Hispanics Are Not As Segregated Within Detroit As Their Non-hispanic Black Counterparts

By Author: Alyry Yesong
Total Articles: 10
Comment this article

Although Hispanics have limited economic resources, they are not as segregated within Detroit as their non-Hispanic black counterparts. Detroit's African American population has endured negative stereotypes for decades, while Detroit's Hispanics have been relatively invisible in comparison. Even by 2000, Hispanics only accounted for 5% of Detroit's total population, and no census tract with Chanel Jewelry a majority Hispanic population had less than 17.1% of its population non-Hispanic white. Den ton and Massey (1991) in their study of racial/ethnic turnover in 20,000 census tracts during the 1970s found that somewhere between 5% and 50% Hispanic led to rapid Hispanic transformation of a tract, but over 50% Hispanic led to a slow-down in the transition process. For black tracts, over 50% led to further transition to majority black tracts.

The authors concluded that neither Hispanics nor blacks were solely interested in locating in Hispanic or black only tracts, and whereas non-blacks were averse to residing in black dominated tracts, Hispanic dominated tracts ...
... still attracted non-Hispanics. Thirdly, the rapid growth of the Hispanic population occurred simultaneously with an economic resurgence in the 1990s, and while Hispanics became more visible, that visibility was associated with employment of Hispanics and improvements in the built environment of the ethnic enclave. Housing values have actually increased in several tracts and a major Hispanic complex devoted to tourism has been developed since 1990 (Patterson 2002).

However, it cannot be concluded that the rapid growth of the Hispanic population between 1990 and 2000 caused the succession process to occur. This question can only be answered with additional research. Although it appears that the growth of the Hispanic population is causing non-Hispanic white turnover, there are Pandora Jewelry undoubtedly other processes at work. Detroit has been losing its non-Hispanic white population for several decades through the processes of suburbanization (Farley et al. 2000; Darden et al. 1987), and with the onset of deindustrialization in the 1960s, the outmigration of residents to other regions of the country (Greenwood 1988).

A recent report by Southeast Michigan Council of Governments (SEMCOG 2004) predicted that as the baby-boomers age into the retirement years that the Detroit Metropolitan Area will continue to lose migrants to other regions of Michigan and to other states. This predicted exodus of population will likely provide additional housing opportunities, but it remains to be seen whether Hispanics will be able to purchase these houses and assimilate into the majority non-Hispanic population or whether a continued enclave of poorly educated, low-skilled individuals will be permanently trapped in the inner city. Martin (2007) predicts that the inability of Hispanics to purchase higher-cost housing as a result of lower median household incomes will likely contribute to further segregation in central cities and inner suburbs.

Geographical patterns can raise good questions and offer intriguing insights into cultural processes. Cultural landscapes complex manifestations of human intentions and activity offer perspective on who people are and how we make our worlds. This study examines the geographical distributions of a cultural/political landscape element the domestic campaign sign. To be sure, the domestic campaign sign is a political element and subject to consideration as such, at any scale. It is also a landscape element. At the local level, examining the campaign sign may offer new perspectives on how different groups of people are integrated and socialized into the political process. Looking at these signs also contributes to understanding how the communicative aspects of landscape are utilized differently by different groups within a local social order. This contributes conceptually by linking the two areas in human geography, particularly electoral geography and cultural landscape studies.