The New Destination Disadvantage: Disparities in Hispanic Health Insurance Coverage Rates in Metropolitan and Nonmetropolitan New and Established Destinations

Hispanics have the lowest health insurance rates of any racial or ethnic group, but rates vary significantly across the United States. The unprecedented growth of the Hispanic population since 1990 in rural areas with previously small or nonexistent Hispanic populations raises questions about disparities in access to health insurance coverage. Identifying spatial disparities in Hispanic health insurance rates can illuminate the specific contexts within which Hispanics are least likely to have health care access and inform policy approaches for increasing coverage in different spatial contexts. Using county‐level data from the 2009–13 American Community Survey, I find that early new destinations (i.e., those that experienced rapid Hispanic population growth during the 1990s) have the lowest Hispanic adult health insurance coverage rates, with little variation by metropolitan status. Conversely, among the most recent new destinations that experienced significant Hispanic population growth during the first decade of the 2000s, metropolitan counties have Hispanic health insurance rates that are similar to established destinations, but rural counties have Hispanic health insurance rates that are significantly lower than those in established destinations. Findings demonstrate that the new destination disadvantage is driven entirely by higher concentrations of immigrant noncitizen Hispanics in these counties, but labor market conditions were salient drivers of the spatially uneven distribution of foreign‐born noncitizen Hispanics to new destinations, particularly in rural areas.     

Moving Up in Rural America: Economic Attainment of Nonmetro Latino Immigrants

Rapid Hispanic population growth represents a pronounced demographic transformation in many nonmetropolitan counties, particularly since 1990. Its considerable public policy implications stem largely from high proportions of new foreign‐born residents. Despite the pressing need for information on new immigrants in nonmetro counties and a bourgeoning scholarship on new rural destinations, few quantitative analyses have measured systematically the social and economic well‐being of Latino immigrants. This study analyzes the importance of place for economic well‐being, an important public policy issue related to rural Hispanic population growth. We consider four measures of economic mobility: full‐time, year‐round employment; home ownership; poverty status; and income exceeding the median national income. We conduct this analysis for 2000 and 2006–2007 to capture two salient periods of nonmetro Hispanic population growth, using a typology that distinguishes among nonmetropolitan areas by the categories of “traditional” immigrant destinations concentrated in the Southwest and Northwest, “new” immigrant destinations to capture recent and rapid Hispanic population growth in the Midwest and Southeast, and “all other” rural destinations as a reference category representing more typical nonmetro population trends. We also compare our results to those for metropolitan destinations. We find that place type matters little for stable employment but more so for wealth accumulation and income security and mobility. Compared with urban Latino immigrants, rural Latino immigrants exhibit higher rates of homeownership as well as greater likelihoods of falling into poverty and lower likelihoods of earning a measure of U.S. median income. From 2000 to 2006–2007, rural‐urban differences deteriorated slightly in favor of urban areas. We conclude by discussing implications of these findings and those of addressing rural immigrant economic well‐being more generally.     

Sundown Town to “Little Mexico”: Old‐timers and Newcomers in an American Small Town*

Abstract For more than a century, communities across the United States legally employed strategies to create and maintain racial divides. One particularly widespread and effective practice was that of “sundown towns,” which signaled to African Americans and others that they were not welcome within the city limits after dark. Though nearly 1,000 small towns, larger communities, and suburbs across the country may have engaged in these practices, until recently there has been little scholarship on the topic. Drawing from qualitative and quantitative sources, this article presents a case study of a midwestern rural community with a sundown history. Since 1990 large numbers of Mexican migrants have arrived there to work at the local meat‐processing plant, earning the town the nickname “Little Mexico.” The study identifies a substantial decline in Hispanic‐white residential segregation in the community between 1990 and 2000. We consider possible explanations for the increased spatial integration of Latino and white residents, including local housing characteristics and the weak enforcement of preexisting housing policies. We also describe the racialized history of this former sundown town and whether, paradoxically, its history of excluding nonwhites may have played a role in the spatial configurations of Latinos and non‐Hispanic whites in 2000. Scholars investigating the contemporary processes of Latino population growth in “new” destinations, both in metropolitan and nonmetropolitan areas, may want to explore the importance of sociohistorical considerations, particularly localities' racialized historical contexts before the arrival of Mexican and other Latino immigrants.     

Social Disorganization in New Latino Destinations?*

Abstract Rural industrial restructuring, including growth in meat processing and other nondurable manufacturing, has generated employment opportunities that have attracted Latino in‐migrants to new nonmetropolitan destinations. Long‐time residents, however, are not always receptive. While some observers point to economic and social benefits of a Latino influx, others believe that the newcomers drain local resources, raise poverty and crime rates, and diminish the quality of life in their communities. We evaluate the influence of rapid population growth on emerging Latino destinations—new boomtowns. We use data from the U.S. census and other sources to measure changes in local economic circumstances and quality of life in nonmetropolitan boom counties experiencing high rates of Latino growth between 1990 and 2000. Our findings indicate that large influxes of Latinos had surprisingly few negative economic consequences for local populations. Furthermore, the quality of life in new destinations did not deteriorate in comparison to other nonmetropolitan counties, especially with regard to crime. Mounting pressure to educate students with limited English proficiency is nevertheless apparent. Our conclusion highlights relevant national policy debates and underscores the need for commitment on the part of firms responsible for Latino growth.     

Immigrant Gateways and Hispanic Migration to New Destinations1

Our understanding of the underlying demographic components of population change in new Hispanic destinations is limited. In this paper, we (1) compare Hispanic migration patterns in traditional settlement areas with new growth in emerging Hispanic destinations; (2) examine the role of immigration vis‐à‐vis domestic migration in spurring Hispanic population redistribution; and (3) document patterns of migrant selectivity, distinguishing between in‐migrants and non‐migrant Hispanics at both the origin and destination. We use several recent datasets, including the 1990 and 2000 Public Use Microdata Samples (which include new regional geocodes), and the 2005 and 2006 files of the American Community Survey. Our results document the widespread dispersion of the Hispanic population over the 1990–2006 period from established Hispanic gateways into new Hispanic areas and other parts of the country. Nearly one‐half of Hispanic net migration in new destinations comes from domestic gains. In contrast, both established and other Hispanic areas depend entirely on immigration, with each losing domestic migrants to high growth areas. Migrant flows also are highly differentiated by education, citizenship, and nativity. To fully understand the spatial diffusion of Hispanics requires a new appreciation of the complex interplay among immigration, internal domestic migration, and fertility.     

New Faces in Rural Places: Patterns and Sources of Nonmetropolitan Ethnoracial Diversity since 1990

Much of the research on ethnoracial diversity in nonmetropolitan America consists of case studies describing how the arrival of Hispanics has transformed a particular community. To complement this work, we examine the dimensions and sources of diversity for a sample of 10,000 nonmetro places. We identify two dimensions of diversity—magnitude and structure—and draw hypotheses about their changes and correlates from the spatial assimilation and locational persistence perspectives and relevant scholarship. Our analysis of 1990–2010 decennial census and American Community Survey data documents a pervasive upward trend in diversity magnitude. However, places tend to follow parallel rather than identical diversity trajectories and to retain the same type of racial‐ethnic structure in 2010 that they exhibited 20 years earlier. Fixed effects regression models show that ethnoracial diversity gains are most likely in nonmetro communities with plentiful economic opportunities; fewer old residents; and growing total, foreign‐born, and correctional populations. These correlates hold for micropolitan and rural places and across census regions. Though our results largely conform to locational persistence logic, we find that spatial assimilation still has some merit, underscoring the importance of incorporating multiple theoretical models into a segmented change approach to nonmetropolitan diversity.     

Divergent Pathways to Assimilation? Local Marriage Markets and Intermarriage Among U.S. Hispanics

The growing diversity of the U.S. population raises questions about integration among America's fastest growing minority population—Hispanics. The canonical view is that intermarriage with the native‐born White population represents a pathway to assimilation that varies over geographic space in response to uneven marital opportunities. Using data on past‐year marriage from the 2009–2014 American Community Survey, the authors demonstrate high rates of intermarriage among Hispanics. The analyses identify whether Hispanics marry coethnics, non‐co‐ethnic Hispanics, non‐Hispanic Whites, non‐Hispanic Blacks, or other minorities. The authors highlight variation by race, nativity, and socioeconomic status and reveal that Hispanics living in new immigrant destinations are more likely to intermarry than those living in traditional Hispanic gateways. Indeed, the higher out‐marriage in new destinations disappears when the demographic context of reception is taken into account. The analysis underscores that patterns of marital assimilation among Hispanics are neither monolithic nor expressed uniformly across geographic space.     

Migration of Retirement‐Age Blacks to Nonmetropolitan Areas in the 1990s

Older blacks migrated to nonmetropolitan (nonmetro) communities in the 1990s to a degree not true of the past. Some of the nonmetro counties that attracted them are well‐known retirement areas also favored by other retirees, mostly whites. Two‐thirds of black retirement counties, however, are areas in the Old South that are not attracting other retirees at a substantial rate, if at all. Although the data indicate significant rates of retirement‐age blacks migrating to 85 nonmetro counties, most migration by older blacks is to metro destinations.     

The Changing Spatial Concentration of America's Rural Poor Population*

Abstract This paper documents changing patterns of concentrated poverty in nonmetro areas. Data from the Decennial U.S. Census Summary Files show that poverty rates—both overall and for children—declined more rapidly in nonmetro than metro counties in the 1990s. The 1990s also brought large reductions in the number of high‐poverty nonmetro counties and declines in the share of rural people, including rural poor people, who were living in them. This suggests that America's rural pockets of poverty may be “drying up” and that spatial inequality in nonmetro America declined over the 1990s, at least at the county level. On a less optimistic note, concentrated poverty among rural minorities remains exceptionally high. Roughly one‐half of all rural blacks and one‐third of rural Hispanics live in poor counties. Poor minorities are even more highly concentrated in poor areas. Rural children—especially rural minority children—have poverty rates well above national and nonmetro rates, the concentration of rural minority children is often extreme (i.e., over 80% lived in high‐poverty counties), and the number of nonmetro counties with high levels of persistent child poverty remains high (over 600 counties). Rural poor children may be more disadvantaged than ever, especially if measured by their lack of access to opportunities and divergence with children living elsewhere. Patterns of poverty among rural children—who often grow up to be poor adults— suggest that recent declines in concentrated rural poverty may be short‐lived.     

Emerging Rural Settlement Patterns and the Geographic Redistribution of America's New Immigrants*

Abstract This paper analyzes geographic patterns of population concentration and deconcentration among the foreign‐born population during the 1990–2000 period. A goal is to examine whether the foreign‐born population, including recent arrivals, are dispersing geographically from metro gateway cities into rural and other less densely populated parts of the country. The paper also evaluates the so‐called balkanization hypothesis, which is that immigration flows run counter‐cyclical to the redistribution trends of the native‐born population, while reinforcing spatial isolation and immigrant segregation. Data for U.S. counties or county equivalents come from the 1990 and 2000 U.S. Census (Summary Files 1, 3 and 4). Our results suggest that America's immigrant population is dispersing spatially. Immigrants are less concentrated today than in the past and they are less segregated from other population groups, including their own racial group and whites. However, changes over the past decade have been modest. The immigrant population, even in 2000, remained considerably more concentrated than the native‐born population. The empirical results provide little evidence of geographic balkanization.     

Recent Immigrant Settlement in the Nonmetropolitan United States: Evidence from Internal Census Data*

Abstract In the 1990s, studies have documented widespread growth of immigrants in U.S. communities not known as common destinations in the past. This trend has fueled population growth in some nonmetropolitan areas and offset population decline in other areas. In this paper, we examine the implications of recent foreign born in-migration for rural America. Our focus is on a collection of 59 nonmetropolitan counties where growth in foreign born stock offset declines in U.S. native population and resulted in increased local population by 2000. To understand these nonmetropolitan offset counties, we use confidential Census Bureau data that offer us the detailed geography and larger sample size needed to closely examine spatial shifts in the foreign born population, especially those recently arrived. Our findings illustrate dramatic compositional shifts in the populations of these areas, and suggest new demographic complexity in nonmetropolitan areas in the 21^st century.     

The Impact of Migration on Poverty Concentrations in the United States, 1995–2000

Poverty is frequently conceptualized as an attribute of either people or places. Yet residential movement of poor people can redistribute poverty across places, affecting and reshaping the spatial concentration of economic disadvantage. In this article, we utilize 1995 to 2000 county‐to‐county migration data from the 2000 United States decennial census to explore how differential migration rates of the poor and nonpoor affect local incidence of poverty, and how migration reconfigures poverty rates across metropolitan, micropolitan, and noncore counties. We further examine the impact of differential migration rates on African American and Latino poverty rates, two groups that have experienced higher than average poverty rates and have a sizable presence in rural areas. Our analysis indicates that during the 1990s the poor moved at rates equal to or greater than the nonpoor, and that, especially in micropolitan counties, this movement tended to deepen existing poverty concentrations. Both African American and Latino migration patterns tended to reinforce existing poverty concentrations, a result similar to that of the population as a whole, although the migration patterns of both groups more severely exacerbated poverty in high‐poverty noncore counties.     

Consequences of Population Change for Retail/Wholesale Sector Employment in the Nonmetropolitan Great Plains: 1950–19961

Abstract A rural economic restructuring perspective and central place theory are used to assess the impact of population change on retail/wholesale sector employment for the 438 nonmetropolitan counties of the Great Plains region from 1950 to 1990. Findings indicate that county level population declined for every decade except the 1970 turnaround decade, and the greatest losses were in completely rural nonadjacent counties. The civilian labor force declined for all but the 1970 decade, when there was a substantial increase due to increased nonmetro manufacturing and the baby boom cohorts reaching labor force age. Retail/wholesale labor force increased in every decade except the 1980s. However, regression analysis found a positive and highly significant relationship between population change and retail/wholesale employment change. For this region, population decline is a major contributor to decline in the retail/wholesale employment sector at the county level. Preliminary data from the 1990–1996 period indicate a population and labor force rebound from the 1980s. However, as in the 1980s, gains are most likely concentrated in a small number of mainly urban nonadjacent counties.     

Residence and Income Inequality: Effects on Mortality Among U.S. Counties

Abstract Despite lower average incomes, greater percentages living in poverty, lower levels of health insurance, less preventive health care, and poorer health status, nonmetropolitan residents have been found to experience lower mortality than their metropolitan counterparts. Several pathways through which residence influences mortality have been proposed. The objective of this study is to examine the effects of income inequality on residential differentials in mortality. Using data from the Compressed Mortality File for counties in the coterminous United States for 1990, we estimate weighted least squares models of total mortality for 3,067 counties, and separately for metropolitan and nonmetropolitan counties. Mortality is lower in nonmetropolitan counties than in metropolitan counties, once rates are standardized for age, sex, and race. Moreover, income inequality exerts stronger effects in nonmetro counties, an effect that persists when per capita income, median household size, and racial composition are controlled. The percentage of the population that is black exerts an independent effect on mortality in both metro and non‐metro counties.     

Nonmetropolitan Residential Segregation Revisited

Abstract Nonmetropolitan (nonmetro) residential segregation in 1990 and change in the preceding decade have received insufficient attention. A set of empirical hypotheses are derived and assessed using nonmetro and metropolitan (metro) counties in Texas. Places in nonmetro counties were more segregated than places in metro counties in 1990 as in 1980. Substantial declines in segregation occurred in both nonmetro and metro places but were largest in growing places in nonmetro counties. An analysis controlling for other determinants of segregation supports the premise that population change was a major determinant of 1980–1990 change in segregation. Implications for nonmetro areas in the 1990s are discussed.     

The Spatial Concentration of America's Rural Poor Population: A Postrecession Update

This article examines changes in concentrated poverty in the rural United States between 2000 and 2012. Using data from the decennial census and American Community Survey, we address three main objectives. First, we document changes in the number and share of counties with poverty rates above 20, 30, and 40 percent, stratifying our sample by metropolitan status. Second, we use exploratory spatial methods to identify geographic patterns in county‐level poverty dynamics between 2000 and 2012. Third, we estimate the share of the population living in high‐poverty counties, and track changes over time and by race and poverty status. Overall, we find a substantial increase in concentrated poverty since 2000. Increases in both the number of high‐poverty counties and the share of the population living in these counties were widespread, though spatially and temporally uneven in some cases. We also observe convergence in concentrated poverty between rural and micropolitan areas, and between non‐Hispanic white and Hispanic populations. Overall, we observe a reversal of the declines in concentrated poverty that occurred in the 1990s, and find that in many cases this trend began prior to the Great Recession.     

Rural Depopulation: Growth and Decline Processes over the Past Century

This article highlights the rise and geographic spread of depopulation in rural America over the past century. “Depopulation” refers to chronic population losses that prevent counties from returning to an earlier period of peak population size. In this article, we identify 746 depopulating counties—mostly nonmetropolitan—representing 24 percent of all U.S. counties. More than 46 percent of remote rural counties are depopulating compared to 24 percent of the adjacent nonmetropolitan counties and just 6 percent of metropolitan counties. Rural county populations often peaked in size during the 1940s and 1950s, especially in the agricultural heartland. Depopulation today reflects a complex interplay of chronic net out‐migration and natural decrease that is rooted in the past. Depopulation not only is a direct result of persistent out‐migration but also reflects large second‐order effects expressed in declining fertility and rising mortality (usually associated with population aging). Depopulation has become a signature demographic phenomenon in broad regions of rural America.     

Impacts of Return Migration on Rural U.S. Communities

Rural population loss is caused as much by low in‐migration as by high out‐migration, and for geographically disadvantaged nonmetropolitan counties in the United States, return migration plays a crucial role. This research captures impacts of return migrants on population, economy, and society in declining rural U.S. communities using a qualitative, multisited approach. Interviews conducted at high school reunions with rural returnees in their late 20s to late 40s show that the vast majority of returnees brought spouses and children back with them, increasing the short‐term and long‐term population. They also brought back much needed human capital, including education, job skills, and life experiences, and filled professional positions that are often hard to fill in rural communities. Entrepreneurial activities and self‐employment of many return migrants favorably affected rural economies by improving the employment base and expanding available services. Interviews show how decisions to move back were grounded in social relations that promoted civic engagement. While they mainly moved back for their children and their families, return migrants valued involvement in familiar social networks and the opportunities to make a difference in their rural hometowns.     

Changing Economic Opportunities,Family Structure,and Poverty in Rural Areas1

Abstract Instrustrial restructuring in the 1980s ushered in a new pattern of growing economic diversity over geographic space. The objective of this study is to examine the extent and etiology of changing spatial inequality between and within metropolitan (metro) and nonmetropolitan (nonmetro) areas, as measured by increasing or decreasing county poverty rates. Results based on data from the 1980 and 1990 census summary tape files suggest several conclusions. First, poverty rates increased more rapidly in nonmetro than metro counties during the 1980s; historical patterns of metro-nonmetro economic convergence slowed over the past decade. Second, poverty rates tended to decline in nonmetro counties with traditionally high rates of poverty, thus providing counter-evidence to arguments suggesting that the gap between traditionally poor and nonpoor nonmetro counties has widened. Third, spatial differences in poverty rates and relative increases in county poverty rates over the 1980s were most strongly associated with women's employment and headship status. The results raise questions about the extent to which traditional rural economic development strategies address the potentially deleterious economic effects of rising percentages of poor female-headed families.     

Race,Ethnicity, and Underemployment in Nonmetropolitan America: A 30‐Year Profile*

Abstract Historically, rural racial and ethnic minorities have been among the most economically disadvantaged groups in the United States. Key to understanding economic deprivation is employment hardship, trends in which serve as a benchmark for progress toward racial and ethnic equality. We conceptualize employment hardship as underemployment, which goes beyond unemployment to include discouraged workers, involuntary part‐time workers, and the working poor. Analyzing data from the March Current Population Surveys of 1968 through 1998, we find that (1) there are large and persistent racial and ethnic inequalities in underemployment prevalence; (2) these disadvantages are explained only partially by other predictors of underemployment; (3) nonmetropolitan (nonmetro) minorities are more likely than either all metropolitan (metro) or central‐city minorities to be underemployed; (4) black‐white inequality has held steady overall, though it has declined markedly in nonmetro areas; and (5) Hispanic‐white inequality has increased; this trend, however, is restricted to metro areas, central cities in particular.