Explaining Trends in Racial Segregation, 1970-1980

Abstract

The authors argue that white racial attitudes have shifted from a universal rejection of blacks as potential neighbors to an acceptance of open housing in principle—but not in practice. As a result, 1970-1980 declines in racial segregation were confined to metropolitan areas where the number of blacks was so small that desegregation could be accommodated without threatening white preferences for limited interracial contact. Although new housing construction created an impetus for integration in some areas by increasing the proportion of homes built under the Fair Housing Act, most urban blacks lived in older urban areas where new housing was quite limited.

Contact Theory Extended: The Effects of Prior Racial Contact on Current Social Ties

“…It was assumed that if attitudes were changed, behavioral changes would follow. This assumed linkage between attitudes and behaviors clearly is questionable (Clark, 1992;Farley and Frey, 1994;Hanssen, 2001;Jackman and Crane, 1986;Jaynes and Williams, 1989;Massey and Gross, 1991;Pettigrew, 1971;Schaefer, 1996;Schuman and Johnson, 1976).…”

The Legacy of Black Lynching and Contemporary Segregation in the South

“…The models control for various MSA-level attributes found to be significant predictors of segregation in previous studies (i.e., Massey and Gross 1991;Farley and Frey 1994;Frey and Farley 1996;Krivo and Kaufman 1999;Logan et al 2004). These include an MSA's functional specialization if any, the socioeconomic status of Blacks relative to that of Whites, the amount of new housing in an MSA, the MSA's population size, and the proportion Black.…”

Measures of Geographically Uneven Subpopulation Group Change and Local Group Transitions: Examples from Los Angeles

“…Moreover, in the many cases where researchers devote themselves to the dynamic question of change in levels of segregation, typically the design is to examine temporal change in cross-sectional levels of metropolitan segregation rather than to study dynamic local changes per se. The difference is that segregation levels may change as a result of many group demographic processes operating at Various scales, and therefore such changes do not document transition processes locally (see, for example, Farley and Frey 1994;Massey and Gross 1991;McKinney and Schnare 1989;Smith 1991). Conversely, a great deal of local racial and ethnic change may be taking place that may cancel itself out with respect to changes in aggregate segregation statistics.…”