1

11. PATTERNS, CAUSES, AND

SIGNIFICANCE OF U.S.

NEIGHBORHOODS SEGREGATED

BY ETHNICITY

2

 Why Focus on the Ethnic Social Geography of Metropolitan Area?

• Disproportionate share of immigrants settle in urban not rural areas.

 • Thus, large demographic impact on U.S. metropolitan areas. • They often occupy segregated, ethnically homogeneous

neighborhoods, thus shaping the metro’s social geography. • They give a distinctive character to the neighborhoods in

which they settle.

• Very different age demographics: Younger in age.

3

Generalizations About Ethnic Population Depends on Research Definition

• Ethnicity defined as ethnic/racial self-reported groupAS OPPOSED TO

• Legal Immigrant StatusAS OPPOSED TO

• Ethnicity defined as “foreign born”Defined as persons living in the United States who were

not U.S. citizens at birth. This includes naturalized American citizens, legal

permanent residents (green card holders), illegal aliens, and people on long-term temporary visas such as students or guest workers.

But it does not include those born abroad of American parents or those born in outlying territories such as Puerto Rico

• Natives are those born in the U.S. Puerto Rico, or a U.S. Island Area, or born abroad of a U.S. Citizen parent.

4

Defining Ethnicity: Further Confusion

• Hispanic origin is ethnic rather than race category.

• Race and ethnic definitions overlap because Hispanics may be of any race.

• Also, many Hispanics do not identify with any of the three race categories (white, black, Asian/Pacific Islander, American Indian, or Eskimo).

• Thus, researchers often refer to nonHispanic Whites.  • Generalizations are also difficult because of the country of

origin diversity of the Hispanic population.

5

6

7

8

Asian Population is Diverse

• The three largest groups account for 60% of Asian population—Chinese (except from Taiwan), Asian Indians, & Filipinos

• Korean, Vietnamese & Japanese account for nearly 30%

9

10

Focus on Foreign Born

• In 2010, there were 309 million people living in the U.S.

• 40 million foreign born, 13% of the U.S. population

•  Far from being a historical high rate or prevalence.

• Numbers, however, are at historical high

• Even higher: Most children of legal foreign born are born in U.S. and given citizenship at birth

11

12

13

Statistical Portrait Of The Foreign-born Population In The United States, 2010

14

15

Categorization Based on Legal Immigrant Status in the United States

• Immigrants (Office of Immigration Statistics): persons legally admitted to the United States as permanent residents.

• Temporary legal immigrants are foreigners admitted to the United States for a specified purpose such as visiting, working, or studying

 • Refugees and asylees are people admitted to the U.S.

because they are unable or unwilling to return to their country of nationality because of fear of persecution.

 • Unauthorized/illegal immigrants are foreign citizens

illegally residing in the United States.

16

Temporary migrants: such as temporary workers, students,and exchange visitors.Residual Method: Legal immigrants minus foreign born reported plus correction factor

17

Illegal Immigrants• Estimated 11.4 illegal immigrants in 2012• Economic recession has sharply reduced influx

Especially from Mexico• Illegal immigrants make up 3.7% of nation’s population but

5.2% of its labor force.

18

19

20

21

Brief History of Migration Patterns

• To understand the current composition and locations of foreign born/ethnic population in the American metropolis, it is necessary to briefly review this country’s past immigration policies and immigration patterns

• Four waves of immigrant flows into the U.S.

First Wave: Before 1820Second Wave: 1820-1860Third Wave: 1880-1914Fourth Wave: 1965-present

22

First Wave: Before 1820

• Before official counts. English settlers were the most prominent immigrant group along with Scots, Irish, Germans, Dutch, French, and Spanish.

 

• Came for a variety of religious, political, and economic reasons.

 

• High fatality rate from starvation, disease, and shipwrecks.

• Settled from New York south to Florida

• Expanded westward to Texas, New Mexico, and California

23

The Second Wave: 1820-1860

• From northern and western European countries dominated by Irish, Scottish, and German immigrants.

 • Fewer from China, Japan, Philippines (primarily to CA).

 • Majority English speaking and settled in many different northeastern and

midwestern cities at relatively low residential densities than those coming later. 

• Roman Catholics predominated and challenged the dominance of Americans of Protestant religion.

 • Peasants displaced from agriculture and artisans made jobless by the

Industrial Revolution were desperate to escape from Europe. 

• About 40% of these second-wave immigrants were Irish escaping extreme poverty and famine in their home country.

24

The Third Wave: 1880-1914 (period of rapid U.S. urbanization)

• More than 20 million immigrants to the United States, an average of 650,000 immigrants per year.

 • More than 1 million immigrants arrived annually in six of

the first 14 years of the 20th century. • Along with immigrants from Great Britain, they came from

southern, central, and eastern Europe.

• Mainly Italians, Austrian-Hungarians, Poles, Greeks, Germans, and eastern European Jews.

 • Several hundred thousand Chinese, Japanese, and other

Asian laborers also settled in the western states.

25

• Sought better economic opportunities and religious and political freedoms.

 • Many of these immigrants found jobs in factories in New

York, Chicago, and Detroit.

• Period of rapid industrialization and the growth of employment opportunities in the central city.

 • Provided the skills and the cheap labor that the rapidly

industrializing nation U.S. needed.

• By 1910, foreign-born residents accounted for nearly 15% of the U.S. population and 24% of the U.S. labor force.

 • Immigrants made up more than half of all operatives in

mining, steel, and meatpacking.

26

Locations and Housing of Early Immigrants

• The availability of low cost housing combined with the limited and costly transportation represented strong incentives--if not constraints--for immigrant workers to be located in concentrated residential patterns,

• They frequently lived on the edge of the central business district close to central city employment opportunities.

 • Uncertain job tenure also encouraged immigrants to locate

where substitute employment could easily be found.  • The tenement housing occupied by large segments of this

immigrant population was correctly characterized as slum housing.

27

• For example, the 19th century and early 20th century housing in New York city occupied by East European Jews were described as intolerable physical environments consisting of crowded, airless, lightless, tenements.

 

• Paradoxically, the ethnic slum neighborhoods of the late 19th and 20th centuries also described as urban villages.

 

• Here immigrant groups could find support for their customs and values and at the same time adapt to the customs of the larger society.

 

• Assumed that these ethnic communities—ghettos—would serve as stepping-stone communities through which immigrants would pass in the process of assimilation.

28

Pause in Immigration: 1915-1964

• Throughout World War I (1914-1918) immigration almost ceased as war erupted in Europe.

• Until W.W.I the U.S. government had imposed few restrictions on immigration.

• Laissez-faire policy changed radically, however, with the Immigration Act of 1917

Comprehensively excluded Asian immigrants (Chinese, Japanese, and Koreans), who were viewed as threat to American labor and culture.

Especially Immigration Act of 1924 that imposed quotas on new immigrants—favored northern and western Europe.

These quotas remained the cornerstone of immigration policy until mid-1960s.

29

• Immigration then slowed by the severe economic depression of the 1930s.

 • Easing of legal restrictions only began after World War II. • After World War II, U.S. admitted large numbers of refugees,

an average of 250,000 entered each year through the 1950s. • During the 1940s and 1950s, immigration from Mexico and

other Western Hemisphere nations (e.g., Canada) also increasingly important—especially as agricultural laborers.

 • After 1965 there were major changes in immigration policy.

30

The Fourth Wave: 1965 to Present

• Passage of the Hart-Cellar Act in 1965 which resulted in major immigration reforms.

Eliminated all national-origin and race quotas that had favored European immigrants.

  Immigrants got priority to enter the United States if they had family here, or if they had skills in demand by U.S. employers.

• Coupled with prosperity in Europe (little motivation to out-migrate), we witnessed changed composition of U.S. immigrants.

• During the 1970s, origins of most immigrants changed from Europe to Latin America and Asia

• 1965 Act coincided with economic and political turmoil in Latin American countries (e.g., Dominican Republic, Cuba

 

31

• The volume of immigrants also rose sharply.

• The number of legal immigrants admitted annually soared from 297,000 in 1965 to over 800,000 in 1980.

 • By late 1980s, the U.S. was receiving about 600,000

immigrants per year.

• The rise in immigration in the late 1980s and into the 1990s was also fueled by the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) (Ronald Reagan, President)-1981-1989

 This granted legal resident status to persons who had

illegally lived or worked in the U.S. in the 1980s.

Recent Immigrant Population Growth• Immigration Act of 1990 had effect of further increasing the

size of immigrant flows to U.S.• Greatly increased number of immigrant visas (esp. workers

needed by U.S. employers--engineers and scientists).• In 1990s through 2007, immigration contributed 1 million

newcomers annually to the United States.Immigrants are younger and have boosted the size of the

youth populationAnd have higher fertility rates—1 in 5 U.S. children foreign

born or have at least 1 foreign parent

• Slowed after 2007 because of U.S. economic recession • Now numbers picking up again:

2011—1,062,0402012—1,031,6312013—990,553

32

33

34

35

LOCATIONS OF FOREIGN BORN AND

IMMIGRANT POPULATIONS

36

37

38

HISPANICS• Three-quarters of people identified as "Hispanic" in the 2010

census lived in 8 states:• California, Texas, Florida, New York, Illinois, Arizona, New

Jersey, and Colorado. Over half lived in three: California, Texas, Florida.

 • Favored metropolitan areas:

Traditional Gateways: New York, Los Angeles, Houston, San Antonio, Chicago, Miami, and Houston

Newer Gateways: Atlanta, Raleigh-Durham, Greensboro, Charlotte, Nashville, Las Vegas, & Phoenix, and in Florida (Sarasota, Hialeah, Orlando, Jacksonville, and Tampa)

39

ASIANS• Asians more geographically concentrated than Hispanics.

• Six in ten people live in just five states: California, New York, Texas, Hawaii, and New Jersey.   Slightly more than one in three live in California alone.

 • Other states with large Asian populations:

Illinois, Washington, Florida, Virginia, and Massachusetts

 • Conversely, in forty-one states, the Asian share of the

population falls below the national average of 4 percent. • Metropolitan Areas with the largest populations of Asians:

New York, Los Angeles, San Jose, San Francisco, Honolulu, San Diego, Chicago, Houston, Fremont, CA, and Seattle. 40

Large Metros Traditionally Been the Nexus of Minority Settlement

• Between 1990-2010, the combined white share of population in 100 largest metro areas decreased from 71% to 57%.

• Hispanics grew from 11% to 20% of population across these metro areas.

• White share of population in smaller metro areas and outside of metro territory also declined, but remains much higher, at 73% and 80%, respectively.

• Population growth trends 2000-2010 continued these trends.• By 2010, minorities (non-whites and Hispanics) comprised

more than half the population in 22 of the 100 largest metro areas, up from 14 areas in 2000 and just 5 in 1990.

41

42

Reasons for Concentrating in Certain Destinations

• Immigration often occurs in “chains” that link family members and friends to common destinations.

 • Especially, less-skilled immigrants who rely on kinship ties

and informal networks for employment opportunities. • For the Latinos and Asians who comprise the overwhelming

majority of today’s immigrants, the places where they first touch American soil contain self-sustaining ethnic communities that provide both social and economic support.

43

44

Metropolitan Destinations of Immigrants to the U.S.

• Earlier European immigrants tended to cluster in northeastern and midwestern metropolitan areas--New York, Chicago, Pittsburgh, Buffalo; smaller numbers along Pacific coast.

 

• These are still important destinations. 

• However, more recent immigrants have settled the metropolitan areas of the western and southern states.

 

• Thus, although the United States has become more racially and ethnically diverse—

 

• Diversity is not being felt uniformly throughout the country.

45

Suburban Location Trends• For most of America’s history, immigrants flocked to cities,

attracted by jobs and like-nationality groups that provided social and economic support.

• Influence of minority population growth was felt more strongly in central cities—especially largest--than in our suburbs.

 • Increasingly, minority growth is occurring in the suburbs.

• Minority dominance of growth in these suburbs is due to the growing city-suburb migration of minorities.

 • Minorities are now an important share of the net out-migration

streams to the suburbs. • Also due to increased foreign immigration directly to suburbs, and

to the high natural increase of suburban minorities (young age structures with many more births than deaths).

46

47

Suburban Location Trends (con’t)

Less of a need for foreign born to socially and economically assimilate in long-settled ethnic enclaves.

Today, many “immigrants in American are pre-assimilated”They know more about America before they come, and

many already know English.They are more upwardly mobile economically.They contemplate homeownership earlier.

48

49

50

NEIGHBORHOOD ETHNIC SEGREGATION PATTERNS

• More difficult to make simple generalizations about the neighborhood segregation patterns of ethnic groups.

• Neighborhood segregation of ethnic minorities tends to be weaker for second and third generations than the foreign born.

• Considerable evidence that ethnic groups will decentralize into suburban locations as the socioeconomic status and language skills of their members increase.

• Over a relatively short time period, one can sometimes observe the entire shifting of an ethnic neighborhood--residences, stores, churches, etc.

• There is still much persistence of neighborhoods dominated by single ethnic group in many American metropolises.

51

Are Ethnic Groups More Segregated From White Americans Than Black Populations?

• Compared to the residential segregation patterns of African-Americans, both Asian and Hispanic populations are much less segregated from white population groups (based on Index of Dissimilarity in 2010).

 Blacks vs. Whites = 59Hispanics vs. Whites = 48Asians vs. Whites = 41

 • However, simply generalizing about an ethnic group as

diversified as Hispanics is wrought with danger. 

Mexicans are most likely to reside in proximity to whites.But Cubans and Puerto Ricans are the least likely.

Racial and Ethnic Segregation Patterns, 2010(367 metropolitan areas across the U.S.)

• Average white lives in a neighborhood that is 75% white, 8% black, 11% Hispanic, and 5% Asian. Notable change since 1980, when the average white’s

neighborhood was 88% white.• The average black lives in a neighborhood that is 45% black,

35% white, 15% Hispanic, and 4% Asian. • The average Hispanic lives in a neighborhood that is 46%

Hispanic, 35% white, 11% black and 7% Asian.• The average Asian lives in a neighborhood that is 22%

Asian, 49% white, 9% black, and 19% Hispanic.

52

53

54

Theories of Intrametropolitan Location of Ethnic Groups

Spatial Assimilation Model• During the first decades of the 20th century assimilation

was usually seen as an all-or-none process.  

• Assimilation:To become similar with respect to life-styles, attitudes

and behaviors.To be absorbed and incorporated into the dominant

culture with the result that the ethnic population loses its identity.

 • American was construed as a "melting pot".

 • Native Americans urged immigrants to be 100%

Americans.

55

The Melting Pot• “Melting pot" implied that all immigrants would in time be

refined to a single specimen of red-blooded American. • Thus the spatial assimilation model views the intrametropolitan

location and segregation patterns of ethnic groups as a reflection of the state of their assimilation.

 • As individuals improve their language skills, education, and

income they attempt to leave behind less successful members of their groups.

 • That is, they convert their better socioeconomic status and

improved cultural skills into residential gain—by locating in places with greater advantages and amenities.

 • Results in lower levels of neighborhood segregation and a

more decentralized or suburban residential pattern.

56

Place Stratification Model

• Proposes that the segregation patterns and central city locations of ethnic groups will persist even after gains achieved in assimilation and socioeconomic status.

• The place-stratification model is frequently linked with the explanations given for the segregation of groups based on discrimination and prejudice.

 • That is, racial and ethnic minorities are not just sorted by

place according to their group’s relative standing in society. • Rather, members of certain groups will not be fully able to

convert their socioeconomic and assimilation gains into residence in the same hierarchically higher communities as the majority.

57

Subcultural Attachment Model

• Also proposes that the segregation patterns of ethnic groups will persist even after gains achieved in assimilation and socioeconomic status.

 • Relies on very different set of arguments. • Minority segregation is at least in part voluntary.

• That is, minority/ethnic group members seek out communities with disproportionate numbers of fellow group members because of perceived advantages of living in neighborhoods dominated by the same ethnic subculture.

 • This model thus views the ethnic neighborhood as bearing

similarities with the homogeneous and close-knit village or small town.

58

POSITIVE FUNCTIONS OF ETHNICALLY SEGREGATED NEIGHBORHOODS Validity of the Subcultural Model?

Defense Functions• Advantages of relatively homogeneous ethnic

neighborhood with relatively well-defined boundaries. 

• Enables the minority population to be readily apprised of territorial violations by "intruders" or "outsiders".

 • Defensive function reflects the fear of the minority

population of potentially harmful actions by the established majority population.

 • Thus, neighborhood homogeneity helps maintain territorial

defenses and integrity.

59

Avoidance Functions• The ethnically segregated neighborhood enables its

occupants to avoid the established and often unfamiliar and hostile way of life of the majority society.

 • Occupied by people with similar backgrounds, language,

customs. 

• Residents supported by familiar social institutions. Clubs, churches--that support the residents daily

needs and activities. 

• Thus, residents feel at ease, have links with past, & feel less social pressure to adapt and conform.

60

Preservative Functions• Segregated ethnic population facilitates the preservation

of its cultural heritage.

  Language, customs, religious social institutions,

beliefs, and its overall way of life.

 • Facilitates the passing down of customs from one

generation to another.

 • The ethnic neighborhood thus serves as a vehicle for

socialization.

61

Attack Functions • Segregated neighborhood provides the ethnic group with

a base for action in its struggle with members of the dominant society.

 • The neighborhood represents a potential power base.

Election of local government representatives, neighborhood based organizations.

  Business and related economic activities owned and

operated by ethnic populations.

Demands for cultural sensitivity in public schools.