1 / 72

Race and Space in Urban America Perspectives from Census 2000

Race and Space in Urban America Perspectives from Census 2000. William H. Frey Population Studies Center University of Michigan and The Brookings Institution www.frey-demographer.org. Common Misperceptions from Census 2000. America is a diverse melting pot Cities are back

denim
Télécharger la présentation

Race and Space in Urban America Perspectives from Census 2000

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. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Race and Space in Urban AmericaPerspectives from Census 2000 William H. Frey Population Studies Center University of Michigan and The Brookings Institution www.frey-demographer.org

  2. Common Misperceptions from Census 2000 • America is a diverse melting pot • Cities are back • Racial segregation has not declined • Smaller households create "childless cities" Source: William H. Frey, analysis of 2000 Census

  3. America’s New Demographic Regions • The New Sunbelt • Melting Pot America • The Heartland Source: William H. Frey, analysis of 2000 Census

  4. Fastest Growing, 1990 - 2000 Source: William H. Frey, analysis of 2000 Census

  5. Growth 1980s and 1990s Selected New Sunbelt and Old Sunbelt States Nevada Colorado Georgia 0 10 20 40 50 60 70 30 Florida 80s Texas 90s California Source: William H. Frey, analysis of 2000 Census

  6. Immigrant Magnet States Source: William H. Frey, analysis of 2000 Census

  7. New Sunbelt, Melting Pot, and Heartland States New Sunbelt Melting Pot Heartland States Source: William H. Frey,

  8. Demographic Components, 1990s California New York Texas Immigration Domestic Migration Natural Increase Source: William Frey.

  9. Demographic Components, 1990s Colorado Georgia Pennsylvania Immigration Domestic Migration Natural Increase Source: William Frey

  10. Immigration and Domestic Migration Census Day 2000 - July 1, 2001

  11. Foreign Born U.S. Born – Out of State 1900-2000 California Transplants U.S. vs. Foreign Origin Source: William Frey

  12. Share of U.S. in Melting Pot States Foreign Born 70% Asian Language at Home 68% Spanish at Home 76% Mixed Marriages 51% Native Born 37% English at Home 34% Source: William Frey.

  13. 90 - 99 Immigrants 1. New York ------------- 1,408,543 2. Los Angeles ----------- 1,257,925 3. San Francisco --------- 494,189 4. Miami ------------------ 420,488 5. Chicago ----------------- 363,662 6. Washington ------------ 267,175 7. Houston ---------------- 214,262 8. Dallas-Fort ------------- 173,500 9. San Diego -------------- 159,691 10. Boston ------------------ 137,634 10 “Classic” Immigrant Magnet Metros Source: William H. Frey, analysis of 2000 Census

  14. Domestic Migrant Magnet Metros 90 - 99 Net Migration 1. Atlanta ---------------- 498,283 2. Phoenix --------------- 396,092 3. Las Vegas ------------- 394,331 4. Dallas ------------------ 235,611 5. Denver ----------------- 200,658 6. Portland, OR ----------- 198,896 7. Austin ------------------ 168,817 8. Orlando ---------------- 167,120 9. Tampa ----------------- 157,209 10. Charlotte --------------154,320 Source: William H. Frey, analysis of 2000 Census

  15. Hispanic Concentration2000 Source: William H Frey,

  16. 1.Los Angeles 1,819,370 2. New York 992,185 3. Chicago 600,810 4. Dallas 594,836 5. Houston 575,098 6. Miami 501,543 1990 - 2000 Greatest Hispanic Gainers Source: William H. Frey, analysis of 2000 Census

  17. Up- and Coming Hispanic Growth Magnets 2000 Populations > 50,000 • %Growth • 1. Greensboro 694 • 2. Charlotte 622 • 3. Raleigh 569 • 4. Atlanta 362 • 5. Las Vegas 262 • 6. Portland, OR 175 • 7. Orlando 170 • 8. Minn. -St. Paul 162 • 9. Reno 145 • 10. Grand Rapids 136 • 11. Salt Lake City 133 Source: William H. Frey, analysis of 2000 Census

  18. Asian Concentration2000 Source: William H Frey,

  19. 1990 – 2000 Greatest Asian Gainers 1. New York 710,809 2. Los Angeles 611,201 3. San Francisco 554,326 Source: William H. Frey, analysis of 2000 Census

  20. Up- and Coming Asian Growth Magnets 2000 Populations > 50,000 • %Growth • 1. Las Vegas 286 • 2. Atlanta 200 • 3. Austin 175 • 4 . Orlando 171 • 5. Tampa 149 • 6. Phoenix 149 • 7. Dallas 133 • 8. Portland OR 119 • 9. Minn. - St. Paul 118 • 10. Denver 115 • 11.Miami 113 Source: William H. Frey, analysis of 2000 Census

  21. Black Concentration2000 Source: William H Frey,

  22. 1990 - 2000 Greatest Black Gainers 1. Atlanta 459,582 2. New York 450,725 3. Washington DC 358,727 4. Miami 241,492 5. Chicago 181,101 6. Dallas 176,293 7. Philadelphia 162,932 8. Houston 142,304 Source: William H. Frey, analysis of 2000 Census

  23. 1990 - 2000 Major Black Growth Centers (Over 200,000 blacks and 30% growth) • % Growth • 1. Orlando 62.2 • 2. Atlanta 61.9 • 3. Miami 43.4 • 4. Tampa 36.8 • 5. Charlotte 34.7 • 6. Columbus, OH 34.6 • 7. Jacksonville, FL 34.3 • 8. Boston 33.8 • 9. Raleigh 33.1 • 10. Dallas 31.7 Source: William H. Frey, analysis of 2000 Census

  24. White Concentration2000 Source: William H Frey,

  25. 1990 - 2000 Greatest White Decliners 1. Los Angeles -843.065 2. New York -679,790 3. San Francisco -269,844 4. Philadelphia -199,359 5. Miami -118,506 6. Chicago -93,794 7. San Diego -84,448 8. Pittsburgh -81,900 Source: William H. Frey, analysis of 2000 Census

  26. 1990 - 2000 Greatest White Gainers 1. Phoenix 434,195 2. Atlanta 359,299 3. Las Vegas 326,145 4. Denver 278,445 5. Dallas 255,208 6. Portland OR 230,535 7. Seattle 199,172 8. Minn.St. Paul 191,127 9. Austin 187,426 10. Raleigh 171,168 11. Charlotte 162,258 12. Nashville 146,615 Source: William H. Frey, analysis of 2000 Census

  27. 15 – 25% Over 25% Fastest White Growth, 1990-2000 Source: William H. Frey

  28. White Dispersal to The New Sunbelt Source: William H. Frey,

  29. Greatest White Growth, 1990-2000 GrowthCountyMetro Area 175% Douglas, CO Denver 110% Forsyth GA Atlanta 99% Archuleta CO nonmet 99% Elbert CO nonmet 96% Park CO nonmet 85% Paulding CO Atlanta 85% Boise ID nonmet 84% Henry GA Atlanta 79% Custer CO nonmet 79% Loudoun VA Washington DC 77% Summit WA nonmet 76% Washington WA nonmet Source: William H. Frey,

  30. Immigrant Magnets Other Metros Non Metro Distribution by Metro Size, 2000 White Non-White Source: William H. Frey, analysis of 2000 Census

  31. America’s Patchwork Quilt Source: William H Frey,

  32. 20% and Over 10% to 20% 5% to 10% Under 5% Children Speaking Spanish at Home Source: William H. Frey, analysis of 2000 Census

  33. Families of Poverty Children Married Couples Female Head Male Head California Michigan 6 8 25 47 45 69

  34. States with Adult Dropout Gains

  35. CA Education ShiftsAdults, 1990-2000

  36. City Revival is Immigrant Driven “White Flight” Continues

  37. Central City Growth Trends, 1960 - 2000 Source: William H. Frey, analysis of 2000 Census

  38. % of Areas with 1990s Population Gains Total Population Central Cities 71% Suburbs 94% White Population Central Cities 37% Suburbs 79% Source: William H. Frey, analysis of 2000 Census

  39. Gains by Race, 1990-2000 Whites Blacks Asians Hispanics Source: William H. Frey, analysis of 2000 Census

  40. Metro Area Categories: • Melting Pots (eg. LA, NY, Miami) • North-Largely White-Black (eg. Detroit, Cleveland) • North-Largely White ( eg. Pittsburgh, Minn-St Paul) • South-Largely White Black (eg. Atlanta, Raleigh) • South & West - Largely White (eg. Seattle, Denver, Tampa)

  41. City Race Compositions, 2000 Source: William H. Frey, analysis of 2000 Census

  42. Melting Pot Metros Source: William Frey.

  43. North-Largely White-Black Metros Source: William Frey.

  44. South -Largely White-Black Metros Source: William Frey.

  45. White Growth, 1990-2000Atlanta Metro Area Gain: GT 50% Gain:10 - 50% Gain: 0 - 10% Loss: 0 -10% Loss: GT 10%

  46. White Growth, 1990-2000New York Metro Region Gain: GT 50% Gain:10 - 50% Gain: 0 - 10% Loss: 0 -10% Loss: GT 10%

  47. Minority Suburbanization and Integration is occurring for: • Melting Pot Metros • Black-gaining Metros • Multiple Race Persons Source: William H. Frey, analysis of 2000 Census

  48. Trends in Minority Suburbanization Source: William H. Frey, analysis of 2000 Census

  49. City-Suburb Dissimilarity for Metro Types Source: William H. Frey, analysis of 2000 Census

  50. Suburb Race Compositions, 2000 Source: William H. Frey, analysis of 2000 Census

More Related