ABSTRACT. Miami is the primate city in a system of urban settlements that make up a Cuban ethnic archipelago in the United States. The city is also a national magnet, attracting Cuban migrants from metropolitan regions across the archipelago. Four large secondary cores of Cubans outside Florida serve as major “feeders” to the Miami enclave: northern New Jersey, New York City, Los Angeles, and Chicago. Currents of migration to Miami are especially strong among older, foreign‐born, and disadvantaged Cubans, an indication of segmented paths in Cuban assimilation. Although concentration in Metropolitan Miami has been the Cuban story over the past three decades, processes of deconcentration now may well be under way.

The influx of lower class émigrés during the 1980 Mariel Boatlift complicates the “success story” image of previous waves of Cuban exiles to the United States. Examination of Mariel exiles in terms of racial variation in adaptation does not exist; nor is analysis of the geographic distribution and internal migration of Mariel Cubans within the United States represented. Mariel exiles maneuver along distinguishable paths of adaptation as evidenced by patterns of settlement and geographical mobility. I argue that place is a necessary ingredient in illuminating diverse adjustment experiences among immigrants and refugees in the United States. Being a marielita. specifically is different to being a Cuban in Miami. I feel first of all Cuban, not particularly marielita., but I can't deny that I left Cuba in 1980, and that sets me apart from other people that came here at the beginning of the revolution. Being a marielita. is hard. A lot of people didn't understand us, didn't care for us, we were different. We were darker.

Within population geography, the last decade has seen an explosion in qualitative work in terms of the types of work, the topics addressed, and the potential theoretical consequences. Yet focus groups have received less attention as an alternative method. This paper highlights the particular promises, challenges, and practicality of doing focus group research in population geography. I begin by addressing how this research method answers ongoing pleas within the subdiscipline for non‐essentialist ways of thinking about taken‐for‐granted social categories and labels. I then outline two other promising outcomes of this method, including the potential for unique and spontaneous group interactions, and the potential for the empowerment of participants. I use the rest of the paper to provide a review of some of the methodological details of focus group research, with the idea of encouraging more population geographers to engage with this method. Throughout, I contend that focus groups have the capability to further our understanding of population processes, and to connect population geography research to ongoing debates within the broader discipline. Observations stem from an extensive review of existing focus group research, along with my own focus group research conducted with residents living in multiracial suburban communities. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

ABSTRACT. In an effort to provide a more complex and multifaceted understanding of the process of spatial assimilation, this article explores alternative paths in understanding racial/ ethnic minority residential patterns. It scrutinizes patterns of contemporary Asian Indian and Chinese settlement in two metropolitan areas: Austin, Texas and Phoenix, Arizona. Though not particularly evolved in terms of their Asian immigrant settlement or dynamics, Austin and Phoenix represent the growing number of newly emergent Asian centers throughout the nation that have developed with the rapid rise of immigration from these two countries in the past several decades. The analysis utilizes records from the 2000 census to document and map Asian Indian and Chinese settlement within each metropolitan area and to investigate whether‐and to what degree‐each group is clustered or dispersed. The article then raises important questions about the consequences of concentration and dispersal for the incorporation of Asian Indian and Chinese residents.

The development of Latin American cities is characterized by formal and informal urban development patterns, weak land-use planning, inequitable economic opportunities, and unequal social divisions. These and other factors have created divergent, and highly fragmented patterns of spatial segregation at all geographic levels. However, little empirical evidence has captured the extent and magnitude of spatial segregation of the poor within specific mega-cities. The combination of advanced spatial segregation indicators with statistical measures allows for the detection and measurement of segregation between multiple groups at multiple scales across the urban region. The paper explores the extent of spatial segregation of different socio-economic groups in Lima, Peru, using 1993 census and more recently released data, presenting a methodology for integrating older and newer data sources. The results indicate that segregation across the Metropolitan Region is localized, with "pockets" of difference across otherwise seemingly homogeneous areas. 
 El desarrollo de las ciudades latinoamericanas es caracterizado por patrones de desarrollo urbano formales e informales, planificación débil de uso del suelo, oportunidades económicas injustas y divisiones sociales desiguales. Estos y otros factores, han creado patrones de segregación espacial divergentes y muy fragmentados a todos niveles geográficos. Sin embargo, poca evidencia empírica ha captado el grado y magnitud de la segregación espacial de los pobres dentro de mega-ciudades específicas. La combinación de indicadores avanzados de segregación espacial con medidas estadísticas, permite la detección y medición de la segregación entre múltiples grupos y escalas dentro de la región urbana. Este estudio explora el grado de segregación espacial de distintos grupos socioeconómicos en Lima, Perú, utilizando datos del censo de 1993 y otros datos recientes, presentando una metodología que integra fuentes de datos nuevos y viejos. Los resultados indican que la segregación en la región metropolitana está localizada en "bolsillos" de diferencias a lo largo y ancho de áreas aparentemente homogéneas.