Making a place in the metropolis: locational attainment in cities and suburbs.

What accounts for the differences in the kinds of communities within the metropolis in which members of different racial and ethnic groups live? Do socioeconomic advancement and acculturation provide greater integration with whites or access to more desirable locations for minority-group members? Are these effects the same for Asians or Hispanics as for blacks? Does suburbanization offer a step toward greater equality in the housing market, or do minorities find greater discrimination in the suburban housing market? Data from 1980 for five large metropolitan regions are used to estimate "locational-attainment models," which evaluate the effects of group members' individual attributes on two measures of the character of their living environment: the socioeconomic standing (median household income) and racial composition (proportion non-Hispanic white) of the census tract where they reside. Separate models predict these outcomes for whites, blacks, Hispanics, and Asians. Net of the effects of individuals' background characteristics, whites live in census tracts with the highest average proportion of white residents and the highest median household income. They are followed by Asians and Hispanics, and-at substantially lower levels-blacks. Large overall differences exist between city and suburban locations; yet the gap between whites and others is consistently lower in the suburbs than in the cities of these five metropolitan regions.

Locational returns to human capital: minority access to suburban community resources.

The suburbanization of racial and ethnic minorities is analyzed in terms of the locational resources provided by their communities of residence. In suburbs in the New York CMSA, non-Hispanic whites and Asians, on average, live in communities with higher average socioeconomic status, while Hispanics and blacks live in the less desirable suburbs. Models predicting suburban socioeconomic status for each racial/ethnic group show that whites and Hispanics receive consistent returns on income, acculturation, and family status. Asians' locational patterns differ because they are unrelated to measures of acculturation; for blacks, locational outcomes correspond least to any of these human capital characteristics.

Assimilation and stratification in the homeownership patterns of racial and ethnic groups.

"This study investigates homeownership differences among twelve racial/ethnic groups using the [U.S.] Public Use Sample data (PUMS) of the 1980 census.... The study identifies a number of differences among non-Hispanic whites, blacks, American Indians, and Asian and Hispanic groups in access to homeownership.... For every group there is a strong correspondence between homeownership and various individual-level factors: age, household composition, socioeconomic position and language acculturation. The observed differences in ownership are substantially attenuated when group differences in some of these variables are controlled."

Variations on two themes: racial and ethnic patterns in the attainment of suburban residence.

To investigate racial and ethnic diversity in suburbanization, we draw on two complementary theoretical traditions, which we label "assimilation" and "stratification." Our analytic model is multilevel, and includes variables characterizing individuals, households, and metropolitan contexts. We use it to analyze the determinants of suburban versus central-city residence for 11 racial/ethnic groups. The analysis reveals that family status, socioeconomic, and assimilation variables influence the suburbanization process rather consistently. We take this finding as evidence in favor of the assimilation model. These effects display group variations, however, in a manner predicted by the stratification model. There are also suburbanization differences among metropolitan areas, particularly related to the relative economic status of cities and their suburbs, and between the northeast/north central regions and the south/west. Finally, we conclude that suburbanization is variable across the groups in a way that is not captured by broad categories such as "Asian" or "Hispanic."

Empowering nets of participation.

To test the implications of field work in a psychiatric hospital for children, this study focuses on the effects of network properties of organizational units, personal network position, and other individual attributes, on individual power. The contextual analysis is carried out by two linked regression equations, one at the individual and one at the contextual level, a procedure that has methodological advantages over a single regression model. The results suggest that sheer complexity can undermine inequalities among bureaucratic units and occupational groups, and that organizational democracy is fostered when complex role relations promote extensive interunit communication. Specifically, we find that a main mechanism that endows individuals with power is found in the local domains of participation, i.e., the organizational units of which they are members, and that the capacity of such a unit to empower its members depends on its integration in organization-wide communication networks. The basis of this integration is conceived as overlapping circles of weak ties that inhibit segmentation along occupational or organizational lines and sustain wide participation by rewarding those who participate.