Ethnic Differences in Settlement Patterns Among Hispanics in New York City

Transcription

1 Ethnic Differences in Settlement Patterns Among Hispanics in New York City Arun Peter Lobo 1, Ronald J. O. Flores 2, and Joseph J. Salvo 1 1 NYC Department of City Planning, 22 Reade Street, Suite 4W, New York, NY St. Lawrence University, Piskor Hall, Canton, New York Key Words: Hispanic settlement, ethnic differences in settlement, residential ethnic succession, New York City residential patterns. Introduction New York City s position as a port city has always been reflected in its diverse population. As recently as 1940, more than nine in ten city residents were white, but even then, no single European ethnic group comprised a majority. Since the passage of the 1965 Immigration Amendments, the city has received over 3 million immigrants, and ethnic changes have been complemented by equally striking racial changes. The influx of immigrants has taken place in the context of a continuing exodus of native-born whites. By 2000, whites accounted for just over one-third of the city s population. Hispanics were the largest minority group, numbering 2.2 million, and comprised 27 percent of the population; blacks and Asians comprised 25 percent and 10 percent, respectively. The role of immigration can be seen in the share of the foreign-born, which doubled, from 18 percent in 1970 to 36 percent in Among Hispanics, the increase in ethnic diversity has been striking. In 1970, the large majority of Latinos in New York were Puerto Rican, but by 2000, a declining Puerto Rican population comprised just over one-third of all Hispanics. Puerto Ricans were succeeded by other groups, including Dominicans, who comprised 26 percent of the Hispanic population, South American groups (15 percent) such as Colombians and Ecuadorians, as well as, Mexicans (nine percent). The importance of cultural and structural differences between European ethnic groups has long been recognized and a considerable amount of scholarship has focused on how these differences have manifested themselves in settlement patterns (Logan, 2000). While there has been much research on the settlement patterns of Hispanics overall, little attention has been given to variation among Hispanic ethnic groups, except for a handful of studies on Puerto Ricans, Mexicans, and Cubans. Still fewer studies have examined variations in Hispanic ethnic settlement when multiple groups are settling in the same labor and housing markets, as is the case in New York City. The diverse array of new Hispanic immigrants settling in New York City in large numbers provides the opportunity to fill this gap in our understanding of ethnic differences in Hispanic residential settlement. Moreover, it allows us to examine the process of Hispanic ethnic succession now underway in New York, with newer Hispanic groups succeeding Puerto Ricans, and to highlight how distinct ethnic clusters have emerged as ethnic groups compete for neighborhood turf. Human ecology in its various forms has served as the foundation for much of the scholarship on the dynamics of ethnic settlement. Given their lack of resources, new immigrant groups have historically clustered in older, less expensive, housing in centralized locations near employment. Further when the social distance between the original inhabitants and the new immigrants was high, the former moved away, leaving behind vacancies that were quickly filled by newly arrived members of the immigrant group. As neighborhoods experienced a shift in occupancy from white to nonwhite and from native-born to immigrant, this process of invasion-succession resulted in neighborhood deterioration (Schwirian, 1983). Underlying these classic visions was the assumption that neighborhood change and immigrant settlement were, at their core, socioeconomic processes operating. The models assume a free and open market where competition determined the shifting and sorting (Schnore, 1972) of population groups across city areas. The assumptions of the classic ecological models of neighborhood change were based on growing monocentric, industrializing cities that needed large numbers of unskilled immigrants. But the premise that immigrants would be economically and socially at the bottom of the social queue is increasingly coming into question. Today s service-based economy has fueled employment in highly skilled, highly paid occupations, as well as in low paying, low skilled service occupations, and newly arrived immigrants can be found at both ends of the occupational spectrum. The higher socioeconomic background of many recent immigrants serves to enhance their housing and residential choices. Unlike earlier waves of immigrants, they are able to directly settle in middle class white communities; however, others choose to reside with coethnics in immigrant enclaves (Alba et al., 2000). In this case clustering/segregation may not reflect economic vulnerability, but rather strength. The emergence of a service-based economy has 2145

2 produced a dual city in New York, a result of cleavages across race, class, gender, nativity and ethnicity. In an attempt to model this diversity as it is reflected in space, Marcuse (1997) sees the city landscape dotted with citadels, enclaves and ghettos. The citadel, most analogous to the imperial enclave, is where power and hierarchy are visibly displayed in new walled cities, such as the Trump Tower in Manhattan. Reflecting the other extreme of urban polarization is the ghetto, which represents populations involuntarily clustered, and left out of the social and economic mainstream. In contrast, the ethnic enclave is a voluntary form of settlement that is economically integrated with the mainstream, and is a means of enhancing its members economic, social and political identity (p. 242). In this paper, we focus on the clustering patterns of Puerto Ricans, Dominicans, and South Americans; by looking at the racial structure of these clusters, we highlight how Hispanic ethnic settlement intersects with the city s overall racial hierarchy. Moreover, we argue that, as Logan (2000) found with European groups, ethnicity itself is a potent force that is wielded, as a group moves into a neighborhood and eventually comes to dominate it. This is especially evident in the succession now underway in New York, where newer Hispanic groups compete to succeed longer-resident Puerto Ricans. At the same time, there are stable Hispanic multiethnic neighborhoods, where different groups co-reside, and where their common middle-class backgrounds help cement ethnic relationships. Neighborhood Classifications New York s 2,217 census tracts are spread across five counties (Figure 1), which are known as boroughs : the Bronx, Brooklyn, Manhattan, Queens, and Staten Island (not shown). We created a neighborhood typology, appropriate for the city, that took into account the racial/ethnic structure of neighborhoods. We examined tracts with at least 100 persons and defined nine mutually exclusive neighborhood types (Figure 2). In four of these neighborhood types, just one race/ethnic group whites, blacks, Asians, or Hispanics was dominant, if the group comprised 50 percent or more of the population and each of the other groups had less than 20 percent. Hispanic-dominant neighborhoods were scattered through the south Bronx and northeast Brooklyn, as well as in Washington Heights in northern Manhattan and Corona in Queens. There were also neighborhoods were Hispanics coreside with whites (Hispanic-white neighborhoods, heavily in Queens), blacks (Hispanic-black neighborhoods, primarily in the south Bronx and northeast Brooklyn), and Asians (Hispanic-Asian neighborhoods in Queens), where each of the major groups comprised 20 percent or more of the population, and others were less than 20 percent. Hispanic-melting pot neighborhoods had three groups, including Hispanics, each with 20 percent or more of the population, and these too were largely in Queens. Tracts that did not fall in the above classification had only a small Hispanic presence, but had substantial proportions of whites, blacks and Asians. These tracts were labeled Other melting pot neighborhoods. Growth in Hispanic Neighborhoods, Hispanic neighborhoods grew from 817 tracts in 1990 to 933 tracts in Over eight-in-ten Hispanics lived in these neighborhoods in 1990 and This growth was primarily a result of white-dominant neighborhoods turning Hispanic-white, in Ridgewood and Woodhaven in western Queens, and in the northern and eastern Bronx, and to a small extent in northern Staten Island. Hispanic neighborhoods also transitioned, from one type to another, a reflection of shifts in patterns of coresidence between Hispanics and nonhispanics. In Queens, for example, many Hispanic-white tracts turned Hispanic-melting pot areas, as whites left and Asians and Hispanics moved in. The largest proportionate increase was evident in Hispanic-Asian neighborhoods, which more than tripled, from 21 to 67. Hispanic-black tracts numbered 363 and Hispanicdominant numbered 134 in These were the poorest areas in the city and housed one-half of the Hispanic population. Ethnic Clusters and Multiethnic Hispanic Neighborhoods An ethnic cluster was said to exist when one group accounted for 50 percent or more of Hispanics in a tract (Figure 3). There were 493 Puerto Rican clusters in 1990, overwhelmingly concentrated in the Bronx, Brooklyn, and Manhattan. This transition table at the bottom of Figure 3 shows how the decline in the Puerto Rican population resulted in neighborhood succession between 1990 and Of the 493 Puerto Rican clusters, only 278 tracts, or 58 percent, remained Puerto Rican in 2000; these were the poorest clusters, with Hispanic household income averaging only $19,800. Clusters turning over included 16 tracts in the West Bronx that turned Dominican-majority, and 173 tracts in the West Bronx and Brooklyn that transitioned into neighborhoods with no ethnic majority. These 173 tracts without an ethnic majority were overwhelmingly Puerto Rican-Dominican in composition, and were a result of both, a decline in the Puerto Rican population, 2146

3 as well as an increase in Dominicans. There were also 60 newly emerged Puerto Rican clusters in the north and east Bronx, in tracts that were formerly nonhispanic (primarily white-dominant), but that turned Hispanic due to Puerto Ricans moving in from other parts of the borough. Hispanic household income in these tracts stood at $30,600, indicative of the middle-class background of Puerto Ricans moving there. But with the decline in the Puerto Rican population, the total number of Puerto Rican clusters had dropped by nearly one-third, to 354 tracts in Dominican clusters more than doubled, from 38 tracts in 1990, to 80 tracts in The number of South American clusters in 2000 declined slightly, to 67, as other groups moved in, turning these clusters into multiethnic Hispanic neighborhoods. Neighborhoods with no ethnic majority saw the largest numerical increase, doubled from 216 tracts to 432 tracts during this period Ethnic Clusters: Ghettos Versus Enclaves Figure 4 shows ethnic clusters in 2000, on the right, and the racial structure of these clusters on the left. The table presents the racial structure of these clusters in both 1990 and As noted earlier, the classic ecological/assimilation framework assumed that ethnicity and immigrant status reinforced spatial concentration as members of an ethnic community found valuable resources in concentrated numbers. In this sense, ethnic enclaves reflect a social and voluntary component to segregation. But Marcuse (1997) notes that other concentrations fall outside the economic mainstream, marginalizing groups who live there, and refers to these areas as ghettos. Hispanic ethnic concentrations run the gamut on this continuum, from enclaves to ghettos. To highlight this hierarchy of neighborhood settlement, we examine the racial/ethnic structure and the socioeconomic profile of these clusters and note where they fit into the city s overall racial hierarchy. Puerto Rican Clusters The role of class is clearly evident in the spatial patterns of Puerto Ricans, who have the longest history in the city. Though they declined 12 percent in the 1990s, Puerto Ricans still accounted for over one-inthree Hispanics in The arrival of the largest waves of Puerto Ricans in the post-world War II years paralleled the decline of the city's manufacturing sector, which was the major source of employment for this blue-collar group (Salvo et al., 1994). Labor force participation rates declined, and there was a huge increase in poverty, which has persisted over the decades. Puerto Rican clusters were overwhelmingly in the city s poorest sections, with 202 tracts or 57 percent in Hispanic-black neighborhoods in 2000, primarily a result of public housing located in these areas. The concentration of Puerto Ricans and blacks in these ghettos, has resulted in residential propinquity between the two groups. The residential index of dissimilarity between Puerto Ricans and blacks in the Bronx, with its heavy concentration of public housing, was just 34. In comparison, the residential index of dissimilarity between the two groups was 63 in Queens, a borough that does not have much public housing. The overall decline in the Puerto Rican population has also been evident in neighborhoods in public housing. According to the Housing and Vacancy Survey, the share of Puerto Rican households who lived in public housing declined from 19 percent in 1991 to 17 percent in 1999, providing Dominicans, as we will see, an opportunity to increase their presence in such housing. Puerto Rican clusters also existed in middle-class neighborhoods, with 85 tracts, or nearly one-quarter in Hispanic-white tracts in 2000, and 24 tracts (seven percent) in Hispanic-melting pot areas. Many of these clusters are in leafy low density neighborhoods in the north and east Bronx, reflecting Puerto Rican suburbanization within the city. The movement of Puerto Ricans into these formerly white middle-class tracts, turned these neighborhoods Hispanic-white in While the overall Puerto Rican population in the Bronx declined, these neighborhoods were the only areas in the borough that gained Puerto Ricans. This movement has followed patterns set by earlier European ethnic groups, with outflows from the southern part of the borough into the eastern and northern Bronx. But these middle-class clusters were home to less than 30,000 Puerto Ricans, and represent Puerto Rican residential assimilation, rather than vibrant ethnic enclaves. Dominican Clusters While the overall Puerto Rican population has been in decline, Dominicans increased by 67 percent in the 1990s, thanks to high fertility and immigration, to reach 554,000 in Dominicans are heavily concentrated in low wage jobs in the cyclical garment industry and in the service sector (Pessar, 1995). Moreover, a significant share of Dominicans is of African ancestry, which exposes them to racial discrimination. Dominicans, like Puerto Ricans before them, suffer from extreme poverty, family instability and persistent economic stress. Despite their high rates of poverty, less than four percent of Dominican households lived in public housing at the start of the 1990s, as the long waiting list for this scarce source of housing has usually shut out 2147

4 most newer immigrant groups. As a result, Dominicans have had to use government vouchers that only partly subsidize housing costs, a more expensive alternative to public housing. Close to 12 percent of Dominican households at the start of the decade lived in units that were subsidized by the Federal, State, or/and city governments; these were largely concentrated in the 16 Dominican clusters in Washington Heights in northern Manhattan and in Corona, Queens. Dominicans could speak their own language in these neighborhoods and gradually acculturate to mainstream society. Immigrants have traditionally concentrated in such areas, which can often smooth their transition to mainstream society. Hispanic household income in these clusters ($24,300) was about average, and these neighborhoods fell somewhere between Marcuse s ghettos and enclaves. By the close of the decade, the share of Dominicans in subsidized housing had doubled, to nearly one-quarter of all Dominican households. The growth in subsidized units took place primarily in Hispanic-black neighborhoods of the West Bronx, in buildings that were abandoned in the era of white-flight of the 1970s. These buildings were acquired by the city through tax foreclosures and rehabilitated in the following decades at a cost of billions of dollars (Lobo et al., 2002). Dominicans have used government subsidies to occupy much of this housing throughout the 1990s. By 2000, Dominicans comprised a majority of Hispanics in many tracts across the West Bronx, largely resulting in Dominican clusters in Hispanic-black neighborhoods increasing to 51 in 2000, from 14 in Thus, Puerto Rican concentration and entrenchment in public housing has directly affected the residential choices of the similarly economically disadvantaged, but more recently arrived Dominicans, shaping their reliance on subsidized housing. It points to competition among Hispanic ethnic groups for scarce government resources. Logan (2000) notes that an ethnic group s economic adaptation does not occur in a vacuum and directly affects the experiences of other ethnic groups. In other words, in advancing their own economic interests, Puerto Rican actions have helped shape the experiences of Dominicans. The departure of many Puerto Ricans from public housing in the 1990s, however, has given Dominicans greater access to such housing, with the share of Dominican households in public housing doubling, reaching eight percent at the close of the decade. Much of the Dominican increase in public housing took place in Hispanic-black tracts in the South Bronx, but this was not sufficient to dislodge the Puerto Rican majorities in these neighborhoods. Due to the increasing presence of Dominicans in subsidized and public housing, Hispanic-black neighborhoods absorbed nearly onehalf of the increase in the city s Dominican population. In prior decades, levels of segregation between Dominicans and blacks have been high, but the growth of Dominicans in Hispanic-black tracts has resulted in increasing co-residence between the groups. In the city overall, the level of segregation between the two groups declined from 70 in 1990 to 65 in In the Bronx, with its abundance of public and subsidized housing, there was a decline in the moderate level of segregation between Dominicans and blacks, from 49 in 1990, to 43 in In Queens, however, with its paucity of public housing, segregation remained high, with an index of approximately 70 in both periods. South American Clusters Colombians and Ecuadorians, who largely comprise the city s South American population, are more likely to be well educated, urban professionals than other Hispanic immigrants (Guarnizo et al., 1999). While Ecuadorians are not as well educated or concentrated in white collar occupations as Colombians, their overall levels of human capital and white collar employment are notably higher than Hispanics overall (Flores, 1999). As a result, their socioeconomic profile in the United States is close to that of mainstream Americans. In 1990, over one-half of the 70 South American clusters were in Hispanic-white tracts, and one-third in Hispanic-melting pot neighborhoods, where Hispanic household income was in excess of $38,000. The relatively high incomes of South Americans and the low percentage that self-identified themselves as black, gave them access to these middle-class neighborhoods, without causing extensive outflows of whites, resulting in an integrated pattern of settlement. Socioeconomically, South American clusters, including those in Hispanic-Asian neighborhoods, were much more economically stable than either Dominican or Puerto Rican clusters levels of poverty and public assistance recipiency were below city averages, and families were more likely to have a married couple present (Lobo et al., 2002). South American clusters did not fit the mold of the classic ethnic enclave as Hispanics, and South Americans in particular, did not dominate demographically in these neighborhoods. But these neighborhoods, primarily in Queens and also home to many Asian immigrants, had enormous economic vitality and a bustling immigrant street life. Hispanics in these neighborhoods seemed well on their way to social and economic integration with the mainstream. The 1990s saw continued high levels of immigration from South America that were absorbed in 2148

5 and around South American clusters in Queens. The high volume of South American flows, coupled with continuing white out-migration and negative natural increase, as well as strong Asian growth, resulted in dramatic changes in South American patterns of coresidence with nonhispanics. The number of South American clusters that were Hispanic-white dropped, from 37 in 1990 to 14 in 2000, or just 21 percent of South American clusters. In contrast, the share of South American clusters in Hispanic-Asian tracts increased from 9 to 21, or 31 percent of the total. The number of clusters in Hispanic-dominant and Hispanic-melting pot areas also grew, to 6 (nine percent) and 26 (39 percent), respectively, in Unlike the case with Puerto Ricans and Dominicans, there were no South American clusters in Hispanic-black neighborhoods, partly due to the group s low reliance on public housing. While there was a perceptible shift in the racial make-up of South American clusters, from Hispanic-white mix to Hispanic- Asian, and to a less extent, to Hispanic-dominant and Hispanic-melting pot, South American clusters continued to be vibrant economically, with an average household income of $38,000. Multiethnic Hispanic Neighborhoods As seen earlier, tracts with no ethnic majority saw the biggest increase, from 216 tracts in 1990, to 432 in The ethnic composition in these tracts was distinct, depending on the racial configuration of the area. Tracts without any ethnic majority that were Hispanicblack were heavily in the west Bronx and northeast Brooklyn and were overwhelmingly Dominican-Puerto Rican. Hispanic household income stood at just $22,300 in these Hispanic-black tracts in 2000, compared to $29,000 for all tracts without an ethnic majority. On the other end of the spectrum, tracts without an ethnic majority that were Hispanic-white ($35,300), Hispanic- Asian ($33,900), and Hispanic-melting pot ($34,200) were overwhelmingly in Queens, were middle-class, and had large concentrations of Puerto Ricans, South Americans, Dominicans, as well as Mexicans and Central Americans. The large number of Puerto Ricans in these tracts is testament to the emerging middle-class in this community; the movement into western Queens included flows from poorer areas, such as Bushwick and Cypress Hills in Brooklyn, and was as step up for Puerto Ricans in those neighborhoods. In tracts without an ethnic majority in Western Brooklyn, with its mix of Hispanic-white and Hispanic-dominant areas, Puerto Ricans were again the largest group, followed by Mexicans, Dominicans, and South and Central Americans. Tracts with no ethnic majority were home to increasing numbers of Hispanic ethnics. In 1990, 81 percent of Puerto Ricans lived in Puerto Rican clusters, but by 2000, this share had dropped to just 56 percent; those living in tracts with no ethnic majority increased from 14 percent to 34 percent (data not shown). Similarly, the share of Dominicans living in tracts with no ethnic majority increased from 22 percent in 1990, to 36 percent in 2000, and the share of South Americans in such neighborhoods increased from one-third to onehalf during this period. While Logan (2000) stresses competition between ethnic groups, multiethnic neighborhoods can be seen as an example of ethnic groups cooperating with each other. These multiethnic neighborhoods are primarily middle-class, and it is possible that common class interests help cement relationships between the groups. Indeed, Guarnizo et al. (1999) found that Colombian entrepreneurs benefit from multiethnic concentrations because they enhance markets for their goods and services. Discussion From an ecological perspective, Puerto Rican concentrations reflect the most recent iteration of a long history of ethnic successions in these older, inner city areas. From a political-economic perspective, however, their concentration reflects a long legacy of discrimination and housing disinvestment. These concentrations have not occurred in a free market, but have been actively shaped by the State, especially with respect to the location of public housing. But close to one-third of Puerto Rican clusters were in Hispanicwhite and melting pot middle-class neighborhoods, indicative of a growing middle-class component to the population. In the 1990s, with continuing out-migration, Puerto Rican clusters declined, starting a process of neighborhood succession that highlights how ethnic groups compete for neighborhood turf. Puerto Rican concentration and entrenchment in public housing has directly affected the residential choices of Dominicans, shaping their reliance on subsidized housing. Logan notes that an ethnic group s economic adaptation does not occur in a vacuum and directly affects the experiences of other groups. Thus, in advancing their own economic interests, Puerto Rican actions have helped shape the experiences of Dominicans. The departure of Puerto Ricans from public housing, however, has allowed Dominicans to move into these Hispanic-black neighborhoods, which resemble Marcuse s ghettos. Thus, public housing, which has served to isolate Puerto Ricans, is now likely to do the same for Dominicans. Interestingly, the original Dominican cluster in Washington Heights, while poor, exhibits 2149

6 many of the characteristics of a vibrant enclave. While Dominicans have been the largest group moving into Puerto Rican neighborhoods, they have also been joined by the more recently arrived Mexicans. It is very likely that many Mexican clusters will emerge in the next decade in Western Brooklyn, as they continue to move into these tracts, edging out other groups. As very recent immigrants, Mexicans do not have access to public housing, and have so far escaped the high levels of isolation that public housing entails. In contrast with the Bronx and Brooklyn, Hispanic settlement in middle-class Queens reflected the better economic resources of South American immigrants. It is clear that economic assimilation and residential integration are not always consonant, as economically successful ethnics such as South Americans may prefer to live with co-ethnics in racially diverse communities, rather than with just whites. Finally, in multiethnic tracts, we find a variant on Marcuse s ethnic enclave type, with a diverse array of Hispanic ethnic groups coresiding with Asians and whites in vibrant multiethnic enclaves. The settlement patterns observed raise questions regarding the emergence of Hispanic ethnicity as a potent force. The recency of arrival of many Hispanics, and their settlement in ethnic clusters, makes it more likely that nationalist identities will be chosen over a panethnic Hispanic label, which is a political creation of the U.S. It will be interesting to see how the growth of multiethnic Hispanic neighborhoods, which are based more on class affinities than cultural ones, affects the evolution of a panethnic Hispanic identity. 1 The views expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Department of City Planning or the City of New York. The authors would like to acknowledge the assistance of Drew Minert, Alathia Ashman, and Timothy Calabrese. Bibliography Alba, R., J. Logan, and B. Stults The changing neighborhood contexts of the immigrant metropolis. Social Forces 79: Flores, Ronald J. Ortiz The Recently Arrived Foreign Born in New York State in New York State in the 21 st Century, edited by Thomas A. Hirschl and Tim B. Heaton Westport: Praeger Publishing Guarnizo, Luis Eduardo and Luz Marina Diaz Transnational Migration: A View From Colombia. Ethnic and Racial Studies 22: Lobo, Arun Peter, Ronald Flores, and Joseph Salvo The Impact of Hispanic Growth on the Racial/Ethnic Composition of New York City Neighborhoods. Urban Affairs Review 37 (5): Logan, John R Still a Global City: The Racial and Ethnic Segmentation of New York in Globalizing Cities: A New Spatial Order?, edited by Peter Marcuse and Ronald van Kempen Oxford: Blackwell Publishers Marcuse, Peter The Enclave, The Citadel and the Ghetto: What has Changed in the Post-Fordist U.S. City. Urban Affairs Review 33: Pessar, P A Visa for a Dream: Dominicans in the United States. New York: Allyn and Bacon. Salvo, Joseph, Ronald Ortiz and Arun Peter Lobo Puerto Rican New Yorkers in New York: New York City Department of Planning. Schnore, Leo The Urban Scene. New York: The Free Press Schwirian, Kent Models of Neighborhood Change. Annual Review of Sociology 9:

7 Figure 1. Selected Neighborhoods in New York City Woodlawn Williamsbridge Washington Heights Harlem West Bronx South Bronx BRONX MANHATTAN East Harlem College Point Fort Totten Clinton Chelsea Lower East Side Park Slope Greenpoint Williamsburg Astoria Woodside Jackson Heights Corona Ridgewood Elmhurst Flushing Bushwick Richmond Hill Woodhaven Cypress Hills City Line Ozone Park East New York Queens Village QUEENS Sunset Park BROOKLYN Far Rockaway Coney Island INSET Port Ivory St George STATEN ISLAND 2151

8 Figure 2. Patterns of Co-residence in Hispanic Neighborhoods, 1990 and 2000 Joint Statistical Meetings - Section on Government Statistics Neighborhood Type Dominant Hispanic Hispanic-White Hispanic-Black Hispanic-Asian Melting Pot Census Tracts HISPANIC NEIGHBORHOODS Hispanic-dominant 50% + in a tract. Everyone else < 20% Hispanic-black Each with 20% + Everyone else < 20% Hispanic-white Hispanic-Asian 2152 Hispanic-melting pot Three groups each with 20% +

9 Figure 3. Ethnic Clusters in Hispanic Neighborhoods, 1990 and 2000 Joint Statistical Meetings - Section on Government Statistics Census Tracts Ethnic Cluster Puerto Rican majority Dominican majority 1990 South American majority No ethnic majority Tracts in 2000 Total, Puerto Rican Dominican S. American No ethnic Nonhispanic Neighborhood Type 1990 cluster cluster cluster cluster Puerto Rican majority Dominican majority South American majority No ethnic majority Nonhispanic 1, ,227 Total tacts, , ,284

10 Figure 4. Patterns of Co-residence and Ethnic Clusters in Hispanic Neighborhoods, 2000 Joint Statistical Meetings - Section on Government Statistics Neighborhood Type Tracts Dominant Hispanic Hispanic-White Hispanic-Black Hispanic-Asian Melting Pot Ethnic Cluster Puerto Rican majority Dominican majority South American majority No ethnic majority Tracts Total Puerto Rican Clusters Dominican Clusters S. American Clusters No Ethnic Cluster All Hispanic tracts Hispanic-dominant Hispanic-White Hispanic-Black Hispanic-Asian Hispanic-Melting Pot