Reynolds Farley
William H. Frey
Changes in the Segregation of Whites from Blacks
During the 1980s: Small Steps toward a More
Racially Integrated Society
No. 92-257
Research
Reports
Population Studies Center
University of michigan
;:
\
.
Reynolds Farley
William H. Frey
Changes in the Segregation of Whites from Blacks
During the 1980s: Small Steps toward a More .
Racially Integrated Society
No. 92-257
Research Report
September 1992
Reynolds Farley is Professor of Sociology and Faculty Associate at the University of Michigan Population
Studies Center, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
William H. Frey is Research Scientist and Associate Director for Training at the University of Michigan
Population Studies Center, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
;:
,.
CHANGES IN THE SEGREGATION OF WHITES FROM BLACKS DURING THE 1980S: Small Steps toward a More Racially Integrated Society INTRODUCTION
High levels of black-white reSidential segregation have become a staple of American
urban life for much of the twentieth century.
While other racial and ethnic groups became
aSSimilated geographically, blacks were constrained to reside in selected neighborhoods. and
communities.
These separate black and white residential patterns were reinforced and
maintained by a series of institutional mechanisms which evolved over time and led to peak
segregation levels during the 1960s (National AdviSOry Commission on Civil Disorders 1968).
Evidence from the 1970's decade shows a discernible but slight diminution in segregation levels
(Massey and Denton 1987, 1988). These reductions resulted. in part, from attitude changes and
legislation traced to the mid-1960's Civil Rights movement.
This paper represents the first analysis of black-white reSidential segregation for 1980­
1990. It evaluates patterns for all metropolitan areas with substantial black populations. The
results show a continued reduction in residential segregation, across metropolitan areas,
suggesting that the forces aimed at lowering institutionalized segregation have had some effect.
The next section recounts the primary influences on black-white segregation, historically. through
the mid-1960s. The subsequent section points up forces, which evolved Since the 1960s. that
have acted to reduce segregation. These introductory sections will be followed by an evaluation
of 1980-1990 segregation patterns. An appendix presents 1980 and 1990 segregation scores for
all metropolitan areas.
Development of Institutionalized Segregation
Urban histOrians report that black-white residential segregation was not extreme at the
tum of this century.
In northern cities, small numbers of blacks shared neighborhoods with
2
immigrants from southern and eastern Europe, and in southern cities, enclaves of blacks were
scattered across the urban landscape. In both regions, a few prosperous blacks lived In largely
white neighborhoods (Gatewood 1990. pp. 65-66, 194-196; Green 1967; Kusmer 1976: Lieberson
1963. Chap. 3: Rabinowitz 1978; Spear 1967, Chap. 1).
Whites, in an era of Social Darwinism, desired to maintain a social and physical distance
from supposedly inferior blacks. so a system of racial residential segregation was Imposed upon
blacks as they migrated to cities. a system which was not forced upon Italians, Poles or Jews.
Southern cities legislated where blacks and whites could live but the NAACP won the
Buchangn vs. Wgrley suit (1917) overturning these Jim Crow ordinances (Vose 1959). Less than
a decade later. however. the Supreme Court upheld the use of restrictive covenants to prevent
blacks, Asians, Jews or any other targeted minority from occupying a home (Corrigan vs. Buckley
1926). These were written into the deeds of many residential developments built during the first
half of this century.
President Truman's Commission on Civil Rights in 1947, for example,
estimated that 80 percent of the land in Chicago was covered by racially restrictive covenants
(Committee on Civil Rights 1947, pp 68-69).
In the north, blacks who moved Into white areas were targeted for violence.
Racial
competition for land helped trigger the bloody World War I era riots in East St. Louis (Rudwlck,
1966) and Chicago (Chicago Commission on Race Relations 1922). That war led to the growth
of a middle-class black population. some of whom sought better housing located in white
neighborhoods. The use of intimidation and violence toward such blacks was symbolized by the
two highly publicized trials of Dr. Ossian Sweet In Detroit in the late 1920s (Levine 1976. pp. 163­
165; Canot 1974, pp. 300-303; Capeci 1984, pp. 6-7; Thomas 1992, pp. 137-139).
A more genteel. and perhaps even more effective, way of preserving segregation was
denying blacks the credit they needed to purchase homes in white neighborhoods. Congress, in
the early 1930s, established the Home Owner's Loan Corporation to allow families buffeted by
3
the Depression to retain their homes.
This agency and its progeny -- the Federal Housing
Administration (FHA) -- developed the modem mortgage which. for the first time. permitted
middle- and lower-income families to become homeowners. As part of their program. the FHA
encouraged the drawing of color-coded maps indicating the credit worthiness of neighborhoods.
Operating on the assumption that a racial transition inevitably led to a drastic fall in home values,
areas which were racially mixed as well as those containing Jews -- regardless of their economiC
status -- were shown on red on these maps which continued to influence lending practices after
World War II (Jackson 1985. pp. 185-186).
By 1940, a system of American Apartheid (Massey 1990) was firmly in place as
demonstrated by the Taeubers (1965. Table 4). Using block data for the 109 cities with large
black populations in 1940, they determined that interracial neighborhoods were extremely rare
and that the typical city had a segregation score of 85. That is. it would have been necessary to
shift either 85 percent of the white or 85 percent of the black population to eliminate segregation.
Building New Ghettos after World War /I
Although the Supreme Court overturned the enforcement of restrictive covenants
(Shelley vs. Kraemer 1948), the institutional forces encouraging segregation were so monumental
that black-white residential isolation did not decline in the quarter century after World War II.
Indeed. the Taeubers reported that segregation increased between 1940 and 1950 in 83 of the
109 cities they investigated.
Four specific strategies exacerbated black-white segregation.
First were mortgage
lending patterns. Between 1945 and 1970. 29 million new homes and apartments were added to
the nation's housing stock which included 37 million units in 1940 (U. S. Bureau of the Census
1943. Table 2; 1975, Table N-156). This building was strongly encouraged by federal agencies:
the FHA by insuring mortgages: Fannie Mae by creating a secondary market for mortgages
thereby increasing the flow of capital to the housing market; and the Veterans' Administration's
4
programs encouraging home ownership by veterans and surviving spouses. As Jackson (1985)
described it, the nation invaded and conquered a suburban ·crabgrass frontier- following World
War II.
Redlining policies, which were endorsed by the federal agencies and by the ethical
standards of the National Association of Real Estate Boards which prohibited introducing
minorities into white neighborhoods, assured that housing market decisions were made on a
color-coded basis and that the crabgrass frontier in the East and Midwest would be white
(McEntire 1960, p. 245). FHA mortgage policies apparently replaced restrictive covenants as the
most effective weapon maintaining segregation (Kain and Quigley 1975, p.300). Of course,
hundreds of central-city neighborhoods went from white to black occupancy after World War II,
,but the first black to enter such areas often had to purchase a home for cash or on a land
contract, use agents operating on the fringes of the real estate Industry, or find a white who would
act as front for the transaction.
Second, throughout, the late 1940s blacks who sought better housing in white areas were
targets for intimidation and sometimes for violence. Hirsch (1983) described the many incidents
of whites stoning the houses and cars of blacks who dared to be the pioneers in Chicago white
neighborhoods. In the suburb of Cicero, 46 homes of blacks were attacked in a two-year interval.
Violence over this issue eventually led to three deaths in Cicero and the mobilization of the
National Guard (Squires m..a!. 1987, p. 120; Hirsch 1983. pp.89-91). Similar attacks occurred In
other cities. but this violence abated when it became clear to whites that they could move from
racially changing central cities and into suburbs where government-backed loans facilitated their
purchasing home in all-white neighborhoods (Thompson, Lewis, and McEntire 1960, p.63;
Dodson 1960: p. 107).
Third, after World War II individual suburbs developed numerous strategies for keeping
blacks out. The techniques to accomplish this -- generally non-violent ones -- are most fully
documented for Dearbom, Michigan (Good 1989) and Parma, Ohio CU. S. vs. City of Panna
5
1981). Both places -- and presumably many other suburbs - developed reputations for extreme
hostility toward blacks. Real estate agents agreed not to rent or sell to blacks, and those few
blacks who might move in were visited by the police who encouraged them to leave for their own
safety. Zoning ordinances were changed and variances were granted or denied so as to prevent
any construction which might be open to blacks. As a result, many large eastern and midwestern
cities by 1970 were surrounded by a necklace of white suburbs, leading the Kerner Commission
to observe that the policies of the post-war era divided the country -.. .into two societies; one
largely Negro and poor, located in the central cities; the other, predominantly white and affluent,
located in the suburbs and outlying areas (National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders
1968, p. 22).
Finally, the construction of public housing in many cities encouraged residential
segregation. As conceived in the 1930s, this housing was to provide temporary shelter to poor
families as they moved into the middle class, but by the early 1960s, public housing in large cities
became the home of last resort for the most despised and dispossessed group in America:
problem families often headed by an impoverished black woman (Friedman 1967).
Federal
spending for urban renewal after World War II paid for the destruction of older homes occupied by
blacks. Instead of dispersing this population to white central city neighborhoods or the suburbs,
public housing was built. Advocates recommended scattered site housing, but whites in central
city neighborhoods and in the suburbs refused to allow such units. The protracted litigation about
public housing in Chicago (Hills vs. Gatreaux 1976; Squires!lS!. 1987) and in Yonkers illustrates
the tenaCity of local reSidents when threatened by the possible arrival of poor blacks. So public
housing units were constructed with the foreseeable result of further concentrating the black
population in largely black areas. (Adams §1.i[. 1991, pp. 109-111: Bickford and Massey 1991:
Hirsch 1983, pp. 223-227; Lemann 1991, p. 74; Squires~.1989. p. 103).
6
Together, these forces operating in the immediate post-World War II period had the effect
of preserving and, in some cases, increasing high levels of black-white segregation.
This
occurred despite the beginning development of a black middle class population which could
afford the housing cost in white suburban communities.
In this respect the black experience differs from other racial and ethnic groups.
As
Lieberson (1963. Chaps. 3, 4 and 5) showed, European immigrants were residentially segregated·
from native-born Americans upon arrival, but this isolation decreased as their economic status
improved.
individuals.
Indeed, it appears that the first to leave ethnic ghettos were the most successful
Blacks were the exception.
As the Jim Crow system spread throughout cities.
prosperous blacks were denied the option to live among whites and were forced back into the
ghetto, leading Zunz (1982: 398), on the basis of his investigation of class, race and segregation
in Detroit, to observe that blacks lived urban history in reverse.
Studies based on the 1960 and 1970 censuses showed that skin color, not economic
status, was the cause of segregation since, regardless of their prosperity or poverty, blacks were
segregated from their white peers (Farley 1975. pp. 882-888; Massey 1979a and 1981a; Simkus
1978; Taeuber 1965; Taeuber and Taeuber 1965, Chap. 4).
CHALLENGING THE PATTERN OF RACIAL SEGREGATION
While institutionalized racial segregation seemed to be well entrenched
by the mid­
1960s, the Civil Rights movement set in motion a series of developments that served to counter
practices and attitudes that led to segregation.
Interacting with these was a continued
SOCioeconomic advancement of the black population together. Four related developments served
to arrest continued segregation during the 1970s:
Changes in Racial Attitudes
First, the racial attitudes of whites had changed. When national samples of whites were
first asked about the principle of segregation, they strongly endorsed it. As part of the domestiC
7
intelligence effort at the start of Wond War II, NaRC asked a sample of 3,600 whites: "00 you
think there should be separate sections in towns and cities for Negroes to live in?"
Eighty~
four percent agreed. The most liberal group were high school graduates in the Northeast but
even among them, three-quarters endorsed residential segregation (National Opinion Research
Center 1942. Question 22).
Since the early 1960s, NaRC has asked whites whether they agree or disagree with the
statement, "White people have a right to keep blacks out of their neighborhoods if they want to,
and blacks should respect that right."
Just before the Civil Rights Act was passed, about
60 percent of whites agreed that whites could exclude blacks, but by 1990. only one white in five
agreed (Schuman. Steeh and Bobo 1985, Table 3; National Opinion Research Center 1990.
Item 127B).
Endorsing a principle is easier than accepting black neighbors or approving governmental
strategies to enforce that ideal. Changes in white attitudes, however. are much more than just
about principles. In 1958, Gallup found that 44 percent of a national sample of whites said they
would move if a black came next door. When the question was last asked -- in 1978 -- only
14 percent said having a black neighbor would trigger their fiight. (Schuman, Steeh and Bobo
1985, Table 3.3).
Since the 1970s. NaRC has asked whites whether they would vote for a law which says
a homeowner can decided for himself whom to sell to, even if he prefers not to sell to a black or
for an alternative law which says a homeowner cannot refuse to sell because of someone's race.
In the early 1970s - five years after the Fair Housing Act guaranteed blacks their property rights ­
- only one-third of whites said they would vote for an open housing law. By 1990, a majority of
whites choose the law protecting minOrity rights over homeowners' rights (Schuman, Steeh and
Bobo 1985; National Opinion Research Center 1990, Item 128).
Successes of the Civil Rights, the Open Housing and Urban Redevelopment Movements
8
Second, residential integration depended upon the success Of the civil rights movement,
especially In the field of open housing. After Wond War II, local ordinances were passed in many
communities and a few states protecting the housing market rights of blacks, Jews and Asians
(Smith 1989; Salt man 1978. 1990) but the major achievement was the Fair Housing Act of 1968,
a law upheld and even strengthened by encompassing Supreme Court rulings (Jones VB. AHred
H. Maver Co 1968; Uo S. VB, Mjtchell1971; Zuch Vs. Hussey 1975; Havens VS. Coleman 1982).
Although enforcement of the law by federal agencies was often lax (Lamb 1984. p. 172).
the open housing movement was bolstered by developments concemlng reSidential finance. In
1975. Congress passed the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA) which neither outlawed
discrimination nor told banks where to invest.
Rather it proved to be a potent "freedom of
information" requirement since it mandated that federally chartered banks and thrifts explicitly
report where they made or denied loans.
Studies in Atlanta (Dedman 1988) and Detroit
(Blossom. Everett and Gallagher 1988) demonstrated that banks loaned much more frequently to
white areas than to economically similar black neighborhoods.
In 19n. urban development groups succeeded in getting Congress to pass the
Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) which specified that federally chartered fiscal institutions
had an obligation to meet the credit needs of the entire community they served specifically
mentioning the credit needs of low and moderate income areas.
Presumably a bank which
closed branches in poor black neighborhoods and opened them in affluent white suburbs would
abrogate their responsibilities. The law took on greater importance in the 1980s as a national
system of interstate banks replaced local ones.
Community development groups challenged
mergers before federal regulatory agencies charging that banks failed to satiSfy their CRA duties.
In Atlanta. studies which linked HMDA and CRA information lead banks to create a pool of $65
million for loans in black and moderate income neighborhoods (Robinson 1992. p.104),
Presumably. these loans help to stabilize inner city neighborhoods which might have gone
9
through the usual white to black transition. Similar studies of apparent discrimination in lending
practices using HMDA have been carried out in many Cities (Feins and Bratt 1983; Leahy 1985;
Pol, Guy, and Bush 1982; Shlay 1988: Taggert and Smith 1981).
The civil rights movement was also successful in making the Fair Housing Act a strong
one. The 1988 amendments allow the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to
bring suit against violators much more easily and, for the first time, substantial financial penalties
may be assessed against those who break the law (Kushner 1992).
The open housing movement effectively kept the issue of discrimination in the housing
market before the public. In 1977, HUD carried out the first national audit study of discrimination
in the sale or rental of advertised housing
(Wienk~.
1979). In 1989, a federally sponsored
similar investigation reported that black home seekers were typically treated differently than
whites, specifically they were provided less information about their housing market choices.
Authors of the 1989 study concluded .....blacks and Hispanics experience systematic
discrimination in terms and conditions, financing assistance. and general sales effort in about half
of their encounters with real estate agents (Tumer, Stryk, and Yinger 1991. p.43). Although
there are no empirical studies of the impact of HMDA, the CRA or the strengthened Fair Housing
Law upon segregation. open housing advocates now have a much stronger hand now than in the
past.
The Supreme Court decision in the Chicago public housing litigation established the
principle that such housing could not be constructed so as to perpetuate segregation and ruled
that public housing should be spread across a metropolis. (Hills vs. Gatreaux 1976).
Subsequently. federal judges ordered scatter site public housing in many localities but relative
few units were built, largely because of the intransigent opposition of residents and partly
because federal funds for this purpose were cut drastically. The voucher plans, rent supplements
and Section 8 grants which replaced public housing in some cities encouraged a degree of
10 residential integration (Rosenbaum and Popkin 1991; Rosenbaum,1992; Uef and Goering 1987,
p. 246: Gray and Tursky 1986; Stucker 1986, P.259).
Growth of the Black Middle Class
A third factor contributing to decreases in segregation was the continued growth of the
middle· and upper-income black population. White attitudes about integration have become more
liberal and, we presume. prosperous and extensively educated blacks will be seen by whites as
"acceptable neighbors". Data from the Census of 1980 pertaining to segregation by class differed
from those for previous enumerations and revealed that blacks who held prestigious jobs, who
had large incomes or who completed many years of schooling were somewhat less segregated
from similar whites than were blacks toward the bottom of these status distributions (Denton and
Massey 1989, Table 1; Massey and Denton 1987, Table 7).
Between 1940 and the earty 1970s. the black middle class grew more rapidly than the
white. A minimum criterion for membership might be having an income at least twice the poverty
line. The percent of blacks living in such households increased from a miniscule 1 percent in
1940 to 39 percent in 1970.
Among whites, the change was from 12 percent in 1940 to
70 percent in 1970. The period between the early 1970s and 1990 involved a much slower
growth of the middle class. By 1988. about 43 percent of the black and 71 percent of the white
populations lived in households with incomes more than double the poverty line (U. S. Bureau of
the Census 1972. 1982, 1989).
There is an important change. Similar to whites, the income distribution of blacks has
become more polarized.
In 1968, 5 percent of black households had incomes in excess of
$50,000 in constant 1990 dollars. This grew to 8 percent in 1974 and continued to rise. so that by
1990, one black household in eight had such a large income. Among whites, the change was
from 15 percent with incomes above $50,000 in 1968 to 28 percent in 1990 (U. S. Bureau of the
Census 1991 a, Table B-10).
11 Members of this growing black economic elite will seek improved housing. In places with
large prosperous black populations such as Atlanta (Garreau 1991. Chap. 4) and Washington
(Dent 1992), some of them may decide to live in emerging upper-class black suburbs. Many
others. however. are likely to make housing decisions similar to their white peers, contributing. we
believe. to reductions in segregation.
The Construction of New Housing
A fourth factor necessary for declines in segregation was the construction of new
housing. Older neighborhoods often have clear and widely-known identities, sometimes with
reputations for hostility toward blacks. Newly developed areas generally lack such reputations.
In addition, fair housing advocates often target new developments for their testing, and finally,
since 1972 HUD regulations require that builders and developers who use federally backed loans
affirmatively market their properties, meaning that they are sometimes advertised In black
newspapers or on soul music stations (Lief and Goering 1987, p .. 238).
The 1970s and 1980s were years of substantial new construction. In the earlier decade
an average of 1.8 million units were started annually and. in the 1980s. approximately 1.5 million
each year (U. S. Bureau of the Census 1991b, Table 1289). This assists In reducing segregation.
BLACK-WHITE RESIDENTIAL SEGREGATION: TRENDS IN THE 1980S
The 1970s differed from previous decades in that there was an unambiguous pattern of
small declines in segregation. Studies which investigated the largest arrays of metropOlises were
emphatiC in stressing that declines outnumbered rises. albethey the decreases very modest
(Jakubs 1988; Wilger 1988). As Massey and Gross (1991, p. 13) authoritatively concluded:
"During the 1970s. there were hopeful signs that the monolithic facade of racial
segregation in U. S. Cities was beginning to crumble. After decades of persistently high
and nearly universal residential segregation between blacks and whites. the prevailing
direction of change after 1970 was downward."
12 Old black-white segregation continue to drop in the 1980s or were the 1970s aberrant
years? Here we address this question.
Areas, Data and Indexes
At the outset we note four points about the methodology and data for our investigation:.
1) We considered all metropolitan areas (PSMAs and. In New England. NECMAs)
defined for the Census of 1990 and analyzed those 232 metropolises in which there were 20.000
or more blacks or in which blaCks made up 3 percent or more of the population.
Data were
obtained from the STF-1A files of the Census of 1990 and the equivalent file from 1980. We did
not assess segregation In places with few blacks because the index of dissimilarity is unreliable if
the ratio of blacks to areal units is low.
2) Data for block groups in 1980 and 1990 were analyzed.
These averaged 903
residents in 1980 and 564 In 1990. They give a more sensitive picture of segregation - and
higher scores -- than do indexes based on census tract data. We used geographically constant
metropOlises consisting of the counties for the metropolis as defined for the 1990 enumeration.
3) In this analysis. we analyze data for people who identified themselves as white or
black on the race question. About 6 percent of whites and 3 percent of blacks went on to claim
Hispanic heritage on the distinct question which asked about Spanish-origln (U. S. Bureau of the
Census 1992, Table 2).
4) To measure segregation, we used the Index of dissimilarity, an Index which is not
influenced by the relative size of the black or white population (Zoloth 1976). Were there a
system of apartheid such that every block group in a metropoliS were exclusively black or
exclusively white, the index would take on its maximum value of 100. Were individuals randomly
assigned to place of residence. the index would approach its minimum value of zero.
The
numerical value of the index reports the proportion of either blacks or whites who would have to
13 be shifted from one block group to another to eliminate segregation; that is, to produce an index
of zero (Duncan and Duncan 1955; Jakubs 1979; Massey and Denton 1988; White 1986).
National Patterns
Trends of the 1970s continued into the 1980s. There was a pervasive pattern of modest
declines, the average index of dissimilarity falling from 69 to 65. Segregation decreased in 194 of
the 232 locations, and the drop was 5 points or more in 85 of them.
Figure 1 shows the
distributions of metropolises by their segregation scores, with the shift to the left indicating a
decline in the separation of the races.
In 1980. 14 metropolises had extremely high scores
exceeding 85. Ten years later this changed such that only four metropolises had scores at that
extreme level. In 1980, 29 metropolises might have been classified as moderately segregated if.
by that. you mean a score of less than 55. The number of "moderately" segregated places more
than doubled to 68 in 1990.
[Figure 1]
The most and least segregated locations are listed in Table 1. Looking at places where
segregation was greatest in 1990. 11 of the 15 most segregated areas are older midwestern
industrial centers and two are retirement communities in Florida. The list of most segregated
places in 1980 was dominated by older midwestern metropolises but also included seven Florida
retirement centers. Five of these disappeared from the list as their populations grew rapidly and
the new housing built during the 1980s was less racially segregated. The average score for the
most highly segregated places fell from 88 to 84.
[Table 1]
The list of metropolises with lowest levels of segregation is dominated by places whose
economic base involved the Armed Forces: Jacksonville, North Carolina (Camp LeJuene);
Lawton (Ft. Sill); Anchorage (Elmendorf Field); Fayetteville. North Carolina (Ft. Bragg) and
Clarksville (Ft. Campbell) appeared on the list both years while Fort Walton Beach (Elgin Air
FIGURE 1. Distribution of 232 Metropolitan Areas by Black-White Residential Segregation Soores: 1980 and 1990 I
1990-....
I
,.----,
,
,
,,
,,
,,
,,
,,
,,
,,
,,
,
'...
\
\
\\
\
\
19BO
\
\\
""
" '.
SOURCE: U. S. Bureau of the Census, Censuses of population and Housing; 1980. SfF.1A Files.
Indexes are based upon distributions of blacks and whites across block groups for
metropolises as defined in 1990.
TABLE 1. Metropolitan Areas with Greatest and Least Black-White Residential Segregation;
1980 and 1990
1980
o
1990
o
• METROPOLISES WITH GREATEST SEGREGATION·
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
8)
9)
10)
11)
12)
13)
14)
15)
Bradenton
Chicago
Gary
Sarasota
Cleveland
Detroit
Ft. Myers
Flint
Ft. Pierce
West Palm Beach
Ft. Lauderdale
Naples
Saginaw
Milwaukee
St. Louis
91
91
90
90
89
89
89
87
87
87
86
86
86
'85
85
AVERAGE
88
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
8)
9)
10)
11)
12)
13)
14)
15)
Gary
Detroit
Chicago
Cleveland
Buffalo
Flint
Milwaukee
Saginaw
Newark
Philadelphia
Sf. Louis
Ft. Myers
Sarasota
Indianapolis
Cincinnati
91
89
87
86
84
84
84
84
83
82
81
81
80
80
80
AVERAGE
84
• METROPOLISES WITH LEAST SEGREGATION·
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
8)
9)
10)
11)
12)
13)
14)
15)
Jacksonville, NC
Lawrence, KN
Danville
Anchorage
Fayetteville, NC
Lawton
Honolulu
Anaheim
Charlottesville
Clarksville
Colorado Springs
San Jose
EI Paso
Columbia, MO
Victoria
49
49
49
AVERAGE
45
36
38
41
42
43
43
46
47
48
48
48
48
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
8)
9)
10)
11)
12)
13)
14)
15)
31
37
38
41
41
42
43
43
43
Jacksonville, NC
Lawton
Anchorage
Lawrence. KN
Fayetteville, NC
Clarksville
Anaheim
Ft. Walton Beach
Cheyenne
Honolulu
Tucson
Danville
San Jose
Charlottesville
Killeen
45
45
45
45
45
AVERAGE
42
44
14 Force Base): Honolulu (Wheller Ariu Force Base and Peart Harbor Navy Yard); Cheyenne
(Warren Air Force Base) and Kileen (Ft. Hood) were on the 1990 list. The university towns of
Lawrence, Kansas and Charlottesville had low levels of segregation in 1990 while a similar place;
Columbia, Missouri; was among the least segregated a decade eartier.
Two metropolises
exceeding one-half million -- Honolulu and Tucson - as well as San Jose with its population of
1.5 million and Anaheim with 2.4 million were on the 1990 list suggesting that some large
metropolises have low levels of segregation. And while the percent black was small in several of
the integrated places. it was far above the national average in others including Fayetteville.
Danville. Lawton and Chartottesville.
Despite an increasing geographic dispersal of the nation's black population. a plurality of
blacks still live in areas with large black populations. Among the 23 areas with 1990 black
populations exceeding 200,000, all except one (Detroit) reduced them. Segregation levels over
the 1990s decreased (see Table 2).
These reductions were most apparent in areas which
attracted large numbers of middle class blacks during the decade, such as Atlanta. Dallas and
Houston.
[Table 2)
Metropolitan Attributes
.Was the pattem of modest' declines in segregation widespread or was it limited to
metropolises with special characteristics?
Several factors are associated with whether
segregation levels are high or low (Denton and Massey 1989; Galster 1988: Marshall and Jiobu
1975; Massey and Denton 1987; Massey and Gross 1991).
Regions
Among the most important of these is region: places in the West and South are much
less segregated than those in the Northeast or Midwest. Figure 2 shows average segregation
scores by region and the percent change during the 1980s.
In 1980, places in the most
TABLE 2. Black-White Residential Segregation for Individual Metropolitan Areas with Largest 1990 Black
Populationsa
WHITE-BLACK RESIDENTIAL SEGREGATION SCORE Region!
Metropolitan Area
1990 Black
Population
(1000)
Black Percent of
Metropolitan
Population
1990
Change
1980-90
NORTHEAST
New York
Philadelphia
Newark
Boston
2,250,026
929,907
422,802
233,819
26.3
19.1
23.2
6.2
77.8
81.5
82.8
70.4
-0.6
-1.1
-1.0
-5.9
1,332,919
943,479
423,182
355,619
200,508
22.0
21.5
17.3
19.4
12.8
87.1
88.8
81.1
86.1
75.5
-3.6
0.1
-3.9
-3.1
-5.1
1,041,934
736,153
616,065
611,243
430,470
410,766
399,011
398,093
397,993
252,340
245.726
231,654
26.6
26.0
25.9
18.5
34.7
16.1
40.6
2S.5
10.5
29.2
27.1
19.9
67.5
72.6
75.4
69.0
73.S
66.2
75.6
56.7
74.6
64.1
79.3
64.6
-3.9
-6.4
-2.4
-9.2
-2.2
-14.8
-0.2
-S.5
-6.4
-3.6
-0.3
-3.0
992,974
303,826
11.2
14.6
71.4
68.7
-8.7
-6.0
MIDWEST
Chicago
Detroit
St. Louis
Cleveland
Kansas City
SOUTH
Washington, DC
Atlanta
Baltimore
Houston
New Orleans
Dallas
Memphis
Norfolk
Miami
Richmond
Birmingham
Charlotte
WEST
Los Angeles
Oakland
aWith 1990 black populations greater than 200,000.
15 segregated region -- the Midwest -- averaged 13 points higher than those In the least segregated
region -- the West. Segregation decreased in all regions but more rapidly in the South and West
where levels were lower at the start. As a consequence, the gap between the highly segregated
Midwest and the more integrated West increased to an average of 16 points: 71 in the Midwest,
55 in the West in 1990. Only four of the 25 western metropolises -- Denver, Los Angeles.
Oakland and Portland -- had scores above 65 but in the Midwest, 48 of 61 locations had such
extensive segregation in 1990.
[Figure 2]
Functional Specialization. Metropolises differ in their economic specializations. Many of
those in the Midwest grew rapidly after the Civil War and attained a large size early this century
because they specialized in producing steel or manufacturing durable goods. Some metropolises
are centered around a major university such as Gainesville, Tuscaloosa or Athens, Georgia while
other places have an unusually large proportion of their work force employed by the state or
federal government.
Segregation levels are strongly linked to the economic base of
a community.
A
metropolis centered around a large university will have a different stock of housing and attract a
different demographic mix than another metropolises which specializes in heavy industrial
manufacturing.
Each of the 232 metropolises was classified according to the following
demographic or economic characteristics. 1
• percent of population aged 65 and over (retirement communities)
• percent of employed work force in durable goods manufacturing industries (durable
goods communities)
• percent of employed work force in non-durable goods manufacturing industrial (non­
durable goods communities)
• percent of employed work force in public administration (government communities)
FIGURE 2. Black-White Residential Segregation Scores, 1980 and 1990, for Metropolfses Classified by Region and by FuncUonal Specialization
REGIONS
TYPEOF METROPOUS
REt1REMENTr
R
NOlmtEAST
.....-..
tN. 111)
I
(Na32)
II\!
DlJRABI.!OOOOSI
tN·....,
m
M10WEST
...,..
MIXEDI
..I
tN-101)
(NaI1)
III!
-t.,
tof.OI.IAASL!Q00D8
tN
~
SOUTHI
.-I
-
0GYEfN.I!N1'
(Na11~
tN-.,
-..
lNVERSItY
~
tNdt,
WEST tNd5) ........
MIJ1'MV
tN a 23)
to
·10
PERCENT
CHANG!
10
20
ao
.to
so
eo
10
eo
iO
8EQREOAl'CH SCClRES
IC119BO
lo 010
PERCENr
CfWt3!
. . 1990
10
io
30
<10
Go eo 70
SEGREGAl'CH SCOR!S
~ PERCENrCI-fANGE
I
&0
~
16 • percent of population aged 18 to 24 enrolled in college (university communities)
• percent of total labor force in the Armed Forces (military communities)
H a metropolis were one standard deviation or more above the national average on any
one of these measures, it was classified Into one of the types listed in Figure 2. Mixed places are
metropolises which had a diversified economic base: they were not far above average on any
dimension.
Retirement communities - all but three of them in Florida - had exceptionally high levels
of segregalion. Few older blacks have the requisite savings to move into these retirement areas
so their elderly population are largely white. Additionally, Fitzgerald'S (1981) study of a Florida
retirement center reports that many residents moved there from cities in the North with long
histories of racial strife. The retiree's attitudes were conservative and they preferred to live in
segregated communities.
Of the 44 metropolises which specialize In durable goods manufacturing. 41 are locaIed
in the MidWest or Northeast where segregation levels are high. Cleveland. Detroit. Flint. Gary
and Saginaw, for example, have been among the most segregated locations since the end of
World War II (Taeuber and Taeuber 1965. Table 4).
Many of the non-durable goods
manufacturing centers -- 16 of 21 -- are in the South and specialize in textiles. chemicals or food
produds. Residential segregation in these locations was somewhat less than in durable goods
centers.
Govemment. university and military metropolises attrad populations which differ in
important ways -
especially in educational attainment -
from metropolises which have
manufacturing as their bases. Many residents in university and military centers spend only a few
years in the metropolis so their attachment to their neighborhoods may be ephemeral and those
living in dormitories. in barracks or in single families homes on base; may be assigned their place
of residence.
17 Govemment centers had moderate levels of segregation.
The neighborhoods in the
Washington metropoliS. for example. were considerably more mixed than those of other large
eastem and midwest em centers. Fifteen of the 29 govemment centers are state capitols and. by
the 1980s. 36 states had fair housing laws similar to the federal legislation (Lamb 1992, p. 10).
Quite likely, those enforcing these laws live in state capitols and hence there may be greater
awareness of residential discrimination issues in such metropolises.
Most university metropolises are moderate In size but their black and white populations
are residentially mixed. Southem university cities including Athens, Charlottesville, Gainesville
and Lubbock have unusually low scores and, in the Midwest. the least segregated locations
include Ann Arbor, Champaign-Urbana, Columbia and Lawrence. Wineberg's (1983) study of
Gainesville shows how demographic changes at a university overturned that City's traditional
pattern of segregation. In the 1970s, the University of Florida attracted black students, many of
them choosing to live off-campus in apartments which had previously been closed to blacks. The
school also recruited black professionals who decided not to live in the impoverished black
section but rather in previously white neighborhoods commensurate with their incomes and
occupations.
The most unusual metropolises are those dominated by the Armed Forces: they have low
levels of segregation. In some places, this is undoubtedly encouraged by the fact that blacks are
in military service so they are assigned to integrated quarters or live off-base in apartment
complexes which have demonstrated, to the satisfaction of the base commander, that they do not
discriminate on the basis of race. But even large metropolises whose economies depend upon
the military - Norfolk with 1.4 million residents and San Diego with 2.5 million -- had relatively low
levels of segregation.
Between 1980 and 1990, manufacturing metropolis stood out for their low rate of change
in segregation, although even in these places separation was less at the end of the decade.
18 Reductions were greatest in the retirement communities; places which experienced high rates of
population growth and new construction during the 1980s.
Age of Metropolis. The older a metropolis, the more likely it was to be highly segregated
in 1990 and the less likely that segregation levels declined. To classify places by age, we
determined when the largest city first attained a size of 50,000. For Baltimore, New Orleans and
New York, this occurred decades before the Civil War while many other presently large
metropolises, including Atlanta, Denver and Los Angeles, satisfied this criterion in the later years
of the Nineteenth Century. Some large metropolises are post-World War II locations: Anaheim,
Ft. Lauderdale and Riverside. And then there are locations which entered the metropolitan ranks
after the Fair Housing Law was enacted such as Daytona Beach and Anchorage.2
[Figure 3]
Figure 3 shows that the oldest metropolises were most segregated in both 1980 and
1990. Differences by age were substantial since, in 1990, the average segregation score was 76
in places whose central cities were large a century ago, but only 61 in the newest locations.
DeClines in segregation during the decade were largest in the youngest metropolises but were
certainly not restricted to such places.
New ConstnJctlon. New construction is also related to segregation since apartments and
homes built after 1969 came onto the market when discrimination was illegal. If a high proportion
of the housing stock in a metropolis is new, we expect the place to be less segregated than in
another metropolis in which most of the housing was built before World War II or in the building
boom which followed.
To index this dimension, we used homes and apartments built 1980 to 1989 as a percent
of the stock of housing enumerated in 1980. Many metropolises - including several large ones-­
had much of their housing stock constructed during the 1980s. In Orlando, for instance, housing
units erected during the 1980s were 66 percent as numerous as those existing in 1980; in
FIGURE 3. Black-White Residentiar Segregation Scores, 1980 and 1990, for MetropoUses Classmed by Age and by New Housfng Construction in 1980
ABE OF tvETFIOPOUSES
HOMES BUILT IN 1980SAS PERCENT OF
(Decade Central CIly Reached 60,000)
.
1980HOUSING STOCK
......
BeFORE 1890I
(N-29)
.
·
.......
189000190(1I
tN-27)
·
·
14.11024.0%
(NooA)
.....,..
1910001920I
(N .. 40)
.......
1830001&40I
(N-24)
~
tN·A)
-
NO OITY OF SO.ooo
(N.38)
~
24.1"ORMORI!!
mi
...1014_
tN· 57)
..19500019110I
-
(N.40)
1970 OR AFTER
(N .. 34)
.!O
40
PERCSIT
a:
LESS1HANla
tN·fi9)
0
10
20
ao
.io
io
eo
eo
70
0
SEIlRSlATICIfSOOAES
io
·10
10
20
ao
PEACeN'I'
aw.oe
CIiWlE
[c::::f1980-
n _
.
.
1990
~
PERCENTCHANGE
.io
so
c!o
SEQREG.A.TICIf SCORES
I
70
80
!IQ
20 the Jim Crow era probably still are highly segregated, and this, in turn, may encourage a racial
polarization which perpetuates the separation of whites from blacks. The effects of the heavy
hand of the past are mitigated, we believe, by new construction which is the fourth factor
influencing segregation levels in 1990. Finally, several demographic factors -- size of metropolis,
the percent of its population black and the relative prosperity of blacks help to determine levels of
segregation.
Table 3 presents a regression analysis testing the hypothesis that residential segregation
in 1990 in the 232 metropolises was dependent upon region, type of metropoliS, its age, the
recent construction of homes and apartments and three indicators of its demographic make-up.
[Table 3]
Metropolises in the Northeast and Midwest were more segregated than those in the
South or West, an effect net of functional specialization, age, size or other factors. There is no
reason to believe that people in the North are more conservative about racial issues than those in
the South or West. Rather, the net effect of region is rooted in the history of local governments,
specifically the power of independent suburbs to exclude blacks. Northeastern and Midwestern
states developed policies with regard to the prerogatives of local governments in the mid­
Nineteenth Century, granting town and city officials much authority. With this system in place,
suburban communities sprung up around Northeastern and Midwestern .cities early in this
century. After World War II, more suburbs were incorporated, places which invoked their own
zoning statutes, developed land use regulations, established their own police forces and created
school systems for their residents. When whites began leaving central cities in large nu mbers in
the 1950s and 1960s -- a migration hastened to some degree by the presence of blacks in those
cities (Frey 1979, 1980a, 1980b, 1984) -- they found suburban communities which either had
histories of animosity toward blacks or places which soon responded to the wishes of their
TABLE 3. Model of Black-White Residential Segregation in 1990
REGRESSION
INFORMATION
Partial
Regression
Coefficient
48.7
INTERCEPT
Value
of t
CHARACTERISTICS OF
VARIABLES
Mean
Standard
Deviation
5.3
REGION8
+4.59**
+7.41**
-4.80**
2.4
4.5
-2.4
.14
.26
.11
.35
. +10.80**
+3.52*
-.61
-2.40
-8.93**
-9.74**
5.1
2.2
-.3
-1.3
-4.5
-5.7
.07
.18
.06
.09
.25
.39
.28
.27
.25
.29
1.74
-.02
-.55
-3.21
.9
-.0
-.3
-1.9
.24
.28
.17
.15
.45
.38
.35
Northeast Midwest West .44
.31
FUNCTIONAL SPECIALIZATION8
Retirement
Durable Goods Manufacturing
Non-Durable Goods Manufacturing
Government
University
Military
.09
.08
AGE OF METROPOLlS8
1900 or Earlier 1910t01940 1950 to 1960 1970 or Later NEW CONSTRUCTION. 1980 TO 1989
.43
-.14**
-3.1
19.0
14.4
2.70**
.14*
-.29**
4.0
2.3
-3.7
12.9
13.4
65.6
1.1
9.3
8.1
DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS
Log of Total Population Size in 1990
Percent of Population Black in 1990
Ratio of Black to White Household Income in 1980
ADJUSTED R-SQUARED
SAMPLE SIZE
.60
232
aOmitted categories are SOUTH for region, DIVERSIFIED for functional specialization and NO CITY OF
50,000 for age of metropolis.
·S~gnificant
at .05 level.
··Significant at .01 level.
NOTE: Because the dependent variable has a truncated range -- 0 to 100 -- a logit transformation has
been used in analyses similar to this one (Massey and Denton, 1987). However, the distribution of
the dependent variable is nearly normal (See Figure 1) so OLS regreSSion with an untransformed
segregation score is appropriate.
21 residents and developed strategies indicating that their neighborhoOds, parks and public schools
were for whites.
State legislatures in the South, toward the end of the Nineteenth Century, reorganized
local govemments, partly because of a fear that black voters would join poor whites in a populist
movement. Local authority was otten vested in county-wide govemments subject to strict state
control. As a result, most southern cities are not surrounded by numerous suburbs. Decisions
about zoning or policing, which are made by individual suburbs in the North are made at a county
level in the South. School districts in most southern states are drawn along county lines, an
important factor encouraging integration in those many metropolises which were subject to
federal court desegregation orders. Southem whites seldom have the option of moving into a
suburban community with an exclusively white public school system.
Additionally, southern
states have permissive annexation laws. Recognizing the suburban trend and wishing to raise
tax revenues, administrators in southern cities annexed their sparsely settled fringes In the 1950s
and 1960. a prerogative all but impossible in the Northeast and Midwest. Older cities along the
West Coast -- Los Angeles. San Francisco and Portland -- have systems of local government
similar in some ways to those of the Midwest, but many of the newer western cities had the
authority to annex so they are not surrounded by numerous independent suburbs, a factor linked
to the lower segregation scores of this region.
The functional specialization of a metropoliS had an impact upon the extent of
segregation.
Places classified as retirement communities or as durable goods manufacturing
centers were Significantly more segregated in 1990 than metropolises with a mixed economic
base. Net of other factors. retirement places had scores 11 points higher and durable good
places, 4 points higher, while the net effect of having a university or a military installation as the
community'S economic base was a reduction of 9 or 10 points. This comes about, we believe.
because racial attitudes differ by type of metropolis (Schuman and Gruenberg 1970) and because
22 the military plays an unusually strong role in integrating both Its own personnel and the areas they
dominate.
Recent construction in a metropolis was associated with lower levels of segregation apart
from other factors.
Consider
two places which were equivalent in every way except for the
number of new homes and apartments built during the 1980s. Let's suppose that in the first
location, construction equaled 5 percent of the housing stock there in 1980. while in the other it
equaled 30 percent.
The metropolis with the greater amount of
new
construction had a
segregation score 4 points lower, Implying that neighborhoods built recently are less segregated
and suggesting that the Fair Housing Act may be somewhat effective.
Population size also had an independent effect. On average. these 232 metropolises
had about 400,000. If we compare a place of that siZe to a place of one million which was similar
on every dimension except size, we find that the larger metropolis had a segregation score three
points higher.
New construction, size of a metropoliS and its age are closely intertwined since many of
the older places are large ones which have grown lethargically in recent decades. This means
that If age of a location is entered into an explanatory model along with the confounding variables
measuring new construction and size, then age does not have a significant independent effect.
As Figure 3 shows, however, older metropolitan areas are the most highly segregated, but the
effect due to age can just as easily be attributable to siZe or the absence of new construction.
We argued that the development of a prosperous black middle class encouraged
residential integration.
Are metropolises in which the economic disparities smallest the ones
which are least residentially segregated? We calculated the ratio of black to white average
(mean) household income from the 1980 census (the most recent data available) to index black­
white discrepancies in economic standing.
23 This analysis suggests that where blacks and whites were more similar with regard to
income, segregation was less.
Among these metropolises, blacks had household incomes
66 percent those of whites. Let's suppose that two places are similar in aI/ regards except that, in
the first, black household income was just 56 percent that of whites, while in the second it was
76 J?8rcent that of whites. The model in Table 2 reports that the net effect of such a difference
upon the segregation score was 6 points. That is, independent of other factors, increases in the
income of blacks relative to that of whites were associated with declines in segregation.
Presumably, if the 1980s had been a decade of substantial financial gains for blacks, segregation
scores would have been lower in 1990.
WHAT ACCOUNTS FOR DECLINING SEGREGATION IN THE 1980S?
What explains the modest decreases In segregation? Was there a national trend which
affected all places similarly. perhaps attributable to the open housing movement and to changing
racial attitudes? Or were certain factors associated with large declines?
We wished to determine which characteristics of a metropolis -- its region, functional
specialization, age. new construction or demographic attributes - had net effects upon changes
in black-white segregation.
The dependent variable is the percent change in the index of
dissimilarity. Results are shown in Table 4. The dependent variable has a negative sign, that is.
the typical metropolis experienced a 6 percent drop in segregation.
[Table 4]
Region had a substantial effect since the trend toward more integrated neighborhoods
was muted In the Northeast and Midwest. a finding which holds even after you take into account
the age of the metropolis and its specialization. Segregation decreased less in these regions
than in the South or West because of the proliferation of Independent suburban governments,
many of them taking actions to discourage black homeseekers.
Litigation efforts for open
housing are also hampered in the Northeast or Midwest since even if a court overturns a zoning
TABLE 4. Model of Percent Change in Black-White Residential Segregation In the 1980s
REGRESSION
INFORMATION
Partial
Regression
Coefficient
INTERCEPT
Value
of t
CHARACTERISTICS OF
VARIABLES
Mean
Standard
Deviation
-10.2
-1.8
+5.5**
+4.5**
+2.5
4.1
4.0
1.9
.14
.26
.11
.35
+3.1*
+0.4
+1.6
+2.0
+0.8
-3.4**
2.0
0.4
1.3
1.6
0.6
-2.8
.07
.18
.09
.08
.06
.09
.25
.39
.28
.27
.25
.29
-1.6
-1.3
-1.7
-2.0
-1.1
-1.1
-1.4
-1.7
.24
.28
.17
.15
.43
-0.2**
-5.6
19.0
14.4
+0.1
+0.6
+0.6**
0.3
1.8
6.5
12.8
1.6
6.1
1.0
1.4
4.3
REGION8
Northeast Midwest West .44
.31
FUNCTIONAL SPECIAlIZATION8
Retirement Durable Goods Manufacturing Non-Durable Goods Manufacturing Government University Military AGE OF METROPOlIS8
1900 or Earlier 1910 to 1940 1950 to 1960 1970 or Later NEW CONSTRUCTION, 1980 TO 1989
.45
.38
.35
DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS
Log of Total Population Size in 1980
Growth Rate of Black Population in 1980sb
White Exposure to Blacks in 1980
ADJUSTED R-SQUARED
SAMPLE SIZE
.41
232
SOmitted categories are SOUTH for region, DIVERSIFIED for functional specialization and NO CITY OF
50,000 for age of metropolis.
~his is the average annual growth rate for the decennial period.
"Significant at .05 level.
"'Significant at .01 level.
24 regulation or orders affirmative marketing, it will affect just one small component of the entire
suburban ring.
The functional specialization of a metropolis was not linked to the rate of change in
segregation with two exceptions. The shift to lower levels was particularly slow in retirement
communities, undoubtedly reflecting the preferences and financial capabilities of older whites.
And military locations, which had exceptionally low levels of segregation in 1980, had unusually
large reductions. The net effect of having a military specialization was an additional decline of
3 percentage points beyond the average 6 percentage point decrease. For much of the 1980s,
there was employment growth in the Armed Forces and an increase in population in places with
military specializations leading to lower levels of segregation (U.
S. Bureau of the Census 1991b,
Tables 537 and 538).
The age of a metropolis had no independent effect upon changes in segregation but, as
expected, places with much new construction experienced unusually large declines.
Let's
suppose that in one metropolis, the amount of new housing built during the 1980s equalled
5 percent of the housing stock present at the start of the decade while In another, new
construction equalled 30 percent. This difference translated into an additional 5 percentage point
decline in segregation. As the older housing stock in stagnant metropolises is replaced and as
new places grow, we can expect further decreases in segregation.
The net effects of several demographic characteristics were considered. Population Size
was not linked to change in segregation. The geographic redistribution of black population is
reducing segregation but the process is complicated. Black growth during the 1980s was more
rapid in metropolises which had lower segregation at the start of the decade. The correlation
coefficient relating the black growth rate during the decade to the index of dissimilarity in 1980
was negative: -.20.
In the Midwest such highly segregated places as Chicago, Cleveland.
Detroit and St. Louis lost black migrants while less segregated Grand Rapids, Omaha and
25 Minneapolis attracted blacks. Most western metropolises gained migrants of all races but two of
the most segregated locations -- Los Angeles and San Francisco - had substantial out­
migrations of blacks while places with low levels of segregation in 1980 - Las Vegas, Phoenix
and Riverside -- were popular destinations for black migrants. There is a new pattern of black
migration as they scatter away from the traditional urban concentration, a migration process
which will reduce residential segregation, nationally.
Among individual metropolitan areas,
however, the growth rate of the black population did not have a net effect of reducing
segregation. In fact. independent of other factors, black growth had a slight - but Insignificant -­
effect of Increasing segregation. This comes about because when many blacks migrant into a
metropolis, quite a few settle in established black neighborhood which may Increase segregation
at least temporarily.
Because whites are reluctant to live in neighborhoods with many blacks. we believe that
from a demographic standpoint some metropolises are easier to integrate than others. Suppose
there is a long history of segregation in one place such that whites live in neighborhoods which,
on average. are only 2 percent black. In another place, integration may have occurred so that
whites live In neighborhoods in which 12 percent of the residents are black. Given recent change
in attitudes, we think that whites in the highly segregated metropolis might not be upset if a few
more blacks came to their neighborhoods since their areas will still be overwhelmingly white. But
in the other metropolis. white reSistance to further Integration might be greater since it may
appear to whites that their neighborhoods are being overrun by blacks. As attitude studies report.
whites will accept token number of black neighbors but are averse to buying homes in
neighborhoods seen as open to black (Bobo, Schuman and Steeh 1986; Farley.m...aL. 1978).
Data from the Census of 1980 were used to calculate an index measuring the exposure
of whites to black neighbors (James and Taeuber 1985; Ueberson 1981; Massey and Denton
1987, Table 1, 1988).
To summarize the situation in a metropolis, we determined the
26 average percentage of population black in the typical block group of whites in 1980. This index
has been described as the probability of whites contacting blacks in their neighborhood or as a
measure of white "exposure- to black neighbors. Its minimum value is zero and its maximum
value is the percent black in that metropolis. On average. whites in the 232 metropolises lived in
block groups in which 6 percent of the population was black. In southern locations with numerous
black residents and moderate levels of segregation, whites resided with quite a few blacks; in
Tallahassee whites lived in neighborhoods where 18 percent of the residents were black; in
Richmond and Norfolk, 13 percent. In northern metropOlises, the higher levels of segregation
isolated whites from blacks. In Kansas City and Detroit in 1980, whites lived in areas where only
4 percent of their neighbors were black; in Chicago and Milwaukee; 3 percent; and in Boston,
2 percent.
This measure of white exposure to black neighbors had a substantial net impact upon
segregation changes during the 1980s. The higher the proportion black in the neighborhoods of
whites in 1980, the smaller the decline in segregation. Imagine two metropolises which were
similar in other regards, but in one, whites lived in block groups which were 2 percent black while
in the other the block groups were 12 percent black.
This differences translated into a
6 percentage point difference in the rate of decline in segregation strongly suggesting that whites
will accept limited numbers of blacks but that integration will occur slowly if at all when it means
that whites must live in neighborhoods with many blacks.
This finding is consistent with the
hypothesis that there is little white demand for housing in neighborhoods which already have
many black residents.
CONCLUSION
For the first six decades of this century, racial competition for neighborhoods occurred
throughout the country.
As blacks gained a toe-hold in the industrial economy, they sought
neighborhood amenities and better housing for their families; often housing located outside the
27 black area. Whites, wishing to maintain the traditional system of racial stratification. attempted to
establish a physical separation for the presumably Inferior blacks.
The contest was nOt an
equitable one. Most Institutions -- federally chartered lenders. municipal governments, the public
schools, neighborhood associations and often the courts - sided with whites. As an outcome,
censuses from 1940 to 1970 revealed a pervasive, thoroughly persistent system of racial
residential segregation.
Vet, changes began to occur in the decades following World War II which served to
loosen these constraints. By the 1960s, whites came to recognize the discrepancy between the
ideal of equal opportunities and the actual treatment of blacks. The civil rights and open housing
movement were eventually successful in getting laws passed and in amassing the data needed to
show not only the extent of segregation but that traditional lending practices - if not explicitly
discriminatory - greatly disadvantaged blacks. By the 1970s. liberal court decisions began to
uphold the property rights of minorities and overturned the most blatant segregationist practiCes
such as the location of public housing. Presumably blacks who sought better housing for their
families in the 1970s and 1980s faced numerous hurdles as the audit studies suggests. but they
may have been more surmountable than those challenging blacks earlier this century.
There are now some hopeful trends. trends which were not evident when the Kerner
CommiSSion wrote their bleak but realistic report In the late 1960s. For two decades. black-white
segregation has declined. New housing appears to be less segregated than old. the geographic
shift of blacks is toward areas which are not so highly segregated and we can Identify quite a few
medium Sized and a few large metropolises which have sizable black populations but are not
extremely segregated. And federal enforcement mechanisms have shifted In favor of equal
opportunities in the housing markets, although the pace of change might best be calibrated by a
glacierologist.
28 Nevertheless, blacks remain a uniquely segregated group.
By 1990, three large
minorities were found in the United States: blacks made up 12.1 percent of the population;
Hispanics, 9.0 percent and Asian/Pacific Islanders, 2.9 percent (U. S. Bureau of the Census
1992, Table 4). The distindive urban experience of blacks is evident in Figure 4 which shows
indexes of dissimilarity. computed from block group data, comparing the residential distribution of
each minority group to aU other persons. For each group, we included a metropolis if the minority
comprised at least 3 percent of the population in 1990 or if there were 20,000 members of the
minority resident there.
[Figure 4)
The average segregation score comparing blacks to non-blacks in 1990 was 64 reflecting
a decline of 4.5 points. The similar scores assessing the residential segregation of Hispanics or
Asians in 1990 were 43. Thus if the segregation of blacks continues to decrease at the rate of
the 1980s almost fifty years will elapse before the segregation level of blacks falls to the level
currently experienced by Hispanics and Asians.
There was a fall In the segregation of blacks in the 1980s while there was no change for
Latinos and the segregation of Asians increased. A full study of this topic requires dlsaggregatlng
Latinos and Asians. Quite likely some subgroups such as the Vietnamese and Puerto Ricans are
highly segregated while others -- probably the Japanese and Cubans -- are not so segregated
(Bean and Tienda 1987, Chap. 5; Langberg and Farley 1985; Massey 1979b, 1981b; Massey and
Bitterman 1985). There are, we believe, two basic demographic trends influencing segregation
trends among Asians and Latinos in the 1980.
On the one hand, these populations have
dispersed from their traditional points of arrival into metropolises where segregation levels are
lower. On the other, a few metropolises continue to receive a high proportion of the immigrants
from Latin America and Asia. And in these places, very rapid growth is asSOCiated with persisting
or increasing segregation as immigrants settle into ethnic enclaves. For Latinos, the dispersion
29 processes leading to lower levels of segregation were offset by the effects of population growth.
But the Asian population grew much more rapidly -- an increase of 108 percent in the decade for
Asians compared to 58 percent for Hispanics - and contributed to the higher levels of residential
segregation shown in Figure 4.
Despite these shifts. the residential pattems of the rapidly
growing Asian and Latino populations contrast with the much higher levels of segregation of
blacks.
30 FOOTNOTES
1. The following classification procedures were used:
Durable Goods Manufacturing. Because data from the Census of 1990 about industry of
employment were not available, we determined the percent of employed workers in durable
goods manufacturing industries in 1980. If this percent in a metropolis were at least one standard
deviation unit above the mean for all metropolises, the location was classHied as specialized In
durable goods manufacturing. (N - 44).
Non-durable Goods Manufacturing.
A similar procedure was used with data for
employment in non-durable goods manufacturing. (N - 21).
University. Because age-specific enrollment data were not available from the Census of
1990, we used 1980 data and determined the percent of population 18 to 24 enrolled in school. If
this proportion in a metropolis were one or more standard deviations above the average for all
metropolises, the place was classHied as a university metropolis. (N - 21).
Government. Using data concerning employment in 1988, we determined the ratio of
local, state and federal employment in a metropolis to the total population as cOunted in 1990. If
a metropolis had a ratio which was at least one standard deviation unit above the average for all
318 metropolises, we classified it as specializing in government. (N
Military.
=29).
Using data concerning employment in 1988, we determined the ratio of
employment - both civilian and non-civilian -- by the Armed Forces in a metropolis to the total
population counted in the Census of 1990. If this ratio were one or more standard deviation units
above the average for all 318 locations, it was assumed to have a military specialization.
(N = 23).
Retirement. We used Census Bureau estimates of metropolitan populations by age in
1985. If the percent over age 64 in a metropolis were one or more standard deviations above the
average for the 318 metropolitan areas, the location was identified as a retirement place. This
31 procedure Identified 6 locations which had elderly populations. not because retirees were moving
there. but rather because of their long histories of very slow population growth. They were
deleted from the retirement communities. (N I I 15).
There were 23 metropolises which were classified as specializing in two fields; typically
university and government. or military and government. For purposes of the statistical modeling.
they were recoded into only one category. There were 102 metropolises not classified into any of
the six specializations.
2. Thirty-five metropolises defined for the 1990 census had no central cities which ever
reached 50.000.
Undoubtedly, some of these cities will do so by 2000.
There were three
metropolises -- Nassau-Suffolk, New York; Orange County. New York and Monmouth-Ocean.
New Jersey -- which contain no central city.
APPENDIX
Page 1
Indices of Dissimilarity for IJl.acb and Whites
318 US Metropolitan Areas • 1980
Metropolitan
Area
ABILENE
AKRON
AlBANY,GA
ALBANY,NY
.AI..13I.QJERQUE
ALEXANDRIA
ALLENTOWN
ALTOONA
AMARILLO
ANAHEIM
ANCHORAGE
ANDERSON, IN
ANDERSJN, SC
ANN ARBOR
ANNISTON
APPLETON
ASHVILLE
ATHENS
ATLANTA
ATLANTIC CITY
AUGUSTA
~
AUSTIN
BAKERSFIELD
BALTIMORE
~
BATON ROUGE
BATTLE CREEK
BEAUMONT
BEAVER COUNlY
BELLINGHAM
BENTON HARfIJR
EER3EN
BWNGS
BILOXI
BINGHAMTON
BlRMNGHAM
BISMARK
BLOOMINGTON, IN
BLOOMINGTON, IL
80ISECITY
BOSTON
EOJLDER
BRADENTON
BRAZORIA
BReJERTON
ERDGEPORT
BROWNSVILLE
BRYAN
BUFFALO
BURUNGTON, NO
BURUNGTON, vr
CANTON
CASPER
CEDAR RAPIDS
1990 Size
(1000s)
Percent
120
658
113
874
481
132
687
131
188
2411
226
131
145
283
116
315
175
156
2834
319
397
357
782
543
2382
147
528
136
361
186
128
161
1278
113
197
264
908
84
109
129
206
3784
225
212
192
190
828
260
122
969
108
137
394
61
169
6
10
46
5
3
28
2
1
5
2
6
8
17
11
19
Black
0
8
19
26
14
31
5
9
6
26
0
30
11
23
6
1
15
8
0
18
2
27
0
3
4
0
6
1
8
8
3
10
0
11
11
19
1
6
1
2
Index of Dissimilarity
1980
1990
45
74
70
66
41
67
60
63
65
43
38
77
60
55
63
66
71
54
73
72
56
64
57
59
75
50
73
67
76
67
40
78
77
52
58
50
79
66
43
47
41
70
40
79
58
47
69
49
56
84
58
34
67
56
54
53
79
72
67
43
72
63
66
74
47
42
78
62
55
65
74
72
53
79
77
54
63
66
66
78
66
74
73
81
68
37
77
82
49
63
48
80
61
49
50
40
76
40
91
64
51
72
57
73
84
57
37
74
50
58
Page 2
Metropolitan
Area
CHAMPAIGN
CHARLESTON, SC
CHARLESTON, WV
CHAFLOTTE
CHARLOTIESVILLE
CHATTANOOGA
CHEYENNE
CHCAGO
CHro
CINCINNATI
ClARKSVILLE
CLEVELAND
COl..OFW)Q SPRINGS
COLUMBIA, MO
COLUMBIA, SC
COLUMBUS, GA
COLUMBUS, OH
CORPUSCHRISTl
CUMBERlAND
DALLAS
DANVILLE
DAVENPORT
DAYTON
DAYTONA BEACH
DECATUR,AL
DECATUR,IL
DENVER
DES MOINES
DETROIT
DOTHAN
DI.JBl.XJJE
DULUTH
EAUCLAIRE
ELPASO
ELKHART
ELMIRA
ENID
e:E
8.JGEf\E
EVANSVILLE
FAFG:>
FAYETTEVILLE, NC
FAYETTEVILLE, AI<
FLINT
FLORENCE, AL
FlORENCE, SC
FORT COLLINS
FORT LAUDERDALE
FORTMVERS
FORT PIERCE
FORT SMITH
FORT WALTON BEAI
FORT WAYNE
FORT WORTH
fREEK)
GADSDEN
GAINESVILLE
GALVESTON
G/JR{
GLENS FALLS
1990 Size
(1000s)
Percent
Black
173
507
250
1162
131
433
73
6070
182
1453
169
1831
397
112
453
243
1377
350
102
2553
109
351
951
371
132
117
1623
393
4382
131
86
240
138
592
156
95
57
276
283
279
153
275
113
430
131
114
186
1255
335
251
176
144
364
1332
667
100
204
217
605
119
10
30
6
20
14
13
3
22
1
13
21
19
7
7
30
38
12
4
2
16
32
5
13
9
11
12
6
4
22
21
0
1
0
4
5
6
4
5
1
6
0
32
1
20
12
39
1
15
7
12
4
9
8
11
5
14
19
18
19
2
Index of Dissimilarity
1980
1990
54
58
69
65
45
78
43
87
56
80
42
86
47
49
63
62
71
53
62
66
45
63
78
76
71
66
66
67
89
53
60
65
66
50
71
66
51
69
41
66
53
41
65
84
62
60
48
73
81
78
70
43
76
66
59
78
54
65
91
80
53
62
70
68
48
80
51
91
57
82
48
89
48
49
64
59
76
63
59
81
41
68
80
83
70
68
70
73
89
63
60
68
66
49
75
64
56
70
46
70
51
43
67
87
64
65
45
86
89
87
69
54
77
82
65
80
61
75
90
79
Page 3
Metropolitan
Area
GRAND FORKS
GRAND RAPIDS
GREAT FALLS
GR:EI.EY
GREEN BAY
GI:ENSEOO
GREENVILLE
HAGERSTQIM.I
HAMILTON
HARR5Bl.JR3
HARTFORD
HCKCJ=tY
HONOLULU
HOUMA
HClJSTOO
HUNTINGTOO
HUNTSVILLE
INDIANAPOUS
OWACITY
JACKSON,MI
JACKSON,MS
JACKSON, TN
JACKSONVILLE, FL
JACKSONVILLE, NC
JANESVILLE
JERSEY CITY
JOHNSON CITY
JOHNSTOWN
JOLIET
JOPLIN
KALAMAZOO
KANKAKEE
KANSAS CITY
KENOSHA
KILLEEN
KNOXVILLE
KOKOMO
LACROSSE
LAFAYETIE,LA
LAFAYETTE, IN
LAKE CHARLES
LAKE COUNTY
LAKELAND
LANCASTER
LANSING
LAREOO
LAS CRUCES
LAS VEGAS
LAWRENCE
LAWTON
LEWISTOO
LEXINGTOO
LIMA
LINCOLN
LITTLEROCK
LONGVIEW
LORAIN
LOS ANGELES
LOUISVILLE
WB80CK
1990 Size
(1000s)
Percent
71
688
78
132
195
942
641
121
291
588
1124
222
836
183
3302
313
239
1250
96
150
395
78
907
150
140
553
436
241
390
135
223
96
1566
128
255
605
97
98
209
131
168
516
405
423
433
133
136
741
82
111
105
348
154
214
513
162
271
8863
953
223
2
6
1
0
1
19
17
6
5
7
9
8
3
15
19
2
20
14
2
8
42
31
20
20
5
14
2
2
10
1
9
15
13
4
19
6
5
0
25
2
23
7
13
2
7
0
2
10
4
18
0
11
8
2
20
22
8
11
13
8
Black
Index of DissimilarItY
1980
1990
60
74
51
52
60
68
63
73
63
78
71
60
44
64
69
73
64
80
38
74
75
66
65
31
72
70
66
82
76
64
58
80
76
68
45
68
64
54
60
40
74
73
72
68
60
54
46
51
41
37
45
58
71
49
68
58
62
71
74
64
64
78
61
54
64
71
65
77
74
79
73
56
46
67
78
77
59
83
40
78
75
67
75
36
74
78
70
82
77
68
60
79
81
68
53
70
75
53
62
43
78
75
79
71
60
60
53
64
38
43
54
66
71
51
70
64
66
80
77
71
Page 4
Metropolitan
Area
LYNCHBURG
MACON
MADISON
MANCHESTER
MANSAEID
MCAllEN
tJEDR:R)
M8.B:lJRNE
~
tsr:::eo
MIAMI
M[)[)lESEX
MIDLAND
MILWAUKEE
MINNEAPOI.IS
MOBILE
M:DESlO
tvDNMOUTH
PvDRE
~RV
tJl.JrCE
MUSI<EOOI/
NAPLES
NASHVILLE
NASSAU
. rEN BEDFORD
NEW HAVEN
NEW LONDON
NEW ORlEANS
NEWYOAK
NEWARK
NIAGARA FALLS
NORFOlK
OAKLAND
OCALA
ODESSA
OKLAHOMA CITY
OLYMPIA
OMAHA
ORANGE COUNTY
ORLANDO
0NENSEk:H)
OXNARD
PANAMAC/TY
PARKERSBUAG
PASCAGOULA
PENSACOLA
PECRA
PHILDElPHIA
PHOENIX
PNEBLUFF
PfTTSBURGH
prrrSAELD
POFfTLAND, ME
PORTLAND, OR
PORTSM:lUTH
PCl..IG«EEPSE
PRJV[)ENCE
PfOVO
PUEBlO
1990 Size
(1000s)
Percent
142
281
367
336
126
384
146
399
982
178
1937
1020
107
1432
2464
477
371
986
142
293
120
159
152
985
2609
506
804
255
1239
8547
1824
221
1396
2083
195
119
959
161
618
308
1073
87
669
127
149
115
344
339
4857
2122
85
2057
139
243
1240
350
259
916
264
123
21
35
3
1
8
0
0
8
41
5
21
7
8
14
4
27
2
6
31
36
6
14
5
15
7
2
10
5
35
26
23
5
29
15
13
5
11
2
8
7
12
4
2
11
1
20
16
7
19
3
43
8
2
1
3
1
8
4
0
2
Black
Index of Dissimilarity
1990
1980
49
60
55
41
71
50
42
62
76
46
75
62
67
84
65
74
45
71
76
67
67
80
70
66
79
53
70
55
74
78
83
72
57
69
61
55
65
48
72
60
65
63
47
60
52
64
64
74
82
51
68
75
53
47
68
48
58
69
57
45
54
63
53
49
74
58
56
78
76
51
81
68
84
85
70
77
56
75
77
70
76
78
86
70
80
58
71
54
76
78
84
71
65
75
70
75
75
38
76
59
80
71
55
73
56
63
70
73
83
62
73
75
54
50
73
56
55
76
63
45
Page 5
Metropolitan
Area
RACINE
RALEIGH
RAPID CITY
READING
FEDDN3
FEN:)
RICHLAND
RlCHMClIID
RIVERSIJE
FDANCl<E
R:lCHESTEA,MN
FOCHESTER. NY
A:X::KR:R)
SACRAMENTO
SAGINAW
ST. CLOUD
ST. JOSEPH
ST.LOUIS
SALEM
SALINAS
SALT LAKE CITY
SAN ANGELO
SAN ANTONIO
SAN DIEGO
SAN FRANCISCO
SAN JOSE
SANTABARBARA
SANTACRUZ
SANTA FE
SANTA ROSA
SARASOTA
SAVANNAH
SCRANTON
SEATTLE
SHARON
SHEEOYGAN
SHERMAN
SHREVEPCRr
SIOUX CITY
SIOUX FALLS
SOUTH BEND
SPOKANE
SPRINGFIELD, IL
SPRINGFELD, tJO
SPRINGFIELD, MA
STATE COLLEGE
STEUBENVILLE
STOCKTON
SYRACUSE
TACOMA
TALLAHASSEE
TAMPA
TERRE HAUTE
TEXARKANA
TOLEDO
TOPEKA
TRENTON
TUCSJN
TULSA
TUSCALOOSA
1990 Size
(1000s)
Percent
Black
175
735
81
337
147
255
150
866
2589
224
106
1002
284
1481
399
191
83
2444
278
356
1072
98
1302
2498
1604
1498
370
230
117
388
278
243
734
1973
121
104
95
334
115
124
247
361
190
241
603
124
143
481
660
586
234
2068
131
120
614
161
326
667
709
151
10
25
2
3
1
2
2
29
7
12
1
9
8
7
10
0
3
17
1
6
1
4
7
6
8
4
3
1
1
1
4
36
1
4
5
0
7
35
2
1
10
1
8
2
6
2
4
6
6
7
30
9
5
22
11
8
19
3
8
26
Index of Dlssimllaritv
1980
1990
71
57
47
68
49
48
52
64
49
72
51
70
75
58
84
61
58
81
49
60
55
47
57
59
65
45
47
40
37
45
80
71
68
60
73
70
59
67
63
47
69
47
71
59
70
56
67
61
76
53
59
74
64
61
77
58
76
45
69
59
70
62
53
69
49
48
53
68
58
75
48
70
78
60
86
62
66
85
51
68
59
56
65
63
68
48
45
42
43
49
90
75
73
69
73
77
67
73
68
46
71
50
70
62
74
56
70
69
77
54
62
82
69
60
82
57
77
53
81
59
Page 6
Metropolitan
Area
1YLER
UTICA
VALLEJO
VANCOUVER
VICTORIA
VINELAND
VISALIA
WACO
WASHINGTON
WATERlOO
WAUSAU
WEST PALM BEACH
WHEEL..NG
WICHITA
WICHITA FALLS
WIUAMSPORT
WILMINGTON, DEL
WIlMINGTON; NC
I.fOD:STER
YAKIMA
YeA<
YOUNGSTOWN
VUBACITY
1990 Size
(1000s)
Percent
Black
151
317
451
238
74
138
312
189
3924
147
115
864
159
454
122
119
579
120
710
189
418
493
123
21
4
10
1
7
17
1
16
27
6
0
12
2
8
9
2
15
20
2
1
3
11
3
Index of Dissimilarity
1980
1990
60
72
52
38
45
59
59
62
68
73
74
78
64
68
62
73
64
70
58
55
74
79
49
65
68
54
41
49
54
64
72
71
79
81
87
62
76
72
74
68
71
61
63
75
81
48
32 REFERENCES
Adams, Carolyn §Ul. 1991. Philadelphia: Neighborhoods. Division. and a Conflict in a Post~
industrial City. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Bean, Frank D. and Marta Tlenda. 1987. The Hispanic Population of the United States. New
York: Russel! Sage.
Bickford. A. and Douglas Massey. 1991. "Segregation in the Second Ghetto." Social Forces 69:
1011-1036.
Blossom. Teresa, David Everett, and John Gallagher. 1988. ~he Race for Money." Detroit Free
emu (August).
Sobo, Lawrence. Howard Schuman, and Charlotte Steeh. 1986. "Changing Racial Attitudes
toward Residential Integration: In Housing Desegregation and Federal Poljcy. edited by
John M. Goering. Chapel Hili, NC: University of North Carolina Press.
BUQhanan vs. Warley. 1917. 245 U. S. 60.
Canot, Robert. 1974. American Odyssey. New York: Bantam Books.
Capeci, Dominic J., Jr. 1984. Race Relations in Wartime Detroit: The Sojoumer Truth Housing
Controversy of 1942. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Chicago Commission on Race Relations. 1922. The Negro in Chicago: A Study of Race
Relations and a Race Riot. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Committee on Civil Rights. 1947. To Secure These Rights. Washington. DC: U. S. Government
Printing Office.
Corrigan vs. Bucklev. 1926. 271 U. S. 323.
Dedman, W. 1988. ~he Color of Money." The Atlanta Joumal~onstHution (May 1-16).
Dent, David J. 1991. "The New Black Suburbs." The New York Times Magazine, (June 14).
33 Denton, Nancy A. and Douglas S. Massey. 1989. "Residential Segregation of Blacks, Hispanics
and Asians by Socioeconomic Status and Generation." Social Science Quarterly 69: 797­
817.
Dodson, Jack E. 1960. "Minority Group Housing in Two Texas Cities: In Studies in Housing
and Minority GrouPS, edited by Nathan Glazer and Davis McEntire. Berkeley, CA:
University of Califomia Press.
Duncan, Otis Dudley and Beverly Duncan. 1955. "A Methodological Analysis of Segregation
Indexes." American Sociological Review 20: 210-217 (April).
Farley, Reynolds. 1975. "Population Trends and School Segregation in the DetrOit area."
Wayne law Review 21(3): 867-902 (March).
Farley, Reynolds, Howard Schuman, Suzanne Bianchi, Diane Colasanto and Shirley Hatchett.
1978. "Chocolate City, Vanilla Suburbs: Will the Trend toward Racially Separate
Communities Continue?" SOCial Science Research 7: 319-344 (December).
Feins, Judith D. and Rachel G. Bratt. 1983. "Barred in Boston: Racial Discrimination in
Housing." APA Joumal (Summer): 344-355.
Fitzgerald, Frances. 1981. 'Cities on a Hill. New Vork: Simon and Schuster.
Frey, William H. 1979. "Central City White Flight: Racial and Nonracial Causes." American
Sociological Review 44 (June): 425-448.
_ _ _. 1980a. "Black In-Migration, White Flight and the Changing Economic Base of the
Central City." American Joumal of Sociology 85(6) (March): 1396-1417.
_ _ _. 1980b. "Status Selective White Flight and Central City Population Change." Joumal
of Regional Science 20(1): 71-89.
_ _ _" 1984. "lifecourse Migration of Metropolitan Whites and Blacks and the Structure of
Demographic Change in large Central Cities." American Sociological Review 49
(December): 803-827.
34 Friedman, L. M. 1967. "Govemment and Slum Housing: Some General Considerations."
J.m
and Contemporary Society 32: 357-370.
Galster, George. 1988. "Assessing the Causes of Racial Segregation: A Methodological
Critique: Journal of Urban Affairs 10(4): 395-407.
Garreau, Joel. 1991. Edge City: LKe on the New Frontier. New York: Doubleday.
Gatewood, Willard B. 1990. Aristocrats of Color: The Black EIRe - 1880-1920. Bloomington, IN:
Indiana Universfty Press.
GOOd. 1989. Orvie: The Dictator of Dearbom. the Rise and Reign of Orville L. Hubbard.
Detroit: Wayne State University Press.
Gray, Robert and Steven Tursky. 1986. "Location and RaciaVethn!c Occupancy Patterns for
HUD-Subsidized Family Housing in Ten Metropolitan Areas." In Housing pesegregation and
Federal Policy. edited by John M. Goering. Chapel Hili, NC: Universfty of North Carolina
Press.
Green, Constance Mclaughlin. 1967. The Secret City: A History of Race Relations in the
Nation's Caojtol. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Universfty Press.
Havens VI. Coleman. 1982.
Hills vs. Gatreaux. 1976. 425 U. S. 284.
Hirsch, Arnold R. 1983. Making the Second Ghetto: Race & Housina in Chicago: 1940-1960.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Jackson, Kenneth. 1985. Crabgrass Frontier: The Suburbanization of the United States. New
York: Oxford Universfty Press.
Jakubs. John F. 1979. "A Consistent Conceptual Definition of the Index of Dissimilarity."
Geographical Analysis 11 (3) (July): 315-321.
_ _ _" 1986. "Recent Racial Segregation in U. S. SMSAs." Urban Geograohy 7(2): 146-163.
35 James, David R. and Karl E. Taeuber. 1985. "Measures of Segregation." Pp. 1-32 In
§oclolooical Methodology. edited by Nancy B. Tuma. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Jones vs. Alfred H. Maver Co. 1968. 392 U. S. 409.
Kafn, John F. and John M. Quigley. 1975. Housing Markets and Racial Discrimination: A
Microeconomic Analysis. New York: National Bureau of Economic Research.
Kushner, James A. 1992. "Federal Enforcement and Judicial Review of the Fair Housing
Amendments Act of 1988." Paper presented at the Fannie Mae Annual Housing
Conference, Washington, DC, May 19.
Kusmer, Kenneth L. 1976. A Ghetto Takes Shape: Black Cleveland. 1870-1930. Urbana,IL:
University of Illinois Press.
Lamb, Charles M. 1984. "Equal Housing Opportunity." In Implementation of CMI Rights PoliCY,
edited by Charles S. Bullock, 11/ and Charles M. Lamb. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole
Publishing.
_ _ _. 1992. "Fair Housing Implementation from Nixon to Reagan." Madison, WI; The
Robert M. LaFollette Institute for PubliC Affairs. Working Paper 11. (June).
Langberg. Mark and Reynolds Farley. 1985. "Residential Segregation of Asian Americans in
1980." §ociology and §ocial Research 70(1): 71-75.
Leahy, Peter J. 1985. "Are RaCial Fadors Important for the Allocation of Mortgage Money?"
American Journal of Economics and Sociology 44(2): 185-196.
Lemann. Nicholas. 1991. The Promised Land: The Great Black Migration and How It Changed
America. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.
Levine. David Allan. 1976. Internal Combustion: °rhe Races in Detroit: 1915-1926. Westport.
CT: Greenwood Press.
Lieberson. Stanley. 1963. Ethnic Patterns in American Cities. New York: Free Press.
36 Lieberson, Stanley. 1981. -An Asymmetrical Approach to Segregation." In Ethnic Segregation in
~
edited by C. Peach, V. Robinson and S. Smith. London: Croom Helm.
Lief, Beth J. and Susan Goering. 1987. "The Implementation of the Federal Mandate for Fair
Housing: In Divided Neighborhoods: Changing Patterns of Racial Segregation. edited by
Gary A. Tobin. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications. Urban Affairs Annual Review 32.
Marshall, Harvey and Robert Jiobu. 1975. "Residential Segregation in United States Cities: A
Causal Analysis." Social Forces 53(3) (March): 449-460.
Massey, Douglas S. 1979a. "Effects of Socioeconomic Factors on the Residential Segregation
of Blacks and Spanish Americans in U. S. Urbanized Areas." American Socjological
Review 44: 1015-1022.
_ _ _" 1979b. -Residential Segregation of Spanish Americans in the United States Urbanized
Areas.- Demographv 16: 553-564.
_ _ _" 1981a. -Social Class and Ethnic Segregation: A Reconsideration of Methods and
Conclusions: American Sociological Review 46: 641-650.
_ _ _" 1981b. "Hispanic Residential Segregation: A Comparison of Mexicans, Cubans, and
Puerto Ricans." SOCiology and Social Research 65: 311-322.
_ _ _. 1990. "American Apartheid: Segregation and the Making of the Underclass."
American Journal of Sociology 96(2) (September): 329-357.
Massey. Douglas S. and Brooks Bitterman. 1985. "Explaining the Paradox of Puerto Rican
Segregation." Social Forces 64: 306-331.
Massey, Douglas S. and Nancy A. Denton. 1987. "Trends in the Residential Segregation of
Blacks, Hispanics and Asians." American Socioioglcal Review 52: 802-825.
_ _ _" 1988. "The Dimensions of Residential Segregation." Social Forces. 67 (December):
281-315.
37 Massey, Douglas S. and Andrew B. Gross. 1991. "Explaining Trends in Racial Segregation.
1970-1980." Urban Affairs Quarterly 27(1) 13-35 (September).
McEntire, Davis. 1960. Residence and Race. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders. 1968. Report of the National Advisory
CommiSSion on Civil Disorders. New York: Bantam Books.
National Opinion Research Center. 1942. White Attitudes Toward Negroes. Denver: University
of Denver (July 21). (The National Opinion Research Center is not located at the University
of Chicago).
_ _ _" 1990. General Social Surveys. 1972 and 1990: Cumulative Codebook. Distributed by
the Roper Center for Public Opinion Research, Storrs, CT: University of Connecticut.
Pol, Louis G., Rebecca F. Guy and Andrew J. Bush. 1982. "Discrimination in the Home Lending
Market: A Macro Perspective." Social Science Quarterly 63(4) (December): 716-728.
Rabinowitz. Howard N. 1978. Race Relations in the Urban Soyth: 1865-1890. New York:
Oxford University Press.
Robinson, Carla J. 1992. "Racial Disparity in the Atlanta Housing Market." In The Hoyslng
Status of Black Americans, edited by Wilhelmina A. Leigh and James B. Stewart. New
Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
Rosenbaum, James E. 1992. "The Education and Employment of Low-Income Black Youth in
White Suburbs." Evanston. IL: Center for Urban Affairs and Policy Research. (Unpublished
report).
Rosenbaum, James E. and Susan J. Popkin. 1991. "Employment and Earnings of Low-income
Blacks Who Move to Middle-Class Suburbs." In The Urban Underclass, edited by
Christopher Jencks and Paul E. Peterson. Washington. DC: The Brookings Institution.
Rudwick. Elliot. 1966. Race Riot in East St. Louis: July 2.1917. Cleveland: World Publishing
Co.
38 Sallman, Juliet. 1978. Open Housing; pvnamics of a Social Moyement. New YorK: Praeger.
_ _ _. 1990. A Fraoile Movement: The Struggle for Neighborhood Stabilization. New YorK:
Greenwood Press.
SChuman. Howard and Barry Gruenberg. 1970. '"The Impact of City on Racial Attitudes."
American Journal of Sociology 76(2) (September) 213·261.
Schuman, Howard, Charlotte Steeh and Lawrence Bobo. 1985. Racial Attitydes In America;
Trends and INemretations. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Shelley vs. Kraemer. 1948. 344 U. S. 1.
Shlay. Anne B. 1988. -Not in That Neighborhood: The Effects of Population and Housing on
the Distribution of Mortgage Anance within the Chicago SMSA." §ocjal Scjence
Research 17; 137-163.
Slmkus. Albert A. 1978. "Residential Segregation by Occupation and Race in Ten Urbanized
Areas, 1950·1970." American Sociological Review 43: 81·93.
Smith. Richard A. 1989. "The Effects of Local Fair Housing Ordinances on Housing
Segregation." American Joumal of Economies and SOCiOlogy 48(2)
(April)~
219·230.
Spear, Allan H. 1967. alack Chicago: The Making of a Negro Ghetto: 1890-1920. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.
Squires, Gregory D., Larry Bennett, Kathleen McCourt and Philip Nyden. 1987. Chicago; Race,
Class, and the Response to Urban Decline, Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Stucker, Jennifer L. 1986. "Race and ReSidential Mobility: the Effects of Housing Assistance
Programs on Household Behavior," In Hoysing pesegregation and Federal Policy. edited by
john M. Goering. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press.
Taeuber, Karl E. 1965. '"The Effect of Income Redistribution on RaCial ResideNial Segregation."
Urban Affairs Quarterly 4: 5-14 (September).
39 Taeuber, Karl E. and Alma F. Taeuber. 1965. Negroes in Cnies: ReSidential Segregation and
Neighborhood Change. Chicago: Aldine.
Taggart, Harriett Tee and Kevin W. Smith. 1981. "Redlining: An Assessment of the Evidence of
Disinvestment in Metropolitan Boston." Urban Affairs Ouarterlv 17(1) (September): 91-107.
Thomas, Richard W. 1992. Life for Us is What We Make It: Building Black Community in
Detron. 1915-1945. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
Thompson, Robert A., Hylan Lewis and Davis McEntire. 1960. "Atlanta and Birmingham: A
Comparative Study in Negro Housing." In Studies in Housing and Minority Groups, edited by
Nathan Glazer and Davis McEntire. Berkeley, CA: University of Califomia Press.
Turner, Margery Austin, Raymond L. Stryk and John Yinger. 1991. Housing Discrimination
Studyj Synthesis. Washington, DC: U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.
U. S. Bureau of the Census. 1943. Sixteenth Census of the United States; 1940. Housing,
Vol. II, Part 1.
_ _ _" 1972. Public use Samples of Basic Records from the 1970 Census.
_ _ _. 1975. Historical StatistiCS of the Unijed States: Colonial Times to 197Q. Part 2.
_ _ _" 1982. Census of Population. 1940. Public Use Microdata Sample.
U. S. Bureau of the Census. 1989. Current Population Survey. 1988. Public Use Microdata
Sample.
_ _ _' 1991a. Current Population Reports, Series P-60, No. 174.
____. 1991b. Statistical Abstract of the United States: 1991.
_ _ _. 1992. Census of Population and Housing. 1990. 1190 CPH-1-1.
U. S. vs. City of Parma. 1981. 494 F. Supp. 1049.
U. S. vs. Mitchell. 1971. 335 F. Supp. 1004.
Vose, Clement E. 1959. Caucasians Only: The Supreme Court. the NAACP and the Restrictive
Covenant Cases. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
40 White, Michael J. 1986. American Neighborhoods and Residentjal Differentiation: New York:
Russell Sage.
Wienk, Ronald E., Clifford E. Reid, John C. Simonson. and Frederick J. Eggers. 1979.
Measurlna Racial DiSCrimination in American Housing Markets: The Housina Market
Practices Survey. Washington. DC: Department of Housing and Urban Development. Office
of Policy Development and Research.
Wilger, Robert. 1988. Black-White Residential Searegatjon in 1980. Ph.D. Dissertation.
University of Michigan, Department of Sociology.
Wineberg, Morton D. 1983. "Changing Dlstnbutlon of the Black Population: Florida Cities,
1970·1980." Urban Affairs Quarterly 18(3): 361-370 (March).
Zoloth, Barbara S. 1976. "Ahemative Measures of School Segregation." Land EconomicS 52:
278-298.
Zuch vs. Hussey. 1975. 394 F. Supp. 1028.
Zunz. Oliver. 1982. The Changing Face of Inequaljty: Urbanlzatjon. Industrial Develooment. and
Immigrants In Detroit, 1880-1920. Chicago: University of Chicago Press•.