Neighbourhoods and the creation stability and success of mixed ethnic unions
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 25

Neighbourhoods and the creation, stability and success of mixed ethnic unions PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 71 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

Neighbourhoods and the creation, stability and success of mixed ethnic unions. Zhiqiang Feng Paul Boyle, Maarten van Ham, Gillian Raab. linking lives through time www.lscs.ac.uk. Why study mixed-ethnic unions?. Geographical Segregation

Download Presentation

Neighbourhoods and the creation, stability and success of mixed ethnic unions

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


Neighbourhoods and the creation stability and success of mixed ethnic unions

Neighbourhoods and the creation, stability and success of mixed ethnic unions

Zhiqiang Feng

Paul Boyle, Maarten van Ham, Gillian Raab

UPTAP Workshop

linking lives through timewww.lscs.ac.uk


Why study mixed ethnic unions

Why study mixed-ethnic unions?

  • Geographical Segregation

    • Numerous studies have ignored mixing within households/families

  • Government actively promotes integration of ethnic minorities

  • Mixed-ethnic unions

    • Demonstrate break-down of ethnic barriers and are suggestive of degree of ethnic integration in a society

    • Numbers are small but increasing

    • Create new minority groups-mixed ethnic groups

UPTAP Workshop


Proportions of mixed unions by ethnic group

Proportions of mixed-unions by ethnic group

UPTAP Workshop

England and Wales, Data Source: 1991 and 2001 HHSARs


Theories

Theories

  • Assimilation

    • Most assimilated groups more likely to cross ethnic lines to out-partner

  • Demography

    • Sex ratio

    • Relative size

  • Social exchange

    • Lower status majority members partner higher status minority members

  • Segregation

    • Reduce opportunity to meet potential partners

UPTAP Workshop


Existing studies in britain

Existing Studies in Britain

  • Data sources

    • Labour Force Surveys (Jones 1984, Coleman 1985, 2004)

    • The Fourth National Survey of Ethnic Minorities (1994) (Muttarak 2003)

    • Census

      • Household SARs (Berrington 1996, Model & Fisher 2002)

      • ONS LS (Muttarak 2005)

UPTAP Workshop


Studies in britain

Studies in Britain

  • Most are descriptive

  • They tend to use cross-sectional analyses

UPTAP Workshop


Some results from previous studies

Some results from previous studies

  • Positive effects:

    • Age

    • Second generation

    • Males

    • Educational attainment

    • Higher social class

UPTAP Workshop


Some results from previous studies1

Some results from previous studies

  • Negative

    • Size of ethnic group

    • Residential segregation

    • Cultural distance

UPTAP Workshop


Issues with cross sectional analysis

Issues with cross-sectional analysis

  • We don’t know when or where marriage / cohabitation occurred

    • Prevalence vs incidence

  • Pre-marriage / cohabitation conditions unknown

    • Socio-economic situations may change after marriage / cohabitation

    • Not suitable for causal inference

UPTAP Workshop


Longitudinal analysis

Longitudinal analysis

  • Identify people who were already in Britain before partnering occurred

  • Have data on pre-marriage / cohabiting situations

  • First British study to use the ONS LS and SLS to identify geographical influences on mixed-ethnic unions

UPTAP Workshop


Why study neighbourhood effects

Why study neighbourhood effects?

  • Neighbourhoods may be important locations for social contacts

  • Places reflect social relations and constitute and reinforce social relations (Delaney 2002)

  • Places can be racialised – predominantly ethnic neighbourhoods may create “local cultures” which discourage mixed-ethnic unions

UPTAP Workshop


Why study neighbourhood effects1

Why study neighbourhood effects?

  • Previous studies find mixed-ethnic couples are more likely to live in mixed-ethnic neighbourhoods

  • However, it is not clear whether this is because mixed-ethnic couples form there or move there after marriage / cohabitation

  • Most studies use cross-sectional data so it is difficult to study event sequences

UPTAP Workshop


Objectives

Objectives

  • Measure the growth of mixed-ethnic couples and their changing geographical distribution between 1991 and 2001

  • Test whether living in a mixed-ethnic neighbourhood makes it more likely that people will end up in mixed-ethnic couples

  • Test whether people in mixed-ethnic couples are more likely to move into mixed-ethnic neighbourhoods

  • Test whether mixed-ethnic couples are more likely to dissolve than single-ethnic couples

UPTAP Workshop


Objectives1

Objectives

5.Test whether mixed-ethnic couples are less likely to dissolve if they live in mixed-ethnic neighbourhoods

6.Test whether living in a less deprived neighbourhood makes it more likely that people will end up in mixed-ethnic couples

7.Test whether people in mixed-ethnic couples are more likely to move into less deprived neighbourhoods

UPTAP Workshop


Data source

Data source

  • ONS LS

    • Longitudinal 1971-2001

    • 1% sample of England and Wales (500,000)

  • SLS

    • Longitudinal 1991-2001

    • 5.3% sample of Scottish population (265,000)

UPTAP Workshop


Definition of ethnic groups

Definition of ethnic groups

Presentation group

in the study1991 (ETHNIC9)2001(ETHGRP0)

White (W)WhiteBritish

Irish

Other white

Black (B)Black-CaribbeanBlack-Caribbean

Black-AfricanBlack-African

Black other Other Black

Black & White White & Black Caribbean

White & Black African*

Asian (A)IndianIndian

Pakistani Pakistani

Bangladeshi Bangladeshi

Other Asian (OA)ChineseChinese

Other AsianOther Asian

Others (O)Other ethnic group: White & Asian

non-mixed originOther mixed

Other ethnic group: Other ethnic group

mixed origin

UPTAP Workshop


Classifications of mixed ethnic unions

Classifications of mixed-ethnic unions

UPTAP Workshop


Number of mixed ethnic unions england wales

Number of mixed-ethnic unions England & Wales

Mixed-ethnic unions 19912001

White / Black (WB)12311737

White / Asian (WA)641902

White / Other Asians (WOA)643730

White / Others (WO)9981770

Total35135139

UPTAP Workshop


Mixed ethnic neighbourhoods

Mixed ethnic neighbourhoods

Relative size

minority population / white population

Exposure index

Diversity

Shannons entropy

UPTAP Workshop


Mixed ethnic neighbourhoods1

Mixed ethnic neighbourhoods

  • Continuous?

    or

  • Dichotomous?

  • Use different forms in different models?

UPTAP Workshop


Methodology

Methodology

  • Objective 1 (growth of mixed-ethnic unions, 1991 vs 2001)

    • ONS LS + SLS

    • Descriptive

    • Logistic / log-linear models

UPTAP Workshop


Methodology1

Methodology

  • Objective 2 & 6 – whether mixed-ethnic neighbourhoods or less deprived neighbourhoods have positive effects on formation of mixed-ethnic unions

    • ONS LS data, 1981 vs 1991, 1991 vs 2001

    • Whether people aged 6+ & single in 1981, ended up being married to, or cohabiting with, people from another ethnic group in 1991

    • Repeat for 1991-2001

    • Logistic & Heckman selection model controlling for probability of partnering

UPTAP Workshop


Methodology2

Methodology

  • Objectives 3,4,5,7 – whether mixed-ethnic couples

    • More likely to move to mixed ethnic neighbourhood

    • More likely to dissolve than single ethnic couples

    • Less likely to dissolve if living in mixed-ethnic neighbourhoods

    • More likely to move into less deprived neighbourhoods

      • ONS LS 1991-2001

      • Sample: People who were married or cohabiting in 1991

      • Logistic model of the probability of these events in 2001

UPTAP Workshop


Individual variables

Individual variables

UPTAP Workshop


Work so far

Work so far

  • Literature review

  • Research design

  • SLS proposal approved

  • Data request sent to ONS LS

UPTAP Workshop


  • Login