race and space in urban america perspectives from census 2000
Download
Skip this Video
Download Presentation
Race and Space in Urban America Perspectives from Census 2000

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 72

Race and Space in Urban America Perspectives from Census 2000 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 200 Views
  • Uploaded on

Race and Space in Urban America Perspectives from Census 2000. William H. Frey Population Studies Center University of Michigan and The Brookings Institution www.frey-demographer.org. Common Misperceptions from Census 2000. America is a diverse melting pot Cities are back

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Race and Space in Urban America Perspectives from Census 2000' - denim


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
race and space in urban america perspectives from census 2000

Race and Space in Urban AmericaPerspectives from Census 2000

William H. Frey

Population Studies Center

University of Michigan

and

The Brookings Institution

www.frey-demographer.org

common misperceptions from census 2000
Common Misperceptions from Census 2000
  • America is a diverse melting pot
  • Cities are back
  • Racial segregation has not declined
  • Smaller households create "childless cities"

Source: William H. Frey, analysis of 2000 Census

america s new demographic regions
America’s New Demographic Regions
  • The New Sunbelt
  • Melting Pot America
  • The Heartland

Source: William H. Frey, analysis of 2000 Census

slide4

Fastest Growing, 1990 - 2000

Source: William H. Frey, analysis of 2000 Census

selected new sunbelt and old sunbelt states

Growth 1980s and 1990s

Selected New Sunbelt and Old Sunbelt States

Nevada

Colorado

Georgia

0

10

20

40

50

60

70

30

Florida

80s

Texas

90s

California

Source: William H. Frey, analysis of 2000 Census

slide6

Immigrant Magnet States

Source: William H. Frey, analysis of 2000 Census

slide7

New Sunbelt, Melting Pot,

and Heartland States

New Sunbelt

Melting Pot

Heartland States

Source: William H. Frey,

slide8

Demographic Components, 1990s

California

New York

Texas

Immigration

Domestic Migration

Natural Increase

Source: William Frey.

slide9

Demographic Components, 1990s

Colorado

Georgia

Pennsylvania

Immigration

Domestic Migration

Natural Increase

Source: William Frey

immigration and domestic migration
Immigration and Domestic Migration

Census Day 2000 - July 1, 2001

1900 2000 california transplants u s vs foreign origin

Foreign Born

U.S. Born – Out of State

1900-2000 California Transplants U.S. vs. Foreign Origin

Source: William Frey

share of u s in melting pot states
Share of U.S. in Melting Pot States

Foreign Born 70%

Asian Language at Home 68%

Spanish at Home 76%

Mixed Marriages 51%

Native Born 37%

English at Home 34%

Source: William Frey.

10 classic immigrant magnet metros
90 - 99 Immigrants

1. New York ------------- 1,408,543

2. Los Angeles ----------- 1,257,925

3. San Francisco --------- 494,189

4. Miami ------------------ 420,488

5. Chicago ----------------- 363,662

6. Washington ------------ 267,175

7. Houston ---------------- 214,262

8. Dallas-Fort ------------- 173,500

9. San Diego -------------- 159,691

10. Boston ------------------ 137,634

10 “Classic” Immigrant Magnet Metros

Source: William H. Frey, analysis of 2000 Census

slide14

Domestic Migrant Magnet Metros

90 - 99 Net Migration

1. Atlanta ---------------- 498,283

2. Phoenix --------------- 396,092

3. Las Vegas ------------- 394,331

4. Dallas ------------------ 235,611

5. Denver ----------------- 200,658

6. Portland, OR ----------- 198,896

7. Austin ------------------ 168,817

8. Orlando ---------------- 167,120

9. Tampa ----------------- 157,209

10. Charlotte --------------154,320

Source: William H. Frey, analysis of 2000 Census

hispanic concentration 2000
Hispanic Concentration2000

Source: William H Frey,

1990 2000 greatest hispanic gainers
1.Los Angeles 1,819,370

2. New York 992,185

3. Chicago 600,810

4. Dallas 594,836

5. Houston 575,098

6. Miami 501,543

1990 - 2000 Greatest Hispanic Gainers

Source: William H. Frey, analysis of 2000 Census

slide17

Up- and Coming Hispanic Growth Magnets

2000 Populations > 50,000

        • %Growth
  • 1. Greensboro 694
  • 2. Charlotte 622
  • 3. Raleigh 569
  • 4. Atlanta 362
  • 5. Las Vegas 262
  • 6. Portland, OR 175
  • 7. Orlando 170
  • 8. Minn. -St. Paul 162
  • 9. Reno 145
  • 10. Grand Rapids 136
  • 11. Salt Lake City 133

Source: William H. Frey, analysis of 2000 Census

asian concentration 2000
Asian Concentration2000

Source: William H Frey,

1990 2000 greatest asian gainers
1990 – 2000 Greatest Asian Gainers

1. New York 710,809

2. Los Angeles 611,201

3. San Francisco 554,326

Source: William H. Frey, analysis of 2000 Census

slide20

Up- and Coming Asian Growth Magnets

2000 Populations > 50,000

        • %Growth
  • 1. Las Vegas 286
  • 2. Atlanta 200
  • 3. Austin 175
  • 4 . Orlando 171
  • 5. Tampa 149
  • 6. Phoenix 149
  • 7. Dallas 133
  • 8. Portland OR 119
  • 9. Minn. - St. Paul 118
  • 10. Denver 115
  • 11.Miami 113

Source: William H. Frey, analysis of 2000 Census

black concentration 2000
Black Concentration2000

Source: William H Frey,

slide22

1990 - 2000 Greatest Black Gainers

1. Atlanta 459,582

2. New York 450,725

3. Washington DC 358,727

4. Miami 241,492

5. Chicago 181,101

6. Dallas 176,293

7. Philadelphia 162,932

8. Houston 142,304

Source: William H. Frey, analysis of 2000 Census

slide23

1990 - 2000 Major Black Growth Centers

(Over 200,000 blacks and 30% growth)

        • % Growth
  • 1. Orlando 62.2
  • 2. Atlanta 61.9
  • 3. Miami 43.4
  • 4. Tampa 36.8
  • 5. Charlotte 34.7
  • 6. Columbus, OH 34.6
  • 7. Jacksonville, FL 34.3
  • 8. Boston 33.8
  • 9. Raleigh 33.1
  • 10. Dallas 31.7

Source: William H. Frey, analysis of 2000 Census

white concentration 2000
White Concentration2000

Source: William H Frey,

slide25

1990 - 2000 Greatest White Decliners

1. Los Angeles -843.065

2. New York -679,790

3. San Francisco -269,844

4. Philadelphia -199,359

5. Miami -118,506

6. Chicago -93,794

7. San Diego -84,448

8. Pittsburgh -81,900

Source: William H. Frey, analysis of 2000 Census

slide26

1990 - 2000 Greatest White Gainers

1. Phoenix 434,195

2. Atlanta 359,299

3. Las Vegas 326,145

4. Denver 278,445

5. Dallas 255,208

6. Portland OR 230,535

7. Seattle 199,172

8. Minn.St. Paul 191,127

9. Austin 187,426

10. Raleigh 171,168

11. Charlotte 162,258

12. Nashville 146,615

Source: William H. Frey, analysis of 2000 Census

fastest white growth 1990 2000

15 – 25%

Over 25%

Fastest White Growth, 1990-2000

Source: William H. Frey

slide28

White Dispersal to The New Sunbelt

Source: William H. Frey,

slide29

Greatest White Growth, 1990-2000

GrowthCountyMetro Area

175% Douglas, CO Denver

110% Forsyth GA Atlanta

99% Archuleta CO nonmet

99% Elbert CO nonmet

96% Park CO nonmet

85% Paulding CO Atlanta

85% Boise ID nonmet

84% Henry GA Atlanta

79% Custer CO nonmet

79% Loudoun VA Washington DC 77% Summit WA nonmet

76% Washington WA nonmet

Source: William H. Frey,

slide30

Immigrant Magnets

Other Metros

Non Metro

Distribution by Metro Size, 2000

White

Non-White

Source: William H. Frey, analysis of 2000 Census

america s patchwork quilt
America’s Patchwork Quilt

Source: William H Frey,

slide32

20% and Over

10% to 20%

5% to 10%

Under 5%

Children Speaking Spanish at Home

Source: William H. Frey, analysis of 2000 Census

slide33

Families of Poverty Children

Married Couples

Female Head

Male Head

California

Michigan

6

8

25

47

45

69

city revival is immigrant driven

City Revival is Immigrant Driven

“White Flight” Continues

slide37

Central City Growth Trends, 1960 - 2000

Source: William H. Frey, analysis of 2000 Census

of areas with 1990s population gains
% of Areas with 1990s Population Gains

Total Population

Central Cities 71%

Suburbs 94%

White Population

Central Cities 37%

Suburbs 79%

Source: William H. Frey, analysis of 2000 Census

gains by race 1990 2000
Gains by Race, 1990-2000

Whites

Blacks

Asians

Hispanics

Source: William H. Frey, analysis of 2000 Census

slide40

Metro Area Categories:

  • Melting Pots

(eg. LA, NY, Miami)

  • North-Largely White-Black

(eg. Detroit, Cleveland)

  • North-Largely White

( eg. Pittsburgh, Minn-St Paul)

  • South-Largely White Black

(eg. Atlanta, Raleigh)

  • South & West - Largely White

(eg. Seattle, Denver, Tampa)

city race compositions 2000
City Race Compositions, 2000

Source: William H. Frey, analysis of 2000 Census

melting pot metros
Melting Pot Metros

Source: William Frey.

north largely white black metros
North-Largely White-Black Metros

Source: William Frey.

south largely white black metros
South -Largely White-Black Metros

Source: William Frey.

slide45

White Growth, 1990-2000Atlanta Metro Area

Gain: GT 50%

Gain:10 - 50%

Gain: 0 - 10%

Loss: 0 -10%

Loss: GT 10%

slide46

White Growth, 1990-2000New York Metro Region

Gain: GT 50%

Gain:10 - 50%

Gain: 0 - 10%

Loss: 0 -10%

Loss: GT 10%

minority suburbanization and integration is occurring for
Minority Suburbanization and Integration is occurring for:
  • Melting Pot Metros
  • Black-gaining Metros
  • Multiple Race Persons

Source: William H. Frey, analysis of 2000 Census

slide48

Trends in Minority Suburbanization

Source: William H. Frey, analysis of 2000 Census

slide49

City-Suburb Dissimilarity for Metro Types

Source: William H. Frey, analysis of 2000 Census

suburb race compositions 2000
Suburb Race Compositions, 2000

Source: William H. Frey, analysis of 2000 Census

slide52

Declines in Black Segregation 1980 - 2000

        • Seg Index Decline
  • Atlanta -15
  • Dallas -23
  • Houston -16
  • Charlotte -12
  • Raleigh -15
  • Orlando -27
  • Tampa -17

Source: William H. Frey, analysis of 2000 Census

large city segregation 2000
Large City Segregation, 2000

Black-White

Chicago, Il 87

Aurora, CO 33

Hispanic-White

Oakland,CA 70

Jacksonville, FL 25

Asian-White

New Orleans 64

Anaheim CA 20

Source: Frey, Myers

slide56

Exposure for Whites and Blacks

New York Metro, 2000

Whites

Blacks

W-B Mixed

Hispanics

Other

Whites

Blacks

Asians

Source: Frey, Myers

slide57

Exposure for Whites and Asians

San Francisco Metro, 2000

Whites

Asians

W-A Mixed

Hispanics

Other

Whites

Blacks

Asians

Source: Frey, Myers

growing cities are attracting families
Growing cities are attracting families

Suburbs are attracting smaller younger , boomer and older households

Source: William H. Frey, analysis of 2000 Census

slide59

Population and Household Growth

1970 - 2000

Source: William H. Frey

growing central cities 1990s
Growing Central Cities, 1990s

Pop Rate HH Rate Diff:

Las Vegas 85% 77% -8%

Bakersfield 41% 34% -7%

Austin 41% 38% -3%

Phoenix 35% 28% -7%

Fresno 21% 15% -6%

Orange Co 21% 11% -10%

Source: Frey, Myers

slide61

City Growth by Household Type

Source: William H. Frey

slide62

City Growth by Household Type

Source: William H. Frey

ozzie and harriet cities circa 2000
Ozzie and Harriet Cities Circa 2000

1. Santa Ana, CA 42

2. Anaheim, CA 32

3. San Jose, CA 30

4. El Paso, TX 30

5. Virginia Beach, VA 29

6. Riverside, CA 28

7. Arlington, TX 28

8. Anchorage, AK 27

9. Fresno, CA 25

10. Colorado Springs, CO 25

Source: William Frey

non family households over 65
Non-Family Households-Over 65

1. Pittsburgh, PA 14

2. St. Louis, MO 13

3. Miami, FL 12

4. Louisville, KY 12

5. Buffalo, NY 12

6. Philadelphia, PA 12

7. Baltimore, MD 11

8. Cincinnati, OH 11

9. Cleveland, OH 11

10. Toledo, OH 11

Source: William Frey.

slide65

Growth by Age, 1990-2000

Source: William H. Frey

slide66

Asian/Other

Hispanic

black

white

Los Angeles - Race Profiles by Age

Under 15

15-64

65+

Source: William Frey.

slide67

Asian/Other

Hispanic

black

white

Salt Lake City - Race Profiles by Age

Under 15

15-64

65+

Source: William Frey.

slide68

Asian/Other

Hispanic

black

white

Detroit - Race Profiles by Age

Under 15

15-64

65+

Source: William Frey.

slide69

Los Angeles – 2025

Age Structure by Race-Ethnicity

slide70

Detroit – 2025

Age Structure by Race-Ethnicity

common misperceptions from census 200071
Common Misperceptions from Census 2000
  • America is a diverse melting pot
  • Cities are back
  • Racial segregation has not declined
  • Smaller households create "childless cities"

Source: William H. Frey, analysis of 2000 Census

useful websites
Useful Websites

www.census.org www.CensusScope.org

Source: William H. Frey, analysis of 2000 Census

ad