The Threat of the “Other”: Ethnic Competition and Racial Interest

Gonzalez‐Sobrino, Bianca

doi:10.1111/soc4.12382

Cited by 4 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 31 publications

(80 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For instance, ethnic competition theory holds that ethnic/racial groups that are in proximity and that hold relatively equal social-structural positions become antagonistic as they contend for scarce resources such as jobs, housing, schools and state support (cf. Olzak and Nagel 1986;Cunningham 2012;Gonzalez-Sobrino 2016). In Social Psychology, group threat theory suggests that large numbers of ethnic minorities often lead to high levels of resentment, anger and fear among Whites (see for instance Tajfel and Turner 1979) or in Rotterdam's case, 'Autochtoons'.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Epilogue: What’s the Matter with Rotterdam?

Vertovec

2018

IMISCOE Research Series

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

What’s the matter with Rotterdam? This is a question I asked in a 2017 lecture (available to view at www.mmg.mpg.de), when trying to figure out how and why the city seems to disrupt common contemporary narratives concerning migration and cities. That is, social scientists since Simmel have postulated that cities are largely incubators of cosmopolitanism, or openness (if only indifference) to socio-cultural differences. It is often presumed that such openness goes together with an acceptance of ethnic diversity and immigration. Opinion polls and ethnographic research in cities usually bears out this presumption. Hence, it comes as surprising if not shocking to learn that in super-diverse Rotterdam – with over 50% of its population stemming from some 180 nations – the urban model of cosmopolitan incubator seems to fail. Authors in this collection have pointed to developments in Rotterdam by way of negative reactions to diversity, substantial voting for rightwing, anti-immigrant parties, and an ‘unhappy version’ of super-diversity in which the growth of a disapproving atmosphere has led to sharper ethnic boundaries, retreat into white enclaves, and low levels of white-ethnic minority social contact. Indeed, what’s the matter with Rotterdam?

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Epilogue: What’s the Matter with Rotterdam?

Vertovec

2018

IMISCOE Research Series

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The sociological literature on racial preferences, however, shows that racial discrimination is endogenous and should be understood as part of the structure on which the racial ideology supporting historically constituted races is based, what many social scientists have called racism (Bonacich, 1972;Bonilla-Silva, 1997;Reskin 2003;Gonzalez-Sobrino, 2016;Richeson & Sommers, 2016). The institutional perspective in the sociological literature, for example, emphasizes the social and systematic nature of racism (Wellman, 1977).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Three essays on racial discrimination

Kim¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The first chapter shows that small business owners in credit markets, in particular minority owners, have difficulty in securing sources of capital for their business operation in spite of their economic importance. The literature on credit market discrimination shows consistent results that can be interpreted as evidence that minority owners are discriminated against compared to their counterparts (i.e., white owners) in obtaining loans, which may be caused by lenders' discrimination, although such behavior is prohibited under current fair-lending laws. The first chapter uses pooled cross sectional data from the Survey of Small Business Finances (1993, 1998, and 2003) and a bivariate probit model based on Heckman's approach to deal with sample selection bias for those choosing to apply for loans that has been ignored in analyses of credit markets for small businesses owners. Our analyses confirm previous results suggesting that minority owners are discriminated against in credit markets. The second chapter examines the determinants of discriminatory preferences. The economic literature mainly presumes that racial preferences are exogenous in explaining racial disparities. The research in this area, however, has shown that economic and noneconomic considerations can influence racially prejudiced sentiments. The second chapter adds to the literature by 1) combining repeated cross-sectional survey data - from multiple waves (1976-2018) of the General Social Survey (GSS) - to get more precise estimates and test statistics with more power; 2) conducting regression analyses with different model specifications to show the robustness of the empirical results; 3) showing how empirical results are affected when careful controls for age, period, and cohort are included in the model; and 4) using a quantile regression approach to examine whether there exist differential effects of the variables of interest across the entire distribution of discriminatory preferences. Our findings show that unemployment rates are closely associated with discriminatory preferences, which is consistent with what classical labor market competition theories predict. Also, education seems to be particularly important in predicting discriminatory preferences, especially at the upper end of the preference distribution. The third chapter argues that it is important to investigate how age, period, and cohort impact the shift in racial preference, since any temporal change can be attributed to the effects of these three variables. However, it is noteworthy that there are few attempts in this area that examine the effects of these three time-dimensional variables in explaining the shifts in racial preference, reflecting the difficulties of obtaining estimates due to the linear dependence among them. To separate the contributions of age, period, and cohort on racial preference, the third chapter uses the General Social Survey from multiple waves (1972-2018) and estimates the bounds of the effects instead of obtaining point estimates. Our bounding analyses, combined with theoretical assumptions, is consistent with the theory in allowing for positive effects of age on discriminatory preferences, which interact with negative effects of period and cohort in explaining changing discriminatory preferences over time. These findings suggest that discriminatory preferences in the United States will continue to show a general downward trend, although there may be variations over time.

show abstract

Everyday multiculturalism in union: power construction in migrant domestic workers’ unionism

Baig

2019

Ethnic and Racial Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Threat of the “Other”: Ethnic Competition and Racial Interest

Cited by 4 publications

References 31 publications

Epilogue: What’s the Matter with Rotterdam?

Epilogue: What’s the Matter with Rotterdam?

Three essays on racial discrimination

Everyday multiculturalism in union: power construction in migrant domestic workers’ unionism

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About