Locating Hispanic Americans, 1900-2020
July 2025
Working Paper Number:
CES-25-50
Abstract
This study examines Hispanic Americans' residential settlement patterns nationwide in the last 120 years. Drawing on newly available neighborhood data for the whole country as early as 1900, it documents the direction and timing of changes in two aspects of their location. First, it charts Hispanics' transition from a predominantly rural population to majority metropolitan by 1930 and also their growing presence in all regions of the U.S. while still maintaining a predominance in the West and Texas. Second, it provides the first evidence of the long-term trajectory of their segregation from whites in the metropolitan areas where they were settling. As shown by studies of more recent decades, Hispanics were never as segregated as African Americans. Nonetheless, similar to African Americans, their segregation from whites increased to high levels through the middle of the century, followed by slow decline. For both groups metropolitan segregation was driven mainly by segregation among central city neighborhoods prior to the 1940s. But new forms of segregation ' a growing city/suburb divide and increasing segregation among suburban places ' have become the largest contributors to segregation today.
Document Tags and Keywords
Keywords
Keywords are automatically generated using KeyBERT, a powerful and innovative
keyword extraction tool that utilizes BERT embeddings to ensure high-quality and contextually relevant
keywords.
By analyzing the content of working papers, KeyBERT identifies terms and phrases that capture the essence of the
text, highlighting the most significant topics and trends. This approach not only enhances searchability but
provides connections that go beyond potentially domain-specific author-defined keywords.
:
minority,
hispanic,
midwest,
metropolitan,
segregated,
segregation,
population,
urbanization,
neighborhood,
suburb,
disparity,
residential segregation,
urbanized,
suburbanization,
suburban
Tags
Tags are automatically generated using a pretrained language model from spaCy, which excels at
several tasks, including entity tagging.
The model is able to label words and phrases by part-of-speech,
including "organizations." By filtering for frequent words and phrases labeled as "organizations", papers are
identified to contain references to specific institutions, datasets, and other organizations.
:
National Science Foundation,
Geographic Information Systems,
Russell Sage Foundation,
National Institutes of Health,
Census Bureau Disclosure Review Board,
Integrated Public Use Microdata Series,
Minnesota Population Center,
Federal Statistical Research Data Center
Similar Working Papers
Similarity between working papers are determined by an unsupervised neural
network model
know as Doc2Vec.
Doc2Vec is a model that represents entire documents as fixed-length vectors, allowing for the
capture of semantic meaning in a way that relates to the context of words within the document. The model learns to
associate a unique vector with each document while simultaneously learning word vectors, enabling tasks such as
document classification, clustering, and similarity detection by preserving the order and structure of words. The
document vectors are compared using cosine similarity/distance to determine the most similar working papers.
Papers identified with 🔥 are in the top 20% of similarity.
The 10 most similar working papers to the working paper 'Locating Hispanic Americans, 1900-2020' are listed below in order of similarity.
-
Working PaperMetropolitan Segregation: No Breakthrough in Sight🔥
May 2022
Working Paper Number:
CES-22-14
The 2020 Census offers new information on changes in residential segregation in metropolitan regions across the country as they continue to become more diverse. We take a long view, assessing trends since 1980 and extrapolating to the future. These new data mostly reinforce patterns that were observed a decade ago: high but slowly declining black-white segregation, and less intense but hardly changing segregation of Hispanics and Asians from whites. Enough time has passed since the civil rights era of the 1960s and 1970s to draw this conclusion: segregation will continue to divide Americans well into the 21st Century.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperStructural versus Ethnic Dimensions of Housing Segregation🔥
March 2016
Working Paper Number:
CES-16-22
Racial residential segregation is still very high in many American cities. Some portion of segregation is attributable to socioeconomic differences across racial lines; some portion is caused by purely racial factors, such as preferences about the racial composition of one's neighborhood or discrimination in the housing market. Social scientists have had great difficulty disaggregating segregation into a portion that can be explained by interracial differences in socioeconomic characteristics (what we call structural factors) versus a portion attributable to racial and ethnic factors. What would such a measure look like? In this paper, we draw on a new source of data to develop an innovative structural segregation measure that shows the amount of segregation that would remain if we could assign households to housing units based only on non-racial socioeconomic characteristics. This inquiry provides vital building blocks for the broader enterprise of understanding and remedying housing segregation.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperFinding Suburbia in the Census
June 2025
Working Paper Number:
CES-25-40
This study introduces a methodology that goes beyond the urban/rural dichotomy to classify areas into detailed settlement types: urban cores, suburbs, exurbs, outlying towns, and rural areas. Utilizing a database that provides housing unit estimates for census tracts as defined in 2010 for all decennial census years from 1940 to 2020, this research enables a longitudinal analysis of urban spatial expansion. By maintaining consistent geography across time, the methodology described in this paper emphasizes the era of development, as well as proximity to large urban centers. This broadly applicable methodology provides a framework for comparing the evolution of urban landscapes over a significant historical period, revealing trends in the transformation of territory from rural to urban, as well as associated suburbanization and exurban growth.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperBlack Pioneers, Intermetropolitan Movers, and Housing Desegregation
March 2016
Working Paper Number:
CES-16-23
In this project, we examine the mobility choices of black households between 1960 and 2000. We use household-level Decennial Census data geocoded down to the census tract level. Our results indicate that, for black households, one's status as an intermetropolitan migrant ' especially from an urban area outside the South ' is a powerful predictor of pioneering into a white neighborhood. Moreover, and perhaps even more importantly, the ratio of these intermetropolitan black arrivals to the incumbent metropolitan black population is a powerful predictor of whether a metropolitan area experiences substantial declines in housing segregation.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperIs the Melting Pot Still Hot? Explaining the Resurgence of Immigrant Segregation
August 2004
Working Paper Number:
CES-04-10
This paper uses decennial Census data to examine trends in immigrant segregation in the United States between 1910 and 2000. Immigrant segregation declined in the first half of the century, but has been rising steadily over the past three decades. Analysis of restricted access 1990 Census microdata suggests that this rise would be even more striking if the native-born children of immigrants could be consistently excluded from the analysis. We analyze panel and cross-sectional variation in immigrant segregation, as well as housing price patterns across metropolitan areas, to test four hypotheses of immigrant segregation. Immigration itself has surged in recent decades, but the tendency for newly arrived immigrants to be younger and of lower socioeconomic status explains very little of the recent rise in immigrant segregation. We also find no evidence of increased nativism in the housing market. Evidence instead points to changes in urban form, particularly the tendency for ethnic enclaves to form as suburbanizing households leave older neighborhoods, as a central explanation for the new immigrant segregation.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperWHITE-LATINO RESIDENTIAL ATTAINMENTS AND SEGREGATION IN SIX CITIES: ASSESSING THE ROLE OF MICRO-LEVEL FACTORS
January 2016
Working Paper Number:
CES-16-51
This study examines the residential outcomes of Latinos in major metropolitan areas using new methods to connect micro-level analyses of residential attainments to overall patterns of segregation in the metropolitan area. Drawing on new formulations of standard measures of evenness, we conduct micro-level multivariate analyses using the restricted-use census microdata files to predict segregation-relevant neighborhood outcomes for individuals by race. We term the dependent variables segregation-relevant neighborhood outcomes because the differences in average outcomes for each group on these variables determine the values of the aggregate measures of evenness. This approach allows me to use standardization and components analysis to quantitatively assess the separate contributions that differences in social characteristics and differences in rates of return make towards determining the overall disparity in residential outcomes ' that is, the level of segregation ' between Whites and Latinos. Based on our micro-level residential attainment analyses we find that for Latinos, acculturation and gains in socioeconomic status are associated with greater residential contact with Whites, in agreement with spatial assimilation theory, which promotes lower segregation. However, our standardization and components analyses reveals that a substantial portion of White-Latino disparities in residential contact with Whites can be attributed to differences in rates of return; that is White-Latino differences in the ability to translate acculturation and gains in socioeconomic status into more residential contact with Whites. This is further elaborated upon by assessing the changes in contact with Whites for Whites and Latinos after manipulating single variables while holding all others constant. This can be interpreted as the role of discrimination which is emphasized by place stratification theory. Therefore we conclude that while members of minority groups make gains in residential outcomes that reduce segregation by attaining parity with Whites on social characteristics as spatial assimilation theory would predict, a substantial disparity will persist as Latinos cannot translate those gains into greater contact with Whites at the rate that Whites can. At the aggregate level of analysis, this means that White-Latino segregation remains substantial even when groups are equalized on social and economic characteristics.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperUrban-Suburban Migration in the United States, 1955-2000
February 2016
Working Paper Number:
CES-16-08
This study uses census microdata from 1960 to 2010 to look at the rates of suburbanization in the 100 largest metro areas. Looking at the racial and ethnic composition of the population, and then further breaking down these groups by income, it's clear that more affluent people were more likely to move to the suburbs. Also, the White non-Hispanic population has long been the most suburbanized group. A majority of the White population lived in suburbs by 1960 in the 100 largest metro areas, while most of the Black non-Hispanic population lived in urban core areas as late as 2000. The Hispanic and Asian populations went from majority urban to majority suburban during this period.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperApplying Current Core Based Statistical Area Standards to Historical Census Data, 1940-2020
January 2025
Working Paper Number:
CES-25-10
In the middle of the twentieth century, the Bureau of the Budget, in conjunction with the Census Bureau and other federal statistical agencies, introduced a widely used unit of statistical geography, the county-based Standard Metropolitan Area. Metropolitan definitions since then have been generally regarded as comparable, but methodological changes have resulted in comparability issues, particularly among the largest and most complex metro areas. With the 2000 census came an effort to simplify the rules for defining metro areas. This study attempts to gather all available historical geographic and commuting data to apply the current rules for defining metro areas to create comparable statistical geography covering the period from 1940 to 2020. The changes that accompanied the 2000 census also brought a new category, "Micropolitan Statistical Areas," which established a metro hierarchy. This research expands on this approach, using a more elaborate hierarchy based on the size of urban cores. The areas as delineated in this paper provide a consistent set of statistical geography that can be used in a wide variety of applications.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperChanges in Metropolitan Area Definition, 1910-2010
February 2021
Working Paper Number:
CES-21-04
The Census Bureau was established as a permanent agency in 1902, as industrialization and urbanization were bringing about rapid changes in American society. The years following the establishment of a permanent Census Bureau saw the first attempts at devising statistical geography for tabulating statistics for large cities and their environs. These efforts faced several challenges owing to the variation in settlement patterns, political organization, and rates of growth across the United States. The 1910 census proved to be a watershed, as the Census Bureau offered a definition of urban places, established the first census tract boundaries for tabulating data within cities, and introduced the first standardized metropolitan area definition. It was not until the middle of the twentieth century, however, the Census Bureau in association with other statistical agencies had established a flexible standard metropolitan definition and a more consistent means of tabulating urban data. Since 1950, the rules for determining the cores and extent of metropolitan areas have been largely regarded as comparable. In the decades that followed, however, a number of rule changes were put into place that accounted for metropolitan complexity in differing ways, and these have been the cause of some confusion. Changes put into effect with the 2000 census represent a consensus of sorts for how to handle these issues.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperForeign-Born Out-Migration from New Destinations: The Effects of Economic Conditions and Nativity Concentration
April 2010
Working Paper Number:
CES-10-09
Immigrants living in new destinations in 1995 were 2.5 times more likely to undertake a labor market migration by 2000 as those living in traditional places. This paper looks at two competing explanations for immigrants' differential secondary migration, namely nativity concentration versus labor market context. Utilizing confidential Census data for 1990 and 2000, we examine out-migration from 741 labor markets that cover the entire country and develop new destination classifications specific to the growth and composition patterns of foreign-born from the largest Asian, Latin American and Caribbean foreign-born groups, and Canadians. The hypothesis guiding the analysis was that immigrants would be less likely to leave labor markets that have both robust economic conditions and high levels of compatriot affinity as measured by nativity concentration. The combined and group models provide strong support for the argument that immigrant's out-migration decisions respond both to local labor market economic conditions and compatriot availability, net of human capital and national origin.View Full Paper PDF
