Racial and Ethnic Integration in U.S. Metropolitan Neighborhoods: Patterns, Complexities and Consequences Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Diana Leilani Karafin, B.A., M.A. Graduate Program in Sociology The Ohio State University 2009 Dissertation Committee: Lauren J. Krivo, Advisor Vincent J. Roscigno Rachel E. Dwyer Copyright by Diana Leilani Karafin 2009 Abstract In my dissertation, I problematize the current framing and understanding of U.S. racial and ethnic neighborhood integration in an increasingly heterogeneous society. Research questions and analyses are shaped by contemporary race theories which emphasize how societal systems, structures, and racial ideologies condition institutions, outcomes, and a shifting U.S. racial order (Bonilla-Silva 2004; Mills 2004; Omi and Winant 1994). I examine the often implied, yet rarely empirically validated, proposal that long-term racial and ethnic neighborhood integration is a primary remedy for the inequities and deleterious consequences associated with racial residential segregation. I construct a descriptive and analytical national portrait of the patterns and socioeconomic consequences of metropolitan neighborhood integration between 1980 and 2000. I extend existing research by illuminating national patterns that account for Latinos as well as Blacks and Whites, and by directly comparing neighborhood and group-level socioeconomic advantage/disadvantage for a range of integrated and homogenous neighborhood types. Most importantly, I explicitly examine whether Blacks and Latinos residing in durable integrated contexts appear to be significantly more advantaged than those situated in long-term, predominantly minority communities. Using data for neighborhoods embedded within metropolitan contexts from the Neighborhood Change Database I first assess descriptive patterns of the frequency and ii durability of integration in metropolitan neighborhoods over two decades. I employ a racial/ethnic neighborhood integration typology which more fully incorporates differential combinations of Latinos, Blacks, Whites, and Others in neighborhoods than heretofore employed. I find vast differentiation in the frequency, stability, and paths of change among various types of integrated and homogenous contexts. White, Black, and Latino neighborhoods remained the norm across the two decades, though the share of two-group neighborhoods increased from 17.3% to 29.2% (in particular, White-Black, White-Latino, and Latino-Black neighborhoods). Regarding the question of stability, White, Black, and Latino neighborhoods were significantly more stable than the integrated areas. These patterns were further characterized by the concentration of Whites in White neighborhoods across the two decades, and substantial flux in the population composition of all neighborhood types. I then use hierarchical multinomial models to evaluate the relationship between neighborhood advantage/disadvantage and the odds a neighborhood remained integrated or became integrated. The results demonstrate that, net of various metropolitan and neighborhood population and housing characteristics, the most advantaged integrated contexts were the least stable and the most likely to transition to all White contexts. In contrast, the most disadvantaged integrated contexts were the most stable, with those that do change being more likely to transition to predominantly Black or Latino contexts. When examining the odds a homogenous neighborhood in 1980 became integrated in 2000, the results indicate that more disadvantaged neighborhoods were significantly more likely to become integrated than less disadvantaged communities. iii The final portion of the research asks whether long-term integrated areas, and the group-members in them, are significantly more advantaged compared to homogenous and transitioning contexts (and their group members). The central finding is that while racially stable White-Black areas were significantly less disadvantaged than racially stable Black areas, the average level of Black advantage in stable White-Black neighborhoods was significantly less than the average level for those in long-term Black neighborhoods. In contrast, Latinos had higher levels of advantage in racially stable White-Latino neighborhoods compared to those in stable majority Latino neighborhoods (and stable White-Latino contexts as a whole had less disadvantage than long-term Latino communities). Overall, my results underscore the problematic nature of making a single generalization of stable racial and ethnic integration as a “success story.” Situating my findings within the broad urban stratification and race theory literatures, I discuss the theoretical implications of my findings for understanding the shifting U.S. racial order and inequality across the residential landscape. iv DEDICATION Dedicated to Nobuo v Acknowledgments First, I would like to acknowledge the person who has played the most important role in my growth and development during my graduate school tenure, my adviser Lauren J. Krivo. I would absolutely not be where I am today without Laurie’s willingness to stand by an eager, yet sometimes wayward and confused, graduate student. My path to complete graduate school has been neither linear nor traditional, yet Laurie has remained a steadfast source of support throughout. Along with serving as my adviser, Laurie has provided me with numerous opportunities that have enriched my experience at Ohio State. These include hiring me as a research assistant, collaborating with me on a research project, introducing me to scholars outside of OSU, and inviting me to join the Racial Democracy, Crime, and Justice Network (with Ruth Peterson). Regardless of the particular nature of the struggles, questions, or dilemmas I have faced, Laurie has been reliable in her wisdom, honesty, and encouragement. Laurie demands excellence in her own work, and does not compromise her standards despite her many, constant, competing obligations. Laurie is incredibly present in her meetings and in the level of detail and thought she puts into her feedback. I am grateful for her willingness to dedicate so much time to my development. She has left an indelible mark on my life, both personally and professionally. I remain inspired by Laurie’s passion, vi generosity, and kindness for those less fortunate than herself. For my dissertation project specifically, I am thankful for Laurie’s insight, direction, and patience. Laurie has read countless drafts that have moved the project forward substantially. Thank you, Laurie, for the sacrifices you have made to help this undeserving graduate student complete her dissertation. I am also especially thankful for the opportunity to work with Vincent Roscigno in the contexts of committee member, collaborator, and informal adviser. In all of these roles, Vinnie has demonstrated to me the significance of placing research questions and findings within bigger and broader theoretical contexts. He has challenged me to never lose sight of the “so what” question regardless of what I am working on. His creativity, enthusiasm, and willingness to ask the tough questions have played an important role in shaping this project. I am also grateful for the countless occasions in which Vinnie shared advice with me about the field and a work-life balance. Thank you, Vinnie, for your dedication all these years. Thank you, also, for helping me to see that there is a place for all in sociology (even someone like me). Rachel Dwyer, also a member of my committee, has played an important role in the development of my dissertation project. Her insight early on helped me to better conceptualize my questions, approach, and contributions. Rachel has a keen awareness of the most relevant theoretical and methodological debates characterizing the residential segregation and urban sociology literatures. She has graciously shared her insight with vii me, prompting me on numerous occasions to re-consider how my own work should evolve. I am also extraordinarily indebted to two professors who are not committee members, Ruth Peterson and Devah Pager. Many years ago, Ruth hired me as a Research Assistant to work on her edited volume (with Laurie Krivo and John Hagan) The Many Colors of Crime: Inequalities of Race, Ethnicity and Crime in America (2006). Ruth also kindly invited me to join the Racial Democracy, Crime, and Justice network of scholars (with Laurie Krivo). I was lucky to have the opportunity to work closely with Ruth. Her uncompromising demand for quality, her sharp wit, and her ability to do the impossible (squeeze 24 hours of work into 8) continue to motivate me. I am thankful Ruth took a risk and trusted me to work on such an important project so dear to her and Laurie and John. I continue to benefit from the cumulative advantages resulting from this early experience. I remain a permanent and proud member of the multitude of “Ruth fans.” I am incredibly thankful that Devah Pager also took a risk several years back, and hired me (with Bruce Western) to work as a Research Assistant on a study of discrimination in the New York City low-wage labor market. I am grateful for the research skills garnered through this project. I am inspired by her passion in conducting the most rigorous work and disseminating findings in an accessible fashion to a broad spectrum of audiences. I am also thankful that Devah graciously provided me with