Denmark’s 2002 family reunification policy required foreign spouses to be 24+ and have stronger ties to Denmark than elsewhere. This reshaped union formation and fertility among immigrants, further increasing educational attainment. The reforms, as Bojana Cuzulan, Marie Louise Schultz-Nielsen and Peter Fallesen observe, reveal the consequences of constraining marriage market access in populations that typically marry young.
The context
At the turn of the 20th century, Denmark was more of a sending than a receiving country. From around 1960 and onwards, however, migration flows to and from Denmark became increasingly net-positive. From 1974 to 2000, Denmark received increasing numbers of migrants from outside the European Union and Nordic countries, and while the native Danish population grew by only 6%, the population with an immigration background increased very rapidly (Cuzulan et al. 2025). By 2024, its share had reached 16% (Figure 1). With lower employment levels than native Danes, these migrants placed strain on the finances of the Danish welfare system (Schultz-Nielsen 2001).
The main driver of the increasing immigrant population in Denmark from countries outside the European Union and the Nordics was chain-migration through ethnic intramarriage and family reunification (together with asylum and refugee resettlement). As of 2002, the largest immigrant and descendant groups originated from Turkey, Iraq, Lebanon, former Yugoslavia, Pakistan, Somalia, and Iran – all countries of origin associated with a high degree of ethnic intramarriage (Qvist and Qvist 2025). At that time, the main marriage market for 1.5- (arriving before age 15) and second-generation immigrants was located outside Denmark; 70-80% found spouses in their parents’ countries of origin.
The reforms
Following concerns that the increasing immigration of individuals with lower average employment rates than native Danes was threatening the financial sustainability of the generous Danish welfare state model (Haagen Pedersen 2002), Denmark tightened its immigration and family reunification policies from the 1990s onwards (Bauer et al. 2004). This culminated with a set of reforms in the early 2000s. In 2000, an attachment requirement was introduced, which meant that family reunification with a foreign spouse could only take place if the couple’s combined attachment to Denmark was as strong as to any other country. The requirement initially applied to foreign citizens who were neither refugees in need of protection nor migrant workers from the EU. From July 2002, the attachment requirement also applied to Danish citizens and was tightened so that the combined attachment to Denmark had to be greater than to any other country.
At the same time, in July 2002, the 24-year rule was introduced, tightening regulations around family reunification, so that both the Danish resident and the foreign spouse had to be at least 24 years old for family reunification to take place. As a consequence, access to what had previously been the main marriage market for immigrants and descendants became much more limited. As seen from Figure 2 where the two vertical lines indicate reform years, marriage rates among immigrants and descendants declined by around 60% following the reforms, with the main reaction occurring after the reforms of 2002. With a lag of around one year, first birth rates also declined.
The consequences
Focusing specifically on immigrant women, who tend to be the younger spouse within a marriage and thus were more directly affected by the age cutoff of the 24-year rule, it is possible to trace the long-term life course consequences of this shock to their marriage market. Focusing on life course outcomes among birth cohorts who spent the first six years of their adulthood under the 24-year rule, Figure 3 shows the changes in the probability of being married, living in non-marital cohabitation, and being a mother at ages 25 and 30, expressed as changes in percentage points.
Exposure to the reform for cohorts who turned 18 after 1 July 2002, led to an 18 percentage-point decrease in the probability of being married at age 25 (30% relative decrease). The probability remained 6 percentage points lower at age 30 (9% decrease), indicating a long-term change to marriage timing. Further, those who married were more likely than earlier cohorts to marry migrants already present in Denmark (Cuzulan et al. 2025). Figure 3 also shows that following the 2002 reform, the probability for young women of cohabiting with a non-marital partner at age 25 was 7 percentage points higher (70% increase), but there was no difference at age 30.
Further, the probability of a woman having children was 9 percentage points lower at age 25 (17% decrease), while the effect was smaller at age 30 where the probability of having children was 4 percentage points lower (5% decrease). Last, average years of schooling among the immigrant women affected by the reform increased by close to half a year at age 30 (4% increase), indicating that limiting chain migration through marriage among women who tended to marry young for cultural reasons led to increased human capital accumulation. This applies after considering other differences such as personal characteristics and general time trends.
Conclusion
Restricting access to external marriage markets for 1.5- and second-generation immigrant women significantly reshaped their life trajectories. By delaying marriage and fertility, the reform promoted higher educational attainment, which may improve economic integration in the long run. Cultural adaptation to the family patterns of Danish natives was gradual, as cohabitation increased but did not entirely replace marriage. Marriage policies can have far-reaching demographic and socioeconomic effects. Policymakers should consider these consequences when designing immigration and integration policies, balancing cultural norms with broader social and economic objectives.
References
Bauer, T., Larsen, C., & Matthiessen, P. C. (2004). Immigration policy and Danish and German immigration. In Zimmermann, K. F., Tranæs, T. (Eds.), Migrants, work, and the welfare state (pp. 31–73). Odense, DK: University Press of Southern Denmark
Cuzulan, B., Schultz-Nielsen, M. L., & Fallesen, P. (2025). The Demographic and Socioeconomic Consequences of Restricting Access to Marriage for Young Immigrant Women in Denmark. Demography, 62(1), 87–112. https://doi.org/10.1215/00703370-11791081
Haagen Pedersen, L. (2002). Befolkningsudvikling, integration og økonomisk politik [Population development, intergration, and economic policy]. Copenhagen, DK: Danish Rational Economic Agents Model, DREAM.
Qvist, H.-P. Y., & Qvist, J. Y. (2025). Interethnic Union Formation Among 1.5- and Second-Generation Immigrants: The Role of Cultural Proximity. International Migration Review, 59(1), 468–501. https://doi.org/10.1177/01979183231177969
Schultz-Nielsen, M. L. (2001). The integration of non-Western immigrants in a Scandinavian labour market: the Danish experience. Copenhagen, DK: Rockwool Foundation Research Unit.