Why Are Ethnic Residential Concentration &
Segregation Structural Differences That Matter?

Positive: Preservation of ethnic cultures

Negative: May be indicative of discrimination (e.g., realtors).
May reflect constricted opportunity structures.
Explanations of Ethnic Residential Segregation

Social class hypothesis: Ethnic segreg. is largely a reflection of social class differences among the ethnic groups.

Social distance hypothesis: Those ethnic groups who are held at greater social distance (in terms of preference for co-workers, friends, dates, & mates) will exhibit greater residential segregation.

Ethnic identity hypothesis: Persons of the same ethnic ancestry choose to live in proximity so that social interaction can be maximized and group norms and values can be maintained and the advantages (e.g., institutional completeness) of size and concentration can be realized.

Ethnic Concentration vs Ethnic Segregation
Segregation = the degree to which two (or more) groups live apart from one another.
If 100% of an ethnic group’s members live in just a few census tracts (CT), that group is not highly segregated if, one or more other ethnic groups share those CTs in large numbers.
Hypothetical Example: A city of 1 million population
comprising 3 ethnic groups.
Census Italians Swedes Martians
Track % of % of % of
(CT) N Italians N Swedes N Martians
1 1800 68% 360 3% 1840 0.2%
2 450 16% 120 1% 3430 0.3%
3 450 16% 720 6% 2830 0.3%
4 0 0% 48 0.4% 3952 0.4%
5 0 0% 60 0.5% 3940 0.4%
. . . 0 0% …. …. …. ….
250 0 0% …. …. …. ….
Total 2,700 100% 12,000 985,300

Italians are highly concentrated, but their level of segregation is low. In fact, there are more Martians than Italians in each
Census Tract.


If the Swedes are distributed over the other 245 census tracks in the city in similar manner to their distribution over CTs 1-
5, they have a very low degree of concentration.
A Measure of Concentration
- What percentage of census tracts in the city contains 50%
(or 90%) of an ethnic group’s population?

Example #1: In the 2001 census, only 2.4% of the census tracts of Montreal contained 50% of the city’s population of persons of Jewish ethnic origin. Only 13.6% of the
Montreal CTs contained 90% of the Jewish population.
This ethnic group is highly concentrated.

Example #2: In contrast, in that same census, 19.7% of the
CTs contained 50% of the British ethnic origin population.
That is, the British are much more dispersed than Jewish people.
Findings: See data from Balakrishnan and Gyimah (2003: 119)
A Measure of Segregation ( The Index of Dissimilarity)
Calculation:
- Based on pairs of ethnic groups.
- Is the sum of either the positive or negative differences between the two groups, in terms of their proportional representations in each CT. a) how over- or under-represented is group A in that CT, compared to its proportion in the city as a whole; b)how over- or under-represented is group B in that CT compared to its proportion in the city as a whole; c) subtract the one answer from the other; d) sum those results in ‘c’ for all CTs.

Possible Range: From zero (no segregation) to 1.0 (complete segregation)
Observations From 2001 Census (Mtl, Tor, Vanc.)
Re: Concentration
1. Ability to speak the French language very much influences choice of residential location in Montreal.
2. Jews are the most residentially concentrated ethnic group in
Canada. Within Montreal and Toronto, Jews are especially highly concentrated.
3. After Jews, visible minorities are the most concentrated
groups in all three cities.
Blacks, whether African or Caribbean, exhibits significantly lower spatial concentration than the other two major visible minorities (Chinese and South Asians), which is strikingly different from the situation in the USA.
Re: Segregation
4. Segregation is highest in Montreal and lowest in Vancouver.
5. Visible minorities exhibit relatively high segregation, but
show considerable differences among themselves, as Blacks
are less segregated than Asians.
6. The French are well integrated outside Montreal.
7. Jews are the most highly segregated group.

Re: Social Distance Hypothesis
- supported. Both Fr & Br exhibit low segregation from W.
Eur. Groups, moderate segreg from the C & E Eur groups, and high segreg. from the visible minority groups.