The Unique Case of Minneapolis–St. Paul, MN: Locational Attainments and Segregation in the Twin Cities

Abstract

The Minneapolis-St. Paul Metropolitan Area has a rapidly growing foreign-born population in part due to its high levels of refugee reception and migrants drawn to the burgeoning high-tech and manufacturing industries. As a result, the Twin Cities are unique in that every major racial group has a sizable foreign-born segment with a wide range of U.S. entry experiences and thus the area offers an opportunity to investigate the dynamics of locational attainments and segregation of a highly diverse non-White population. Accordingly, we examine the residential outcomes of Blacks, Latinos and Asians, investigate how nativity, socioeconomic gains, and acculturation translate into residential contact with Whites, and draw the link between these micro-level locational attainments and overall segregation patterns for the area. We find Latinos and Asians experience traditional spatial assimilation dynamics but a different pattern is seen for Blacks wherein foreign-born Blacks are less segregated than U.S.-born Blacks, reversing the expected role of nativity and acculturation and suggesting a more complicated story of ethnic stratification and assimilation supported by the segmented assimilation framework.

Metropolitan racial residential segregation in the United States: A microlevel and cross-context analysis of Black, Latino, and Asian segregation

“…In general, group differences in resources are less important to White-Black segregation, as Black locational attainments more strongly reflect place stratification effects. We also find that the classical spatial assimilation model is less applicable to understanding Black segregation as nativity works in the opposite direction for Black households in comparison with Latino and Asian households, consistent with our past research and suggesting a pattern of segmented assimilation (Crowell and Fossett 2020). While a deeper analysis of Black immigrant segregation is beyond the scope of this study, other research has offered further insight into variation in Black immigrant segregation patterns (Scopilliti and Iceland 2008;Tesfai 2019).…”

“…The implications of this framework for understanding the segregation patterns of the groups considered here is that we may not observe uniform patterns of locational attainments but may in fact find attainment patterns that run counter to what the spatial assimilation hypothesis would have us expect (South, Crowder, and Chavez 2005b). For example, in our past research on the Minneapolis-St. Paul metropolitan statistical area, we found that US-born Black households were more likely to be segregated from White households than foreign-born Black households, counter to what we found for Latino and Asian households (Crowell and Fossett 2020). From the segmented assimilation perspective, we argue this pattern results because Black households experience a trajectory of assimilation that is more strongly impacted by institutionalized racism and particularly an established legacy of Black residential segregation.…”

“…However, in the case of nativity and citizenship, these dynamics do not entirely hold true for Black households, where foreign-born Black householders experience greater residential contact with White households as compared to US-born Black householders in nearly all metropolitan areas, resulting in an average estimated coefficient that is positive for naturalized and noncitizens as compared to US-born citizens. This deviation from the spatial assimilation pattern for Black households could possibly be situated in the literature on segmented assimilation, which posits assimilation is not necessarily a straightforward process of upward mobility in tandem with more contact with White households, particularly for groups who experience the negative effects of racialization in the United States (Crowell and Fossett 2020;Iceland and Scopilliti 2008;Portes and Zhou 1993). We conclude our discussion of the broad findings from the regression results by noting that results for White households across individual models were inconsistent, demonstrating weaker effects that are consistent with past findings in the literature and reflecting the high levels of residential contact that White households have with one another (Pais, South, and Crowder 2012;South, Crowder, and Pais 2008).…”

“…Also like the Latino population, this is primarily the result of Asian population growth and immigration (Iceland, Weinberg, and Hughes 2014;Logan and Stults 2011;Massey 2001). Research has consistently found that among non-White groups, the Asian population as a whole is generally the least residentially segregated from White households and experience greater rates of social mobility in comparison to other minority groups, particularly among later generations, which in turn may increase their residential contact with White households (Crowell and Fossett 2020;Massey and Denton 1987;Massey 2020;Sakamoto, Goyette, and Kim 2009;Zhou and Logan 1991). However, despite empirical evidence of social mobility and attainment, the role of racialization and racism must still be understood as shaping the experiences of Asian and Asian American individuals in the United States (Lee and Kye 2016).…”

“…Segmented assimilation was first empirically explored within the context of the labor market (e.g., Portes and Zhou 1993) but can be extended to many social outcomes that serve as indicators of social mobility and resources, including residential locational outcomes (Crowell and Fossett 2020;Iceland and Scopilliti 2008). The implications of this framework for understanding the segregation patterns of the groups considered here is that we may not observe uniform patterns of locational attainments but may in fact find attainment patterns that run counter to what the spatial assimilation hypothesis would have us expect (South, Crowder, and Chavez 2005b).…”