American Indian Poverty in the Contemporary United States

Abstract

Little sociological attention over the last two decades has focused on the deprivation experienced by indigenous people. Fusing insights from American Indian history and the race and labor market inequality literatures, we address this gap in this article through a historically informed labor market analysis of poverty—an analysis that considers the pervasiveness of contemporary Native poverty, its potential basis in labor market opportunities, and the extent to which it has been patterned by two major demographic and economic shifts: (1) the rapid urbanization of the American Indian population and (2) the proliferation of tribally owned casinos. Findings reveal, most notably, the incredibly rigid and durable character of poverty for this population, historically and currently and across geographic space, and with little overall impact of local labor market opportunity. The presence of tribal casinos reduces such poverty, but only to a small degree and not nearly enough to compensate for sizable American Indian and white poverty differentials. Group history is key, we conclude, to shaping how space, labor markets, and economic development reduce or buttress relations of inequality.

Religious and Spiritual Practices Among Homeless Urban American Indians and Alaska Natives with Severe Alcohol Problems

“…A long legacy of European American colonization has had a devastating impact on American Indian and Alaska Native (AI/AN) communities, resulting in significant poverty, intergenerational trauma, and pronounced health disparities (Davis, Roscigno, & Wilson, 2016; Gone & Calf Looking, 2011). Health disparities include disproportionately high rates of psychiatric problems, especially posttraumatic stress disorder, anxiety disorders, suicidal behavior, and substance use disorders (Brave Heart et al, 2016; Gone & Trimble, 2012).…”

“…Approximately 70% of AI/ANs live in urban areas due to various factors, including forced relocation (e.g., the Indian Relocation Act of 1956) and increased opportunities for employment (Castor et al, 2006; Davis et al, 2016; Jackson, 2002; Wendt & Gone, 2012). Although urbanization has benefited some AI/ANs, many have struggled to maintain adequate long-term employment and affordable housing.…”

“…Although urbanization has benefited some AI/ANs, many have struggled to maintain adequate long-term employment and affordable housing. Urbanization has thus resulted in poverty that is on par with that on reservations and is considerably higher than in the general urban population (Davis et al, 2016; Dickerson & Johnson, 2010). …”

Indian Country Poverty: Place‐Based Poverty on American Indian Territories, 2006–10

“…Despite the persistence of reservation poverty, sociological analyses of trends in American Indian economic and social conditions are few, with some notable exceptions (see Davis, Roscigno, and Wilson ; Huyser, Sakamoto, and Takei ; Huyser, Takei, and Sakamoto ). Of those studies, only one has attended to locational factors.…”

“…Of those studies, only one has attended to locational factors. Davis et al () tested labor market factors and locality as predictors of American Indian poverty, finding that American Indian poverty was not solely a function of residence on or off tribal territories. Instead, their analysis points to a confluence of geography, history, and labor market opportunities as predictors of American Indian poverty.…”