Jul

16

Most Segregated Cities for Asians

Filed Under Original Essays and Analysis, Race and Racism, Uncategorized by Rachel  

This post is a follow-up to an earlier post, you can look at this post from July 2nd where I discuss the different dimensions of residential segregation. That post discusses a few of the methodological issues, and it links to the Census Bureau report where the data comes from. So if you are confused about the differences, between clustering and exposure (for example), you can get more information from that post. If you link to the actual Census report, they show statistical formulas that are used in calculating segregation using each method described. They also discuss other issues related to measuring segregation.

You should also keep in mind this is only measuring segregation for Asians and Pacific Islanders, and its only measuring urban segregation. I am preparing future posts on Native Americans, and you can read the previous posts on

The analysis of Asians includes 20 metro areas which met the Census criteria of having at least 3% representationthe number was 43 metros for African Americans and 36 metros for Latinos.

All data comes from the US Census Bureau

5 Least Even Metro Areas (cities where Asians are most least evenly spread; the number is the percent of people who would have to move for the group to be evenly distributed across the metro area)

  1. Orange County, CA
  2. San Jose
  3. Houston
  4. Los Angeles
  5. San Diego

5 Lowest Exposure Metros (cities where Asians have lowest chance of having contact with whites)

  1. San Jose
  2. San Francisco
  3. Los Angeles
  4. New York
  5. Oakland

5 Most Concentrated Metros (cities where Latinos are most densely concentrated/less evenly spread throughout the metro area)

  1. Riverside-San Bernardino, CA
  2. Portland, Vancouver
  3. Seattle, Bellevue, Everette
  4. San Diego
  5. San Francisco

5 Most Centralized Metros (cities where Asians are most concentrated in the central core of the city)

  1. Portland, Vancouver
  2. Riverside, San Bernardino, CA
  3. San Francisco
  4. Washington, DC
  5. Seattle, Bellevue, Everette

5 Most Clustered Metros

  1. Los Angeles
  2. San Jose
  3. Oakland
  4. Orange County, CA
  5. San Diego

Overall Most Segregated for Asians (Averaging ranks for all 5 major dimensions) Drumroll..

  1. San Francisco
  2. San Diego
  3. New York
  4. (tie) San Jose & Los Angeles
  5. Houston
  6. (tie) Riverside, San Bernardino, CA & Seattle, Bellevue, Everette
  7. Washington, DC
  8. Chicago

A Few Points for Discussion:

Like African Americans, Asians tend to be most segregated in cities where they are well represented and have a long history of settlement (i.e. San Francisco). Unlike African Americans, Asians are clearly most segregated in California. I suspect that this segregation also overlaps with class and immigration status, with those who are poorer and more recent immigrants being more segregated. I was struck by the segregation of Asians when I visited San Francisco a few year ago, and I vividly remember walking into a Jack-in-the-Box and every single worker I saw was Asian. I dont know that the neighborhood was segregated, but the number of low income Asian Americans is what I noticed. It is the only time I have ever seen a business that was a chain (presumably) owned by whites and staffed by all Asians.

Unfortunately, New York makes its obligatory appearance on the list. In case you havent noticed New York is on the most segregated list for Blacks, Latinos, and Asians; Chicago also makes the list. Not exactly something either of those cities should be proud of.

The segregation indices for Asians are also much lower than they are for Latinos or Blacks, and the Asian American population is not very evenly spread throughout the countyonly 20 cities had enough Asian Americans to run the analysis. Asian Americans are a much smaller percentage of the population than Blacks (12-13%) and Latinos (13-14%); they make-up between 3-4% of the US population, and they are the fastest growing group. Im sure there are distinctions between the levels of segregation for various Asian American ethnic groups, but it isnt as easy to guesstimate what those differences are from just looking at this data.

Comments

12 Responses to “Most Segregated Cities for Asians”

  1. Rachel on July 18th, 2007 6:09 pm

    Rescued comments from original post post on most segregated cities.

    13 Responses to Most Segregated Cities for Asians

    dylangaine on July 17th, 2007 5:00 am (Edit) surprising that in SF ranks #1. i live in NYC, i can understand all the reasons why it is that way here, but in CA were talking about 2nd/3rd/4th generation? and still segregated? i wonder then how much of this has to do with by choice. im chinese and i can speak personally on how private my family tends to be, especially towards non-chinese ppl.

    rory @ parentalcation on July 17th, 2007 11:06 am (Edit) Its pretty obvious that given any larger number of any ethnic group in an area, the more segregation you will have, but I also think that one of the reasons bigger cities usually have more segregation is because they are hubs that draw more recent immigrants.

    Given two cities with the same relative numbers and ratio of any given groups, the one that has the most recent immigrants is going to be more segregated. Except for African Americans, my impression is that each successive generation of a group will integrate themselves more and more into society. This was my observation growing up in Los Angeles. My middle class suburb had many 2nd, 3rd, and 4th generation Hispanic-Americans and Asians who were completely integrated.

    I would like to see a study that measures the relative change in segregation for successive generations.

    I am guessing that African Americans will show less integration mobility than other ethnic groups, due to their unique history. Unlike other ethnic groups, their forefathers werent voluntary immigrants, and of course there is the legacy of slavery. This is not to ignore racism, but more to say that the racism and barriers have existed for longer, become more entrenched, and become that much harder to eliminate.

    I am also afraid that with the dramatic increase in Hispanics, their will be less generational integration in the future.

    Lynn Gazis-Sax on July 17th, 2007 2:06 pm (Edit) but in CA were talking about 2nd/3rd/4th generation? and still segregated?

    Not true. In California were talking about a mix of 2nd/3rd/4th generation and immigrants. Here in Orange County, I routinely work with immigrants from various Asian countries, as well as encountering Asian-Americans who are rather further removed from the immigrant generation than I am.

    Sara no H. on July 17th, 2007 7:22 pm (Edit) Id like to know where St. Louis ranks on that list. I got ribbed about being from Dogtown all the time as a kid, and I have to admit it chafes a little to see that my current home (sunny San Diego) is on the list at all when STL isnt.

    Rachel on July 17th, 2007 7:51 pm (Edit) Asian American Sociology 101there is a huge difference between Asian American immigrant groups that are mostly refugees and Asian American immigrant groups where most people are migrating for economic opportunities.

    SO heres my theory (I have no idea if it has been tested) groups such as Laotians, Cambodians, Vietnamese, and Hmong will be more likely to be segregated than Chinese, Filipino, Korean, Japanese, Indian, etc. I think this accounts for Houstons appearance on the list. Houstons Asian Americans are mostly Vietnamese.

    But that is just one issue.A proxy for residential integration could be intermarriage, and I have data for that somewhere. The only group that wont work for is Indians because arrange marriage and pseudo-arranged marriage are still influencing Indian intermarriage patterns.

    Rachel on July 17th, 2007 7:53 pm (Edit) Sara no H, St. Louis isnt on the list on cities analyzed because its Asian American population is less then 3%.

    MikeR on July 17th, 2007 8:17 pm (Edit) Are Middle eastern peoples like the Turkish, Arabs,Persians and Arminians also included in the Asian catigory? Additionally, Are Philipino,Samoans and the other people of the pacific ocean? If they are not it would be great to also see the stats on their segregation.

    Lynn Gazis-Sax on July 17th, 2007 10:08 pm (Edit) SO heres my theory (I have no idea if it has been tested) groups such as Laotians, Cambodians, Vietnamese, and Hmong will be more likely to be segregated than Chinese, Filipino, Korean, Japanese, Indian, etc.

    That fits for Orange County; we have a Vietnamese area, but I cant think of an Indian area, even though there are plenty of Indian immigrants.

    Are Middle eastern peoples like the Turkish, Arabs,Persians and Arminians also included in the Asian catigory?

    Ill feel kind of weird, as a Greek-American, if Armenians turn out to be a different race from me, but I suppose these arbitary lines have to get drawn somewhere, so for all I know they officially are.

    Rachel on July 17th, 2007 10:28 pm (Edit) People from the Middle East are classified as white, generally speaking.

    Rachel on July 17th, 2007 10:59 pm (Edit) By the Census, not necessarily by themselves.

    Paul on July 18th, 2007 12:43 am (Edit) Im a little surprised that Honolulu (where Asians constitute about fifty-five percent of the population) didnt make the list.

    Donna Darko on July 18th, 2007 2:03 am (Edit) This will sound model minority-like but a lot of Asian American mono-racial couples choose areas with good schools and physical safety to raise their kids i.e. nice, majority white suburbs.

    lovelesscynic on July 18th, 2007 1:40 pm (Edit) I think your theory could be true, certainly for Japanese Americans. Chinese Americans Im less sure about, since they draw from such a wide range, wealthy professionals from Hong Kong, illegal immigrants from mainland China, as well as ethnic Southeast Asian Chinese. Filipino/as too, from what Ive read Filipino/as tend to be more impoverished than other members of the model minority, I dont know if this would influence living patterns.

    Donna Darko, your point is a good one, although I sometimes read those newspaper reports about reverse white flight, whites avoiding suburbs with too many Asians because the pressure would be too high. Given the journalistic standards of the day, Im not sure if they are reporting actual trends or just anti-Asian anxiety.

  2. Alas, a blog » Blog Archive » Least Segregated Cities for Asians on July 18th, 2007 6:39 pm

    [...] most segregated cities for [...]

  3. Donna Darko on July 18th, 2007 7:43 pm

    After lovelesscynic’s last comment, I responded that white flight from Asian suburbs is mostly a California and Silicon Valley-specific problem.

  4. TLB on July 19th, 2007 1:12 am

    Here in L.A., we still have restrictive covenants that forbid Koreans from moving from mid-Wilshire to The Valley or The Westside. Koreans that do so even frequently find themselves driven out of those neighborhoods.

    I kid!

    But, of course, there’s this (which can safely be ignored): tinyurl.com/2spd8e

  5. JD on July 24th, 2007 9:49 am

    Why do we always have to try and “desegregate” people??? If people of different ethnic and racial groups wanted to live together, they would!!! This is another example of why multiculturalism does NOT work.

  6. MikeR on July 24th, 2007 12:41 pm

    JD desegregation can create monocuturalism and multicuturalism helps to preserve ethnic and racial groups. I don’t understand what you mean about if people from different cultures wanted to live together they would. I think most Americans don’t mind intergration much. Are you in favor of segregation?

  7. JD on July 25th, 2007 9:19 am

    I’m just saying that most asians live in anasian neighborhoods etc. because that is what they want, same for other groups. It’s called freedom of association. I don’t think people should try to force people to live together. Sure, many people of different ethnic groups live side by side and don’t mind, but all in all, different racial and ethnic groups have a tendency to stick together. Also, I disagree about multiculturalism helping to preserve different ethnic groups. I think it has the opposite effect, it weakens them. Nowhere is chinese culture stronger than in China, however in the USA, you get a watered down version of a “chinese-american” culture. Multicult dilutes the original culture until it’s finally eliminated.

  8. Andrew on July 25th, 2007 4:20 pm

    I’d agree that ‘ethnic grouping’ and residential segregation shouldn’t automatically be associated with one another. There’s a significant difference between someone being kept out because of his or her ethnic/cultural background, and people deciding to locate to or remain in a particular residential area because of a desire to maintain ethno-cultural solidary relationships. Context, as always matters - ethnic dispersion or aggregation in residential patterns in a particular city provides only one set of data from which to extrapolate conclusions (especially normative conclusions), but not the only. History, ethno-cultural particularity, economics, etc. all factor in as well.

    I’d disagree however that multiculturalism leads to a ‘dilution’ of an original culture. I accept that multiculturalism is an over-used term, and I avoid it when I can since it means so many things to so many people. But the larger point is: haven’t we moved beyond a position of pure versus impure, original versus diluted, when it comes to culture and heritage? I’m Asian American, and I certainly don’t belong to my ‘original’ culture in respect of my language, ethics, values, politics, or what have you, despite the fact that I do see myself as more “Asian” in certain situations than others. However, I’m not sure if my relatives in the home country are so pure themselves, especially in this day and age of massive globalization and cross-cultural influence. What the U.S. has, and what has been both its strength as well as the source of its most contentious politics, is its ethno-constitutional hybridity. It would be a shame if we gave that up for nativism of whatever stripe, since the rest of the world has that in spades.

  9. Angel H. on July 25th, 2007 7:18 pm

    JD: Have you met our friend, Indigo?

  10. Rachel on July 25th, 2007 7:39 pm

    Yeah, Like Indigo, I believe this will be JD’s last comment.

    JD is banned.

  11. cynematic on February 1st, 2008 5:39 am

    I’m late to the party, but wanted to add:

    >>5 Most Concentrated Metros (cities where Latinos[?] are most densely concentrated/less evenly spread throughout the metro area)

    1. Riverside-San Bernardino, CA
    2. Portland, Vancouver
    3. Seattle, Bellevue, Everette
    4. San Diego
    5. San Francisco>SO heres my theory (I have no idea if it has been tested) groups such as Laotians, Cambodians, Vietnamese, and Hmong will be more likely to be segregated than Chinese, Filipino, Korean, Japanese, Indian, etc. I think this accounts for Houstons appearance on the list. Houstons Asian Americans are mostly Vietnamese.

  12. cynematic on February 1st, 2008 5:43 am

    Hmmm, seems to be a snafu in posting? Looks as if the latter half of my post got chopped. Basically, I was responding to your speculation that poverty plus recent immigrant status would account for greater residential segregation among various Asian ethnic subgroups, and suggesting that on the other end of the SES spectrum, the wealthy (and immigrant?) may tend to cluster as well. This is from what I can see of San Gabriel Valley neighborhoods like San Marino, for example. Fascinating, and thanks for posting the data!

Leave a Reply