Global Neighborhoods: Beyond the Multiethnic Metropolis

Abstract

Neighborhoods where blacks and whites live in integrated settings alongside Hispanics and Asians represent a new phenomenon in the United States. These “global neighborhoods” have previously been identified in the nation’s most diverse metropolitan centers. This study examines the full range of metropolitan areas to ask whether similar processes are occurring in other parts of the country. Is there evidence of stable racial integration in places that lack such diversity? What are the paths of neighborhood change in areas with few Hispanic or Asian residents, or areas where Hispanics are the principal minority group, or where there is no large minority presence at all? We distinguish four types of metropolitan regions: white, white/black, white/Hispanic/Asian, and multiethnic. These necessarily differ greatly in neighborhood composition, but some similar trajectories of neighborhood change are found in all of them. The results provide new evidence of the effect of Hispanic and Asian presence on black-white segregation in all parts of the country.

The Emerging Spatial Organization of the Metropolis: Zones of Diversity and Minority Enclaves in Chicago

“…Although the pathways of neighborhood change in Chicago are also found to a greater or lesser degree in most metropolitan regions of the nation (as shown by Zhang and Logan 2016), we are not arguing that they have the same spatial pattern in other places. But the same questions apply elsewhere and the methodological approaches used here can be applied generally to reveal similarities and differences around the country.…”

“…The analysis relies heavily on visualization of spatial patterns, comparing maps in 1980 and 2010 (which is the period studied on a national scale by Zhang and Logan 2016). Similar analyses could be completed for any metropolitan area, and we presume that these could reveal important differences.…”

“…More significantly it does not consider the substantial differences in background, culture, and class position among Hispanics and Asians from different national origins (Logan et al 2002). These are the same broad group categories studied by Zhang and Logan (2016), and we apply their definition of group presence in a census tract: at least a quarter of the average group share in metro areas across the country. In 1980 we count non-Hispanic whites as present if their share is at least 15.8% of the tract total, blacks at least 4.7%, Hispanics at least 3.6%, and Asians at least 0.7%.…”

“…The disadvantage is that doing so could result in very dissimilar definitions in various parts of the country. Zhang and Logan (2016) dealt with this issue by using a single national standard but making comparisons only among regions with similar composition. In this case, the national criteria result in categories that on average well represent the intended typology.…”

“…Decades of continual mass immigration are leading to significant revision of residential patterns including the disappearance of white neighborhoods and the emergence of various kinds of multiethnic communities (Lee and Wood 1991; Frey and Farley 1996; Denton and Massey 1991; Parisi, Lichter, and Taquino 2015). The “global neighborhood” is a prime example of a major new category that includes a significant presence of non-Hispanic whites and blacks along with newer Hispanic and Asian minorities (Logan and Zhang 2010; Zhang and Logan 2016). Studying the decade-by-decade pathways to the creation of these diverse communities, Logan and Zhang provide evidence for a now-common sequence of neighborhood change where an all-white neighborhood first accepts growing shares of Hispanic and/or Asian residents and subsequently is available for entry by African Americans.…”