National estimates of racial segregation in rural and small-town America

The objective of this paper is to provide, for the first time, comparative estimates of racial residential segregation of blacks, Hispanics, and Native Americans in nonmetropolitan and metropolitan places in 1990 and 2000. Analyses are based on block data from the 1990 and 2000 U.S. decennial censuses. The results reveal a singularly important and perhaps surprising central conclusion: levels and trends in recent patterns of racial segregation in America's small towns are remarkably similar to patterns observed in larger metropolitan cities. Like their big-city counterparts, nonmetropolitan blacks are America's most highly segregated racial minority--roughly 30% to 40% higher than the indices observed for Hispanics and Native Americans. Finally, baseline ecological models of spatial patterns of rural segregation reveal estimates that largely support the conclusions reached in previous metropolitan studies. Racial residential segregation in rural places increases with growing minority percentage shares and is typically lower in "new" places (as measured by growth in the housing stock), while racially selective annexation and the implied "racial threat" at the periphery exacerbate racial segregation in rural places. Our study reinforces the need to broaden the spatial scale of segregation beyond its traditional focus on metropolitan cities or suburban places, especially as America's population shifts down the urban hierarchy into exurban places and small towns.     

Immigrant residential segregation in U.S. metropolitan areas, 1990–2000

This paper examines the extent of spatial assimilation among immigrants of different racial and ethnic origins. We use restricted data from the 1990 and 2000 censuses to calculate the levels of dissimilarity by race and Hispanic origin, nativity, and year of entry, and then run multivariate models to examine these relationships. The findings provide broad support for spatial assimilation theory. Foreign-born Hispanics, Asians, and blacks are more segregated from native-born non-Hispanic whites than are the U.S.-born of these groups. The patterns for Hispanics and Asians can be explained by the average characteristics of the foreign-born that are generally associated with higher levels of segregation, such as lower levels of income, English language ability, and home ownership. We also find that immigrants who have been in the United States for longer periods are generally less segregated than new arrivals, and once again, much of this difference can be attributed to the characteristics of immigrants. However, patterns also vary across groups. Levels of segregation are much higher for black immigrants than for Asian, Hispanic, and white immigrants. In addition, because black immigrants are, on average, of higher socioeconomic status than native-born blacks, such characteristics do not help explain their very high levels of segregation.     

Hypersegregation in the twenty-first century

We used metropolitan-level data from the 2000 U.S. census to analyze the hypersegregation of four groups from whites: blacks, Hispanics, Asians, and Native Americans. While blacks were hypersegregated in 29 metropolitan areas and Hispanics were hypersegregated in 2, Asians and Native Americans were not hypersegregated in any. There were declines in the number of metropolitan areas with black hypersegregation, although levels of segregation experienced by blacks remained significantly higher than those of the other groups, even after a number of factors were controlled. Indeed, although socioeconomic differences among the groups explain some of the difference in residential patterns more generally, they have little association with hypersegregation in particular, indicating the overarching salience of race in shaping residential patterns in these highly divided metropolitan areas.     

Residential segregation of Spanish Americans in united states Urbanized Areas

Residential segregation among Spanish Americans, whites and blacks is measured in the 29 largest U.S. urbanized areas. Results show that Spanish Americans are much less segregated from whites than are blacks and are less concentrated within central cities. Spanish-white segregation also tends to be much lower in suburbs than in central cities, while back-white segregation is maintained at a high level in both areas. Segregation of Spanish Americans from whites is found to decline with generations spent in the United States. Finally, the relative proportion of Spanish who live in a central city and the relative number of Spanish who are foreign stock, are both highly related, across urbanized areas, to variations in the level of Spanish-white segregation.     

Does the Hispanic Paradox in U.S. Adult Mortality Extend to Disability?

Studies consistently document a Hispanic paradox in U.S. adult mortality, whereby Hispanics have similar or lower mortality rates than non-Hispanic whites despite lower socioeconomic status. This study extends this line of inquiry to disability, especially among foreign-born Hispanics, since their advantaged mortality seemingly should be paired with health advantages more generally. We also assess whether the paradox extends to U.S.-born Hispanics to evaluate the effect of nativity. We calculate multistate life tables of life expectancy with disability to assess whether racial/ethnic and nativity differences in the length of disability-free life parallel differences in overall life expectancy. Our results document a Hispanic paradox in mortality for foreign-born and U.S.-born Hispanics. However, Hispanics’ low mortality rates are not matched by low disability rates. Their disability rates are substantially higher than those of non-Hispanic whites and generally similar to those of non-Hispanic blacks. The result is a protracted period of disabled life expectancy for Hispanics, both foreign- and U.S.-born.     

Neighborhood Concentrated Disadvantage and Adult Mortality: Insights for Racial and Ethnic Differences

While racial and ethnic differences in mortality are pervasive and well documented, less is known about how mortality risk varies by neighborhood socioeconomic status across racial and ethnic identity. We conducted a prospective analysis on a sample of adults living at or below 300% poverty with 8 years of the National Health Interview Survey (N = 159,400) linked to 11,600 deaths to examine the association between neighborhood disadvantage and mortality for non-Hispanic whites, non-Hispanic blacks, and U.S.- and foreign-born Hispanics. Using multilevel logistic regression, we find that the probability of death from any cause for lower-income adults is higher in more-disadvantaged neighborhoods, compared to less-disadvantaged neighborhoods, but only for whites. The adjusted likelihood of death for blacks and foreign-born Hispanics is not associated with neighborhood disadvantage, and the likelihood of death for U.S.-born Hispanics is lower in more-disadvantaged neighborhoods. While future research and policy should focus on improving health-promoting resources in all communities, care should be given to better understanding why race/ethnic groups have differential mortality returns with respect to area-specific socioeconomic conditions.     

Distinguishing the geographic levels and social dimensions of U.S. metropolitan segregation, 1960–2000

In this article, we assess trends in residential segregation in the United States from 1960 to 2000 along several dimensions of race and ethnicity, class, and life cycle and present a method for attributing segregation to nested geographic levels. We measured segregation for metropolitan America using the Theil index, which is additively decomposed into contributions of regional, metropolitan, center city-suburban, place, and tract segregation. This procedure distinguishes whether groups live apart because members cluster in different neighborhoods, communities, metropolitan areas, or regions. Substantively, we found that the segregation of blacks decreased considerably after 1960 largely because neighborhoods became more integrated, but the foreign born became more segregated largely because they concentrated in particular metropolitan areas. Class segregation increased between 1970 and 1990 mainly because the affluent increasingly clustered in specific metropolitan areas and in specific municipalities within metropolitan areas. The unmarried increasingly congregated in center cities. The main purpose of this article is to describe and illustrate this multilevel approach to studying segregation.     

The spatial separation of the poor in Canadian cities

We used the 1991 Canadian census to examine the extent of spatial separation of the poor in Canadian cities. Although there were no extensive areas of blight, decay, or housing abandonment, we found high spatial separation of poor visible minorities in the selected cities. The index of dissimilarity indicates high segregation of poor blacks and moderate separation of poor Asians from the nonpoor population. We tested the effects of three major structural factors--racial and ethnic segregation, income segregation, and urban redevelopment--and found that racial and ethnic residential patterns are related strongly to the spatial separation of poor persons. The relationship between income segregation and spatial separation of the poor is not significant, however. We also found that the relationship between urban redevelopment and spatial separation of the poor pertains only to blacks. These findings suggest that blacks are vulnerable in the process of urban redevelopment.     

Latino,Asian, and black segregation in U.S. metropolitan areas: Are multiethnic metros different*

This study examines 1990 residential segregation levels and 1980–1990 changes in segregation for Latinos, Asians, and blacks in U.S. metropolitan areas. It also evaluates the effect of emerging multiethnic metropolitan area contexts for these segregation patterns. While black segregation levels are still well above those for Latinos and Asians, there is some trend toward convergence over the decade. More than half of the areas increased their Latino segregation levels over the 1980s, and almost three-fourths increased their Asian segregation levels. In contrast, black segregation levels decreased in 88%ofmetropolitan areas. Multiethnic metropolitan area context is shown to be important for internal segregation dynamics. Black segregation levels are lower, and were more likely to decline in multiethnic metropolitan areas and when other minority groups grew faster than blacks. Latino segregation was also more likely to decline in such areas, and declines in both Latino and Asian segregation were greater when other minority groups were growing. These findings point up the potential for greater mixed-race and mixed-ethnicity coresidence in the neighborhoods of multiethnic metropolitan areas.     

Multiple Meanings of Minority Concentration: Incorporating Contextual Explanations into the Analysis of Individual-Level U.S. Black Mortality Outcomes

Prior research on mortality for U.S. blacks focuses on the detrimental effects of minority concentration and residential segregation in metropolitan areas on health outcomes. To date, few studies have examined this relationship outside of large U.S. central cities. In this paper, we extend current research on the minority concentration and mortality relationship to explain the rural advantage in mortality for nonmetropolitan blacks. Using data from the 1986–1994 linked National Health Interview Survey/National Death Index, we examine the rural-urban gap in mortality for U.S. blacks. Our findings indicate that blacks in nonmetropolitan areas experience a lower risk of mortality than metropolitan central city blacks after indicators of socio-economic and health status are controlled. Our findings also point to the importance of accounting for contextual factors. Net of individual level controls, minority concentration exerts differential effects across metropolitan and nonmetropolitan areas, such that nonmetropolitan black residents experience a lower risk of mortality in high minority concentration areas than blacks in metropolitan central city areas. This finding suggests a reconceptualization of the meaning for minority concentration with respect to studies of health outcomes in nonmetropolitan communities.     

Race,language, and social policy: Comparing the black and Hispanic experience in the U.S.

Recent studies project that most new U.S. workers by the year 2000 will be minorities, and warn that educational deficiencies among blacks and Hispanics may lead to a two-tiered society. Since the 1960s the U.S. government, prodded by a coalition of black and Hispanic rights organizations, has adopted a minority-discrimination model of equal opportunity that requires affirmative-action benefits for both protected groups to compensate for past discrimination. For Hispanics these programs have required separate, Spanish-language instruction in school.Since 1969, the availability of new survey data on ethnicity, family income, and Englishlanguage proficiency from the Census Bureau and the National Assessment for Educational Progress has permitted comparisons of social mobility by racial and ethnic groups. These studies show greater economic success among nonEnglish-speaking groups from Europe and Asia than among white-Anglo-Saxon-Protestant (WASP) groups, and they show similar upward mobility among Hispanics when proficiency in English is taken into account.These optimistic trends are tempered by the demands of the new global economy for high levels of literacy and numeracy in the knowledge-based industries of the future. In this job competition Asian-Americans, despite their language difficulties, have been most successful and blacks least successful. The political and ideological needs of black and Hispanic leaders have tied government policies to the minority-discrimination model and linked Hispanic remedies to Spanish-language programs, but the empirical data associate economic success with the acculturation model and English-language proficiency.     

Racial concentration and segregation across U.S. counties, 1950–1980

By presenting race-specific population concentration indexes for U.S. counties for the 1950-1980 period, this paper updates and extends previous analyses of 1900-1974 patterns of population concentration by Duncan et al. (1961) and Vining and Strauss (1977). Declines in population concentration persisted through 1980 only among the white population. Blacks continued to experience increases in population concentration between 1970 and 1980. These racially divergent patterns of concentration in the 1970s have translated into increases in segregation between blacks and whites across U.S. counties.     

Segregated jobs or ethnic niches?: The impact of racialized employment on earnings inequality

Using data from the Multi-City Study of Urban Inequality (MCSUI), this study examines the extent to which the racial or ethnic composition of jobs affects racial and ethnic-linked earnings inequalities among whites, blacks and Hispanics. Four types of jobs are distinguished according to the racial/ethnic composition of jobs in work establishments: predominantly white, multi-racial or mixed, predominantly black, and predominantly Hispanic. We found considerable differences among the four types of jobs. Jobs composed predominantly of white workers are characterized by the highest earnings, the highest status occupations, and the highest levels of education. In contrast, jobs predominantly composed of Hispanic workers are characterized by the lowest salaries, the lowest status occupations, and the lowest levels of education. The data analysis supports the hypothesis that job segregation is responsible for earnings disparities in the case of blacks versus whites, but only partial support for this hypothesis is found in the case of Hispanics versus whites. The analysis also provides support for the “devaluation hypothesis” which suggests that all workers experience pay penalties in jobs in which minority workers are predominant. Further analysis reveals that had most workers been rewarded like whites employed in predominantly white jobs, their earnings would have increased considerably. The only groups of workers who “benefit” from job segregation are Hispanic workers employed in predominately Hispanic jobs. In the absence of competition with others, Hispanics employed in predominantly Hispanic jobs earn more than they would earn in other jobs. The differential effects of the ethnic composition of jobs on economic outcomes of minority populations are evaluated and discussed in light of the roles played by sheltered and protected ethnic economies.     

Housing Tenure and Residential Segregation in Metropolitan America

Homeownership, a symbol of the American dream, is one of the primary ways through which families accumulate wealth, particularly for blacks and Hispanics. Surprisingly, no study has explicitly documented the segregation of minority owners and renters from whites. Using data from Census 2000, this study aims to fill this gap. Analyses here reveal that the segregation of black renters relative to whites is significantly lower than the segregation of black owners from whites, controlling for relevant socioeconomic and demographic factors, contrary to the notion that homeownership represents an endpoint in the residential assimilation process. The patterns for Hispanics and Asians conform more to expectations under the spatial assimilation model. The findings here suggest that race and ethnicity continue to be as important in shaping residential segregation as socioeconomic status, and raise concerns about the benefits of homeownership, particularly for blacks.     

The spatial dynamics of stratification: Metropolitan context, population redistribution, and black and Hispanic homeownership

Racial and ethnic inequality in homeownership remains stubbornly wide, even net of differences across groups in household-level sociodemographic characteristics. This article investigates the role of contextual forces in structuring disparate access to homeownership among minorities. Specifically, I combine household- and metropolitan-level census data to assess the impact of metropolitan housing stock, minority composition, and residential segregation on black and Hispanic housing tenure. The measure of minority composition combines both the size and rate of growth of the coethnic population to assess the impact on homeownership inequality of recent trends in population redistribution, particularly the increase in black migration to the South and dramatic dispersal of Hispanics outside traditional areas of settlement. Results indicate remarkable similarity between blacks and Hispanics with respect to the spatial and contextual influences on homeownership. For both groups, homeownership is higher and inequality with whites is smaller in metropolitan areas with an established coethnic base and in areas in which their group is less residentially segregated. Implications of recent trends in population redistribution for the future of minority homeownership are discussed.     

Diverging Demography: Hispanic and Non-Hispanic Contributions to U.S. Population Redistribution and Diversity

The substantial growth and geographic dispersion of Hispanics is among the most important demographic trends in recent U.S. demographic history. Our county-level study examines how widespread Hispanic natural increase and net migration has combined with the demographic change among non-Hispanics to produce an increasingly diverse population. This paper uses U.S. Census Bureau data and special tabulations of race/ethnic specific births and deaths from NCHS to highlight the demographic role of Hispanics as an engine of new county population growth and ethnoracial diversity across the U.S. landscape. It highlights key demographic processes—natural increase and net migration—that accounted for 1990–2010 changes in the absolute and relative sizes of the Hispanic and non-Hispanic populations. Hispanics accounted for the majority of all U.S. population growth between 2000 and 2010. Yet, Hispanics represented only 16 % of the U.S. population in 2010. Most previous research has focused on Hispanic immigration; here, we examine how natural increase and net migration among both the Hispanic and non-Hispanic population contribute to the nation’s growing diversity. Indeed, the demographic impact of rapid Hispanic growth has been reinforced by minimal white population growth due to low fertility, fewer women of reproductive age and growing mortality among the aging white population America’s burgeoning Hispanic population has left a large demographic footprint that is magnified by low and declining fertility and increasing mortality among America’s aging non-Hispanic population.     

Racial/Ethnic and Nativity Patterns of U.S. Adolescent and Young Adult Smoking

We document racial/ethnic and nativity differences in U.S. smoking patterns among adolescents and young adults using the 2006 Tobacco Use Supplement to the Current Population Survey (n = 44,202). Stratifying the sample by nativity status within five racial/ethnic groups (Asian American, Mexican–American, other Hispanic, non-Hispanic black, and non-Hispanic white), and further by sex and age, we compare self-reports of lifetime smoking across groups. U.S.-born non-Hispanic whites, particularly men, report smoking more than individuals in other racial/ethnic/nativity groups. Some groups of young women (e.g., foreign-born and U.S.-born Asian Americans, foreign-born and U.S.-born Mexican–Americans, and foreign-born blacks) report extremely low levels of smoking. Foreign-born females in all of the 25–34 year old racial/ethnic groups exhibit greater proportions of never smoking than their U.S.-born counterparts. Heavy/moderate and light/intermittent smoking is generally higher in the older age group among U.S.-born males and females, whereas smoking among the foreign-born of both sexes is low at younger ages and remains low at older ages. Taken together, these findings highlight the importance of considering both race/ethnicity and nativity in assessments of smoking patterns and in strategies to reduce overall U.S. smoking prevalence and smoking-attributable health disparities.     

Global Neighborhoods: Beyond the Multiethnic Metropolis

Neighborhoods where blacks and whites live in integrated settings alongside Hispanics and Asians represent a new phenomenon in the United States. These “global neighborhoods” have previously been identified in the nation’s most diverse metropolitan centers. This study examines the full range of metropolitan areas to ask whether similar processes are occurring in other parts of the country. Is there evidence of stable racial integration in places that lack such diversity? What are the paths of neighborhood change in areas with few Hispanic or Asian residents, or areas where Hispanics are the principal minority group, or where there is no large minority presence at all? We distinguish four types of metropolitan regions: white, white/black, white/Hispanic/Asian, and multiethnic. These regions necessarily differ greatly in neighborhood composition, but some similar trajectories of neighborhood change are found in all of them. The results provide new evidence of the effect of Hispanic and Asian presence on black-white segregation in all parts of the country.     

Race and intra-urban migration

Data from the urban renewal experience in Syracuse, New York are used to examine the impact of race on patterns of intra-urban migration. The results show that, overall, the migration patterns exhibited an exponential decay in frequency with increasing distance. Both blacks and whites display this pattern, but blacks tend to cluster more closely around the point of origin. Indirect evidence is developed to show that this phenomenon is due to blacks and whites having different access to information about housing, which ultimately maintains housing segregation.