Examining Ethnic Exposure through the Perspective of the Neighborhood Effect Averaging Problem: A Case Study of Xining, China

Abstract

An increasing number of studies have observed that ignoring individual exposures to non-residential environments in people’s daily life may result in misleading findings in research on environmental exposure. This issue was recognized as the neighborhood effect averaging problem (NEAP). This study examines ethnic segregation and exposure through the perspective of NEAP. Focusing on Xining, China, it compares the Hui ethnic minorities and the Han majorities. Using 2010 census data and activity diary data collected in 2013, the study found that NEAP exists when examining ethnic exposure. Respondents who live in highly mixed neighborhoods (with high exposures to the other ethnic group) experience lower activity-space exposures because they tend to conduct their daily activities in ethnically less mixed areas outside their home neighborhoods (which are more segregated). By contrast, respondents who live in highly segregated neighborhoods (with low exposures to the other ethnic group) tend to have higher exposures in their activity locations outside their home neighborhoods (which are less segregated). Therefore, taking into account individuals’ daily activities in non-residential contexts in the assessment of environmental exposure will likely lead to an overall tendency towards the mean exposure. Using Tobit models, we further found that specific types of activity places, especially workplaces and parks, contribute to NEAP. Ignoring individual exposures in people’s activity places will most likely result in misleading findings in the measurement of environmental exposure, including ethnic exposure.

Does social exposure influence locals' and migrants' city attachment? Comparing residential areas and activity spaces

“…This may be because the sample neighbourhoods were mainly located in the suburbs of Shanghai, where a large number of migrants reside. These results further show that people living in residential spaces with higher migrant exposure experience lower migrant exposure in activity spaces, which is consistent with general conclusions concerning the NEAP (Kim & Kwan, 2021; Kwan, 2018; Ma et al, 2020; Tan et al, 2020).…”

“…Recently, scholars have employed the NEAP to examine social–spatial segregation and have found that people living in highly mixed neighbourhoods tend to conduct their daily activities in less diverse areas than those in residential neighbourhoods (Jones & Pebley, 2014; Krivo et al, 2013; Park & Kwan, 2018). Using census data and activity diary data, Tan et al (2020) confirm that the NEAP exists with regard to ethnic exposure and that different ethnic groups are exposed to various ethnic environments in their activity spaces. The NEAP may therefore drive misleading findings on the relationship between neighbourhood exposure and individual well‐being (Ma et al, 2020).…”

“…These differences drive the neighbourhood effect averaging problem (NEAP) (Kwan, 2018). In studies based on residence‐based exposure measures, NEAP may lead to overestimations or underestimations of neighbourhood effects on city attachment due to the uneven distributions of social groups and individual mobility (Tan et al, 2020). Migrants' city attachment results from the joint impacts of social exposure in residential and activity spaces; thus, the effects on city attachment may vary with exposure to different spaces.…”

Morphological study of safe fixation region of temporomandibular joint prosthesis in Chinese northeast population with 3-dimensional computed tomographic image

“…On the contrary, there are officially 56 ethnic groups in China, including a majority group (ethnic Han) and 55 minority groups. [ 21 ] There are no investigation focusing on the differences among regions and ethnic groups in China currently. A majority of the selected volunteers in our study are Chinese Hans, and there might be differences in the measurements among the ethnic groups and regions in China.…”

Daily Mobility Patterns: Reducing or Reproducing Inequalities and Segregation?

“…It is especially problematic in relation to those living in the bottom-end of the neighbourhood hierarchy. They are generally assumed to face the most serious negative consequences of segregation and are the target of most anti-segregation initiatives yet their exposure to deprivation risks being exaggerated if their daily exposure to more resourceful areas is not accounted for (Jones & Pebley, 2014;Kwan, 2018;Tan, Kwan, & Chen, 2020).…”