A Co-Location Quotient Approach" (2016)

University of Connecticut OpenCommons@UConn Doctoral Dissertations University of Connecticut Graduate School 5-3-2016 Measuring Segregation Patterns and Change: a Co- Location Quotient Approach Natalia Vorotyntseva University of Connecticut, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://opencommons.uconn.edu/dissertations Recommended Citation Vorotyntseva, Natalia, "Measuring Segregation Patterns and Change: a Co-Location Quotient Approach" (2016). Doctoral Dissertations. 1066. https://opencommons.uconn.edu/dissertations/1066 Measuring Segregation Patterns and Change: a Co-Location Quotient Approach Natalia Vorotyntseva, Ph. D. University of Connecticut, 2016 There are many segregation measures introduced and utilized in geographic research up to this date. Because residential segregation can be defined in more than one way the measure’s formulation is dependent on the particular definition the researcher is trying to reflect. Another distinctive feature of the quantitative exploration of segregation is the role of geographic scale. In contrast, global indices focus on overall level of spatial separation of population in the urban area while local indices assume that the index magnitude varies from place to place across the city. The main purpose of this study is to introduce a new measure of segregation that focuses on the lack of interactions of the population groups and to explore its properties. The proposed measure is a modified co-location quotient (CLQ) that was originally applied to point data as a measure of spatial association between two categorical variables. The first part of this dissertation introduces two versions of modified CLQ that are applicable to categories of areally aggregated population. One is the global measure that captures the overall exposure of one population group given the presence of another group. The local version of the measure describes levels of exposure for every single spatial unit. Both, global and local quotients have two basic specifications – two-group CLQ and same-group CLQ. Each variant of the measure allows the option to include the neighborhood size in computation, which theoretically defines the space within which people have the possibility for interaction. The use of CLQ in the proposed mathematical configuration expands the discussion of dimensions of segregation by suggesting the connection between different dimensions that are covered by co-location measure. Using publicly available data from U.S. Census Bureau on racial composition of population CLQs were computed for thirty urban areas, where twenty nine are metro areas and one is Washington Natalia Vorotyntseva – University of Connecticut, 2016 D.C. The basic units of analysis are census tracts and block groups that contain aggregated population counts. Three decennial releases are used: 1990, 2000 and 2010. The results suggest an overall, but uneven, increase in the exposure of white people in given urban areas. Patterns of concentration for white people remained stable over the time span. But the concentration of black people shows a substantial decrease indicating an increasing exposure of blacks in the global sense. Conversely, same-group CLQs for whites and for blacks indicate unequal experiences for these two population groups in America. Additionally, various visualization techniques related to co-location measure were explored. The pointillist approach, suggested in this study, is found to be particularly effective technique for displaying CLQ results compared to widely utilized choropleth mapping. Measuring Segregation Patterns and Change: A Co-Location Quotient Approach Natalia Vorotyntseva B.A., Saint-Petersburg State University, Russia, 2009 M.A., University of Connecticut, 2012 A Dissertation Submitted in partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy at the University of Connecticut 2016 i Copyright by Natalia Vorotyntseva 2016 ii APPROVAL PAGE Doctor of Philosophy Dissertation Measuring Segregation Patterns and Change: A Co-Location Quotient Approach Presented by Natalia Vorotyntseva, B.A., M.A. Major Advisor _____________________________________________ Dr. Robert G. Cromley Associate Advisor __________________________________________ Dr. Dean M. Hanink Associate Advisor __________________________________________ Dr. Daniel Civco Associate Advisor __________________________________________ Dr. Chuanrong Zhang University of Connecticut 2016 iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I must express my deepest gratitude first and foremost to my advisor, Robert Cromley without whom this project would not have been possible. His consistent and encouraging guidance from the very beginning of my graduate studies has led to successful completion of every step of this dissertation. I would also like to thank my committee members Daniel Civco, Chuanrong Zhang and Dean Hanink who were my teachers in various classes and whose subject expertise was extremely helpful to me throughout the entire process. The Department of Geography at the University of Connecticut, including my fellow graduate students, faculty members and staff members, created an excellent environment which I truly enjoyed while pursuing my research and learning about the field of Geography from multiple perspectives. I would also like to thank my family and friends for their active support during my ups and downs as a graduate student. I truly appreciate my parents for the frequent conversations that made the long physical distance between us seem to disappear. My friends have supplied me with a great deal of optimism and positive energy that I carried through my work. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter One Introduction 1 1.1 Residential Segregation in the United States through its Causes and Consequences 1 1.2 Problematic Character of Studying Residential Segregation 3 1.3 Dissertation Outline 5 Chapter Two Literature Review 7 2.1 Overview of The Socioeconomic Conditions that Cause Residential Segregation 7 2.2 Socioeconomic Outcomes for Segregated Neighborhoods 9 2.3 Overview of the Measures of Racial And Ethnic Segregation 11 2.4 Summary 26 Chapter Three Study Area and Methodology 27 3.1 Data 27 3.2 Defining Co-Location Quotients 33 3.2.1 The Global Co-Location Quotient 34 3.2.2 Local Co-Location Quotients 35 3.2.3 The Dimensionality of Co-Location 36 3.3 An Empirical Example 38 3.3.1 Global CLQ Example 39 3.3.2 Local CLQ Example 42 3.4 Summary 48 Chapter Four Comparison of Methods for Analysis of Segregation Patterns 49 4.1 Introduction 49 4.2 Co-Location Results at the Census Tract Level 50 4.2.1 Two-group Co-Location 50 4.2.2 Same-group Co-Location 59 v 4.3 Co-Location Results at the Block Group Level 65 4.4 Sensitivity of the CLQ to Neighborhood Size 71 4.5 Comparison of the CLQ Against Other Measures 72 4.6 Summary 76 Chapter Five Analyzing Segregation Patterns Within Urban Areas Using the Local Co-Location Quotient 77 5.1 Introduction 77 5.2 Local CLQs for the Boston Metropolitan Area 80 5.3 Local CLQ Values for the Detroit Metropolitan Area 87 5.4 Local CLQ Values for the Houston Metropolitan Area 94 5.5 Summary 101 Chapter Six Geovisualization of Residential Segregation Indices: A Pointillist Approach 102 6.1 Introduction 102 6.2 Current Methods for Geovisualizing Segregation Measures 105 6.3 Value-by-Area Cartograms 111 6.3.1 A Contiguous Value-by-Area Cartogram Approach 111 6.3.2 Dorling Circle Non-Contiguous Cartograms 115 6.4 The Pointillist Approach 117 6.5 Summary 125 Chapter Seven Summary and conclusions 126 7.1 Summary and Conclusions 126 7.2 Future Research 128 References 129 vi LIST OF TABLES Table 3.1 Summary Table of Observations Used in Study Dataset 29 Table 3.2 Definitions of MSAs Used in the Analysis 30 Table 3.3 Number of Census Tracts and Block Groups 31 Table 3.4 Racial Categories (One Race) Defined by US Census 32 Bureau for 1990, 2000 and 2010 Table 3.5 Global Co-Location Quotients Between Whites and Blacks, Based on 2010 Data 40 Table 4.1 Global Co- Location Quotients for Between Groups 53 Table 4.2 Changes in Co-Location Values for MSAs Between 1990 and 2010 54 Table 4.3 Descriptive Statistics for Co-Location with Whites Given the Location of Blacks (W|B) and with Blacks Given the Location of Whites (B|W) for 1990, 2000 and 2010 55 Table 4.4 Ranking of Co-Location with Whites Given the Location of Blacks (W|B) in Ascending Order 57 Table 4.5 Ranking of Co- Location with Blacks Given the Location of Whites (B|W) in Ascending Order 58 Table 4.6 Global Co- Location Quotients for Within Groups Computed at the Census Tract Level Using a Zero Order Neighborhood for the Years 1990, 2000 and 2010 60 Table 4.7 Descriptive Statistics for Within Group Co-Location at the Census Tract Level for 1990, 2000 and 2010 61 Table 4.8 Ranking for Co- Location with Whites Given the Location of Whites (W|W) in Ascending Order 63 Table 4.9 Ranking of Co- Location Values with Blacks Given the Location of Blacks (B|B) in Ascending Order 64 Table 4.10 Global Co- Location Quotients for Between Groups Computed at the Block Group Level Using a Zero Order Neighborhood for the Years 1990, 2000 and 2010 67 Table 4.11 Global Co- Location Quotients for Within Groups Computed at the Block Group Level Using a Zero Order Neighborhood for the Years 1990, 2000 and 2010 68 vii Table 4.12 Pearson Correlation Coefficent between the Index of Dissimilarity Values (Whites versus Blacks) and the Co-Location Values for Respective Years 73 Table 4.13 Index of Dissimilarity Computed at the Census Tract Level 73 Table 4.14

Load more