Since the mid 1990s, the immigration system in Australia shifted from permanent settlement to temporary to permanent pathways. Official policy often calls this a win-win and merit-based mechanism. However, it actually created a wide state of "permanent temporariness" for international students. The central puzzle of this paper is: why are the migration outcomes so different? Some students successfully get their Permanent Residency (PR), while other students are trapped in a long term visa limbo.
Official policy discourses usually blame these different outcomes on individual failure or choices. Also, existing literature mostly focuses on the negative consequences of being temporary. This paper aims to explain these outcomes by looking at the underlying governance mechanisms. To answer this question, the study uses "Temporal Governance" (Time Theory) as the main theoretical framework. This shifts the research focus from individual abilities to system structures. It explores how the state controls time as an important filtering and disciplinary mechanism. For example, the state uses unpredictable policy windows, long waiting periods, and fragmented visa stages. Through this time perspective, the paper argues that different migration results are not just because of individual hard work. Instead, the outcomes are structurally decided by how different students deal with these time traps. Success often depends on a student's ability to endure, plan, or "buy" time in an unstable system.
For methodology, this research is based on critical realism. It uses a qualitative and comparative case study of different international students, such as students from China, India, and European countries. The study covers the period before and after the pandemic between 2018 and 2026. By combining policy analysis with 30 to 50 semi structured student interviews and 10 to 15 interviews with key stakeholders, the study investigates how individual experiences of waiting show the time mechanisms that decide migration success or failure.
Ultimately, this research redefines the temporary-to-permanent migration as a conditional process with multiple stages. It shows that the Australian immigration system does not simply "select" migrants based on their skills. Instead, it actively creates structural inequalities and different outcomes through its time governance. Therefore, the system actually institutionalises the 'lives in limbo' that it promises to solve.
