September 2016
Making Sense of Ethnic Attrition in the Nigerian American Second Generation
Amon Emeka Skidmore College
A paper prepared for presentation consideration by Population Association of America 2017 Annual Meetings Chicago, Illinois
Abstract: Prevailing theories of immigrant adaptation hold that with the passage of time and generations, immigrant identities shift away from countries and ethnicities of origin and toward identities that reflect their destinations. Many European immigrants of the 20th century traded their specific national origins for American or White or Euro-American identities. Such identificational shifts have been associated with upward mobility even for some non-European groups including Mexican Americans. But it is not clear that this is path has been available to Nigerian immigrants. They may not be able to trade their Nigerian identities for American and certainly not White identities. When they cease to be Nigerian, they are likely to become Black or African-American in the eyes of others and perhaps in their own eyes. In this paper, I use U.S. Census and American Community Survey to trace patterns of identity in a Nigerian second generation cohort across a 25 year period (1990 to 2014) as they advance from early school-age to adulthood. The cohort shrinks inordinately across the period as its members cease to identify as Nigerian, and evidence suggests that those who are downwardly mobile are more likely to drop out of the Nigerian population leaving us with a positively selected Nigerian second generation and, perhaps, unduly optimistic assessments of intergenerational mobility among Nigerian Americans.
1
Making Sense of Ethnic Attrition in the Nigerian American Second Generation
In 2014, there were just more than 275,000 Nigerian-born people living in the U.S. and tens of thousands more U.S. born persons of Nigerian-parentage. The exact size of the Nigerian second generation cannot be ascertained given limitations of the U.S. Census, but this number is of central importance for the purposes of immigration scholarship. The ability or inability of Nigerian immigrants to translate their high levels of human capital into o e su ate ualit of life and pass those advantages on to their U.S. born children will shed new light on the impacts of national origins, ethnicity and race on immigrant adaptation in the post-Civil Rights Era U.S. Our ability to assess their intergenerational mobility among them will depend on our ability to reliably identify U.S. born adults of Nigerian parentage—the Nigerian second generation, but typical patterns of immigrant adaptation may undermine our ability to do this.
Immigrants adapt in various ways to their new surroundings and this may include changes in the way they identify ethnically and/or racially. Traditional assimilation theories hold that with the passing of time and especially with the passing of generations, immigrants will less often identify with the places and peoples from whence they come and more often with the places and peoples of their new homes (Gordon 1964). The earliest articulations suggested that Irish immigrants, for instance, and especially their U.S. born desce da ts ould ease to ide tif as I ish a d adopt a A e i a ide tit . By the same logic, we may expect to find that some Nigerian-born Americans and even more of their U.S. born children will cease to identify as Nigerian after a time. Such identificational change may or may not reflect assimilation, but it will likely to lead some members of the Nigerian second generation not to identify as Nigerian when faced with questions of ethnic identity. This pattern of disidentification has is referred to as ethnic attrition which is of concern for scholars of immigrant adaptation because it undermines their ability to identify representative samples of second generation populations (Duncan & Trejo 2015). This is an especially pressing concern if those who identify with the ethnicities and national origins of their immigrant parents differ on social and economic dimensions from those who do not. In other words, ethnic attrition is an especially pressing concern if it is selective.
In this paper, I use 1990 and 2000 U.S. Census data along with 2010-14 American Community Survey data to answer the following questions: 1) Is ethnic attrition evidenced in the Nigerian American second generation, and 2) is it selective? These are important questions for both theoretical and methodological reasons. To the extent that it happens, ethnic attrition may signal a pattern of immigrant integration consistent with assimilation and/or racialization theories developed by immigration scholars over the last century. But such attrition may also undermine our ability to track Nigerian American social and economic progress across generations by leading members of the Nigerian second generation not to identify as such. If the e a e e tai t pes that a e o e p o e to trade Nigerian identities for Black and/or American identities, then summary statistics based only on those who retain Nigerian identities will be misleading (Duncan & Trejo 2015). For these reasons, answering the questions asked above is crucial to our understanding of patterns of adaptation and achievement of Nigerian immigrants, Black immigrants, and immigrants more broadly.
2
Why should we expect Nigerian Immigrants to Stop Identifying as Nigerian?
To assess Nigerian adaptations in the U.S. we have to trust that the U.S. born children and grandchildren of Nigerian immigrants will identify themselves as such. Theory and prior research on patterns of immigrant adaptation in the U.S. suggest that some number will not. The phrase ethnic attrition implies no particular rationale, reasoning, or process leading i di iduals to d op out of thei ethnic group (identity), but social scientists have articulated a variety of reasons we might expect to see some amount of ethnic attrition among immigrant minorities. Some have argued that ethnic attrition is likely to reflect a pattern of assimilation whereby immigrants become identificationally indistinguishable from the members of the American mainstream—Americanization—by way of primary group associations and inter a iage ith e e s of the host so iet (Park 1951; Gordon 1964). Others have pointed to the possibility that some immigrants and immigrant groups undergo a segmented or racialized assimilation process that pulls some of them away from their national or ethnic origins and towards racialized minority identities that are marginal to the American mainstream (Portes and Rumbaut 2001; Golash-Boza 2006). All of theories portend ethnic attrition.
Voluntary migrants are expected to move away from identities that accentuate their origins and toward identities that spotlight their destinations. This movement is part and parcel of the assimilation process as described by Milton Gordon (1964) and others. In its most extreme manifestations this identificational assimilation would lead immigrants and especially their children and grandchildren to identify entirely with the new country and not at all with the old. More often however, the salience of ethnic group memberships fade more predictably than the appeal of ethnic labels. Much has been made of an apparent fading of ethnic attachment among Europeans in the U.S. by scholars who suggest that for many of their descendants, ethnicity has become a more fleeting and occasional set of attachments (Lieberson & Waters 1986; Alba 1990; Waters 1990; Alba and Nee 2003). By the end of the 20th century, the descendants of European immigrants of the early twentieth century were by and large a e age A e i a s i their workaday lives and eth i only on special occasions (Alba 1985, 1990; Gans 1979; Waters 1990). This may happen for Nigerians immigrants too, but with a significantly different set of causes and consequences that will be addressed later.
Intermarriage between ethnic groups is by most counts a critical pa t of the sto of A e i a izatio of European immigrants in the 20th century (Lieberson and Waters 1993; Alba 1990). It makes sense that If [a] hus a d a d ife a e ot f o the eth i g oup … the hild e s eth i so ializatio ill ot be as strong as it ould e if oth pa e ts e e f o the sa e g oup. As a esult … the pe petuatio of eth i ide tifi atio a o g the hild e is ot assu ed he the e a e high le els of i te a iage (Waters 1990:102). So it is important to know how typical outmarriage is for whatever group(s) are being studied. However, it may be equally important to know whom they are marrying—what ethnic or racial boundaries are being crossed in the process (Lichter and Qian 2015; Cornell and Hartmann 2008: 172-3). Whether intermarriage will lead to ethnic attrition and, more specifically, assimilation of non- European immigrant groups who have been predominant in U.S. immigration streams for the last half century remains an open empirical question.
3
Ethnic Attrition Is Not Just a White Thing: The Mexican American Case
There is reason to believe that ethnic attrition will occur among non-European immigrants in the U.S. Mexican Americans provide a useful case in point. They constitute the largest non-European immigrant group in the 20th century and there is evidence of substantial ethnic attrition among them. Alba and Islam (2009) showed that Mexican-American birth cohorts shrank considerably between 1980 and 2000. Whereas, more than 260,000 U.S. born 25 to 29 year olds identified as Mexican-American in in 1980 only 203,000 45 to 49 year olds identified as such in 2000—reflecting a 22% loss of identifiably Mexican- American persons. More than one in five Mexican-Americans born in the U.S. between 1951 and 1955 stopped identifying as Mexican-American somewhere between their 25th and 49th birthdays. Ethnic attrition is occurring.
Ho e e , Me i a A e i a s a e ha dl elti g i to the A e i a ai st ea . To the contrary, the matter of properly identifying Mexican-Americans cohorts in the U.S. has become a pressing concern precisely because Mexican identities have continued to predominate in the Mexican descendant population leading to questions about their assimilation and assimilability (Telles and Ortiz 2008). Ethnic attrition is affecting our ability to answer those questions (Duncan & Trejo 2011). The fact that some Mexican descendants identify as non-Hispanic Whites and do not disclose their Mexican ancestry is a problem for social scientists if this attrition is selective, and there is some evidence that it is. Emeka & Vallejo (2011) demonstrate that Americans with Latin American or Spanish ancestry were less likely to ide tif as “pa ish/Hispa i /Lati o if the e e of i ed ancestry, spoke only English, or had finished high school or college. These findings probably extend to Mexican descendants who do not disclose their Mexican ancestry, but we have no way of knowing precisely because we cannot identify them as Mexican descendants. Their absence from our second and third generation samples downwardly biases our assessments of intergenerational mobility among Mexican Americans in the U.S. (Duncan and Trejo 2011).
Prospects for Ethnic Attrition in the Nigerian Second Generation
There is good reason to predict that, like other groups, Nigerians will gravitate toward new American identities that come to supersede national, ethnic, or tribal affiliations central to their identities upon arrival. This may be all the more pronounced in the second generation due to a pattern of intermarriage between recent black immigrants and slave-descended Black Americans (Lee and Bean 2010; Lichter and Qian 2015). By 1990, more than a third (38%) of Nigerian married men had U.S. born Black American wives with no known Nigerian ancestry (Emeka 2016). The children of such unions can make legitimate claims to both Nigerian and Black American identities. Some may come to feel that their Blackness is the thing that matters most to them and to others in their American lives--leadi g the d op out of the Nigerian identity reflecting a racialized pattern of assimilation similar to that illuminated by Tanya Golash-Boza (2006). Whatever the exact effects may be, it is reasonable to predict that intermarriage will bear significantly on patterns of identity in the second generation.
4
It is of no small consequence that Nigerians are a black. The U.S. born children of Nigerian immigrants are certain of their own Nigerian backgrounds but this fact may have no bearing on how they are viewed by other (especially white) Americans. Social psychologists have found that white subjects tend to associate Americaness with Whiteness (Devos and Banaji 2005). While some Mexican Americans can make viable claims to whiteness in the U.S. context, few if any Nigerians can do so. To the extent that this is true, ethnic attrition may leave Nigerian immigrant descendants aspi i g to A e i a ess a d even feeli g A e i a ut ot being viewed as such by others. When they cease to be Nigerian, they do ot e o e A e i a i the a others have—they more likely become Black or Black American in the eyes of others and perhaps in their own eyes. However, some number will surely resist.
The Protective Effects of Nigerian Identity?
Bashi and McDaniel (1997) argue that as much as black immigrants are confronted with the economic challenges of international migration they are also confronted with challenges of arriving in a racially stratified society in which persons deemed Black suffer all manner of degradation—from subtle microaggressions to systematic social exclusion (Feagin 2006) and early death (Guest et al 1998). It is reasonable to expect that Nigerian immigrants would wish to avoid the kind of Black experience described by the authors cited above. One way to do this could be to distance themselves as best they can from Black people and Black identities as generations of immigrants before them (Roediger 2005). It is clear to most observers that Nigerians are phenotypically Black which may preclude their entry into whiteness, but they are also immigrants which may shield them from patterns of exclusion experienced by slave-descended Black Americans. In hopes that they not be (mis)taken for Black American, they may maintain and accentuate Nigerian identities long after they or their parents arrive in the U.S. This might lead us to predict extraordinary levels of ethnic persistence among them, and it may also lead to a pattern of ethnic attrition that is fundamentally different from that observed among European and even Mexican immigrants and their U.S. born descendants. Whereas, ethnic attrition is associated with socioeconomic success and assimilation for those groups, for Nigerians the opposite may be true.
If Nigerians associate Blackness with marginalization (i.e., to be Black is to be marginalized AND to be marginalized is to be Black) then we might expect that those who have positive assessment of their present situation and future prospects would be less likely to identify as Black and perhaps make efforts to avoid that label. Conversely, we might expect those who have an acute sense of their own marginality will be inclined to identify as Black and perhaps not Nigerian since they perceive their Nigerian background to be is far less salient in their lives than the fact of their Blackness. There is compelling evidence to suggest that this is the case among Black Americans or mixed heritage. Penner and Saperstein (2008) demonstrated that in a sample of young adults followed and surveyed periodically between 1979 and 1998, 20% had been re-classified from black to white or white to black at least once. Re-classifications from a white identity to a black identity were associated with spells of unemployment, poverty, and especially incarceration. Any of those three types of negative experience led respondents classified as white in 1979 to more often identify themselves and be identified by interviewers as black later on. For this reason it is important to point out that despite high levels of education evidenced
5 among them, Nigerian families with children have also evidenced high poverty prevalence (Emeka 2016). Poverty may make Black Americans of Nigerians.
Ethnic attrition has tended to coincide with upward mobility and the adoption of White or American identities liberating them from the stigma of immigrant or foreign identities (Alba 2009; Lieberson 1980; Roediger 2005), but this is a path that may not be available to Nigerian and other black immigrants. Instead they may seize on their immigrant—Nigerian—identities to avoid the stigma of being Black. Even against a backdrop of resurgent xenophobia (see Massey and Sanchez 2010) it may be more preferable to be thought of as a Nigerian immigrant than to be thought of as a Black American. Employers, for instance, tend to prefer immigrant workers over black workers all else being equal (Waldinger & Lichter 2003) so it may be in the interest of black immigrants to make sure employers know they are immigrants in whatever ways they can. There is some evidence that black immigrants know this and make conscious efforts maintain accents and manners that signal foreign origins (Waters 1999) to employers and others. This may also lead the most ambitious to hold most tightly to their immigrant origins, and prior studies suggest as much (Portes and Rumbaut 2001).
Ma Wate s 1994,1999) uncovered three types ethnic and racial identity among young members of the West Indian second generation in New York City in the early s. Among the 83 respondents interviewed, the largest number (42%) e p essed la k A e i a ide tities. The te ded to ide tif ith la k A e i a s … did ot see thei eth i ide tities as i po ta t … [and] tended to downplay an ide tit as Ja ai a o T i idadia 999: 287). Another third (31%) of the respondents expressed ide tities that e e o e lea l Eth i . They were often insistent that they were not black American. The remaining respondents were mostly recent immigrants whose identities were more wrapped up in memories of home than American racial dynamics. Among poor and working class respondents A e i a ide tities e e fa o e o o that eth i ide tities hile a o g iddle lass espo de ts Eth i ide tities e e ost o o . This patte suggests that there is some amount of selective ethnic attrition among West Indians whereby the upwardly mobile continue to identify with the atio al a d/o eth i o igi s of thei pa e ts hile the do a dl o ile d op out a d o e to identify themselves as Bla k o Af i a -A e i a .
As much as immigrant attachments to their ethnic and/or national origins are matters of the heart, their identificational choices and expressions may be in part strategic with Nigerian immigrant identities seized upon partly to avoid patterns of black exclusion. But if exclusion is nonetheless encountered we might expect to see Black identities come to the fore—especially in the second generation. If we carry this line of thinking to its logical end, we should expect to find more upwardly mobile members of the second generation holding steadfastly to their Nigerian identities and more marginalized (i.e., impoverished, unemployed, and/or incarcerated) members opting for Black identities. If this is true, ethnic attrition may more closely align with the downward mobility.
Prior Studies of Nigerian American Identity and Mobility
6
There is limited evidence on the question of whether ethnic attrition is occurring among Nigerian Americans. How they identify may differ from situation to situation as has been observed among black Caribbean immigrants (Butterfield 2004). Oluwakemi Balogun (2011) finds support for this idea in her study of middle-class second generation Nigerians in the San Francisco Bay area. Her respondents explained retrospectively how their identities had evolved as they moved through childhood and college and into adult life. Their stories were complex and context-driven. Some were insistent that they were Nigerian —nothing more and nothing less—and others consciously embraced African-American identities in solidarity with their slave-descended brethren. Some embraced both types of identity depending on their place in the life course. In all, her study highlighted the fact that, as for any group, identity is highly situational among Nigerians of the second generation and that both ethnic persistence and ethnic attrition are likely to be observed depending on where and when we observe them.
Onoso Imoagene (2012) interviewed 75 middle-class Nigerians who were born in the U.S. or immigrated at a young age and found that while they recognized themselves as black people, few if any identified as Af i a -A e i a in adulthood. She posits that ei g iddle- lass ade su je ts … eje t a Af i a - American identity that is frequently synonymous with a lower/underclass African-A e i a ultu e (Imoagene 2012: 2170). If this sentiment is widespread, Nigerian Americans may often elevate their Nierian origins in order avoid the stigma of being African American or Black. These studies expose important identificational patterns, but both are limited to middle-class Nigerian Americans of the second generation so they cannot shed light on the question of whether ethnic attrition is associated with downward mobility.
To the e te t that patte s of ide tit a e lassed i the a the I oage e s fi di gs suggest, we may miss less successful members of the Nigerian second generation who do not identify themselves as such, and this could upwardly skew our assessments intergenerational mobility—leading us to unduly optimistic assessments of Nigerian mobility. Emeka (2016), for instance, demonstrates that U.S. born Nigerian men and women surveyed in the 2010-14 American Community Surveys were substantially more likely to be affluent and less likely to be poor than Nigerian-born men and women in 1990, but this could reflect a selective pattern of ethnic attrition whereby affluent members of the Nigerian second generation identify as Nigerian or Nigerian-American and less successful members of the Nigerian second generation identify only as Black.
In all, we are left with good reasons to predict that 1) substantial ethnic attrition will occur among Nigerian immigrants that will manifest prominently in the second generation, and 2) patterns of ethnic attrition among them will be selective with downwardly mobile Nigerians more likely to adopt Black identities rendering them invisible in studies of intergenerational mobility.
Data and Methods
Because ethnic attrition poses the most serious challenges when trying to identify members of the second generation (Duncan and Trejo 2015), I trace patterns of identity among the children of Nigerian immigrants as they move from the households of their immigrant parents—where their identities are
7 often expressed by parents rather than by themselves—to households of their own where they are free to identify as they chose. I use U.S. Census to identify a child cohort (5 to 14 years of age) in 1990 whose members had transitioned into adulthood (25 to 34 years of age) by 2010. Patterns of identity in this cohort will be examined in 1990, 2000, and 2010-14 using U.S. Census and American Community data which are the only nationally representative samples large enough to produce substantial samples of Nigerian-Americans.
Identifying the Nigerian Second Generation in the U.S. Census and American Community Survey
The Census Long Form asks respondents two open-ended questions that are pertinent to the task at hand. For each household member it asks: Where was this person born? and What is this perso ’s ancestry or ethnic origin? It is important to reiterate that the latter of these is an open ended question followed by two blank lines and several examples of appropriate responses. In every year since 1990 that list of e a ples has i luded Nige ia which is important since changes in that list of examples has been shown to influence responses (Lieberson and Waters 1993). It is also important to point out that we cannot be certain who in each household actually fills out the Census enumeration forms. So we do not know for sure whether the mother, father, children, or someone else is making decisions about the ancestry or ethnic background of these members of the Nigerian second generation. Going fo a d, I ill e plai ho e e s of the oho t a e ide itified ithout aki g lai s e essa il about how they identify themselves. Irrespective of who is doing the identifying—immigrant parents or U.S. born children—it is significant that many in the Nigerian second generation are simply not counted among those with Nigerian ancestry.
So long as they reside with their Nigerian- born parent(s) we can reliably locate members of the Nigerian second generation simply and reliably by looking at the birthplace(s) of their co-resident parent(s). Children who were born in the United States but who are residing with one or two Nigerian-born parents are members of the Nigerian second generation. The ancestry question further allows respondents to be identified as Nigerian even in the absence of Nigerian-born parents. I treat all U.S. born respondents who reside with at least one Nigerian-born parent OR are identified as having Nigerian ancestry or ethnic origins as members of the Nigerian second generation. Stepchildren of Nigerian householders married to non-Nigerians are excluded from the analyses to follow. This leaves us with 2,118 members of the second generation observed across the 1990 (N=795) and 2000 (N=799) Censuses and the 2010-14 (N=524) American Community Surveys.
Analytical Strategy
The extent of ethnic attrition will be gauged by producing and comparing weighted population estimates of the Nigerian second generation cohort at ages 5 to 14 in 1990, at ages 15 to 24, and, finally, at ages 25 to 34 in 2010. That exercise will be followed by a set of means comparisons and logistic regressions meant to identify the best predictors of ethnic identity among U.S. born children residing with one or more Nigerian parents. We will see that though most children residing with Nigerian-born parents are themselves identified as Nigerian, some are not. This may be an early indication of ethnic attrition.
8
The dependent variable of interest is a dichotomous variable on which those identified as having Nige ia a est o eth i o igi s are assigned the value of 1 and those who are not identified as such are assigned a 0. That dichotomous dependent variable will be regressed on of dummy variables indicating the age/period at which the survey was taken, whether the child was living with a parent who had not completed high school, whether the child was living with a parent who had completed college, whether the child was living with a family whose income fell below the poverty line, whether the child was living with a family whose income was five times as great as the poverty threshold value or more, whether the child was male or female, and whether he or she exhibited delayed progress through school. Following Rosenfeld (2010) I treat respondents enrolled in school but at a grade level not o e su ate ith his/he age as dela ed. Fo i sta e, ea olds ho a e e olled i s hool ut have not yet completed the 9th grade are considered delayed as are all respondents who are not attending school and have not earned a high school diploma. Finally, I introduce a set of dummies that capture the effects of having co-resident parents of particular birthplace configuration (i.e., Nigerian- born mother & father, Nigerian born mother & U.S. born father, etc.). We can thereby assess that net effects of intermarriage and socioeconomic status on patterns of ethnic identity in the Nigerian second generation.
Results: Ethnic Attrition among Second Generations Nigerian Americans
Figure 1 depicts weighted population estimates of the second generation cohort described in the discussion of methods above. In each of the three time periods the cohort consists of children or young adults 1) living with one or two Nigerian parents and who are themselves identified as having Nigerian ancestry, 2) not living with Nigerian parents but who are themselves identified as having Nigerian ancestry, and 3) living with one or two Nigerian parents but not themselves identified as having Nigerian ancestry or ethnic origins. The sum total of these three groups constitutes the second generation cohort for the purposes of this paper.
The figure above is suggestive of ethnic attrition in two ways. First, there is the height of the bars across the three periods. The substantially shorter bar to the right (2010-14) represents a loss of more than a quarter (26.4%) of the Nigerian second generation between 2000 and 2010-14. Interestingly, the size of the cohort seems to have grown between 1990 and 2000. While it may reflect real growth in the number of second generation members coming to identify as Nigerian in the absence co-resident Nigerian parents, the intercensal growth may also reflect nothing more than sampling error. The decline between 2000 and 2010-14, however, is real. Though these estimates are based on 1-in-20 samples, confidence intervals constructed using replicate weights suggest that true cohort size in 2010-14 could be as low as 12,238 and no higher than 15,479. For every four members of the Nigerian second generation identified in 2000, only three remained identifiable in the 2010-14 period.
9
Figure 1. Nigerian Second Generation Cohort* Population and Composition Estimates, 1990-2014
20,000 18,280 18,838 18,000
16,000 5,375 6,359 14,000 13,859 Living with Nigerian 2,128 Parent(s) BUT Not Identified 12,000 as Nigerian 1,691 10,000 Living with Nigerian 7,337 6,054 Parent(s) AND Identified as 8,000 Nigerian 6,000 Not Living with Nigerian 10,040 Parent(s) BUT Identified as 4,000 Nigerian 6,425 5,568 2,000 0 1990 (5 to 14 yrs old) 2000 (15 to 24 yrs 2010-14 (25 to 38 yrs old) old)
Data Source: 1990 and 2000 U.S. Census 5% Public Use Files and American Community Survey 2010-14 5% Cumulative File (courtesy of the Minnesota Population Center). *The sample is limited to respondents born in the U.S. between 1976 and 1985.
There are some clues as to how this happened in Figure 1. The middle bar suggests that there were 12,413 children living with one or two Nigerian parents in 2000 about half (48.8%) of whom were identified as Nigerian. As we might expect, there is a sharp decline in the number of Nigerian second generation members living with their Nigerian parent(s) as they age into adulthood. The number falls to 3,819 in 2010-14—representing the exodus of 8,594 young adults from their immigrant households. Had all of them been identified as U.S. born Nigerians not living with Nigerian parents in 2010-14, there would have been 15,019 in that lower segment of the bar to the right. However, only 10,040 show up there—a growth of 3,615 which is far short of the 8,594 we would expect to see if ethnic persistence were the rule. Of those young adults who left their immigrant households after 2000, less than half (3,615/8,594=42.1%) identify as Nigerian in 2010-14. The potential for these kinds of identifactional shifts are also evident in Figure 1.
The leads us to the second way ethnic attrition is evidenced in Figure 1. In each of the three bars (periods) there were substantial numbers of Nigerian second generation youth or young adults living with one or more Nigerian parents who were not identified as Nigerians themselves. Table 1 displays the most common ancestries listed for children and young adults living with one or more Nigerian born parents but not themselves identified as Nigerian. I all th ee pe iods, Af o-A e i a o Af i a -
10
American o Bla k were far and away the most common ancestries identified—75% in 1990, 50.4% in 2000, and 54.8% in 2010-14. Far fewer identified Af i a a est o eth i o igi s, and an even smaller number identified American ancestries, suggesting that whatever identificational assimilation is happening is racialized. In short, many children of the Nigerian second generation are identified not as Nige ia ut as Af o-A e i a o Af i a A e i a i te s of a est o eth i o igi s even when they are living with two Nigerian-born parents. Patterns of intermarriage may nonetheless provide some hints as to these identificational shifts.
Table 1. Primary Ancestries Reported for Members of the Nigerian Second Generation Cohort* Living with Nigerian-born Parents but not Identified as having Nigerian Ancestry 1990 2000 2010-14 African Ancestry Identified 6.9% 14.5% 16.4% "African", Not Specified 0.0% 14.5% 14.1% Other African Country/Ancestry Specified 6.9% 0.0% 2.3% Black American Ancestry Identified 75.0% 50.8% 54.8% "Afro-American" 75.0% 0.4% 0.0% "African-American" 0.0% 48.1% 51.4% "Black" 0.0% 2.3% 3.4% White/American Ancestry Identified 9.4% 5.3% 6.4% European Country/Ancestry specified 5.4% 3.9% 0.8% "American" 3.5% 1.4% 0.0% "United States" 0.0% 0.0% 3.9% "White" or "Caucasian" 0.5% 0.0% 1.7% Other or Unreported Ancestry 8.7% 29.4% 22.4% Other 3.7% 2.0% 2.6% Uncodable 0.0% 0.7% 2.3% Not Reported 5.0% 26.7% 17.5% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Weighted N 5,375 6,359 2,128 Unweighted N 241 271 85 Data Source: 1990 and 2000 U.S. Census 5% Public Use Files and American Community Survey 2010-14 5% Cumulative File (courtesy of the Minnesota Population Center).
*The sample is limited to respondents born in the U.S. between 1976 and 1985.
11
The Prevalence of Intermarriage and/or Interethnic Mixing in Nigerian Immigrant Households
Table 2 is a si ple ossta ulatio of othe s pla e of i th fathe s pla e of birth for Nigerian second generation children in 1990. Of the estimated 18,280 children (5 to 14 years old) of the Nigerian second generation 60.1% were living with Nigerian fathers and less than half were residing with Nigerian mothers—suggesting a robust pattern of outmarriage and/or inter-ethnic procreation. In fact, only 34.7% of the children of the Nigerian second generation had two Nigerian-born parents in 1990. Another 17.6% of them were residing with a U.S. born mother and Nigerian-born father while 14.7% were residing with a single U.S. born mother (no father present). The presence of U.S. born parents— mothers in particular—is likely to have some influence on how children are identified and, perhaps, how they come to identify themselves (Rumbaut 1994). Therefore, it is significant that nearly as many Nigerian second generation youth were living with U.S. born mothers (41%) as were living with Nigerian born mothers (44.1%) in 1990.
Table 2. Crosstabulation of Mother's Place of Birth by Father's Place of Birth for Children of the Nigerian Second Generation Cohort* in 1990 Father's Place of Birth Nigeria U.S. Other Absent Total
Nigeria 34.7% 2.1% 0.1% 7.2% 44.1% Mother's Place U.S. 17.6% 8.4% 0.2% 14.7% 41.0% of Birth Other 3.7% 0.0% 1.0% 0.4% 5.1% Absent 4.2% 2.7% 0.0% 2.9% 9.8%
Total 60.1% 13.2% 1.4% 25.3% 100.0%
Weighted N 18,280 Unweighted N 795 Data Source: 1990 U.S. Census 5% Public Use File (courtesy of the Minnesota Population Center). *The sample is limited to respondents born in the U.S. between 1976 and 1985.
Some single U.S. born mothers who do not reside with the Nigerian fathers of their children may not identify those children as Nigerian—rendering them invisible for the purposes of this study and leading to an undercount of the Nigerian second generation. The extent to which this happens may depend on the racial and ethnic identities of mothers themselves. The vast majority of the U.S. Born mothers of Nigerian second generation children in 1990 identified racially as Black (84.1%). All said, more than a third (34.5%) the second generation Nigerian children were residing with U.S. born Black mothers.
As members of the second generation moved out of the their Nigerian-born parents households, the possi ilit of ide tif i g the o the asis of thei pa e ts pla e of i th as eliminated—leaving us
12 reliant on their self-identification. However, from a young age many of them were not identified as Nige ia . It akes se se that hild e ei g aised pa e ts ho ide tif the as ei g of Af o- A e i a athe tha Nige ia a estry might come to think of themselves in those terms. To the extent that this is true, it should not surprise us to see the disappearance of substantial fraction the Nigerian second generation as they move out of their parents households. This eth i att itio is important for ongoing debates about the bearing of race, ethnicity, and nativity in processes of immigrant adaptation, but it also has concrete methodological implications for the study of i te ge e atio al o ilit . If pa ti ula t pes of second generation Nigerian-Americans are more likely to identify as such than others, it could bias our assessment of intergenerational mobility. We will see that ethnic attrition among Nigerians in the U.S. is somewhat selective.
Selective Ethnic Attrition in the Nigerian Second Generation: Bivariate Results
Table 3 displays rates of Nigerian ancestral identification among children and young adults residing with Nigerian born parents across the 1990-2014 period. Children and young adults not residing with one or more Nigerian parents are excluded since 100% of them must necessarily identify as Nigerian (ancestry). For the rest, Nigerian ancestral identification is variable but, as we shall see, somewhat predictable.
Turning first to the bottom of Table 3 we can see that only about half (52%) of children residing with Nigerian parents identified as having Nigerian ancestry themselves. The panels suggest the identities of the children of Nigerian immigrant parents are influenced by patterns of intermarriage and/or interethnic family formation as well as the socioeconomic standings of immigrant parents and their families. First, the can see that children residing in households with two Nigerian immigrant parents are considerably more likely than others to be identified as Nigerian themselves. It is important to recall that well less than half of the Nigerian second generation children reside in such households. The se o d ost o o pa e tal i thpla e o figu atio as U.“. Bo Mothe & Nige ia Bo Fathe , and children and young adults living is those family were only identified as Nigerian about a fifth of the time (21.7%). I te esti gl , of the s all u e of se o d ge e atio e e s li i g i Nige ia -Born Mother & U.“. Bo Fathe households, none were identified as Nigerian. While many members of the Nigerian second generation are not identified as Nigerian even when they reside with two Nigerian-Born parents, they are even less likely to be identified as when they reside with a U.S. Born parent.
13
Minnesota Population Center). Minnesota Population Data Source: 1990 and 2000 U.S.5%Use Census F Public 13,828 64.4% 61.2% 78.9% Mother & Nigerian-Born Father Parents' Places of Birth 3. Table Both Parents Completed High School Both Completed Parents Parents Education Non-Nigerian Foreign Born Foreign Mother Born & Fath Nigerian Non-Nigerian Born Born Foreign Fath MotherNigerian & Non-Nigerian ..Br ohr&Ngra onFte 68 77 0.0% 0.0% 17.7% 0.0% 26.8% 0.0% U.S. Born Mother Born & Father Nigerian Mother & Nigerian-Born U.S. Born Father betMte ieinBr ahr7.%5.%2.%2,2 27.0% 55.1% 71.9% Mother BornAbsent & Father Nigerian No College Educated Parents No College One or One No High Two Diploma School with Parents ieinBr ohr&Asn ahr4.%4.%5.%4,7 57.7% 43.0% 46.1% Born MotherNigerian &Father Absent One or Two College Educated Parents or One Two College Above the Poverty Line Poverty the Above 5XAt orLine Poverty Above the Family Income At or Below the Poverty Line Poverty the At or Below Women Sex Men Normal Progress Normal School Progress/High School Completion *The sample is limited to respondents born in the U.S.born the in betw to respondents limited is *The sample Unweighted N Unweighted Weighted N Weighted Total % Delayed Progress/High School DropoutSchool Progress/High Delayed Rates of Nigerian Ancestral IdentificationAncestral theofNigerian in Nigeria Rates iles and American Community Survey 2010-14 Survey and Community American iles Fi 5% Cumulative r4.%5.%1.%1,505 15.8% 0.0% 54.2% 71.0% 43.6% 100.0% er er een 1976een and 1985. % Identified as Nigerian having Ancestry
1990 nSecond Generation Cohort* byBackgroundSelect Character 12,413 12,712 77 88 44.3% 48.8% 57.7%
544 0 0 45% 50% 60% 9 0 43% 30% 39% 5 1 0% 21% 25% 2 4 45% 54% 62% 8 1 45% 28% 51% 56% 58% 56% 4 1 0% 31% 54% 5 0 47% 50% 55% 0 7 42% 47% 60% 8 0 44% 50% 58% 6 41% 56% or Ethnic Origins
2000 3,819
515
2010-14 28,944 1,206 147 Weighted Weighted
1,144
1,085
1,206 1,122 27,671 23,566 26,001 13,713 15,231 27,014 N
5,781 5,378 1,273 2,943 1,930
213 603 81 33 le (courtesy of the the of (courtesy le Unweighted Unweighted
N
556
200
262
221
985
121
586
620
59 84 10 35 62 84 istics
14
Table 3 reveals a steady decline in the likelihood that children and young adults residing with Nigerian Born parents will be identified as Nigerian over time—from 58% in 1990 down to 44% in the 2010-14 period. The socioeconomic statuses of parents and families also appear to matter with the children of high school dropouts considerably less likely to be identified as Nigerian (23%) while those residing with college graduates are considerably more likely (56%). Members of the Nigerian second generation residing in families with incomes that fell below the poverty threshold were also less likely to be identified as Nigerian (43%). Turning to characteristics of the second generation children and young adults themselves, gender makes surprisingly little difference in patterns of identity in the second generation. Their progress in school, however, does seem to be related. Those students who were behind in school were less likely to be identified as Nigerian (45%) than those who were making normal progress (53%). In all, the ethnic attrition observed here seems to be tied to patterns of intermarriage and socioeconomic mobility, but it is not yet clear if these effects work independently of each other.
More Evidence of Selective Ethnic Attrition: Multivariate Results
Table 4 displays results from logistics regression analyses predicting Nigerian ancestral identification among children and young adults living with at least one Nigerian born parent. Analyses are run separately for 1990, 2000, and 2010-14 to allow for comparison of effects across time periods. It should be noted, however, that the findings from the 2010-14 period reflect identificational patterns of the small number of Nigerian second generation men and women residing with parents in adulthood (25 to 34 years of age), and this group is probably not representative in the whole cohort.
All else being equal, children residing with two Nigerian born parents are more likely than all others to be identified as having Nigerian ancestry themselves.1 In both 1990 and 2000, the largest groups of second generation children and young adults not living with two Nigerian-born parents lived with a U.S. born mother and a Nigerian born father OR a single Nigerian born mother (no father present). More than a third of children were in one of these situations which appear to significantly dampen Nigerian identification. The odds of Nigerian ancestral identification are significantly lower for those residing with a U.S. born mother and Nigerian born father than for any other group. In 1990, the odds of children in this familial situation being identified as Nigerian were only one-tenth (Exp[B]=.10) as great as those of children residing with two Nigerian born parents. Odds of Nigerian were also low for those with Nigerian born mothers but whose fathers were absent in 1990 (Exp[B]=.29).
1 There is one exception. Children and young adults living with a Nigerian born mother and a father born in a different foreign country have higher levels of Nigerian ancestral identification in 2000. They have odds of being identified that are more than twice as great as those of members of the referent category, but they constitute less than 1% of the cohort in 2000.
15
Nigerian Born MotherNigerian and Father PARENTS' PLACE OF BIRTH eae rgesi col SDoot00 .210 - 1.04 0.12 0.04 HS School/ in Progress Dropout Delayed IN Data Source: 1990 and 2000 U.S.5%Use F Census Public N Unweighted N Weighted R Pseudo Nagelkerke's 1.35 CONSTANT 0.06 0.47 0.10 0.30 -0.75 0.69 0.10 0.09 0.05 0.29 -0.37 1 At least parent graduate college 0.07 -2.32 1 At least out parent HS dropped of PARENTS' EDUCATION 0.00 -1.24 2,024.81 -22.54 Born Mother/ Father Absent Nigerian US BornBorn Father Mother/Nigerian Born Father Mother/Absent Nigerian Born Mother/USNigerian Born Father 4. Table to bv XtePvryLn .600 1.76 0.78 0.08 0.07 0.56 -0.25 At or 5XLine above Poverty the Line Poverty the At or below FAMILY INCOME Sex (Male=1)Sex CHILD'S CHARACTERISTICS Nigerian Born Born Mother/Other Foreign Nigerian Father te oeg onMte/ieinBr ahr-.70.0 -1.47 BornBorn Other Foreign Father Mother/Nigerian Nigerian-BornParents,1990-2014 Insufficient N. Results not reported for cells with le with for not cells reported N. Results Insufficient Logistic Regression Results: Predictors IdenNigerianof Results: Regression Logistic 2 1990 (5 to 14 age) yrs of ss ss than 10 cases. iles and American Community Survey 2010-14 Survey and Community American iles Fi 5% Cumulative ..EpB ..EpB ..Exp(B) S.E. B Exp(B) S.E. B Exp(B) S.E. B .700 2.63 0.07 0.97 .700 1.19 0.04 0.17 eeetReferent Referent 2721,1 3,819 12,413 12,712 .3 .1 0.472 0.212 0.333 4 1 147 515 544 0.23 9 tification amongtification U.S. Born Children andYoung Adults R IN *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** 2000 (15 to 24 age) yrs of 02 .60.80 0.06 -0.22 01 .40.83 0.04 -0.18 00 .809 20 .30.13 0.13 -2.06 0.49 0.13 0.98 -0.70 0.14 0.08 0.07 0.68 -0.02 -2.00 0.05 -0.39 04 .70.66 0.07 -0.42 03 .90.74 0.09 -0.30 .000 0.90 0.06 0.10 .700 2.39 0.05 0.87 .700 1.31 0.05 0.27 IN IN le (courtesy of the Minnesota Population Center). Minnesota Population the of (courtesy le *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** 2010-14 (25 to 38 age) yrs of esiding withor One Moreesiding 2.51755 0.00 1,735.58 -22.05 2.04095 0.00 4,059.59 -21.20 02 .90.77 0.09 -0.27 15 .90.20 0.09 -1.59 03 .00.69 0.10 -0.37 .201 4.57 0.14 1.52 .801 1.08 0.13 0.08 Referent IN IN IN IN IN *** ** *** *** ***
16
Parental education and family income have consistent significant effects across the 1990 and 2000 censuses. At both times, children living with a parent who had not completed high school had odds of being identified as Nigerian that were about half as great as those of children living with high school educated parents. Residing with one or more college educated parents boosted the odds of Nigerian ancestral identification even further. Residing with a family whose income was below the poverty th eshold d o e hild e s odds of Nige ia a est al ide tifi atio sig ifi a tl do a d a d esidi g with a fa il hose i o e fi e ti es as g eat the po e t th eshold alue d i es hild e s odds of Nigerian ancestral identification significantly upward. All of these findings are consistent with the prediction that we would observe more ethnic persistence among the upwardly mobile and more ethnic attrition among those less fortunate.
Finally, I include two characteristics of the children themselves: gender and school progress. While the latter of these does not bear independently on patterns of identity, the effects of gender are statistically significant and substantively compelling. At the youngest ages observed here--ages 5 to 14 in 1990— boys were slightly more likely to be identified as Nigerian than girls residing with one or two Nigerian parents, but that relationship flipped in 2000 when the cohort ranged from 15 to 24 years in age. As they aged second generation Nigerian young men became less likely to be identified as Nigerian compared to their female counterparts.
Discussion and Conclusions
Over time immigrants and/or their children may cease to identify with their country of origin. Duncan and Trejo (2015) describe su h losses as eth i att itio . I this pape I ha e esti ated the e te t of ethnic attrition among the children of Nigerian immigrants in the U.S. and uncovered evidence that the pattern is not random. We can think of ethnic attrition as one manifestation of identificational assimilation and, in this sense, important on theoretical grounds. But it can undermine efforts to assess socioeconomic assimilation this or any immigrant group so gauging and accounting for ethnic attrition is pressing for methodological reasons as well.
The cohort of U.S. born Nigerians born between 1976 and 1985 shrunk by more than 25% in between 2000 and 2014. I estimate that this cohort numbered 18,838 in 2000, but only 13,859 were enumerated in the 2010-14 period. This decline is important for reasons pertaining to ongoing debates about the plausibility of assimilation for non-European immigrants in the U.S. twenty first century. There is evidence that Mexican descendants have begun to shed their Mexican identities as they have experienced upward mobility in the U.S.—a pattern that aligns with traditional assimilation theory. However, results here suggest that U.S. born Nigerian children residing in poor families with parents ho ha e ot o pleted high s hool o ollege deg ees a e sig ifi a tl o e likel to d op out of the Nige ia g oup i fa o of a Af i a A e i a a est al ide tity. For Nigerian Americans, it seems that ethnic attrition is associated with downward mobility and perhaps integration into the ranks of slave descended Black Americans.
To the extent that this is true, it means we can only see a positively selected part of the Nigerian second generation in adulthood. In 2000, 10.5% of the Nigerian second generation cohort was not making
17 normal progress in school or had dropped out entirely. In 2010-14, 0.0% fell into this category. It is unlikely that school underachievement was eradicated in the cohort in the intervening decade. It is more likely that while some adolescent high school dropouts in 2000 earned diplomas by 2010, many of the less successful members of the cohort were simply not identifiably Nigerian once they moved out of their immigrant parents homes. They effectively drop out of the Nigerian American population and join the U.S. born Black or African-American population artificially inflating the observed socioeconomic achievements of the Nigerian second generation.
Works Cited
Al a, ‘i ha d. . The T ilight of Eth i it a o g A ericans of European Ancestry: The Case of Italia s. Ethnic and Racial Studies 8(1): 134-58.
---. 1990. Ethnic Identity: The Transformation of White America. New Haven, Connecticut: Yale University Press.
---. 2009. Blurring the Color Line: The Chance for a More Integrated America. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
Al a, ‘i ha d a d Ta i Isla . . The Case of the Dissappea i g Me i a A e i a s: A Eth i - Ide tit M ste . Population Research and Policy Review 28: 109-21.
Alba, Richard and Victor Nee. 2003. Remaking the American Mainstream: Assimilation and Contemporary Assimilation. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
Balogu , Olu ake i. . No Ne essa T adeoff: Co te t, Life Cou se, a d “o ial Net o ks i the Identity Formation of Second-Ge e atio Nige ia s i the U“A. Ethnicities 11(4): 436-66.
Bashi, Vilna and Antonio McDaniel. 1996. A Theo of I ig atio a d ‘a ial “t atifi atio . Journal of Black Studies 27(5): 668-82.
Butterfield, Sherri-Ann. 2004. We e Just Bla k : The ‘a ial a d Eth i Ide tities of “e o d Ge e atio West I dia s i Ne Yo k i Becoming New Yorkers: Ethnographies of the New Second Generation, edited by Philip Kasinitz, John Mollenkopf, and Mary Waters. New York: Russell Sage.
Cornell, Stephen and Douglas Hartman. 1998. Ethnicity and Race: Making Identities in a Changing World. Thousand Oaks, California: Pine Forge Press.
De os, Thie a d Mahza i Ba aji. . A e i a = White? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 88(3): 447-66.
Du a , B ia a d “tepe T ejo. . Who Remains Mexican? Selective Ethnic Attrition and the I te ge e atio al P og ess of Me i a A e i a s in Latinos and the Economy: Integration and Impact in Schools, Labor Markets, and Beyond, edited by David Leal and Stephen Trejo. New York: Springer Science.
18
---. 2015. Assessi g the “o ioe o o i Mo ilit a d I teg atio of U.“. I ig a ts a d Thei Desce da ts. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 657: 108-135
E eka, A o . . Po e t a d Afflue e a oss the Fi st T o Ge e atio of Volu ta Mig atio from African to the United States, 1990- . Sociology of Race and Ethnicity 2(2): 162-85.
Emeka, Amon and Jody Agius-Vallejo. . No -Hispanics with Latin American Ancestry: Assimilation, ‘a e, a d Ide tit a o g Lati A e i a Des e da ts i the U“. Social Science Research 40: 1547-63.
Feagin, Joe. 2006. Systemic Racism.: A theory of Oppression. New York: Routledge.
Ga s, He e t. . “ oli Eth i it : The Futu e of Eth i G oups a d Cultu es i A e i a. Ethnic and Racial Studies 2(1): 1-20.
Golash-Boza, Ta a. . D oppi g the H phe ? Be o i g Lati o a -American through Racialized Assi ilatio . Social Forces 85(1): 27-55.
Golash-Boza, Tan a a d Willia Da it . Lati o ‘a ial Choi es: The Effe ts of “ki Colou a d Discrimination on Latinos' and Latinas' Racial Self-Ide tifi atio s. Ethnic and Racial Studies 31(5): 899- 934.
Gordon, Milton. 1964. Assimilation in American Life: The Role of Race, Religion and National Origins. New York: Oxford University Press.
Guest, A e , Gu a Al g e a d Jo Husse . . The E olog of ‘a e a d “o ioe o o i Dist ess: Infant and Working-Age Mo talit i Chi ago. Demography 35(1):23-34.
Imoagene, Onoso. . Bei g B itish s Bei g A e i a : Ide tifi atio a o g “e o d-Generation Adults of Nige ia Des e t i the U“ a d UK. Ethnic and Racial Studies 35(12): 2153-73.
Lee, Jennifer and Frank Bean. 2010. The Diversity Paradox: Immigration and the Color Line in Twenty- First Century America. New York: Russell Sage Press.
Li hte , Da iel, )he hao Qia , a d D it Tu i . . Whom Do Immigrants Marry? Emerging Patterns of Intermarriage and Integration in the United States. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 662(1): 57-78.
Lieberson, Stanley. 1980. A Piece of the Pie: Blacks and White Immigrants Since 1880. Berkeley, California: University of California Press.
Lieberson, Stanley and Mary Waters. 1986. "Ethnic Groups in Flux: The Changing Ethnic Responses of American Whites." Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 487: 79-91.
---. 1993. "The Ethnic Responses of Whites: What Causes Their Instability, Simplification, and Inconsistency?" Social Forces 72(2): 421-450.
19
Massey, Douglas and Magaly Sanchez. 2010. Brokered Boundaries: Creating Immigrant identity in Anti Immigrants Times. New York: Russell Sage.
Penner, Andrew and Aliya Saperstein. 2008. Ho so ial status shapes a e. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 105: 19628-30.
Portes, Alejandro and Ruben Rubaut. 2001. Legacies: The Story of the Immigrant Second Generation. New York: Russell Sage Press.
Roediger, David. 2005. Worki g Toward White ess: how A erica’s I igra ts Beca e White. New York: Basic Books.
‘ose feld, Mi hael. . No t aditio al Fa ilies a d Childhood P og ess th ough “ hool. Demography 47(3): 755-75.
‘u aut, ‘u e . . The C u i le Withi : Eth i Ide tit , “elf-Esteem, and Segmented Assimilation amo g Child e of I ig a ts. International Migration Review 28(4):748-94.
Telles, Edward and Vilma Ortiz. 2008. Generations of Exclusion: Mexican Americans, Assimilation, and Race. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Waldinger, Roger and Michael Lichter. 2003. How the Other Half Works: Immigration and the Social Organization of Labor. Los Angeles: University of California Press.
Waters, Mary. 1990. Ethnic Options: Choosing Identities in America. Berkeley, California: University of California Press.
---. 1994. "Ethnic and Racial Identities of Second-Generation Black Immigrants in New York City." International Migration Review 28(4): 795-820
---. 1999. Black Identities: West Indian Immigrant Dreams and American Realities. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
20