is referred to as the aged with a migrant background). Less than a fifth (18.9 percent) were family migrants who were accompanied or invited by their children. Retirement migrants accounted for the smallest proportion: one in six (16 percent) respondents came to live in Australia after retirement; their migration to Australia was not linked to their children’s migration.

Overall quality of life

Overall, respondents rated their quality of life highly. Three in four respondents (73.5 percent) answered “good” (60.8 percent) and “very good” (12.7 percent) to complete the statement “your quality of life as a whole is___.” Similarly, as shown in Figure 1, the mean scores of each of the seven sub-dimensions and the overall mean score (with 5 as highest) suggest a high quality of life among the respondents.

Figure 1.

Mean scores on the seven sub-dimensions of quality of life.

Despite a high level of overall quality of life, the break-down by sub-dimension reveals notable variations. The mean scores were higher for “psychological well-being and positive outlook,” “neighborhood resources,” and “family and social relationships,” whereas the scores were noticeably lower for “independence, control over life, freedom” and “adequate financial circumstances.” The lower score for financial circumstances is unsurprising because old migrants are exposed to the intersectional disadvantage of reduced income upon retirement and insufficient labor market participation at a younger age (Jakobsen and Pedersen, 2016; Australian Council of Social Service, 2020). The low scores for independence and control over life may be associated with inadequate financial resources.

Quality of life by pathway of aging in migration

The comparison of quality of life by pathway of aging shows the dynamics of how migration trajectories are associated with standard of living in old age. Table 2 presents the outcomes of the analysis of variance on each sub-dimension of quality of life. To begin, those who aged with a migrant background had the highest quality of life as suggested by their overall mean score (3.89), followed by the retirement migrants (3.58), and the lowest group was that of family migrants (3.55). As presented in Table 2, the differences are statistically significant (F (2, 201) = 4.13; sig. = 0.018). The post-hoc test showed that the aged with a migrant background cohort yielded the highest score and was significantly different from the other two groups while the cohorts of family migrants and retirement migrants were not significantly different from each other.

Table 3 also identifies the sub-dimensions that account for differences in the overall score of quality of life by pathway of aging. There were no significant differences among the three cohorts in terms of “health and functioning,” “family and social relationships,” “neighborhood resources,” and “psychological well-being and positive outlook.” In contrast, significant between-group differences were observed for the sub-dimensions of “independence, control over life, freedom,” “adequate financial circumstances” and “leisure and cultural activities.”

Table 3.

Quality of life by pathway of aging (n = 256).

Sub-dimensions	Aged with a migrant background	Family migrants	Retirement migrants	F-value	Sig
Health and functioning	3.95	3.63	3.96	2.79	0.064
Family and social relationships	3.93	4.13	3.83	2.54	0.082
Independence, control over life, freedom	3.68	3.17	3.36	7.51	0.001
Neighborhood resources	4.00	3.89	3.87	0.84	0.432
Psychological well-being and positive outlook	4.03	4.00	3.81	1.61	0.202
Adequate financial circumstances	3.30	2.72	3.10	4.93	0.008
Leisure and cultural activities	3.71	3.58	3.36	4.09	0.018
Overall	3.89	3.55	3.58	4.13	0.018

The aged with a migrant background cohort recorded the highest level of quality of life in all three difference-making sub-dimensions. Their longer settlement in Australia has enabled this group to secure financial resources in their old age. This cohort showed the highest level of income among three groups (F(2, 171) = 6.803, Sig. = 0.001); this cohort was more likely to be home owners than their two other counterparts (Pearson’s Chi-square = 34.041, Sig. = 0.000). The eligibility for old age income supports from the government was seen to be the main source of psychological comfort and stability. Their comparatively adequate financial circumstances may have provided them a better sense of independence and control over life. They were also seen to be better integrated with the way of life of the destination country which allowed them to better participate in leisurely and cultural activities. These outcomes indicate that the aged with a migrant background cohort had the best quality of life at old age in the migration context.

Although the aged with a migrant background cohort scored high in terms of financial security and leisurely lifestyle, their minority status appeared to be compromising their quality of life. Despite having stayed for a relatively long period in Australia and a corresponding longer period of adjustment, they were unable to completely overcome cultural barriers. In particular, their non-English language background was a constraining factor towards their inclusion and engagement. Their social relations did not extend to non-Asian communities. The following accounts reflect positive and negative factors of quality of life among the aged with a migrant background cohort.¹

I am not very worried here, thanks to the aged pension even when living in public housing. We jokingly say that we are like public servants because we regularly receive money from the government. It is very well set out. (Brian, 72, male, aged with a migrant background)

Maybe I am used to it [living as a migrant]. It is not really uncomfortable. But, I have always been uncomfortable with language. I still feel distant to people from non-Asian backgrounds. I feel closer with Asians. (Susan, 75, female, aged with a migrant background)

The retirement migrants and family migrants had a similar level of overall quality of life. However, they also showed some important differences in some sub-dimensions. The cohort of retirement migrants demonstrated higher scores in “adequate financial circumstances” and “independence, control over life, freedom” than the family migrants. The visa requirements for these two groups partially explain why this is the case. For their visa application, retirement migrants must demonstrate financial capacity (Department of Home Affairs, 2021b). Being better off financially may have given retirement migrants a better sense of independence.

Although the cohorts of retirement migrants and the aged with a migrant background are similar in terms of financial conditions, they also have different migration and settlement trajectories. The former usually migrated at later age and some of them were still in the early settlement stage. One of the positive factors was the sense of a new start in a new society. One participant in the in-depth interviews articulated a high level of satisfaction with the protective social system of Australia. However, acculturative stress had an adverse effect on their psychological well-being and their social network was largely confined to their ethnic community, particularly the church community.

While living here, I find this society so reasonable. It is nice and fair, although it may be seen as socialistic to some degree… The government here is responsible for all from the birth to death. They pay for milk for babies, buy clothes for school students, give unemployment allowance when quitting a job, give pension to old people, and even give a home. (Helen, 66, female, retirement migrant)

We are foreigners forever here. Always feels alienated however hard I try to get into this society. There are so many things [that I find] uncomfortable such as when going to the hospital and joining a group. I studied English a lot in Korea, but rarely have a chance to use it to enjoy the Australian culture. (David, 67, male, retirement migrant)

Family migrants and retirement migrants registered a similar level of quality of life. However, the former scored higher in “family and social relationships” and “leisure and cultural activities” than the latter. Family migrants scored significantly higher than the other groups to the statement: “I have my children around, which is important” (F (2, 249) = 4.246, Sig. = 0.015). These differences were seen to be largely associated with the different family situations. The survey showed that 64.9 percent of family migrants were living with their married children compared with 18 percent among the aged with a migrant background cohort and 22.6 percent among retirement migrants. This group was also seen to effectively use the social networks of their children, who usually arrived earlier than their parents, to form and extend their social relations.

The in-depth interviews reveal that living with children had both positive and negative impacts on the quality of life of elderly family migrants. On the one hand, living in a close relationship with their children was a positive factor for the quality of life of old migrants. On the other hand, dependency on their children for financial support and for their social life was neutralizing the benefits of living close or together with their children. In many cases, family migrants were not prepared for independent life in the migration setting. For instance, most of them (81 percent) were not able to effectively communicate in English; they had the lowest English proficiency among the three groups (F(2, 253) = 11.542, Sig. = 0.000). During the in-depth interviews, some participants expressed loneliness because their relationship with their children was not warm.

My two children had been living here, so I came here. I thought coming here would be better (than living separated from children in Korea). I like it as I can live with my children. (Margaret, 72, female, accompanied/invited by children)

It is difficult because of language. I need to go to the hospital, and it is extremely difficult when my children are not available sometimes. Back in Korea, I met friends freely. Of course, there are some friends in the church here, but I don’t have old friends. So, I often feel lonely. (Deborah, 75, female, accompanied/invited by children)

Conclusion

Among the three groups of old migrants, the overall quality of life was highest among those who migrated when they were young and grew old in Australia. This outcome was attributed to economic and cultural integration resulting from their long period of residence and settlement in the country. The other two groups demonstrated relatively lower levels of quality of life. For those who migrated at around retirement age, they had a relatively shorter residence period (and shorter period of adjustment), they did not have an extensive or close social network, and acculturative stress adversely affected their quality of life. For those who migrated as the dependents of their children, family relationship was a double-edged sword to their quality of life. While a close relationship with their children contributed to their well-being and provided them with psychological support, their dependent position and their lack of financial resources for social, economic and cultural integration were putting downward pressure on their control over life and freedom.

Research implications

By incorporating pathways of aging, this study broadened the knowledge base of the diversity and heterogeneity of old migrants particularly with CALD backgrounds. In addition, exploring the current standard of living using a life course perspective highlighted the time-dependent nature of the quality of life.

The findings of this study may contribute to future research on the quality of life of old migrants. The concept of pathway of aging could be further elaborated. This study used this concept to unpack the migration experience by exploring the quality of life of different cohorts in later years. However, the concept of pathway of aging in migration could encompass more diverse factors and experiences. For example, the pathway of aging in migration may be associated with duration of stay. This study found that length of residence was significantly different by pathway of aging, with the aged with a migrant background on recording the longest residence in Australia. Migrants’ duration of stay and its interaction with other variables could be further considered when operationalizing the concept of pathway of aging in migration.

The life course approach in migration could also consider the timing of migration which, in turn, could include various micro and macro variables such as age of migration, historical period and the social conditions under which the migration trajectory progressed (Rojo-Pérez and Fernández-Mayoralas, 2021). At the micro level, this study found that the age of migration played a role in shaping the quality of life at old age in combination with pathway of aging. At the macro level, timing factors such as economic and political conditions of the origin country and the policy contexts of the destination country could also affect migrants’ life opportunities and disadvantages (De Oca et al., 2011). This study noted differences in quality of life through the timing of migration. However, it was hypothesized that the policy contexts of two countries such as different developmental stages, migration policies and pension systems would affect individuals’ decision-making to migrate and their subsequent life course (Oris et al., 2021). A rigorous examination of the role of temporal factors to the quality of life at the micro and macro levels would enable a holistic approach to the study of migrants’ lifelong experiences.

Policy implications

The policy implications of the findings of this study could be summarized as follows: First, the lack of financial resources was an issue among all of the participants regardless of their pathways of aging. This is consistent with the financial disadvantage of migrants, particularly of those from CALD backgrounds (McLachlan et al., 2013; Federation of Ethnic Communities’ Councils of Australia, 2015). The lack of capacity to meet financial needs could have ramifications on other aspects of quality of life such as independence and psychological well-being. The literature suggests relatively faster progress in terms of functional loss and cognitive independence among people from CALD backgrounds than those without a migration background (Evandrou et al., 2016).

Second, the relatively low level of quality of life among the retirement migrants and family migrants may derive from institutional exclusion (Department of Social Services, 2021). As discussed previously, these two cohorts were less likely to be eligible for government support such as the age pension and other social services.

Lastly, this study identified sub-dimensions of quality of life particularly meaningful to specific groups, suggesting that different pathways of aging imply the need for developing different support programs and services.

Footnotes

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by Kyungnam University Foundation Grant, 2020.

Declaration of conflicting interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This work was supported by Kyungnam University Foundation Grant, 2020.

ORCID iD

Yong Moon Jung

Note

References

Altman

(2015) Age, period, and cohort effects. In: Bean

Brown

(eds) Encyclopedia of Migration. Dordrecht: Springer, pp. 1–4.

Andrews

McKennell

(1980) Measures of self-reported well-being: their affective, cognitive, and other components. Social Indicators Research 8(2): 127–155.

Australian Bureau of Statistics (2022) ABS TableBuilder. Available at: https://www.abs.gov.au/websitedbs/censushome.nsf/home/tablebuilder

Australian Council of Social Service (2020). Poverty in Australia 2020. Available at: https://povertyandinequality.acoss.org.au/poverty/

Baldassar

(2015) Guilty feelings and the guilt trip: Emotions and motivation in migration and transnational caregiving. Emotion, Space and Society 16(2): 81–89.

Benson

O’Reilly

(2009) Migration and the search for a better way of life: a critical exploration of lifestyle migration. The Sociological Review 57(4): 608–625.

Bilotta

Bowling

Nicolini

, et al. (2011) Older people’s quality of life (OPQOL) scores and adverse health outcomes at a one-year follow-up. A prospective cohort study on older outpatients living in the community in Italy. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes 9(72): 1–10.

Blakemore

Boneham

(1994) Age, Race and Ethnicity: A Comparative Approach. Buckingham: Open University Press.

Bong

Gaustadnes

Bergland

, et al. (2021) Community-living older people’s interpretation of the Norwegian version of older people’s quality of life (OPQOL) questionnaire. Health and Social Care in the Community 29(6): 1695–1705.

10.

Borglin

Edberg

A-K

Hallberg

(2005) The experience of quality of life among older people. Journal of Aging Studies 19(2): 201–220.

11.

Bowling

Banister

Sutton

, et al. (2002) A multidimensional model of the quality of life in older age. Aging & Mental Health 6(4): 355–371.

12.

Bowling

Gabriel

Dykes

, et al. (2003) Let’s ask them: a national survey of definitions of quality of life and its enhancement among people aged 65 and over. The International Journal of Aging and Human Development 56(4): 269–306.

13.

Brockmann

(2002) Towards a model of quality of life for older ethnic minority migrants in Germany, Austria and the UK. European Societies 4(3): 285–306.

14.

Casado-Diaz

(2012) Exploring the geographies of lifestyle mobility: current and future fields of enquiry. In: Wilson

(ed) The Routledge Handbook of Tourism Geographies. New York: Routledge, pp. 120–125.

15.

Committee of 50 Year Korean History in Australia (2008) 50 Year History of Koreans in Australia. Seoul: Jin Heung Publications.

16.

De Jong Gierveld

van der Pas

Keating

(2015) Loneliness of older immigrant groups in Canada: Effects of ethnic-cultural background. Journal of Cross-Cultural Gerontology 30(3): 251–268.

17.

de Oca

García

Sáenz

, et al. (2011) The linkage of life course, migration, health, and aging: Health in adults and elderly mexican migrants. Journal of Aging and Health 23(7): 1116–1140.

18.

Department of Education Skills and Employment (2021) Student numbers. Available at: www.internationaleducation.gov.au/research/DataVisualisations/Pages/Student-number.aspx

19.

Department of Home Affairs (2021a) Permanent Migration Program (Skilled & Family) Outcomes Snapshot - Annual Statistics 2011-12 to 2020-21. Available at: www.data.gov.au/data/dataset/permanent-migration-program-skilled-family

20.

Department of Home Affairs (2021b) Retirement visa pathway. Available at: www.immi.homeaffairs.gov.au/visas/permanent-resident/visa-options/retirement-visa-pathway

21.

Department of Home Affairs (2021c) Working holiday maker visa program report. Report, Report no. BR0110, 30 June. Australian Government Department of Home Affairs. Available at: https://www.homeaffairs.gov.au/research-and-stats/files/visitor-visa-june-2021.pdf

22.

Department of Social Services (2021) Social security payments - residence criteria, 30 June. Available at: https://www.dss.gov.au/about-the-department/international/policy/social-security-payments-residence-criteria

23.

Dowd

Bengtson

(1978) Aging in minority populations an examination of the double Jeopardy Hypothesis. Journal of Gerontology33(3): 427–436.

24.

Elder

(1994) Time, human agency, and social change: perspectives on the life course. Social Psychology Quarterly 57(1): 4–15.

25.

Evandrou

Falkingham

Feng

, et al. (2016) Ethnic inequalities in limiting health and self-reported health in later life revisited. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health70(7): 653–662.

26.

Farquhar

(1995) Elderly people’s definitions of quality of life. Social Science & Medicine 41(10): 1439–1446.

27.

Federation of Ethnic Communities’ Councils of Australia (2015) Review of Australian research on older people from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds. Report, March. Australian Government Department of Social Services. Available at: http://fecca.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/Review-of-Australian-Research-on-Older-People-from-Culturally-and-Linguistically-Diverse-Backgrounds-March-20151.pdf

28.

Felce

Perry

(1995) Quality of life: its definition and measurement. Research in Developmental Disabilities 16(1): 51–74.

29.

Fuller-Iglesias

Smith

Antonucci

(2009) Theories of aging from a life-course and life-span perspective: an overview. Annual Review of Gerontology & Geriatrics 29(1): 3–25.

30.

Grewal

Nazroo

Bajekal

, et al. (2004) Influences on quality of life: a qualitative investigation of ethnic differences among older people in england. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 30(4): 737–761.

31.

Hanson

Cooper

Sayer

, et al. (2016) Developmental aspects of a life course approach to healthy ageing. Journal of Physiology 594(8): 2147–2160.

32.

Hareven

(2000) Families, History, and Social Change: Life-Course and Cross-Cultural Perspectives. Boulder: Westview Press.

33.

Hassett

George

(2002) Access to a community aged psychiatry service by elderly from non-English-speaking backgrounds. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry 17(7): 623–628.

34.

Huinink

Feldhaus

(2009) Family research from the life course perspective. International Sociology 24(3): 299–324.

35.

Hutchison

(2018) A life course perspective. In: Hutchison

(ed) Dimensions of Human Behavior: The Changing Life Course. Los Angeles: SAGE, pp. 9–48.

36.

Hutchison

(2019) An update on the relevance of the life course perspective for social work. Families in Society: The Journal of Contemporary Social Services 100(4): 351–366.

37.

Jakobsen

Pedersen

(2016) Poverty Risk Among Older Immigrants in a Scandinavian Welfare State. Discussion Paper, Discussion Paper no. 9944, May. Bonn: Institute for the Study of Labor. Available at: https://repec.iza.org/dp9944.pdf

38.

Jung

(2018) The pursuit of inclusion? Education fever amongst Korean-Australian parents. In: Area Studies and Beyond 22nd Biennial Conference of the Asian Studies Association of Australia (ASAA), Sydney, Australia, 03–05 July 2018, University of Sydney: Asian Studies Association of Australia, p. 77.

39.

Jung

(2020) A Demographic Profile of Korean Australians: Patterns, Trends and Issues. Sydney: Hoju Research Centre.

40.

Kerce

(1992) Quality of Life: Meaning, Measurement, and Models. Report, Report no. NPRDC-TN-92-15, May. San Diego: Navy Personnel Research and Development Center. Available at: https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA250813.pdf

41.

King

(2014) Ageing and migration. In: Anderson

Keith

(eds) Migration: The COMPAS Anthology. Oxford: COMPAS, pp. 108–202.

42.

Koehn

Kobayashi

(2011) Age and ethnicity. In: Sargeant

(ed) Age Discrimination and Diversity: Multiple Discrimination from an Age Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 132–159.

43.

Kojima

Iliffe

Morris

, et al. (2016) Frailty predicts trajectories of quality of life over time among British community-dwelling older people. Quality of Life Research 25(7): 1743–1750.

44.

Lawton

(1991) A multidimensional view of quality of life in frail elders. In: Birren

Lubben

Rowe

, et al. (eds) The Concept and Measurement of Quality of life in the Frail Elderly. San Diego: Elservier Academic Press, pp. 3–27.

45.

Lieber

Chin

Nihira

, et al. (2001) Holding on and letting go: identity and acculturation among Chinese immigrants. Journal of Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology 7(3): 247–261.

46.

Lin

Bryant

Boldero

, et al. (2016) Psychological well-being of older Chinese immigrants living in Australia: a comparison with older Caucasians. International Psychogeriatrics 28(1): 1671–1679.

47.

Liversage

Jakobsen

(2016) Unskilled, foreign, and old: a life course perspective on immigrant poverty. GeroPsych: The Journal of Gerontopsychology and Geriatric Psychiatry 29(2): 93–103.

48.

Martin

Rodríguez-Pinzón

Brown

(2015) The human rights of older persons in the european institutions: law and policy. In: Martin

Rodríguez-Pinzón

Brown

(eds) Human Rights of Older People Universal and Regional Legal Perspectives. Dordrecht: Springer, pp. 125–214.

49.

McLachlan

Gilfillan

Gordon

, et al. (2013) Deep and Persistent Disadvantage in Australia. Staff Working Paper. Canberra: Australian Government Productivity Commission. Available at: https://www.pc.gov.au/research/supporting/deep-persistent-disadvantage/deep-persistent-disadvantage.pdf

50.

Mukherjee

Diwan

(2016) Late life immigration and quality of life among Asian Indian older adults. Journal of Cross-Cultural Gerontology 31(3): 237–253.

51.

Netuveli

Blane

(2008) Quality of life in older ages. British Medical Bulletin 85(1): 113–126.

52.

O’Neil

Tienda

(2015) Age at immigration and the incomes of older Immigrants, 1994–2010. The Journals of Gerontology 70(2): 291–302.

53.

Oris

Baeriswyl

Ihle

(2021) The life course construction of inequalities in health and wealth in old age. In: Rojo-Pérez

Fernández-Mayoralas

(eds) Handbook of Active Ageing and Quality of Life: From Concepts to Applications. Cham: Springer, pp. 97–109.

54.

Radermacher

Feldman

(2015) ‘Health is their heart, their legs, their back’: understanding ageing well in ethnically diverse older men in rural Australia. Ageing & Society 35(5): 1011–1031.

55.

Repetti

Phillipson

Calasanti

(2018) Retirement migration in Europe: a choice for a better life? Sociological Research Online 23(4): 780–794.

56.

Rojo-Pérez

Fernández-Mayoralas

(2021) Handbook of Active Ageing and Quality of Life: From Concepts to Applications. Cham: Springer.

57.

Rowland

(1991) Ageing in Australia. Melbourne: Longman Cheshire.

58.

Schalock

(2000) Three decades of quality of life. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities 15(2): 116–127.

59.

Stypińska

Gordo

(2018) Gender, age and migration: an intersectional approach to inequalities in the labour market. European Journal of Ageing 15(1): 23–33.

60.

Taylor

Taylor-Henley

Doan

(2005) Older immigrants: language competencies and mental health. Canadian Journal of Community Mental Health 24(2): 23–34.

61.

Torres

(2006) Elderly immigrants in Sweden: ‘otherness’ under construction. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 32(8): 1341–1358.

62.

Torres

(2015) Expanding the gerontological imagination on ethnicity: conceptual and theoretical perspectives. Ageing & Society 35(5): 935–960.

63.

Treas

(2008) Transnational older adults and their families. Farmily Relations 57(4): 468–478.

64.

Walker

Mollenkopf

(2007) International and multi-disciplinary perspectives on quality of life in old age: conceptual issues. In: Mollenkopf

Walker

(eds) Quality of Life in Old Age. Dordrecht: Springer, pp. 3–13.

65.

Warburton

Bartlett

Rao

(2009) Ageing and cultural diversity: policy and practice issues. Australian Social Work 62(2): 168–185.

66.

Wingens

de Valk

Windzio

, et al. (2011) The sociological life course approach and research on migration and integration. In: Wingens

Windzio

de Valk

, et al. (eds) A Life-Course Perspective on Migration and Integration. New York: Springer, pp. 1–26.

67.

(2000) Chinese Older People: A Need for Social Inclusion in Two Communities. Bristol: The Policy Press.

68.

Zubair

Norris

(2015) Perspectives on ageing, later life and ethnicity: ageing research in ethnic minority contexts. Ageing & Society 35(5): 897–916.