A dynamic approach to population change in central cities and their suburbs, 1980-1990: crime, employment, and spatial proximity

American Journal of Economics and Sociology, The, April, 2005 by Joong-Hwan Oh

I

Introduction

DURING THE 1980S, population change in metropolitan areas focused on the perpetual migration of the central-city population toward suburban areas (Frey and Fielding 1996). Metropolitan suburban rings continued to gain population at the expense of the central cities (Kasarda 1988). Whites, as the early migrants to suburbs, were the dominant racial group of suburban population composition (Frey and Speare, Jr. 1988). Although the black suburbanization level remained much lower than other minority groups, the suburbs showed a continuous increase in their black population (Baldassare 1992; Frey and Fielding 1996; Frey and Speare, Jr. 1988; Stahura 1986).

In another emerging trend of population change in metropolitan areas, many larger central cities went through a rebound of population growth in the 1980s, despite the loss of population during the previous decade (Frey 1985). The central-city black population especially experienced population growth differently than the whites' decline in central cities. The proportional increase of black composition in central cities is primarily attributable to white flight out of central cities and black in-migration into central cities (Farley et al. 1978; Frey 1980). Given the population dynamics in central cities and their suburbs at the level of a metropolitan area, however, little is known about a model to explain simultaneously the ecological determinants of population change in central cities and their suburbs.

In this paper, two research questions regarding population change in central cities and their suburbs are posed and later tested. First, what are the major factors of population change in central cities and their suburbs? I contend that crime and economic opportunity are two main sources of population change in both locations. Second, do the driving forces of population change occurring in one sector of a metropolitan area affect population change in the other segment of a metropolitan area? The answer is yes. My argument here is that, similar to the impacts of crime rate and employment conditions on population change in one part of a metropolitan area, crime rate and employment opportunity occurring in one part of a metropolitan area will also affect population change in the other segment of a metropolitan area.

Recently, there has been growing concern over the influence of crime on population change in ecological units. The issue is that crime itself is not a product of population change, but a source of population change in a community (Bursik 1986; Katzman 1980; Liska and Bellair 1995; Liska, Logan, and Bellair 1998; Morenoff and Sampson 1997). The assumption is that high-income families concerned with residential safety attempt to leave high-crime territories and, furthermore, that potential in-migrants move into safer areas of destination (Alba, Logan, and Bellair 1994; Liska and Bellair 1995). The findings are actually mixed. In a study of 826 neighborhoods in Chicago, Morenoff and Sampson (1997) report that homicide is related to black population gain and white population loss in Chicago neighborhoods. On the other hand, South and Deane (1993) demonstrate that moving into a neighborhood is unrelated to the perception of crime.

Despite the ongoing ecological expansion in U.S. metropolitan areas, there are few studies that examine the effect of crime on population change in metropolitan areas. Using the 55 largest U.S. central cities from 1970-1980, Sampson and Wooldredge (1986) showed that the crime rate had a negative impact on both white and black population growth in central cities. In a study for a national sample of suburbs for the period 1970 to 1990, Liska, Logan, and Bellair (1998) report that high robbery rates in suburbs are related to black population growth and white population flight.

Although the causal link between crime and population change is an inspiring approach, it should be noted that contemporary human ecologists are markedly concerned with the relationship between the sustenance activities in a given community and population change (Frisbie and Poston, Jr. 1975; Fuguitt and Kasarda 1981; Poston, Jr. 1980; Saenz and Anderson 1994). Most research on the relationship between the economic activity and population change in a given locale has focused on the impact of economic activities on population mobility (Wilson 1984). Such a unidirectional link is based upon the hypothesis that population variation in migration is a function of differentials in economic activities (Frisbie and Poston, Jr. 1975; Poston, Jr. 1980; Sly 1972).

Subdividing population change into two sets, in- and out-migration, it is found that in-migration is strongly influenced by economic activities in a given location. Greenwood (1971), for instance, argues that employment growth in metropolitan areas is positively associated with in-migration rates but negatively with out-migration rates. Jiobu and Marshall, Jr. (1971) report that an increase in manufacturing jobs in cities has a positive impact upon the rate of population growth. Other studies find that areas serving as headquarters and producer services tend to experience population growth (Elliott 1997; Frey and Fielding 1996). Moreover, areas with more diversified industrial activities are more likely to gain population (Saenz and Anderson 1994). Out-migration is also substantially affected by economic activities in a given area. For instance, declines in economic activities and employment induce selective out-migration (Frey and Speare, Jr. 1988).