Early cognitive skills of Mexican-origin children: The roles of parental nativity and legal status

Although one-third of children of immigrants have undocumented parents, little is known about their early development. Using data from the Los Angeles Family and Neighborhood Survey and decennial census, we assessed how children's cognitive skills at ages 3 to 5 vary by ethnicity, maternal nativity, and maternal legal status. Specifically, Mexican children of undocumented mothers were contrasted with Mexican children of documented mothers and Mexican, white, and black children with U.S.-born mothers. Mexican children of undocumented mothers had lower emergent reading skills than all other groups and lower emergent mathematics skills than all groups with U.S.-born mothers. Multilevel regression models showed that differences in reading skills are explained by aspects of the home environment, but the neighborhood context also matters. Cross-level interactions suggest that immigrant concentration boosts emergent reading and mathematics skills for children with undocumented parents, but does not similarly benefit children whose parents are native born.     

Reversing welfare reform? Immigrant restoration efforts and food stamp receipt among Mexican immigrant families

The safety net that immigrants face today differs significantly from the immediate post-Welfare Reform era in terms of eligibility and economic context. To inform debates on immigrant access to the safety net, this paper examines implications of the 2002 Farm Security and Rural Investment Act, which restored food stamp eligibility to nearly two-thirds of immigrants who lost eligibility under Welfare Reform. Using data from the 1995–2013 Current Population Survey and a difference-in-difference design, I examine how restoration efforts have influenced food stamp participation and food insecurity rates among low-income Mexican immigrant households with children. I then examine trends in food stamp receipt across policy and economic changes since Welfare Reform. Overall, results suggest that immigrant restoration efforts have reversed some but not all of the negative consequences of Welfare Reform and that immigrant households' use of food stamps has increased, particularly in the wake of the Great Recession.     

Do less-skilled immigrants work more? Examining the work time of Mexican immigrant men in the United States

Using data from the US Current Population Surveys 2006-2008, I examine the weekly work hours of Mexican immigrants. Mexican immigrant workers on average work 2-4 h less than non-Hispanic whites per week, which contradicts the popular portrait of long immigrant work hours. Four mechanisms to explain this gap are proposed and examined. Results show that the work time disparity between non-Hispanic white and Mexican immigrant workers is explained by differences in human capital, ethnic concentration in the labor market, and selection process into employment. English proficiency has limited effect on work time after location in labor market is specified, while the effect of citizenship status remains robust.     

Undocumented migration and the residential segregation of Mexicans in new destinations

This study uses data from the 2000 Census and 2005–2009 American Community Survey to examine the impact of undocumented Mexican migration to new destinations on residential segregation between Mexican immigrants and native-born whites and native-born blacks. We find that Mexican-white and Mexican-black segregation is higher in new Mexican gateways than in established areas and that, for Mexican-immigrant segregation from whites, this heightened level of residential segregation in new destinations can be explained by the high presence of unauthorized Mexican immigrants living there which tends to bolster segregation between the two groups. By contrast, Mexican-immigrant segregation from native-born blacks tends to be lower in areas with larger undocumented populations, a pattern that is especially true in new destinations. Neither of these opposing effects of legal status on Mexican-immigrant segregation can be explained by compositional differences in assimilation (English ability and earnings) between documented and undocumented immigrants nor by structural variation in metropolitan areas, suggesting a unique association between legal status and segregation.     

Unemployment among Mexican immigrant men in the United States, 2003–2012

Based on their socioeconomic characteristics, Mexican immigrant men should have very high unemployment. More than half do not have a high school diploma. One in four works in construction; at the height of the recent recession, 20% of construction workers were unemployed. Yet their unemployment rates are similar to those of native-born white men. After controlling for education and occupation, Mexican immigrant men have lower probabilities of unemployment than native-born white men – both before and during the recent recession. I consider explanations based on eligibility for unemployment benefits, out-migrant selection for unemployment, and employer preferences for Mexican immigrant labor.     

Economic conditions and native-immigrant asymmetries in generalized social trust

Previous research suggests that individual-level factors such as socio-economic disadvantage and discrimination account for lower levels of generalized social trust of immigrants when compared to natives. This study examines how individual and contextual economic conditions impact such trust gaps. We argue that—beyond objective economic circumstances—evaluations of economic opportunities matter for immigrants’ integration, and for their social trust. Using data from the European Social Survey 2012, 2016, merged with regional economic conditions, results from two-way fixed effects multilevel models show that gaps in social trust are wider in regions where the state of the economy is predominantly evaluated as being prosperous. Additional tests show that, in those regions, immigrants report higher levels of discrimination and lower levels of satisfaction with social life. This study adds the important finding to the literature on social inequality and immigrant integration that favorable economic conditions may, paradoxically, increase native-immigrant trust asymmetries.     

Organizational ecology of immigrant employment and organizational buffer zones: Who leaves first when the organization gets into trouble?

Using data from the German social insurance system immigrant employment in organizational buffer zones will be investigated from an organizational ecology perspective. Theories in organization and labor market research predict higher exit rates of employees holding jobs in buffer zones. These buffer zones protect organizations from unfavorable environmental turbulences. Consequently, analyzing the impact of buffer zone employment on job stability of immigrants requires a fully dynamic approach, which goes beyond a mere identification of generally increased turnover rates of immigrants.In the first step, determinants of organizational dissolution rates will be estimated. In order to obtain a dynamic measurement of unfavorable environmental conditions, the model includes both organizational and time-varying environmental characteristics of organizational populations. This will be done by using a three-level mixed-effects hazard model controlling for observed and unobserved environmental characteristics. In the second step, dissolution rates predicted in the first step will be used as an explanatory variable. These rates indicate the degree of enactment of the flexible buffer zone. It will be shown that immigrants have indeed higher turnover rates, but they tend to remain longer in their organizations when environmental conditions deteriorate—and they are not those who leave first when the organization gets into trouble.     

Housing and neighborhood quality among undocumented Mexican and Central American immigrants

Extensive research has documented the challenges that undocumented immigrants face in navigating U.S. labor markets, but relatively little has explored the impact of legal status on residential outcomes despite their widespread repercussions for social well-being. Using data from the 1996–2008 panels of the Survey of Income and Program Participation to impute documentation status among Mexican and Central American immigrants, we examine group differences in residential outcomes, including homeownership, housing crowding, satisfaction with neighborhood and housing quality, problems with neighborhood crime/safety, governmental services, and environmental issues, and deficiencies with housing units. Results from our analysis indicate that undocumented householders are far less likely to be homeowners than documented migrants, and also live in more crowded homes, report greater structural deficiencies with their dwellings, and express greater concern about the quality of public services and environmental conditions in their neighborhoods. In comparison to native whites, undocumented migrants’ residential circumstances are lacking, but their residential outcomes tend to be superior to those of native-born blacks. Overall, our results highlight the pervasive impact of legal status on stratifying Mexicans’ and Central Americans’ prospects for successful incorporation, but also underscore the rigidity of the black/nonblack divide structuring American residential contexts.     

The healthy immigrant (migrant) effect: In search of a better native-born comparison group

This paper evaluates whether immigrants’ initial health advantage over their U.S.-born counterparts results primarily from characteristics correlated with their birth countries (e.g., immigrant culture) or from selective migration (e.g., unobserved characteristics such as motivation and ambition) by comparing recent immigrants’ health to that of recent U.S.-born interstate migrants (“U.S.-born movers”). Using data from the 1999–2013 waves of the March Current Population Survey, I find that, relative to U.S.-born adults (collectively), recent immigrants have a 6.1 percentage point lower probability of reporting their health as fair or poor. Changing the reference group to U.S.-born movers, however, reduces the recent immigrant health advantage by 28%. Similar reductions in the immigrant health advantage occurs in models estimated separately by either race/ethnicity or education level. Models that examine health differences between recent immigrants and U.S.-born movers who both moved for a new job—a primary motivation behind moving for both immigrants and the U.S.-born—show that such immigrants have only a 1.9 percentage point lower probability of reporting their health as fair or poor. Together, the findings suggest that changing the reference group from U.S.-born adults collectively to U.S.-born movers reduces the identified immigrant health advantage, indicating that selective migration plays a significant role in explaining the initial health advantage of immigrants in the United States.     

“Making it work: Migration,motherhood and employment in Australia”

The transition into motherhood is often associated with a reduction in women's labor force participation, reinforcing gender employment hierarchies. Our study compares women's employment status and paid work time prior to and following birth among immigrants and native-borns in Australia. We also consider how these outcomes differ by generation status and racial and ethnic background. Australia provides a valuable context to understand these outcomes given its skilled migration policy, racial and ethnic diversity, limited childcare and family leave policies, and high rates of part-time work among mothers. We examine longitudinal data from the Household Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia (HILDA) for women from 2001 to 2016. We find that migrant women show lower employment levels and commensurate work hours than native-borns prior to childbirth. After childbirth, migrant mothers maintain lower employment levels, but higher work hours than native-born mothers. Overall, we find that relative to native-borns, migrant women typically experience a smaller reduction in employment and work hours following childbirth, but some of this is likely due to their lower starting position prior to childbirth. Our findings have implications for skilled immigration policies and highlights the unique work-family pressures facing immigrant and native-born women.     

Urban Europeans' viewpoints on immigrants in the city: Re-considering how group threat operates across national and urban contexts

Research analyzing attitudes toward immigrants in Europe studies how the immigrant population size in a country conditions prejudicial attitudes against immigrants. While research on immigrant group size in countries is important, research considering the size of immigrant groups at other geographic scales, such as cities, is relatively unexplored. Using data on nearly 30,000 residents of 63 European cities from the Flash Eurobarometer 366 survey, we ask: how does the immigrant population size in a country and a city relate to how Europeans consider immigrants in their city? Findings show support for a group threat framework in that greater immigrant group size is linked to more anti-immigrant views, but this finding holds only for cities, not for countries. Our discussion centers on the ways in which cities may be linked to this threat, and how a multi-scalar conception of group threat can uncover varying relationships for immigration attitudes.     

Student misbehavior during senior year: A comparison of immigrants and the native-born

Prior research has increasingly shown that the length of time in the U.S. and acculturation may have negative effects on a variety of immigrant outcomes, including academic performance, health, and occupational attainment. However, much of the research on the educational outcomes of immigrants focuses primarily on their academic achievement but neglects another factor that affects educational success—behavior at school. Using data from a sample of high school seniors in several Pacific Northwest school districts, I examine whether more time in the U.S. increases school misbehavior by testing the effects of immigrant generation and indicators of acculturation on three measures of disciplinary problems during the senior year of high school—attending class unprepared, getting in trouble for breaking school rules, and being put on suspension. First and one-point-five generation immigrants attend class more prepared and get into less trouble for breaking the school rules than do third or higher generation students during their senior year of high school. High academic performance and indicators of acculturation explain only part of this beneficial effect of immigrant generation on behavior at school. Additional analyses show that second generation Asian immigrants are more similar to first and 1.5 generation immigrants from all racial and ethnic groups than they are from other second generation racial and ethnic groups in regards to moderate and intermediate behavior.     

Migration and stratification

Migration and stratification are increasingly intertwined. One day soon it will be impossible to understand one without the other. Both focus on life chances. Stratification is about differential life chances - who gets what and why - and migration is about improving life chances - getting more of the good things of life. To examine the interconnections of migration and stratification, we address a mix of old and new questions, carrying out analyses newly enabled by a unique new data set on recent legal immigrants to the United States (the New Immigrant Survey). We look at immigrant processing and lost documents, depression due to the visa process, presentation of self, the race-ethnic composition of an immigrant cohort (made possible by the data for the first time since 1961), black immigration from Africa and the Americas, skin color diversity among couples formed by US citizen sponsors and immigrant spouses, and English fluency among children age 8-12 and their immigrant parents. We find, inter alia, that children of previously illegal parents are especially more likely to be fluent in English, that native-born US citizen women tend to marry darker, that immigrant applicants who go through the visa process while already in the United States are more likely to have their documents lost and to suffer visa depression, and that immigration, by introducing accomplished black immigrants from Africa (notably via the visa lottery), threatens to overturn racial and skin color associations with skill. Our analyses show the mutual embeddedness of migration and stratification in the unfolding of the immigrants’ and their children’s life chances and the impacts on the stratification structure of the United States.     

黄河三角洲山西移民的特点

山西洪洞大槐树 ,是中国移民史上辐射范围最广 ,规模影响最大的移民集散地 ,移民遍及大半个中国。但黄河三角洲的山西移民既有与其他地区的相同之处 ,又呈现出区域特色 :一是移民时间呈阶段性集中 ,又呈持续性延散 ;二是移民原因有均衡天下人口的政府用意 ,又有躲逃天灾的个人动机 ;三是转迁后移入 ,使移民史实见诸方志与民间资料 ,却不见于正史 ;四是移民形式以政府强制性安置为主 ,同时间杂着小股自发性无序移民 ;五是移民成分单一 ,既无官吏富民 ,亦无将士罪囚 ,而是一个由贫苦农民组成的贫民弱势群体。     

The social context of assimilation: testing implications of segmented assimilation theory

Segmented assimilation theory has been a popular explanation for the diverse experiences of assimilation among new waves of immigrants and their children. While the theory has been interpreted in many different ways, we emphasize its implications for the important role of social context: both processes and consequences of assimilation should depend on the local social context in which immigrants are embedded. We derive empirically falsifiable hypotheses about the interaction effects between social context and assimilation on immigrant children’s well-being. We then test the hypotheses using data from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health. Our empirical analyses yield two main findings. First, for immigrant adolescents living in non-poverty neighborhoods, we find assimilation to be positively associated with educational achievement and psychological well-being but also positively associated with at-risk behavior. Second, there is little empirical evidence supporting our hypotheses derived from segmented assimilation theory. We interpret these results to mean that future research would be more fruitful focusing on differential processes of assimilation rather than differential consequences of assimilation.     

From the West Indies to Africa: A universal generational decline in health among blacks in the United States

Research shows that foreign-born blacks have better health profiles than their U.S.-born counterparts. Less is known, however, regarding whether black immigrants’ favorable health outcomes persist across generations or whether these patterns differ across the diverse sending regions for black immigrants. In this study, we use data from the 1996–2014 waves of the March Current Population Survey (CPS) to investigate generational differences in self-rated health among blacks with West Indian, Haitian, Latin American, and African ancestry. We show that first-generation black immigrants have a lower probability of reporting fair/poor health than third/higher generation blacks. The health advantage of the first generation over the third/higher generation is slightly more prounced among the foreign-born who migrated to the United States after age 13. Second-generation immigrants with two foreign-born parents are generally less likely to report their health as fair/poor than the third/higher generation. However, we find no evidence that self-reported fair/poor health varies between second-generation immigrants with mixed nativity parents (only one foreign-born parent) and the third/higher generation. These general patterns hold across each of the ancestral subgroups in the study sample. In summary, our findings highlight a remarkable convergence in health across immigrant generations among blacks in the United States.     

Ethnoracial patterns of schooling and work among adolescents: Implications for Mexican immigrant incorporation

This paper investigates Mexican immigrant incorporation by examining labor force participation and schooling among Mexican-origin adolescents in the United States. Theoretical perspectives on immigrant incorporation, labor migration-related cultural repertoires and adolescent development considered together imply that studying ethnoracial differences in schooling among adolescents without taking work into account can yield mis-leading pictures of Mexican-origin non-high school completion patterns, thus hampering the assessment of incorporation theories. To avoid this, we analyze Mexican-origin generational differences in the relationship between schooling and workforce participation among adolescents compared to non-Hispanic whites and blacks. Using micro-data from the 2000 US Census, we find that Mexican immigrant boys who are not enrolled in school are more likely to be in the workforce, and conversely that those who are enrolled in school are much less likely to be in the workforce, compared to whites and blacks. Such relative differences in school/work specialization, as predicted, diminish across Mexican-origin generations. Moreover, based on supplementary analyses, we find similar patterns for a cohort of young adults who failed to complete high school during the 1990s. Overall, the results are consistent with the idea that cultural orientations growing out of the nature and experience of Mexican labor migration are important for assessing school enrollment patterns among Mexican-origin youth and for gauging their implications for educational policy and immigrant-group incorporation.     

Selective Emigration, Cohort Quality, and Models of Immigrant Assimilation

In this article we identify sample underenumeration, changing cohort quality, and selective emigration as problems that threaten the validity of findings on immigrant socioeconomic assimilation derived from cross-sectional data. Using information on Mexican immigrants from the 1990 U.S. census and a unique binational source of data, we address the effects of these problems on cross-sectional regressions of English proficiency and wage attainment. Our results suggest that the underenumeration of temporary and undocumented migrants biases the estimated effects of human capital variables downward, but that selective emigration does not significantly affect cross-sectional models. We do find, however, that period of entry is a poor proxy for total migrant experience, and when we disentangle duration and cohort effects, we find some evidence for shifts in cohort quality over time, but not the systematic decline seen by others.     

Is immigrant neighborhood inequality less pronounced in suburban areas?

We investigate suburbanization and neighborhood inequality among 14 immigrant groups using census tract data from the 2008–2012 American Community Survey. Immigrant neighborhood inequality is defined here as the degree to which immigrants reside in neighborhoods that are poorer than the neighborhoods in which native whites reside. Using city and suburb Gini coefficients which reflect the distributions of groups across neighborhoods with varying poverty rates, we find that the immigrant-white gap is attenuated in the suburbs. This finding applies to most of the nativity groups and remains after accounting for metropolitan context, the segregation of poverty, and group-specific segregation levels, poverty rates, and acculturation characteristics. Despite reduced neighborhood inequality in the suburbs, large group differences persist. A few immigrant groups achieve residential parity or better vis-à-vis suburban whites while others experience high levels of neighborhood inequality and receive marginal residential returns on suburban location.