Top Ancestry or Hispanic or Racial Subgroups for U.S. County Subs and Places (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 08, 2024, 11:34:19 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Political Geography & Demographics (Moderators: muon2, 100% pro-life no matter what)
  Top Ancestry or Hispanic or Racial Subgroups for U.S. County Subs and Places (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Top Ancestry or Hispanic or Racial Subgroups for U.S. County Subs and Places  (Read 6723 times)
jimrtex
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,817
Marshall Islands


« on: December 20, 2017, 08:27:20 AM »

As I mentioned in the past few weeks, Census recently released their 2012-16 American Community Survey results. One of the tables that release contained is Reported Ancestries and Hispanic/Racial Subgroup information for Asians, American Indians, Alaska Natives and Pacific Islanders.

First, the CONUS map:



As you can see, German Ancestry predominates in most of the North except the Northeast. American is tops in much of the South outside of Florida and Southern Louisiana, and the Mexican Hispanic subgroup dominates much of the Southwest. One issue with Census' ancestry data is that African-Americans tend to check other ancestry instead of one of the Subsaharan African ancestries, which makes African-American predominant cities like New Orleans appear to be something else, (in New Orleans' case, German).
This isn't what happens. The Census bureau does not break out ancestries associated with most races, other than white (European). One of the suggested ancestries on the form is African American.

For example, if you look at Orleans Parish. 383K total persons, 342K reported reported an ancestry, 37K skipped the question, and 4K reported something that the Census Bureau did not classify. This last group might include people who responded 'Jewish' which Census Bureau does not consider an ancestry. I would expect that in areas of New York City, this classification is much higher. In New Orleans, some people may respond with terms that the Census Bureau isn't quite sure how to classify.

276K reported a single ancestry, which is probably high compared to Iowa. 214K of these were an ancestry other than those broken out. 233K were Black. Most of these responded African American ancestry and are lumped in Other. 12K said "African" ancestry, but they are probably indistinguishable from those who responded "African American". You will find similar numbers throughout the rural south, where there are unlikely to be recent immigrants from Africa. In university towns, like Starkville, Athens, etc., you may see some who report specific countries in Africa.

You could use Non-Hispanic Black alone minus specific African and some West Indian groups as "African American ancestry"

There are tables for Asian by Selected Groups, which could be used as equivalent to Vietnamese, Chinese, etc. ancestry. This probably can be used with Asian alone or in combination. Someone who is the offspring of Vietnamese-White relationship could report Vietnamese and Irish, German, etc., and the Irish and German ancestry is included, but Vietnamese would be lumped in with other groups. There are around 12K Asians in Orleans, with about half Vietnamese. The Asian by Selected Groups tables may not be available for many small areas.

There are also Hispanic or Latino by Specific Origin. This is not available for Orleans, but might be for other cities such as Miami, New York, etc. It is availabe at a state level.

For Florida Possible Groups over 100K:

African American (Black Non Hispanic minus West Indian minus (Subsaharan African - African)
2271K

American 1634K (American + European)
Cuban 1400K
Puerto Rican 1014K
Mexican 677K
German 637K
Irish 542K
English 542K
Italian 526K
Haitian 417K
Colombian 350K
Jamaican 232K
Dominican (i.e D.R) 209K
Polish 180K
Asian Indian 163K
Nicaraguan 153K
Venezuelan 144K
Filipino 141K
Honduran 132K
Peruvian 121K
Chinese 117K
Scottish 111K
Guatemalan 108K
French 105K

You could also use the PUMS data to get the direct responses, or at least get an understanding of how people respond.
Logged
jimrtex
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,817
Marshall Islands


« Reply #1 on: December 24, 2017, 01:12:49 AM »

As a test, here's what the NYC Metro map looks like if you define African American to be Non-Hispanic AAs - all Subsaharan African Ancestries - All West Indian Ancestries, as defined on the total ancesty table. Someone can be, say, Nigerian and Dominican, so I may be slightly undercounting by using that metric:



As expected, I think this is a bit over-inclusive. I think of places like Elizabeth, NJ as more Hispanic than African-American, but because the Hispanic groups are fractured, it comes out as plurailty African-American.

jimrtex - do you think this metric is better?
I would subtract (Subsaharan African minus African).

If you look at rural counties in the South, the entire Subsaharan African population is African, but this can also be true of some urban areas.

Brooklyn has 806K non-Hispanic Black alone, and 65K Black Hispanic. It has 166K Puerto Rican and 98K Dominican, so many may not report as black.

There are 308K West Indian (non-Hispanic). Jamaican, Haitian, Barbadian can be presumed to be black. Trinidadian and Guyanese (but they are separately reported) perhaps not so. Black Colombian's, etc. probably also identify as Hispanic.

I looked at the 5 NYC boroughs, Nassau, Suffolk, and Westchester, and the four big upstate counties: Erie, Monroe. Onondaga, and Albany.

If you add the non-Hispanic Black, non-Hispanic Asian, and Hispanic (all races) you get most of the groups that the Census Bureau does not report ancestry. Then subtract *Guyanese, (Subsaharan African minus African) and West Indian (non-Hispanic), it is comparable to the "Other" ancestry. That is "Other" ancestry is for the most part not miscellaneous, but rather ancestry that is consistent with race and ethnicity (e.g. Chinese Asians, report Chinese ancestry; Blacks report African-American ancestry, except when they had some specific knowledge. Barack Obama could have reported Kenyan ancestry. Colin Powell might report Jamaican ancestry)

An exception is the Bronx which has fewer "Other" ancestries than one might expect. My guess is that some Puerto Ricans are reporting ancestries that are tabulated (either Irish, etc. or possibly something else).

So persons who report "African" ancestry probably didn't read the instructions that suggested "African American", or were somehow trying to connect to their African ancestry but didn't know a particular country. Those who report Nigerian or Ghanaian, probably actually do have a connection either themselves, or parents.

Someone who reported Cape Verdean, probably is Other race than Black, So that might also be subtracted from the Subsaharan African population.

Some South Africans probably are not black, particularly someone who said they were of Afrikaner ancestry, but also a significant number of other South Africans may be white (e.g. Elon Musk)

Most West Indian (non-Hispanic) are probably black. Someone who reports their race as "Jamaican" or "Haitian" is counted by the Census Bureau as "Black".

I'm not sure about Guyanese, which the Census Bureau does report as a separate ancestry.
Logged
jimrtex
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,817
Marshall Islands


« Reply #2 on: January 06, 2018, 01:56:41 AM »

I've finally gotten around to putting an interactive version of this map on Carto. The Carto version is by Census Tract, which adds granularity in cities but not necessarily rural areas, where some County Subs/Places may be smaller than a census tract.

That interactive map is here:
https://cinyc.carto.com/viz/bbe0ba2d-3709-4933-9817-c545c4ca78ca/public_map

Clicking on a Census Tract will pop up a window that gives you the name and percentage of the Top Ancestry or Hispanic or Racial Subgroup for that tract.

There are also a series of interactive percentage maps for various ancestries/subgroups in my Carto account.
Interesting. I assume you will be producing single ethnic group maps for other groups (Korean, Vietnamese, Filipino, Asian Indian, etc.)?

Are Japanese in LA more business oriented. and wealthier, so they can live closer to the coast?

On the main map, I would group related groups together by color, with the largest groups less saturated in color.

e.g. Asian and maybe Middle Eastern groups in green. For example, currently Vietnamese is barely distinguishable from Mexican. Since it is easier to distinguish among various green tones, this would work in areas where there are small communities of various Asian ethnic groups (Houston, Southern California, New York).

AIAN in saturated pinks, there might need to be much need for color separation, since there is physical separation. This would permit the Sioux, Cherokee, Choctaw, Navajo, Hopi areas to be visually tied together.

Hispanic in brown, dropping the saturation of Mexican down, so other groups such as Guatemalan, etc. stand out.

Black, in Dark Brown with African American dropped in saturation, so any other groups such as Haitian might stand out.

European in blue, with the Germans in a pale blue, with English. American, Irish somewhat darker, and then Norwegian, Italian, Dutch, etc. in brighter blues.

What percentage of Guatemalans in Harris County reside in C.T. 4327.01?
Logged
jimrtex
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,817
Marshall Islands


« Reply #3 on: January 09, 2018, 02:33:06 AM »

What about Jews?  They're a plurality in certain NYC suburbs, probably in Brooklyn and Manhattan too and various other places like Brookline and Newton outside Boston, in pockets in Broward and Palm Beach etc.   
The Census Bureau does not consider them an ancestry group. The instructions say: "Ancestry
refers to the person’s ethnic origin or descent, "roots," or heritage."

But also say "Do not report a religious group as a person’s ancestry."

These get converted into "Other". I have seen a study where an estimate was mad of how many persons responded "Jewish" based on the number of "Other" responses. It is possible that the number has declined with the ACS, because the followup is quicker.
Logged
jimrtex
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,817
Marshall Islands


« Reply #4 on: January 09, 2018, 02:48:58 AM »

What about Jews?  They're a plurality in certain NYC suburbs, probably in Brooklyn and Manhattan too and various other places like Brookline and Newton outside Boston, in pockets in Broward and Palm Beach etc.   

Jewish is not an ancestry reported by Census. Look for the areas dominated by Russians, Eastern Europeans, and, in some cases in NYC, Americans or Germans for areas in which Jews are the plurality.

Here's a cleaned-up map of the NYC Top Ancestry or Hispanic or Racial Subgroup with AA Estimate by Census Tract (Note the projection is Albers Conic CONUS, which distorts the direction a little bit - sorry Jim, but I made the Print Composer before switching projections and didn't want to redo it):


The clarity of the break between Domininicans and Puerto Ricans in the Bronx is dramatic. Is there a street that is considered the boundary?

Is that a lot of German tracts on the West Side of Manhattan, and American on the East?

What are the groups in Central Brooklyn? Is the entire black area considered Bed-Stuy?

Southwestern Brooklyn is Chinese?

How many ancestries are there represented in NYC? And additional ones in New Jersey?




Logged
jimrtex
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,817
Marshall Islands


« Reply #5 on: January 10, 2018, 04:09:16 AM »

What about Jews?  They're a plurality in certain NYC suburbs, probably in Brooklyn and Manhattan too and various other places like Brookline and Newton outside Boston, in pockets in Broward and Palm Beach etc.   
What does this map show?



I am particularly interested in the area in western Brooklyn, and the area going east from the Williamsburg Bridge. Also, in that northern area, would there be gentrification along the East River?
Logged
jimrtex
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,817
Marshall Islands


« Reply #6 on: January 11, 2018, 02:20:39 AM »

The clarity of the break between Domininicans and Puerto Ricans in the Bronx is dramatic. Is there a street that is considered the boundary?

It looks like the dividing line is the Grand Concourse (or a block or two to the east, to take in the apartment buildings on the east side of the boulevard).
It is kind of interesting that there is a sharp demarcation. Were the Dominican areas historically black? The black areas of the Bronx are now on the northern edge spilling into Westchester.

BTW, did you know NHGIS has Census Tract data for New York going back into the early 20th Century (for the earlier years, it would have foreign born, parents foreign born data, rather than ancestry).

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.
The groups in Central Brooklyn are African American (dark brown), Jamaican (brownish green), West Indian (olive-like color), African (middle green) and Haitian (yellowish green). I wouldn't doubt that some of the Africans there are actually from Africa, instead of African-Americans descended from slaves. Central Brooklyn has a large West Indian and first and second generation African population.

The whole area isn't considered Bed-Stuy. Bed-Stuy is in the northwest portion of the African-American belt in Central Brooklyn. It's nearer to Williamsburg, which is why it is gentrifying. Some of the other black neighborhoods are Crown Heights (southeast of Bed-Stuy), (further southeast) Brownsville and Canarsie (near Jamaica Bay). I think the West Indian/African area is mainly in East Flatbush.
[/quote]
I suspect that it might show up more if you aggregated the specific Subsaharan African groups, thought there are also likely to be distinctly Senegalese, Ghanaian, Nigerian, etc. neighborhoods.

Are the areas further east the result of expansion out of Bed-Stuy? Is that an Asian Indian area that divides the black area further east around JFK?

A curiousity, I was looking at language statistics, which unfortunately are not published on a fine level basis, and discovered that Malayalam speakers were more numerous in Fort Bend County than Harris County.
Logged
jimrtex
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,817
Marshall Islands


« Reply #7 on: January 11, 2018, 04:39:28 AM »

A curiousity, I was looking at language statistics, which unfortunately are not published on a fine level basis, and discovered that Malayalam speakers were more numerous in Fort Bend County than Harris County.

It makes sense. Indian Americans tend to be highly educated/skilled and are concentrated in affluent suburban and urban areas, such as Sugar Land in Fort Bend County. I'm guessing the western and northern Houston suburbs are more affluent than the city proper.
This was specifically to Malayalam.

Harris County typically has more Asian speakers than does Fort Bend, but not necessarily on a percentage basis. Harris County has about 6 times the population as Fort Bend, so there are definitely higher concentrations of most groups in Fort Bend, but for Malayalam it is about 11:1.

Persian 6834 v 1989
Hindi 15148 v 7840
Gujarati 6405 v 5720
Urdu 17503 v 12002
Bengali 3255 v 950
Panjabi 1975 v 640
Marathi 1430 v 710
Nepali 3125 v 120
Sinhalese 955 v 135
Chinese 39,921 v 19,433
Korean 9454 v 999
Vietnamese 77,770 v 13,567
Telugu 3615 v 1435
Kannada 670 v 765
Malayalam 3545 v 6740
Tamil 2830 c 1125
Birmese 1165 v 65
Karen 1005 v 0
Japanese 2894 v 436
Mon-Khmer 3246 v 317
Thai 2013 v 531
Laotian 1533 v 174
Logged
jimrtex
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,817
Marshall Islands


« Reply #8 on: January 12, 2018, 01:24:31 AM »

What it is, is the number of persons reporting single ancestries of Other Groups. Because, the Census does not accept "Jewish" as an ancestry, responses of "Jewish" are coded as "Other". It is not clear whether "Other Groups" includes "Other" or literally other groups. The Census Bureau only shows about 100 ancestries, but NYC may really have neighborhoods that are literally "other groups", like Pitcairn Islanders.

But I had misread the results, and Other Groups are ancestries that the Census Bureau does not show in their ancestry tables, such as Chinese, Mexican, Puerto Rican, and African American. The map display in American Fact Finder does not permit display of ratios, so what I was showing was census tracts with lots of persons who responded that they had one ancestry that was not among those that the Census Bureau shows in their tables. So this would include ancestries associated with Asian, AIAN, NHOPI, Hispanic, and African American identities. The Census Bureau codes responses of Chinese ancestry as valid, it simply does not show such persons in its ancestry tables, which are primarily for European, Middle Eastern, and African (as distinct from African American) ancestries.

The second characteristic is that there be a large number of persons. Census tracts are intended to be permanent, so decade-to-decade comparisons may be made. But they also are intended to have a meaningful size (of around 4000 persons). If they become too populous, as in a suburban growth area, they may be divided, so that the two (or more) new tracts might at least be added together for comparison with the past. If they become too small, they may be consolidated, or perhaps redrawn so as to attempt to make them fit settlement patterns.

Brooklyn hit its top population in 1950, and declined by about 20% in 1950, and has since began to increase, and by 2020 will be close to its 1950 peak. In general there will have been little reason to modify census tracts. Some areas may seen a population decline due to smaller household sizes, or perhaps removal of lower-quality housing, or its replacement with less dense housing. Other areas may have seen building of higher density housing.

The area that caught my interest is Sunset Park. It has a large Chinese population, whose ancestry would be shown in the tables as 'Other Group'. Apparently there are either denser, multi-story housing or more families. By contrast Canarsie has relatively small number of Other Groups. Though largely black, population density may be lower because of smaller household sizes in single-family housing.

The area east of East River has few persons who reported a single ancestry in an 'Other Group', compared to the number who reported multiple ancestries that included an 'Other Group'. This may be due to more mixed ancestry persons in a gentrifying area.
Logged
jimrtex
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,817
Marshall Islands


« Reply #9 on: January 12, 2018, 12:25:53 PM »

What about Jews?  They're a plurality in certain NYC suburbs, probably in Brooklyn and Manhattan too and various other places like Brookline and Newton outside Boston, in pockets in Broward and Palm Beach etc.   
This approach seems to work somewhat better.



The Census Bureau also reports the number of persons who don't report ancestry. The instructions to the ACS, say that one should not report a religion as ancestry. It appears that in Brooklyn, many persons took that to mean not to report ancestry.

The area that stands out is Gravesend, which is home to many Sephardic Jews. They might be less inclined to report that they were "Moroccan" or "Berber", and the form says not to use "Jewish", so what do you. A recent Jewish immigrant from Russia, might have some Russian identity, since they would be less likely to come from a Yiddish-speaking ghetto than their predecessors 100 years ago.

Borough Park to the north also stands out which is a center of Orthodox Jews, which likely have a particularly Jewish identity.

Other areas with a large number of non-reporters, include (western) Crown Heights, and parts of Williamsburg.

This approach seems to work less well in the other boroughs. Queens has more dynamic growth, so use of percentage might be more useful. Manhattan had its peak population in 1910.

Overall, the percentage of non-reporters among the 5 boroughs and surrounding counties is around 10%. Nationwide, the states with the highest percentage of non-reporters are those with reported American ancestry. That is, some persons who don't know what to report, report "American" and others report nothing. If your ancestors were in America 250 years ago, then you could have 10-generations of ancestors (1024 GGGGGGGGrear-grandparents).

The highest share of non-reporters is in West Virginia  with 28%. States over 15%, listed in rank order:

WV 28%
KY 23%
AR 22%
IN 21%
AL 20%
TN 20%
WY 19%
MO 19
OK 19
IA 19
MS 17
OH 17
SC 16
ID 16
KS 16
NC 16

So generally states without a lot of immigrants for a long time, or were settled by persons from other states, as opposed to Europe directly.

Recent migration to the South Atlantic has likely knocked Virginia, Georgia, and Florida off the list, and pushed NC and SC down. States with a particular ethnic identity (IL-Poles and others, WI-German, MN-Scandinavian, LA-French) are notable for their absence from the list covering the middle of the country.

The lowest states are CA, HI, NJ, and RI.

So "not reporting" may indicate "Americans, not specific" and in New York might indicate areas with larger shares of Jews who followed the instructions to not report religion as an ancestry, distinct from persons unaware or not particularly conscious of distinct roots.
Logged
jimrtex
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,817
Marshall Islands


« Reply #10 on: January 12, 2018, 06:20:28 PM »

Hungarian ancestry is the most commonly reported European ancestry in (Hasidic) Borough Park and Williamsburg.
That is also true for Kiryas Joel (not exactly).

The Satmar group originated in the portion of Hungary ceded to Romania after WWI. The community was established in Brooklyn by survivors of the Holocaust., and augmented by refugees after the 1956.

16.4% did not report ancestry (a bit higher than NYC counties).

28.6% reported that they were American ancestry.
16.5% Hungarian.
3.4% European
1.7% Romanian
1.4% Israeli
1.4% German
0.9% Polish
0.7% Syrian
0.6% East European

But 43.7% Other Groups

Most "other groups" are associated with race or Hispanic ethnicity. If someone reports they are of Chinese, Vietnamese, Mexican, Colombian, Hawaiian, Ponapean, Navajo, African American or Inuit ancestry they are lumped in with "Other Groups".

But Kiryas Joel is 99.5% white. So most of the Other Groups there, must be Jewish, or perhaps Heredi.

This suggests that ancestry of "Other Groups" minus Asian, Hispanic, AIAN, NHOPI, Black, plus (Subsaharan African minus African) + Caribbean Non-Hispanic ancestries would indicate a response of Jewish (in NYC, it might also indicate Parsi, Jain, Sikh, etc.).

It might not be as effective among non-practicing Jews, or Conservative or Reform congregations, who might also have a secular identity.
Logged
jimrtex
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,817
Marshall Islands


« Reply #11 on: December 16, 2018, 12:01:36 PM »

I'm bumping this old thread with a link to the 2013-17 ACS version of the interactive maps:

https://www.thecinyc.com/2013-17-ahr-multimap

This multi-map has maps of the Top 6 AHRs in a census tract, plus percentage maps of some of the 31 of the most-predominant AHRs in the U.S.

You can also turn on and off the County and County Sub layers.

If you're using a computer, you can change the opacity (to see underlying geography) and color step (useful for highlighting where the highest percentage of the less-predominant AHRs live - the default is 10 points - you can change it to 0.1, 2, 4, 5 or any number less than 10). Cell phones are too small to include the interactive legend that has this feature - though if you click on a tract, you will get a pop-up with its stats.

Thanks. What is the origin of settlement for Hmong in western North Carolina? All interesting to see the expansion of the Ecuadorian population in north(east) Minneapolis into the Anoka(n?) peninsula.

The Scottish map does not seem to be working. The whole map goes black.

I would label the color step as "percent" or %, rather than points.

Okinawan is misspelled.

Consider turning off low population tracts. I found a 55.56% American tract in Houston, which matched the little airport (Hobby) but only has a population of 9 persons. The other 4 persons are Russian.  I don't know if any colluding is going on.

I would be interested in Czech (or depending on whether there is overlap, Czech/Slovak/Czechoslovak. I think that they be the largest group in Colorado or LaSalle counties. Maybe there could be a map for European ancestries. I'd also be interested in a map for Subsaharan African ancestries, but excluding "African". I think most African American indicate African American ancestry, which the Census Bureau does not report, but there does appear to be some that do indicate African ancestry.

It took me a while to figure out the color step, since it was not instantly responsive, like the zoom is. Maybe it could be +/- control, with a logarithmic scale. It might be useful to go to higher steps for groups like Mexican or African American (but maybe not, since I was looking for for differentiation on the top end).

At the smaller (zoomed out) scales there is a white residue in major cities. It doesn't go away even when I go to 100% opacity.

Could the upper left box be stacked more so it doesn't take up so much screen?

Groups over 10% in a census tract in the Houston area (all in Harris County, except for Asian Indian, which is in Fort Bend).

Mexican 90%+
African American 90%+
Guatemalan 54%
Asian Indian 39%
Vietnamese 32%
German 28%
Salvadoran 24%
Chinese 24%
English 23%
Irish 22%
American 18%
Honduran 17%
Cuban 15%
Burmese 14%
Pakistani 13%
Nepalese 12%
Italian 12%
Cherokee 11%
French 10%
Logged
jimrtex
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,817
Marshall Islands


« Reply #12 on: December 22, 2019, 10:23:56 AM »

Census released its 2014-18 ACS data on Thursday. My new interactive map with the updated Top AHR/Percentage Reporting a particular AHR data is on my newer website here:

https://cinycmaps.com/index.php/ancestry-2013-17/2014-18-top-ahr

Click on Menu to change layers. Otherwise, the maps are pretty much the same as last year. No, Jim, I haven't updated the code to allow you to white out low-population tracts, at least yet. Seems too complicated to code, but I might give it a shot in the coming weeks.


Is Fort Bend 6731.01 (Cinco Ranch) the most populous census tract? 70271 persons?
Logged
jimrtex
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,817
Marshall Islands


« Reply #13 on: December 22, 2019, 08:22:48 PM »

Is Fort Bend 6731.01 (Cinco Ranch) the most populous census tract? 70271 persons?


Yes.
It will be interesting to see what happens when that blob of Indian dominance is chopped into 18 or so tracts.

It appears that CT 6731 has only been divided once. The smaller part 6731.02 only has 17,000 or so persons.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.055 seconds with 12 queries.