In this paper we derive and evaluate measures of multigroup segregation. After describing four ways to conceptualize the measurement of multigroup segregation-as the disproportionality in group (e.g., race) proportions across organizational units (e.g., schools or census tracts), as the strength of association between nominal variables indexing group and organizational unit membership, as the ratio of between-unit diversity to total diversity, and as the weighted average of two-group segregation indices-we derive six multigroup segregation indices: a dissimilarity index (D), a Gini index (G), an information theory index (H ), a squared coefficient of variation index (C), a relative diversity index (R), and a normalized exposure index (P ). We evaluate these six indices against a set of seven desirable properties of segregation indices. We conclude that the information theory index H is the most conceptually and mathematically satisfactory index, since it alone obeys the principle of transfers in the multigroup case. Moreover, H is the only multigroup index that can be decomposed into a sum of between-and within-group components.

The census tract-based residential segregation literature rests on problematic assumptions about geographic scale and proximity. We pursue a new tract-free approach that combines explicitly spatial concepts and methods to examine racial segregation across egocentric local environments of varying size. Using 2000 census data for the 100 largest U.S. metropolitan areas, we compute a spatially modified version of the information theory index H to describe patterns of black-white, Hispanic-white, Asian-white, and multi-group segregation at different scales. The metropolitan structural characteristics that best distinguish micro-segregation from macro-segregation for each group combination are identified, and their effects are decomposed into portions due to racial variation occurring over short and long distances. A comparison of our results to those from tract-based analyses confirms the value of the new approach.

This article addresses an aspect of racial residential segregation that has been largely ignored in prior work: the issue of geographic scale. In some metropolitan areas, racial groups are segregated over large regions, with predominately white regions, predominately black regions, and so on, whereas in other areas, the separation of racial groups occurs over much shorter distances. Here we develop an approach-featuring the segregation profile and the corresponding macro/micro segregation ratio-that offers a scale-sensitive alternative to standard methodological practice for describing segregation. Using this approach, we measure and describe the geographic scale of racial segregation in the 40 largest U.S. metropolitan areas in 2000. We find considerable heterogeneity in the geographic scale of segregation patterns across both metropolitan areas and racial groups, a heterogeneity that is not evident using conventional "aspatial" segregation measures. Moreover, because the geographic scale of segregation is only modestly correlated with the level of segregation in our sample, we argue that geographic scale represents a distinct dimension of residential segregation. We conclude with a brief discussion of the implications of our findings for investigating the patterns, causes, and consequences of residential segregation at different geographic scales.

No abstract

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.Despite recent economic gains in much of the Third World, sociologists have paid little attention to the possible national benefits of economic growth. Instead, they have focused on the possible harm caused by the Third World's dependence on foreign investment and trade. Our analysis questions that focus. Based on data for 62 less-developed countries spanning two decades, we find that the effects of dependence largely vanish when (1) the effects of economic growth are carefully specified, and (2) the "semi-difference" models currently in vogue in cross-national research are replaced by more appropriate difference or difference-of-logs (growth-rate) models. In light of the common claim that economic growth in the Third World benefits only the rich, we employ measures of national welfare that the rich cannot readily monopolize. The effects of economic growth on national welfare are large and robust, whereas the effects of dependence are hard to find. These findings contradict earlier studies, which had concluded that the effects of dependence dwarf the effects of economic growth. "One truth is straightforward. Industrialization is the only hope for the poor " -C. R Snow (1963:30) E conomic growth is a means to an enda better life for the masses. Unless economic growth raises general living standards, true "development" has not taken place. Sociologists, economists, and policymakers agree that improved living standards for all is the ultimate objective of economic policy. Has economic growth benefited the masses in the Third World? Economic growth-an increase in the total value of goods and services produced per person-has been occurring throughout the Third World over the past few decades. But because goods and services can be concentrated in the hands of a few, * Direct all correspondence to Glenn Firebaugh, economic growth need not raise the standard of living for the masses. A recent cross-national study in sociology concluded that economic growth has yielded little benefit for the masses in the Third World (Wimberley and Bello 1992). "The most unforgivable sin of development planners is to become mesmerized by high growth rates in the GrossNational Product and to forget the real objective of development" (Haq 1976:24).To determine whether national living standards are improving or deteriorating, researchers must examine changes in phenomena, like food consumption, that are not easily concentrated. In investigating returns to economic growth, then, the key issue is whether, and to what extent, the expansion of goods and services in the Third World has improved measures that the rich cannot monopolize. To address that issue, we examine the effects of economic growth on changes in f...

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org..

No abstract

No abstract