Structural versus Ethnic Dimensions of Housing Segregation
March 2016
Working Paper Number:
CES-16-22
Abstract
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.
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.
:
black,
minority,
ethnicity,
ethnic,
hispanic,
white,
metropolitan,
segregated,
discrimination,
segregation,
disadvantaged,
population,
racial,
interracial,
race,
housing,
residential,
socioeconomic,
neighborhood,
suburb,
resident,
home,
disparity,
residential segregation
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.
:
Metropolitan Statistical Area,
Harvard University,
Supreme Court,
Decennial Census,
Research Data Center,
American Community Survey,
Russell Sage Foundation,
Public Use Micro Sample,
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 'Structural versus Ethnic Dimensions of Housing Segregation' are listed below in order of similarity.
-
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 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 PaperLocating Hispanic Americans, 1900-2020🔥
July 2025
Working Paper Number:
CES-25-50
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.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 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 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 PaperChanges in Neighborhood Inequality, 2000-2010
March 2016
Working Paper Number:
CES-16-18
Recent work has suggested that higher income inequality may be a desirable attribute of a neighborhood in that it represents diversity, even though high (and rising) inequality appears to be detrimental to the nation as a whole. The research reported here has determined the key characteristics of a census tract that are associated with the level of inequality in 2000 or 2010, and those associated with changes in income inequality between 2000 and 2010. For the change, the strongest influence is a negative effect for the level of income inequality in 2000; that is, higher income inequality in 2000 leads to a decline over the decade, ceteris paribus. Neighborhoods with higher proportions or levels of the following population and housing characteristics tend to have both higher income inequality and a larger increase in income inequality between 2000 and 2010: individuals in poverty, those with a bachelor's degree, older individuals, householders living alone, and median rent, and lower median housing value and household income. Among these, perhaps the most important determinant is the percent in poverty in 2000. Furthermore, as the baseline level of demographic and economic diversity increases, the better the baseline and change characteristics explain the change in the Gini index from 2000 to 2010.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperWho Gentrifies Low Income Neighborhoods?
January 2008
Working Paper Number:
CES-08-02
This paper uses confidential Census data, specifically the 1990 and 2000 Census Long- Form data, to study the demographic processes underlying the gentrification of low income urban neighborhoods during the 1990's. In contrast to previous studies, the analysis is conducted at the more refined census-tract level with a narrower definition of gentrification and more narrowly defined comparison neighborhoods. The analysis is also richly disaggregated by demographic characteristic, uncovering differential patterns by race, education, age and family structure that would not have emerged in the more aggregate analysis in previous studies. The results provide little evidence of displacement of low-income non-white households in gentrifying neighborhoods. The bulk of the income gains in gentrifying neighborhoods are attributed to white college graduates and black high school graduates. It is the disproportionate in-migration of the former and the disproportionate retention and income gains of the latter that appear to be the main engines of gentrification.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperWhat Drives Racial Segregation? New Evidence Using Census Microdata
October 2002
Working Paper Number:
CES-02-26
Residential segregation on the basis of race is widespread and has important welfare consequences. This paper sheds new light on the forces that drive observed segregation patterns. Making use of restricted micro-Census data from the San Francisco Bay Area and a new measurement framework, it assesses the extent to which the correlation of race with other household characteristics, such as income, education and immigration status, can explain a significant portion of observed racial segregation. In contrast to the findings of the previous literature, which has been hampered by serious data limitations, our analysis indicates that individual household characteristics can explain a considerable fraction of segregation by race. Taken together, we find that the correlation of race with other household attributes can explain almost 95 percent of segregation for Hispanic households, over 50 percent for Asian households, and approximately 30 percent for White and Black households. Our analysis also indicates that different factors drive the segregation of different races. Language explains a substantial proportion - more than 30 percent - of Asian and Hispanic segregation, education explains a further 20 percent of Hispanic segregation, while income is the most important non-race household characteristic for Black households, explaining around 10 percent of Black segregation.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperHas Falling Crime Invited Gentrification?
January 2017
Working Paper Number:
CES-17-27
Over the past two decades, crime has fallen dramatically in cities in the United States. We explore whether, in the face of falling central city crime rates, households with more resources and options were more likely to move into central cities overall and more particularly into low income and/or majority minority central city neighborhoods. We use confidential, geocoded versions of the 1990 and 2000 Decennial Census and the 2010, 2011, and 2012 American Community Survey to track moves to different neighborhoods in 244 Core Based Statistical Areas (CBSAs) and their largest central cities. Our dataset includes over four million household moves across the three time periods. We focus on three household types typically considered gentrifiers: high-income, college-educated, and white households. We find that declines in city crime are associated with increases in the probability that highincome and college-educated households choose to move into central city neighborhoods, including low-income and majority minority central city neighborhoods. Moreover, we find little evidence that households with lower incomes and without college degrees are more likely to move to cities when violent crime falls. These results hold during the 1990s as well as the 2000s and for the 100 largest metropolitan areas, where crime declines were greatest. There is weaker evidence that white households are disproportionately drawn to cities as crime falls in the 100 largest metropolitan areas from 2000 to 2010.View Full Paper PDF
