CREAT: Census Research Exploration and Analysis Tool

Papers Containing Keywords(s): 'suburb'

The following papers contain search terms that you selected. From the papers listed below, you can navigate to the PDF, the profile page for that working paper, or see all the working papers written by an author. You can also explore tags, keywords, and authors that occur frequently within these papers.
Click here to search again

Frequently Occurring Concepts within this Search

No authors occur more than twice in this search.

Viewing papers 1 through 10 of 22


  • Working Paper

    Re-assessing the Spatial Mismatch Hypothesis

    April 2025

    Working Paper Number:

    CES-25-23

    We use detailed location information from the Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics (LEHD) database to develop new evidence on the effects of spatial mismatch on the relative earnings of Black workers in large US cities. We classify workplaces by the size of the pay premiums they offer in a two-way fixed effects model, providing a simple metric for defining 'good' jobs. We show that: (a) Black workers earn nearly the same average wage premiums as whites; (b) in most cities Black workers live closer to jobs, and closer to good jobs, than do whites; (c) Black workers typically commute shorter distances than whites; and (d) people who commute further earn higher average pay premiums, but the elasticity with respect to distance traveled is slightly lower for Black workers. We conclude that geographic proximity to good jobs is unlikely to be a major source of the racial earnings gaps in major U.S. cities today.
    View Full Paper PDF
  • Working Paper

    Contrasting the Local and National Demographic Incidence of Local Labor Demand Shocks

    July 2024

    Working Paper Number:

    CES-24-36

    This paper examines how spatial frictions that differ among heterogeneous workers and establishments shape the geographic and demographic incidence of alternative local labor demand shocks, with implications for the appropriate level of government at which to fund local economic initiatives. LEHD data featuring millions of job transitions facilitate estimation of a rich two-sided labor market assignment model. The model generates simulated forecasts of many alternative local demand shocks featuring different establishment compositions and local areas. Workers within 10 miles receive only 11.2% (6.6%) of nationwide welfare (employment) short-run gains, with at least 35.9% (62.0%) accruing to out-of-state workers, despite much larger per-worker impacts for the closest workers. Local incidence by demographic category is very sensitive to shock composition, but different shocks produce similar demographic incidence farther from the shock. Furthermore, the remaining heterogeneity in incidence at the state or national level can reverse patterns of heterogeneous demographic impacts at the local level. Overall, the results suggest that reduced-form approaches using distant locations as controls can produce accurate estimates of local shock impacts on local workers, but that the distribution of local impacts badly approximates shocks' statewide or national incidence.
    View Full Paper PDF
  • Working Paper

    Does Rapid Transit and Light Rail Infrastructure Improve Labor Market Outcomes?

    April 2024

    Authors: Maysen Yen

    Working Paper Number:

    CES-24-22

    Public transit has often been proposed as a solution to the spatial mismatch hypothesis but the link between public transit accessibility and employment has not been firmly established in the literature. Los Angeles provides an interesting case study ' as the city has transformed from zero rail infrastructure before the 1990s to a large network consisting of subway, light rail, and bus rapid transit servicing diverse neighborhoods. I use confidential panel data from the American Community Survey, treating route placement as endogenous, which is then instrumented by the distance from the centroid of each tract in LA to a hypothetical Metro route. Overall, I find proximity to Metro stations increases employment for residents, which is robust to using both a binary and continuous measure of distance. Additionally, I find evidence that increased job density in neighborhoods near new transit stations is contributing to the employment increase.
    View Full Paper PDF
  • Working Paper

    Neighborhood Revitalization and Residential Sorting

    March 2024

    Working Paper Number:

    CES-24-12

    The HOPE VI Revitalization program sought to transform high-poverty neighborhoods into mixed-income communities through the demolition of public housing projects and the construction of new housing. We use longitudinal administrative data to investigate how the program affected both neighborhoods and individual residential outcomes. In line with the stated objectives, we find that the program reduced poverty rates in targeted neighborhoods and enabled subsidized renters to live in lower-poverty neighborhoods, on average. The primary beneficiaries were not the original neighborhood residents, most of whom moved away. Instead, subsidized renters who moved into the neighborhoods after an award experienced the largest reductions in neighborhood poverty. The program reduced the stock of public housing in targeted neighborhoods but expanded access to housing vouchers in other, lower-poverty neighborhoods. Spillover effects on the poverty rates of other neighborhoods were small and dispersed throughout the city. Our estimates imply that cities that revitalized half of their public housing stock reduced the average neighborhood poverty rate among all subsidized renters by 4.1 percentage points.
    View Full Paper PDF
  • Working Paper

    Metropolitan 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 Paper

    Changes in Metropolitan Area Definition, 1910-2010

    February 2021

    Authors: Todd Gardner

    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 Paper

    The Opportunity Atlas: Mapping the Childhood Roots of Social Mobility

    September 2018

    Working Paper Number:

    CES-18-42R

    We construct a publicly available atlas of children's outcomes in adulthood by Census tract using anonymized longitudinal data covering nearly the entire U.S. population. For each tract, we estimate children's earnings distributions, incarceration rates, and other outcomes in adulthood by parental income, race, and gender. These estimates allow us to trace the roots of outcomes such as poverty and incarceration back to the neighborhoods in which children grew up. We find that children's outcomes vary sharply across nearby tracts: for children of parents at the 25th percentile of the income distribution, the standard deviation of mean household income at age 35 is $4,200 across tracts within counties. We illustrate how these tract-level data can provide insight into how neighborhoods shape the development of human capital and support local economic policy using two applications. First, we show that the estimates permit precise targeting of policies to improve economic opportunity by uncovering specific neighborhoods where certain subgroups of children grow up to have poor outcomes. Neighborhoods matter at a very granular level: conditional on characteristics such as poverty rates in a child's own Census tract, characteristics of tracts that are one mile away have little predictive power for a child's outcomes. Our historical estimates are informative predictors of outcomes even for children growing up today because neighborhood conditions are relatively stable over time. Second, we show that the observational estimates are highly predictive of neighborhoods' causal effects, based on a comparison to data from the Moving to Opportunity experiment and a quasi-experimental research design analyzing movers' outcomes. We then identify high-opportunity neighborhoods that are affordable to low-income families, providing an input into the design of affordable housing policies. Our measures of children's long-term outcomes are only weakly correlated with traditional proxies for local economic success such as rates of job growth, showing that the conditions that create greater upward mobility are not necessarily the same as those that lead to productive labor markets.
    View Full Paper PDF
  • Working Paper

    Has 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
  • Working Paper

    Structural 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 Paper

    Changes in Neighborhood Inequality, 2000-2010

    March 2016

    Authors: Daniel Weinberg

    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