Do places with much socio-economic segregation but little racial segregation exist?

[Docere]

Originally Posted by Capsicum

Doesn't Minneapolis have a large proportion of its black population being of Somalian descent?

Yes I believe Somalis make up something like a third of the Black population in Minneapolis.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by Capsicum

One thing brought up in this thread by me and others is that newer, more recently diversified or recently built places are more integrated by virtue of post-dating the era of (legal) segregation and the later white flight.

And most segregation is "blacks vs. non-blacks". So if you have a place with high diversity yet few blacks (say CA) it looks more integrated. If LA were 50% black instead of 5% black or whatever it would likely have very different racial settlement patterns.

People have mentioned Atlanta as an integrated city, and I don't see it. The South suburbs are almost entirely black; the North suburbs are almost entirely non-black.

[Tuckerman]

Originally Posted by Crawford

People have mentioned Atlanta as an integrated city, and I don't see it. The South suburbs are almost entirely black; the North suburbs are almost entirely non-black.

The closer-in North suburbs (Tucker, Sandy Springs, Roswell, etc) are fairly well integrated and middle class. However, part of the reason for integration in the Atlanta area is the simple fact that African-Americans constitute a high percentage of the metro population. Further out suburbs to the North have fewer Af-Am, but North GA never had a very high percentage of Af-Am.

[Capsicum]

Originally Posted by Crawford

And most segregation is "blacks vs. non-blacks". So if you have a place with high diversity yet few blacks (say CA) it looks more integrated. If LA were 50% black instead of 5% black or whatever it would likely have very different racial settlement patterns.

People have mentioned Atlanta as an integrated city, and I don't see it. The South suburbs are almost entirely black; the North suburbs are almost entirely non-black.

That's true in most US cities, though I wonder if there is an example of an American city where blacks are more integrated than say, Asians or Latinos. Blacks also have a longer history (on average) of having large populations living separate from whites than other minorities in most US cities.

In the UK, Canada and maybe France, I think Asians, Arabs and Middle Easterners are more likely to live in enclaves with their "own race", though their populations of African descent are smaller there. Blacks in the UK and Canada at least from stats I've seen are actually more integrated in both a residential way and also more likely to marry outside their race than Asians, while in the US it's the other way around.

[Metro-One]

Funny, I have always felt that Asian / White is the most common interracial couple.

No hyperbole, but around half the people I know in Vancouver are in / have been in an Asian / White relationship.

Servers of my friends (and extended family now) are half white / Asian themselves.

South Asian and West Asians having interracial relationships seems more rare to me. I have long suspected that the prominence of religion in their cultures a major factor for that. Whereas religion plays a more secondary role for considerably larger portions of many western and East Asian cultures (making interracial / cultural relationships far more comparable on average IMO)

Can't remember the exact stat but I did some research a couple years ago on this and in Canada those with Japanese descent are the most likely to marry outside of their own race (around 70% doing so).

[Sun Belt]

Originally Posted by Omaharocks

The most segregated places I've been across the board have all been in the upper midwest and New England. California seems to be the most integrated overall.

I am not so sure why you think California is the most integrated place. It's probably the most diverse state but at a local level it remains segregated like every other city in the United States. Take Los Angeles as an example, there are census tracts that are 98% hispanic, 90% black, 85% white all within a 10 mile drive. You can drive east from coastal areas and will come across stripes or bands of racial neighborhoods in the LA Basin.

The New York Times produced a map that's reveals who lives where called Mapping Segregation.

Take a look. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...-race-map.html

[Capsicum]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

South Asian and West Asians having interracial relationships seems more rare to me. I have long suspected that the prominence of religion in their cultures a major factor for that.

Steve Jobs, Shakira, and Gigi Hadid all have part West Asian ancestry and part European ancestry.

Additionally, even if you look at the earlier history of Middle Eastern or Arab immigration to the West, say the 19th and early 20th century, most were Christian, so the religious divide was not as large.

Chinese/Indian and Black intermarriage also was common in the West Indies (places like Jamaica, Trinidad) going back to the 19th century, though that's not to say that these communities didn't have any tensions with one another.

East Asian American intermarriage was also heavily influenced by the military history of the US in the 20th century, with the war brides from Korea, Japan, the Philippines and Vietnam making up a large proportion of immigrants at various times. By contrast, in the 19th century, prior to the Asian exclusion acts, the various Asian immigrant groups mostly consisted of male laborers, like railway workers and miners.

[Chef]

The typical way of looking at segregation is through the dissimilarity index. A study from the UW Milwaukee took a different approach. It calculated the racial break down of the 50 largest cities on a block by block basis. It defined a black/white integrated block as being at least 20% black and 20% white and then calculated what percentage of the city population lived on blocks like that. It gives somewhat different results than the dissimilarity index. I think both statistical measures have use but this one probably gives a better measure of how likely blacks and whites are to be in close contact with each other. Most of the cities towards the bottom are less than 10% black which is to be expected, but there are some notable exceptions (New York, Chicago, LA, Miami)



http://www4.uwm.edu/eti/integration/integration.htm

[Steely Dan]

^ 36.90% black population in chicago?

that index must be using some pretty old data.

the black population is currently plummeting in chicago.

the ACS estimated that it fell below the 30% mark last year for the first time in over 5 decades.

the extreme black flight from chicago currently taking place is a serious problem for the city that shows no signs of stopping.

in 1980, after decades of white flight, chicago was home to 1.2M blacks that accounted for 40% of the city, but today there are fewer than 800,000 blacks in the city, and the exodus appears to be getting worse.



EDIT: here's the story

Hispanics Pass Blacks As Chicago's 2nd Largest Racial, Ethnic Group: Census
By Tanveer Ali | September 14, 2017 2:21pm | Updated on September 15, 2017 11:38am



CHICAGO — Hispanics are officially the second-largest ethnic or racial group in Chicago, based on Census data released Thursday.

Hispanics formed 29.7 percent of Chicago's population in 2016, based on Census estimates. The population climbed 17,751 over the previous year to 803,476.

Meanwhile the black population dropped by more than 40,000 in one year. There are now 793,852 black Chicagoans, about 29.3 percent of the population.

Since 2000, Chicago's black population has dropped by more than 250,000 people.

The largest racial group in Chicago is white residents. There are an estimated 882,354 white Chicagoans, about 32.6 percent of the population.

source: https://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/2017...6-2017-decline

[dave8721]

Originally Posted by Chef

The typical way of looking at segregation is through the dissimilarity index. A study from the UW Milwaukee took a different approach. It calculated the racial break down of the 50 largest cities on a block by block basis. It defined a black/white integrated block as being at least 20% black and 20% white and then calculated what percentage of the city population lived on blocks like that. It gives somewhat different results than the dissimilarity index. I think both statistical measures have use but this one probably gives a better measure of how likely blacks and whites are to be in close contact with each other. Most of the cities towards the bottom are less than 10% black which is to be expected, but there are some notable exceptions (New York, Chicago, LA, Miami)



http://www4.uwm.edu/eti/integration/integration.htm

In some cities case, the lack of a white population would also make it less likely that there would be integrated black and white blocks (Miami and Los Angeles). In Miami's case non-hispanic whites only make up 11% of the population so of course the likely hood of the ~20% black population living on the same block with the 11% white population would be small. There is quite a bit of White/Hispanic integration and some black/hispanic integration. Not as much black/white integration though they do tend to live near eachother (for example Coconut Grove with its Bahamian black area next to its old hippy white area).

[Docere]

Seattle seems to be one of the most integrated metros in the US. This is dated but still interesting:


Index of Disismilarity:

White-Black 45.6
White-Hispanic 32.8
White-Asian 33.9

Exposure Index:

White 72.1
Black 13.8
Hispanic 13.3
Asian 20.7

https://s4.ad.brown.edu/projects/div...aspx?msa=42644

[wwmiv]

Austin is simultaneously one of the most economically segregated cities in the United States and one of the most racially integrated.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by Docere

Seattle seems to be one of the most integrated metros in the US.

And Seattle is among the whitest and least black major metros. Not a coincidence. Very hard to segregate small numbers.

[emathias]

You could achieve this in two ways:

1) many races mixed well.

2) a mono-racial culture with severe economic stratification

I would assume you mean this in the U.S. I think the answer of "downtowns," is probably largely correct, although other affluent areas developed after the Federal elimination of redlining and covenants are usually relatively integrated compared to cities/neighborhoods developed prior to the elimination of those racist policies. Once an area is segregated, it can be very hard to undo that - it usually requires very high rates of mobility to achieve integration of a segregated area within a human lifetime. The other way is for a neighborhood to completely collapse and then be gentrified in a more integrated manner. If a majority-black area becomes gentrified and becomes 60% white, 20% black, 20% other, that's racially integrated compared to federal numbers, but would "feel" very white compared to a majority-black neighborhood, which I think is why areas that gentrify in that manner feel like they're segregating when, looking at the numbers, they're actually integrating, at least from a racial standpoint.

Outside the U.S., there are many, many places that are relatively racially integrated but economically segregated. And outside major international cities, it's not as common to have racially diverse populations in the Old World as compared to New World countries (the Americas plus Australia and New Zealand). There are exceptions. India has significant diversity, even though many inexperienced Westerners incorrectly assume "Indians" are all one monolithic race (I'll ignore, for the moment, that the concept of "race" is fraught with problems to start with), but Indian culture is EXTREMELY economically segregated, and that also applies to former parts of British India, i.e. Pakistan and Bangladesh.

Historically, there was relatively less mixing across the Subcontinent, even with the British increasing it, especially with railroads. But today, tech centers in India, such a Bangalore, are huge mixing-pots of Indians from all over the country coming together, from fair-skinned, almost Mediterranean-looking people from the North, to very dark-skinned people from South India, people who might be compared to Australian aboriginal peoples. These different groups usually live and work together without too much conflict, especially since most modern, educated, Indians at the very least pay lip service to the idea that the caste system should be destroyed - and there are significant strides in limiting the impact of caste separations these days. But economic segregation remains the standard.

[Docere]

Originally Posted by Crawford

And Seattle is among the whitest and least black major metros. Not a coincidence. Very hard to segregate small numbers.

Yes. Small Black and Hispanic populations. Sizeable Asian population but no dominant group and it hasn't developed the Asian ethnoburbs found in California.

[Labtec]

You will tend to find Asians in the best school districts.

[Docere]

Some figures for Toronto:

Index of Dissimilarity:

White-Visible Minority 0.452
White-Black 0.512

[ilcapo]

What about Kensington in Philly or Downtown Eastside Vancouver?


Suburbs in Europe tend to be diverse and sometimes generally socionomic disadvantaged. However, the Whites are usually immigrants aswell, such as eastern european or balkans.

[Docere]

Originally Posted by ilcapo

What about Kensington in Philly or Downtown Eastside Vancouver?


Suburbs in Europe tend to be diverse and sometimes generally socionomic disadvantaged. However, the Whites are usually immigrants aswell, such as eastern european or balkans.

European cities are less white and public housing is more dispersed. Minorities are concentrated in lower income neighborhoods but they usually live alongside poor and working class whites.

[Docere]

All-Black neighborhoods are pretty much a US thing due to both a higher percentage of the population and the history of residential segregation.

Compare the Caribbean populations in say, New York, Toronto and London. In NYC they mostly live in overwhelmingly Black neighborhoods, while in the other two cities they tend to live in lower income areas often alongside working class whites and South Asians.