African Refugee Resettlement in the United States 9781593323332
188 110 3MB
English Pages 322 Year 2009
Polecaj historie
![Refugee Resettlement in the United States: Language, Policy, Pedagogy (None) [Illustrated]
1783094575, 9781783094578](https://dokumen.pub/img/200x200/refugee-resettlement-in-the-united-states-language-policy-pedagogy-none-illustrated-1783094575-9781783094578.jpg)
Citation preview
The New Americans Recent Immigration and American Society
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
Edited by Steven J. Gold and Rubén G. Rumbaut
A Series from LFB Scholarly African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved. African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
Tamar Mott
LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC El Paso 2009 African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
Copyright © 2009 by LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC All rights reserved.
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Mott, Tamar, 1975African refugee resettlement in the United States / Tamar Mott. p. cm. -- (The New Americans: recent immigration and American society) Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-1-59332-333-2 (alk. paper) 1. Refugees--Africa. 2. Refugees--United States. 3. Africans--United States--Social conditions. 4. Immigrants--United States--Social conditions. 5. Africa--Emigration and immigration. 6. United States--Emigration and immigration. I. Title. HV640.5.A3M66 2009 362.870973--dc22 2009009867
ISBN 978-1-59332-333-2 Printed on acid-free 250-year-life paper. Manufactured in the United States of America.
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
Table of Contents
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
List of Tables ........................................................................................... vii List of Figures.......................................................................................... xi Dedication................................................................................................ xiii Acknowledgements.................................................................................. xv Preface ..................................................................................................... xvii Chapter 1: Previous Research on Migration ............................................ 1 Chapter 2: Quantitative Analysis of the US Foreign Born....................... 31 Chapter 3: The Role of Intermediaries in US Immigration...................... 59 Chapter 4: Research Design..................................................................... 93 Chapter 5: Leaving Africa ....................................................................... 117 Chapter 6: Preparation ............................................................................. 129 Chapter 7: Pathways and Destinations..................................................... 137 Chapter 8: Adaptation to Life in the US .................................................. 171 Chapter 9: Segregation and Conflict........................................................ 193 Chapter 10: Is the Resettlement Process an Effective One? .................... 209 Chapter 11: Conclusions .......................................................................... 231 Appendix A: Supplementary Tables ........................................................ 239 Appendix B: Questionnaires .................................................................... 247 Appendix C: Demographic Characteristics of African Foreign Born in Columbus and Providence ................................................................ 253 References................................................................................................ 281 Index ........................................................................................................ 299
v African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved. African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
List of Tables
Table 2.1: Foreign-Born Population in Large and Mid-sized MSAs, 2000 ..............................................................................................32 Table 2.2: US Total Population and Foreign-Born Distribution, 2000 .........................................................................33 Table 2.3: Region of Birth of the Foreign-Born Population: 1850 to 1930 and 1960 to 2000 .................................................................34 Table 2.4: Percentage of Foreign-Born from Each World Region of the Total Population in Selected MSAs, 2000 ....................................36 Table 2.5: Percentage of Foreign-Born from Each Region of the.......37 Table 2.6: Refugee Arrivals by State, 1983-2004 ...............................49 Table 2.7: African Refugee Arrivals by State, 1983-2004..................51 Table 2.8: Resettlement of Ethiopian, Somali, Sudanese, and Liberian Refugees to US States, 1946-2004................................................55 Table 2.9: Secondary Migration: Top Refugee Flows, 2000-2005 .....56 Table 2.10: Secondary Migration: In/Out-migration, 2000-2005........57 Table 3.1: Ten National Voluntary Agencies......................................66 Table 3.2: Agencies Involved in the 11 Steps of Refugee Resettlement ......................................................................................................73 Table 3.3: International World Relief Organizations ..........................77 Table 3.4: ORR Education Grants Awarded, 2003 .............................80 Table 4.1: Demographics of Refugees, Columbus............................ 104 Table 4.2: Demographics of Refugees, Providence ......................... 105 Table 4.3: Employment and Education of Refugees, Columbus....... 112 Table 4.4: Employment and Educational Background of Refugees, Providence .................................................................................. 113 Table 4.5: Support Services, Columbus Refugees ............................ 114 Table 4.6: Agency and Support Services, Providence Refugees....... 115 vii
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
viii
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States
Table 6.1: Length of Orientation in Africa, Columbus Refugees ..... 130 Table 6.2: Length of Orientation in Africa by Place of Birth, Columbus Refugees ..................................................................................... 130 Table 6.3: Length of Orientation in Africa, Providence Refugees.... 131 Table 6.4: Length of Orientation in Africa by Place of Birth, Providence Refugees .................................................................. 131 Table 7.1: Length of Resettlement Process for Columbus Refugees 143 Table 7.2: Length of Resettlement Process for Providence Refugees .................................................................................................... 144 Table 7.3: Movement Plans of Columbus Refugees ......................... 145 Table 7.4: Movement Plans of Providence Refugees........................ 146 Table 7.5: Pathways of African Refugees to Columbus ................... 148 Table 7.6: State Department Records of Origin Locations of Secondary Migrants to Columbus ................................................................ 150 Table 7.7: Family Shelter Records of Origin Locations of Secondary Migrants to Columbus ................................................................ 150 Table 7.8: Types of Cases, Columbus Refugees ............................... 152 Table 7.9: Free Cases, Primary Resettlement City outside Columbus .................................................................................................... 153 Table 7.10: Family Reunification Cases Residing in Columbus....... 159 Table 7.11: Asylum Cases Whose Primary Location of Residence was Outside of Columbus .................................................................. 161 Table 7.12: Pathways of African Refugees to Providence ................ 163 Table 7.13: Types of Cases, Providence Refugees ........................... 165 Table A.1: Major World Arrivals, 2002............................................ 239 Table A.2: Countries with Highest Levels of International OutMigration, 1960-1995 ................................................................. 240 Table A.3: Countries with Highest Levels of In-migration, 1960-1995 .................................................................................................... 240 Table A.4: Countries Hosting the Most Refugees, 2002................... 241 Table A.5: Top 25 Sending Countries of Refugees and Asylees to the US, 1961-1980 and 1981-2001................................................... 242 Table A.6.1: Regions and Place of Birth of Foreign-Born in the United States, 2000, Europe ................................................................... 243 Table A.6.2: Regions and Place of Birth of Foreign-Born in the United States, 2000, Asia ....................................................................... 244 Table A.6.3: Regions and Place of Birth of Foreign-Born in the United States, 2000, Africa..................................................................... 245 Table A.6.4: Regions and Place of Birth of Foreign-Born in the United States, 2000, Oceania.................................................................. 245
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
List of Tables
ix
Table A.6.5: Regions and Place of Birth of Foreign-Born in the United States, 2000, Americas................................................................ 246 Table C.1: African Foreign-Born Immigration Trends to Columbus, 1951-2000................................................................................... 256 Table C.2: African Foreign-Born Immigration Trends to Providence, 1915-2000................................................................................... 258 Table C.3: Mean Number of Years Lived in the United States of African Foreign-Born in Columbus, 2000 .................................. 259 Table C.4: Mean Number of Years Lived in the United States of African Foreign-Born in Providence, 2000................................. 260 Table C.5: Marital Status of African Foreign-Born Over Age 25 in Columbus and Providence, 2000 ................................................ 264 Table C.6: Number of Own Children in Household for African Foreign-Born Over Age 25 in Columbus and Providence, 2000 264 Table C.7: Educational Attainment of African Foreign-Born Over Age 25 in Columbus and Providence, 2000 ....................................... 267 Table C.8: Employment Status of African Foreign-Born Over Age 25 in Columbus and Providence, 2000 ............................................ 267 Table C.9: Mean and Median Incomes of African Foreign-Born in the Labor Force Over Age 25 in Columbus, 2000............................ 268 Table C.10: Mean and Median Incomes of African Foreign-Born in the Labor Force Over Age 25 in Providence, 2000 .......................... 270 Table C.11: Occupation of African Foreign-Born Over Age 25 in Columbus, 2000.......................................................................... 271 Table C.12: Occupation of African Foreign-Born Over Age 25 in Providence, 2000 ........................................................................ 273 Table C.13: Industries of African Foreign-Born in Columbus, 2000274 Table C.14: Industries of African Foreign-Born in Providence, 2000 .................................................................................................... 275 Table C.15: 1995 Metropolitan Area of Residence for African ForeignBorn living in Columbus in 2000 ............................................... 277 Table C.16: 1995 Metropolitan Area of Residence of African ForeignBorn living in Providence in 2000 .............................................. 278
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved. African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
List of Figures
Figure 2.1: MSA Profile I ...................................................................42 Figure 2.2: MSA Profile II..................................................................43 Figure 2.3: MSA Profile III.................................................................44 Figure 2.4: MSA Profile IV ...............................................................45 Figure 2.5: African Refugee Arrivals by State: 1983-2004 ................48 Figure 2.6: Refugee Arrivals (1983-2004) / Total Foreign-Born 2004 .............................................................................................................50 Figure 2.7: Secondary Migration: Top Refugee Flows, 2000-2005....54 Figure 3.1: Refugees Resettled by National Voluntary Agencies.......67 Figure 3.2: Number of Refugees Resettled by National Agencies......67 Figure 3.3: Refugee Resettlement Index by State, Based on Refugee 71 Figure 3.4: Location Model: Factors Affecting Refuge Movement to and within the US ................................................................................82 Figure 3.5: Factors Affecting Refugee Adaptation in US Cities.........89 Figure 7.1: Federal Allocations for Refugees by State: 1997-2005 .. 142 Figure 8.1: Contextual and Personal Factors that Influence Refugee Adaptation.......................................................................................... 173 Figure C.3: African Foreign-born Population Pyramid, Columbus.. 261 Figure C.4: African Foreign-born Population Pyramid, Providence 261 Figure C.5: Total Foreign-born Population Pyramid, Columbus...... 262 Figure C.6: Total Foreign-born Population Pyramid, Providence .... 262 Figure C.7: English Proficiency of Columbus and Providence Refugees: ‘Do you speak English?’ ................................................... 265
xi African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved. African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
Dedication
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
I would like to dedicate this to my parents, Frank and Susan Mott. Thank you for introducing me to, and making me aware of, the world around me; and teaching me to empathize and reach out to those who are not as fortunate as I am.
xiii African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved. African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
Acknowledgements
I wish to express my appreciation and gratitude to the following people whose help have made this research possible. I would first like to thank Edward Malecki, for his encouragement and thoughtful guidance in the research and writing of this; particularly, for his careful reading of all of my work. Thanks to Lawrence Brown for steering me to Geography in the first place, for his constant motivation, and for making me a better writer. Thank you to Marie Cieri and Dan Lichter, whose insights spurred my intellectual growth and challenged my thinking on these topics. I am grateful to all the representatives from the resettlement agencies in Columbus who provided invaluable insights throughout the research process – those from Community Refugee and Immigration Services, Jewish Family Services, and Us Together; and to those in Providence – from the International Institute of Rhode Island and the Roman Catholic Diocese. I also wish to thank Steve Walker, the State Refugee Coordinator in Ohio for his insights. Further, I am indebted to Robert Forrest for creating of maps as well as formatting and editing this document. I gratefully acknowledge grant support from the Kirwan Institute for the Study of Race and Ethnicity and the Department of Geography at The Ohio State University. Finally, my deepest debts are to all of the refugees who participated in interviews and were willing to provide their stories, without which this research would not have been possible.
xv African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved. African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
Preface
Migration is no longer dominated by outflows from Europe to a handful of destinations, the number and variety of sending regions has increased, and there has been growth in movements from Africa, Asia, and Latin America. The US continues to be one of the dominant receiving countries. Therefore global migration to the US is an important, indeed pressing, topic to study. New cultures and ways of life are changing the structures of places throughout the US. Research on origin countries has examined migration patterns to the US from Latin America and to a lesser extent Asia, but African movements have not been considered in as great detail. Immigration to the US continues to concentrate within larger cities, but there has also been an increasing trend toward movement, including secondary movement, to smallersized cities. Research on destinations has to a great extent neglected smaller-sized cities. This is unfortunate, as the relative impact of migration on these smaller communities can be as great, if not greater, than on larger communities. The process of immigration to the US has changed. Earlier movements consisted of the movement of Europeans, along with the involuntary movement of Africans, who came as slaves to the newly formed colonies. Later, indentured servants and other types of economic migrants followed. As certain groups settled in specific areas, social networks formed and led to continued similar migration patterns. Immigrant intermediaries played a role in these earlier movements, such as those who moved slaves from Africa to the new world and employers (e.g., railroad companies, agribusinesses) who either recruited migrants themselves, at times in far away places, or hired recruiters to do this for them. More recent movements continue to consist of economic migrants, but political upheaval and ethnic xvii
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
xviii
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States
persecution throughout the world also have led to increased refugee movements. With these new movements, a new type of intermediary has come about and plays a dominant role. Both state and voluntary resettlement agencies (VOLAGs) have impacted the settlement patterns of refugees across the US. Long-standing, widely supported migration models have, to a great extent, neglected the role of these intermediaries. Research that has considered refugees in the US has taken into account migration patterns, in addition to experiences and adaptation of refugees in the US. However, only a few studies have specifically targeted the role of government agencies and VOLAGs in the migration patterns and experiences of refugees in the US. The following research enhances our understanding of recent migration flows, concentrating specifically on the pathways of African refugees to US mid-sized metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs) as well as the adaptation patterns of refugees after their arrival in the US. The overriding questions of this research are the following: What factors affect the choice of destination locations of refugees, and what factors influence adaptation of refugees after arrival in the US? Specifically, this research seeks to understand the role VOLAGs play in determining the pathways and destinations of refugees, and in the adaptation of refugees. Based on previous literature review, this researcher hypothesizes that both the federal government and VOLAGs play a role in both processes – to what degree, though, is unclear. Therefore, a multi-method approach, combining quantitative analysis of secondary data and qualitative analysis of interviews with refugees and service providers is utilized. Conclusions drawn from these analyses lead to generalizations helping to clarify patterns of dispersion, and adaptation for the larger groups of African and non-African refugees. A brief literature review is presented in Chapter Two. While unorthodox, this review will be followed by additional literature synopses that are woven throughout in order to bring to bear the relevant background in proximity to the specific research issue being addressed. Because of the immensity of issues within immigration research, and the large number of issues discussed, this structure makes the relevance of prior research clearer. Analysis of data from the US Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) in Chapter Three provides evidence that refugee populations are being resettled to locations that have not historically attracted foreign-born – such as North Dakota, South Dakota, Iowa, Vermont, Kentucky, and Missouri.
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
Preface
xix
Analysis of more recent flows of African refugees to the US shows that they are being resettled, and moving on their own as secondary migrants, to states like Minnesota and Ohio, and not to the historically more common states, like California and Florida. The geography of foreign-born is dependent on country of origin, but the urban geography of the foreign-born is more complex than this – Metropolitan Statistical Areas are differentiated by the era of immigration, immigrant origins, US regions represented in profiles, and place characteristics that draw migrants. Chapter Four turns to a conceptual framework, which examines the role of immigrant intermediaries in migration patterns, particularly stressing the role of VOLAGs in more recent movements. Further, the role of VOLAGs in the adaptation process is considered. With regard to adaptation, because of the diverse nature of contemporary immigrants, multiple theories fit the variety of processes that exist. In the case of refugees, the role of VOLAGs and policy in the US must be considered within the context of adaptation. Refugees are a unique group, as contextual, controllable, forces may play a role in their adaptation. VOLAGs can counteract some of the barriers that refugees face – money and social services allocated to refugees, in addition to the locations where VOLAGs choose to “place” refugees impact in what way, and how fast adaptation occurs. Chapter Five introduces the research design. Qualitative analysis of interviews done with refugees and agency representatives in following chapters considers all aspects of the resettlement process – from the moment refugees leave their home countries to their arrival in the US. The role of VOLAGs in each step of the resettlement process is considered – e.g., their role in maintaining the refugee camps in Africa (Chapter Six), processing refugees in Africa, processing refugees in the US (Chapters Seven and Eight), choosing destination locations, and the adaptation of refugees in the US (Chapters Nine and Ten). Chapter 11 considers the effectiveness of the resettlement process. Participants and agency representatives suggest ways to improve upon, for example, orientation programs, improvements that would lead to faster and healthier adaptation patterns for refugees in the US. Chapter 12 reviews this research and provides conclusions. The wide range of issues researched is brought together, with emphasis on the role of VOLAGs in all aspects of the resettlement process.
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved. African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
CHAPTER 1
Previous Research on Migration
INTRODUCTION In order to set this research project within the context of previous research, this chapter provides a literature review. It begins with an overview of the research done to date, and then reviews the history of global and US immigration patterns. Finally, data sources that can be used to study immigration are introduced.
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
Overview Whereas migration to the US has become more global in scope, the research to date has focused most heavily on immigration from Latin America and Asia, the largest immigrant origin regions (Frey and Liaw 1998; Newbold 2004). Recent research has concentrated less on European immigration, and, African immigrants have been almost entirely overlooked (Wilson 2003). In some recent research on migration to the US, Africa is simply not included at all (Newbold 1999). When Africa has been considered, it has been studied within the context of general sending regions and is often placed within an “other” category (Belanger and Rogers 1993; Rogers and Henning 1999;
1 African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
2
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States
Schmidley 2000). Immigrants from Africa, despite their modest size1, have large impacts on specific receiving areas. According to Lieberson and Waters (1987, 809), “Groups that are numerically small but highly concentrated in a small number of locations can have political and social influence far beyond what one would expect if they were uniformly distributed”. Additionally, in discussing the immigration of 4 million Irish to the US in the nineteenth century, Dinnerstein and Reimers (1999, 22) note that “their impact in this country has far exceeded both their numbers and their percentage of the population”. Once seen as a largely bi-coastal phenomenon, immigration effects on the population composition of US urban areas are creeping inland and down the urban hierarchy (Frey 2006). A map of change in the foreign-born between 1990 and 2000 show changes of 75 percent or higher in states such as Colorado, Kansas, Nebraska, Missouri, Iowa, Minnesota, and Kentucky, compared to changes of less than 25 percent in New York, New Jersey, California, and Florida, states long associated with high immigration (Clark 2003). Despite these changes, researchers continue to concentrate on immigration to the six large gateway states of California, New York, Texas, Florida, Illinois, and New Jersey (Perry and Schacter 2003). Singer (2004) identifies six gateway types, where the most recent three include 16 inland cities among 21 total. When considering Latino migration, Suro and Singer (2002) divide MSAs into four categories: Established Latino Metros, New Latino Destinations, Fast Growing Latino Hubs, and Small Latino Places. The three latter categories are entirely comprised of mid-sized or smaller MSAs.2 And Camarota and Keeley (2001) identify New Ellis Islands as non-traditional areas of 1
Many Africans have historically not qualified for admission to the US. For example, only 2,200 Africans were resettled in 1980-81 and the ceiling for the fiscal year 1982 for admission of African refugees was 3,500 (~1 acceptance per 1000 refugees). Moreover, many Africans do not qualify as refugees – of tens of thousand who fled from Ethiopia following the 1974 overthrow of Haile Selassie, many came to the US on student or tourist visas (Huyck and Bouvier 1983).
2
For purposes of this research, mid-sized MSAs are defined as MSAs with populations between 1 and 5.5 million people. Large- sized MSAs have populations over 5.5 million.
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
Previous Research on Migration
3
immigrant settlement in the 1990s. Nevertheless, our knowledge of immigration impacts on the population profiles of MSAs is largely confined to only three: Los Angeles, New York, and Miami (Alba, Logan, and Stults 2000; Allen and Turner 1997, 2002; Beveridge 2002; Clark and Blue 2004; Johnston, Poulsen, and Forrest 2003; Logan, Alba, and Zhang 2002; Mollenkopf 1999; Newbold 2004; Poulsen, Forrest, and Johnston 2002; Waldinger 2001). While scale has directed attention to large-sized cities, it is important to understand the experiences in smaller urban areas. In studying demographic changes within small US cities, Brennan and Hoene (2003) assert that though mega-cities are dynamic places, they do not typify cities nationwide. While the number of immigrants and resettlement resources within smaller cities may be smaller in absolute terms, the impact on the local community may be great. For example, in 2002, after approximately 1,000 Somali refugees relocated to Lewiston, Maine in the previous year; cultural clashes broke out and community members complained about the stress on Lewiston’s limited finances and generosity. As a result, the mayor wrote a letter requesting that Somalis stop settling in Lewiston (Bouchard 2002). In contrast, after the in-migration of Hispanic populations from Texas, Southern California, and Mexico to small and mid-sized cities in Iowa; citizens from these communities asserted that, despite increased pressures on social services, housing, and schools, cultural diversity was positive and overweighed the negatives (Iowa State University, University Extension 2001). Experiences within these cities and others like them may well be contingent on local circumstances. As in the small and mid-sized cities of Maine and Iowa, other smaller-sized cities increasingly receive secondary migrants (Clark 2003), i.e. those who have migrated to another city after initial resettlement. Although it is documented that the foreign-born are more likely to move than natives (Belanger and Rogers 1993; Perry and Schacter 2003), their movement patterns within the US have not been examined in great detail. Research has quantified the gaining regions (Belanger and Rogers 1993, Lichter and Johnson 2006) and states (Forbes 1985, Frey 2002; Perry and Schacter 2003, Woodrow-Lafield 2006) of foreign-born individuals from other regions or states, respectively, but little has specifically focused on the gaining cities. The few articles that do examine gaining cities consider internal migration to large-sized cities (Frey 1996; Newbold 1999), and not
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
4
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States
smaller-sized cities. For example, while refugee resettlement policies of the US have led to the influx of Somalis to Columbus Ohio, the secondary migration of Somalis to Columbus has also been triggered by Columbus’ economy and social networks (Otiso and Smith 2005). Patterns like these have not been examined extensively. While certain types of immigrant intermediaries such as recruiters (Abella 2004; Johnson-Webb 2002; Massey et al. 1993; Massey et al. 1994; Tyner 2000) and smugglers (Andreas 2001; Conover 1987; Marshall 2002; Stoecker 2005) have been given attention; migration researchers to-date (Massey 1999; Massey and Espana 1987; Overbeek 2002; Piore 1979; Stark and Bloom 1985; Todaro 1969; Todaro and Maruszko 1987; Wallerstein 1974) have not concentrated on the role of the government and voluntary resettlement agencies (VOLAGs) in the migration process.3 When the US Congress first exerted its authority over immigration toward the end of the nineteenth century, it did not enact legislation that would protect and provide resettlement assistance to immigrant populations. 4 This void was filled by voluntary welfare organizations, and their role has been significant ever since (Corsi 1956). Research that has considered refugees in the US has taken into account migration patterns, in addition to the experiences and adaptation of refugees in the US – e.g., the experiences of Cubans (Boswell 1985, Grenier and Perez 2003), Southeast Asians (Airriess and Clawson 2000, Wood 1997), Russians and Ukrainians (Hume and Hardwick 2005), and Africans (Holtzman 2000, Hume and Hardwick 2005, Kusow 2006a). Only a few studies have specifically targeted the role of government agencies and VOLAGs in the migration patterns 3
Note that some researchers have considered the role of “voluntary organizations” or “voluntary associations” (Kuah-Pearce and Hu-Dehart 2006), defined as associations that originate out of the migrant communities and are controlled by them, but not the VOLAGs that “resettle” refugees to the US.
4
According to Stein (1983), “Resettlement involves moving refugees from their country of first asylum to some other country. The country of resettlement is commonly referred to as the refugees’ third country after their homeland and land of first asylum. The country of resettlement may occasionally be the country of first asylum when refugees are moved directly from their homeland by means of an orderly departure program (189).”
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
Previous Research on Migration
5
and experiences of refugees in the US (Miyares 1998, Potocky-Tripodi 2002, Singer and Wilson 2006, Wright 1981). This research will address the gaps that exist in migration research and will enhance our understanding of the process of African migration to mid-sized cities in the US; with particular attention given to the role of the resettlement programs and VOLAGs and their effectiveness, which have been entirely neglected in understanding the urban geography of immigration. Both initial and secondary migration patterns will be taken into account. The adaptation of refugees after their arrival, and the continued role of resettlement agencies in (or not in) that adaptation is also considered.
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
Global Migration Patterns: 1500s to the Present Migration has always taken place, often over long distances, and even globally. The following discussion of global migration divides the period since 1500 into four periods: 1500 to 1800, 1800 to World War I, World War I to 1960s, and 1960s to present. Each period has distinct patterns and causes. In order to understand contemporary migration patterns, one needs to understand the history of migration patterns. Earlier movements can impact later ones, for example, as social networks form between migrants in receiving countries and friends, family members, and communities in sending countries. Section 2.3 then reviews the history of immigration to the US, comparing global and US patterns, examining whether or not US patterns have been fundamentally different from the global ones, and considering the cities within the US where immigrants have historically settled. 1500 – 1800: The Mercantile Period The period from 1500 to 1800 has been labeled the mercantile period within migration research because migration movements stemmed from processes of colonization and economic growth under mercantile capitalism and resulted in Europeans inhabiting large portions of the world (Massey 2003). Consistent with world systems theory, political power became unequally distributed across nations, and the expansion of global capitalism (in the case of this period, mercantile capitalism) created inequalities and a stratified economic order (Wallerstein 1974; Massey
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
6
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States
1999). Core countries (the capitalist powers) and periphery countries (those dependent on the capitalist powers) started to develop during this period and migration was linked to the expansion of markets, as mercantile capitalism expanded from its core in Western Europe to practically all regions of the world, particularly the Americas. Coreperiphery relationships would continue to evolve and impact migration movements up to current times, because the primary reason for migration has been the unequal distribution of incomes (Nayyar 2002). The most massive intercontinental population movements during this time entailed the movement of Europeans to their newly formed colonies throughout the Americas, Africa, Asia, and Oceania, along with the involuntary movement of Africans, who came as slaves to the newly formed colonies (Spellman 2002). Between 1500 and 1890 (during the mercantile and industrial period), four million Africans were forcibly moved North across the Sahara, while three million were transported from East Africa to destinations bordering the Red Sea and in South Asia (Spellman 2002). The number of African emigrants, though, varied over time. Between 1600 and 1700 1.9 million emigrants left Africa. Between 1700 and 1809 (moving into the industrial period), these numbers rose to 6.7 million. Later, between 1810 and about 1870 (in the industrial period) these numbers shrunk to 2.6 million as the slave trade began to be cut off. By the end of the nineteenth century, the legal African slave trade had been phased out of existence. With regard to receiving countries, in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries the Caribbean was the destination for African slaves; between 1810 and 1870 (during the industrial period), Cuba and Brazil were the main destinations (Curtin 1997). While movement from both Africa and Europe increased during this period, movements both to and from the Asian countries were minimal. For example, both China and Japan had isolationist stances. Indeed, between 1638 and 1868 (under the rule of the Tokugawa shogunate), foreigners were expelled from Japan, and emigration from Japan was forbidden (Spellman 2002). 1800 – WWI: The Industrial Period This second period of emigration stemmed from industrial development, such as the development of the steamship in Europe and the spread of capitalism to former colonies in the New World (Curtin
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
Previous Research on Migration
7
1997, Massey 2003). World systems theory continues to explain these movements. With the abolition of the African slave trade (the US emancipation proclamation came into force in 1863) there was a need for labor in the New World – e.g., an increased demand for labor in the farmlands and cities of North America, in addition to the sugar and coffee plantations of Latin America (Moch 1997). This led to a variety of different emigration movements during this period. The largest group of emigrants worldwide during the industrial period was from Europe. Between 1820 and 1931, approximately 63.5 million emigrants left Europe alone, averaging 575,000 Europeans annually (Taft 1936). And, between 1800 and 1914, 85 percent of some 50 million immigrants from Europe settled in just five destinations: US, Argentina, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand; the US received the most at 33 million (Spellman 2002). During the first half of the nineteenth century, the largest bulk of the European emigrants were from Great Britain and Germany. Emigrants from these countries took advantage of labor demands throughout the world, and moved largely for economic and/or hardship reasons. For example, as the potato blight of the 1840s hit Western Europe hard, many Irishman were left with the choice between starvation and emigration (Scott 1968). Those who adhere to neoclassical economic theory explain these trends by noting that individual decisions to migrate abroad are strongly influenced by economic factors. They hold that immigrants settle where expected net returns to migration are the greatest (Todaro 1969; Todaro and Maruszko 1987). The new economics of migration builds on this theory, and adherents assert that decisions are often made jointly by the migrant and by some group of non-migrants. They are made within these larger units of interrelated people (e.g., families, households, communities) so as to maximize the income and minimize the risks for the entire unit. Both costs and returns are shared (Stark and Bloom 1985). Supporters of these economic theories assert that these factors explain all economic movements from this period to the present. The British and German migrants of the early nineteenth century, for the most part, moved to countries where the racial composition, language, religion, and customs were similar to those in their origin country. For example, the citizens of the United Kingdom went in large numbers to the US or British possessions (Ferenczi 1969), Irish emigrants moved to both Britain and the US, and a small number of
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
8
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States
British convicts, at around 160,000, were sent to Australia between the 1780s and 1840s. At times, though, welcoming economic conditions elsewhere overcame this tendency, leading, for example, to a considerable number of Germans migrating to Brazil and Argentina between 1820 and 1840 (Spellman 2002). In addition to emigration movements from Europe during this period, there were also smaller movements from Asia. Beginning in the nineteenth century, and continuing into the 1920s (during the great migration, to be discussed below), emigrants from India and China replaced African slaves and found work on plantations throughout the Americas and Asia as indentured laborers. Most settled in Malaysia, Thailand, Hawaii, Fiji, Peru, Cuba and Australia; while smaller numbers went to areas of the Americas, including Trinidad and Guyana (Curtin 1997). During the almost full century of the indentured system’s existence (the indentured system was abolished in Britain in 1916), approximately 1.5 million Indians became part of London’s expanding global empire (Spellman 2002). Chinese migration to the US, Australia, and Canada also increased during this period as a result of the discovery of gold (Gabaccia 1997). Nearly 50,000 Chinese immigrated to California between 1851 and 1855, and the total migration to California and Australia amounted to 135,000 in the 1850s – approximately a quarter of all Chinese migration. Later, in the 1860s, Chinese laborers found work within the West Coast on the US transcontinental railway construction (Spellman 2002). The Great Migration The greatest European migration to-date took place from the 1880s until World War I. Overall emigration from Northern and Western Europe declined, but was more than counterbalanced by emigration from Southern and Eastern Europe. The most important sending countries between 1881 and 1915 were in order of rank: Italy, United Kingdom, Austria-Hungary, Spain, Germany, Russia, Ireland, China (through Hong Kong only), Portugal, Canada, British India, Russian Poland, Belgium, Japan, and Mexico. During this same period, the most important receiving countries were, in order of rank: US, Straits Settlements (the British colonies of Southeast Asia, including Pinang, Singapore and Malacca), Argentina, Ceylon (Sri Lanka), Brazil, Canada, Germany, Australia, Belgium, Cuba, New Zealand, Mexico,
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
Previous Research on Migration
9
and South Africa (Taft 1936). Between 1871 and 1915, over 90 percent of all European immigrants to Latin America settled in just three countries – Argentina, Brazil, and Uruguay (Spellman 2002). Decreases in German emigrants in the second half of the century occurred because as Germany became economically and politically strong, there was less need to leave. This is consistent with neoclassical economic theory and the new economics of migration. Additionally, unlike England, Germany had few colonies requesting emigrant labor. Scandinavian emigration, though, reached its peak in the 1880s as Scandinavian migrants traveled to Latin America and North America, with just over two million emigrants from Denmark, Norway, and Sweden settling in these regions between 1865 and WWI. The largest groups of emigrants though, between the 1880s and WWI, were from Southern and Eastern Europe; movement from Southern Europe grew to 700,000 annually (Spellman 2002). Emigration resulted from economic and political crises in these origin countries. For example, Italian emigrants left to escape economic and political turmoil unleashed by the political changes of unification. The largest groups of migrants during this period included Slavs and Jews from Russia, Poland, Austria-Hungary, and the Balkans who migrated mainly to the US, South America, and a few other destinations. Emigrants from Italy moved to Argentina and the US – 9 million between 1876 and 1926 (Spellman 2002). Between 1870 and 1920, Italian emigrants constituted a third of Italy’s population (Gabaccia 1997). Emigrants from Spain migrated to Argentina and other South American countries, those from Portugal migrated to North and South America, and those from Greece and Finland migrated to the US (Taft 1936). Asian migration continued through the late nineteenth century. Between 1882 and 1917, nearly a million and a half Chinese migrated to Thailand, while another million took up work as miners and rubber workers in Malaysia. Further, contract labor continued to be recruited aggressively in the Western US to work within the intensive cash crop enterprises, in addition to building rail lines and roads to mining and construction sites (Spellman 2002). These flows gradually reduced in size as anti-immigration laws came into place. In fact, Chinese immigrants to the Americas declined from over 20 percent of all immigrants in the 1850s to less than 5 percent per year after 1890 (McKeown 2004).
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
10
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States
It was during this period that Japanese first began to migrate from Japan following the Meiji Restoration in 1868. It began as a rebellion, and led to reform. The emperor was reinstated and Japan was transformed from a feudal society with pre-machine age technology to an industrial power. Between 1885 and 1930, roughly one million Japanese emigrated (Spellman 2002). One-half of the one million Japanese who emigrated settled in the US. Later, reflecting increased immigration restrictions in the US, Japanese migration patterns shifted to South America, particularly to Peru and Brazil (Spellman 2002). WWI – 1960s: The Period of Limited Migration
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
Post-WWI After the First World War, there were both troops coming back home and refugee movements5. At this time, the newly formed League of Nations created a special High Commission for Refugees, which helped facilitate the movement of refugees across Europe. During this period, Jewish populations faced religious persecution, and refugees from communist Russia sought political freedom. With the aid of the League of Nations, refugees from Russia, Eastern Europe (Poland, Hungary), Southern Europe (Greece), the Balkans, and Southwest Asia (Armenia, Syria, Assyria/Iraq, Turkey) were resettled (Spellman 2002, Taft 1936). As refugee flows increased, the fear of massive unemployment became a concern to some destination countries in the 1920s. As a result, demands were raised for protection of domestic workers against foreign competition. Anti-Semitism also contributed to this stand (Rystad 1992). Consequently, restrictive legislation was enacted in 5
A formal definition of “refugee” was not created until the Refugee Act of 1980, though its definition was nearly identical to the definition in the 1967 United Nations Protocol relating to the status of refugees (US Department of Health and Human Services 2003b). Moreover, a general definition of “refugee” was provided in the 1951 Convention relating to the status of refugees, and included persons who, as a result of events occurring before 1951, have a fear of being persecuted in their home country are residing outside his/her country of nationality (United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees 1997).
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
Previous Research on Migration
11
some countries, including the US (e.g., the Immigration Act of 1924), Germany (after WWI), and Italy (1927) (Spellman 2002), and parallel substantial increases in nationalistic feelings arose in some countries. These systems of immigration control continued at least until the close of WWII (Taft 1936). As the US set immigration quotas, France replaced the US as a refuge for unemployed and needy emigrants during the interwar years. In fact, France was the foremost country of in-migration in the world at this time, with over two million workers traveling to France in the 1920s. Smaller groups of Europeans also sought settlement in South America, particularly Brazil. Furthermore, despite selective restrictions in some countries, migration to Australia, New Zealand, and American destinations other than the US received levels similar to those of the first decade of the twentieth century (McKeown 2004). As certain groups settled in specific areas – for example, Poles in the Midwestern US, or Russians in Israel – social networks formed. Massey and Espana (1987), proponents of social capital theory, define these immigrant networks as a web of social ties that links potential immigrants in sending communities to people and institutions in receiving areas. Acts of migration at one point in time systematically alter the context within which future migration decisions are made, greatly increasing the likelihood that later decision makers will choose to migrate, thus creating cumulative causation. Thus, the movement of Poles and Russians in the early twentieth century, led to similar migration flows in subsequent periods. To this day, Poles and Russians continue to move to the Midwestern US and Israel, respectively. During this period, the Zionist movement, officially supported by the League of Nations and Great Britain as of 1917, involved the transfer of thousands of Jews back to their ancient homeland in Palestine. Though some Jewish populations simply emigrated west from Europe (e.g., to the US), considerable numbers of Jewish populations migrated from Poland and Germany to Palestine during this period. These movements continued through the Great Depression (Taft 1936). The Great Depression Restrictive legislation became more extensive with the beginning of the economic depression in 1929, and virtually all international migration
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
12
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States
stopped. When examining European overseas migration during this period (not including Austria Hungary, Poland and Russia because data were not available), there was a drop in the average annual emigration from about 718,000 between 1881 and 1915 to about 367,000 between 1925 and 1931 – a drop of approximately 49 percent (Taft 1936). There were, though, some small movements and return migrations (increases in repatriation continued through 1933) during this period (Massey 2003). Movement of contract laborers from China and India continued, while new movements also developed. For example, Chinese migration flows developed in Asia, particularly from the wartorn regions of Shantung and Northern China to Manchuria and to the rubber plantations and cities of the Malay Peninsula (which includes parts of Burma, now Myanmar; Thailand; and Malaysia) (Taft 1936; Curtin 1997). While certain populations were not allowed entry, quota laws in the US did not apply to all immigrant groups (e.g., Mexicans, Canadians, and Filipinos). For example, in the 1940s, there was a system of labor recruitment (the Bracero Program), which allowed Mexicans to work temporarily in the US. Caribbean workers were also recruited to work temporarily in the US during this time. Migration to the US from other parts of the Americas increased to over 150,000 a year in the 1920s (Castles and Miller 2003; McKeown 2004). Post-WWII In the aftermath of WWII, the United Nations adopted a universal declaration of human rights that opened the way for the unhindered relocation of refugees who feared persecution in their own country. The movement was largely refugees and displaced persons. These refugees consisted partly of Jewish survivors of the war, though a count of survivors in Displaced Persons camps and other locations suggested that only a small fragment of Europe’s Jews had survived. Nonetheless, some Jewish populations from Eastern Europe did emigrate, for example to Israel and the US (Rystad 1992; Holmes 1995). While Europeans made up a large proportion of refugee groups following WWII, there were a variety of refugee movements from other countries. With the Partition of India and Pakistan in 1947, there were movements from and within this region. In 1947 an estimated five
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
Previous Research on Migration
13
million Hindu and Sikh refugees from Pakistan arrived in the bordering country of India, while almost the same number of Muslims in India sought refuge in Pakistan. Additionally, as the Soviets crushed the Hungarian Revolution in 1956, refugees flooded across the Hungarian border. Almost 200,000 Hungarians moved to Western Europe during this period, with a majority settling in neighboring Austria6 (Spellman 2002). Finally, with the onset of the Cold War, there was an influx of refugees from East Germany and Eastern Europe (Rystad 1992). For example, between 1950 and 1998 (continuing into the period of postindustrial migration), 3.9 million ethnic Germans moved from Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union to Germany, particularly West Germany (2.3 million of these moved after 1989, as a result of political changes in Eastern Europe and the break-up of the Soviet Union) (Dietz 1999). With decolonization during this period also came movement from the former colonies to the former mother countries (Spellman 2002), often to help rebuild the war-torn land of Europe. These populations, in addition to populations from Eastern Europe, were recruited by highly industrialized countries of Western Europe to work as temporary laborers. This continued through the 1970s (into the period of postindustrial migration) (Castles and Miller 2003). Examples of these movements would include emigrants from North Africa (former colonies) settling in France and Germany; and movements of Eastern Europeans to Belgium, Switzerland, Sweden, and the Netherlands (Moch 1997). 1960s – Present: The Period of Postindustrial Migration In the 1960s the patterning of international migration represented a sharp break with that of the earlier periods, as intercontinental migration truly became global in scope, and was no longer dominated by outflows from Europe to a handful of destinations. The number and variety of sending regions increased as the global supply of immigrants 6
For many, Austria was the country of first asylum and served as a transit point for Hungarian emigrants going to third countries. Some were processed here by the Immigration and Naturalization Services (INS) with voluntary agency support, and resettled to US (Huyck and Bouvier 1983).
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
14
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States
shifted from Europe to developing countries of the Third World (Castles and Miller 2003). Emigration from Europe comprised a small fraction of immigrant flows, while emigration from Africa, Asia, and Latin America increased (Stalker 1994, Zlotnick 1998). Additionally, the variety of destination countries grew during this period. Countries within Oceania and the Americas continued to attract immigrants, while Western Europe, too, began to attract significant numbers of immigrants. This was particularly true for Germany, France, Belgium, Switzerland, Sweden, and the Netherlands (Cohen 1995). Refugee movements played a role in the increased numbers from Africa, Asia, and Latin America and there were both continued and new refugee movements. For example, in 1971, over 10 million refugees fled East Pakistan (Bangladesh) into neighboring India. Superpower rivalry during this period contributed to militarization, internal conflict, and the destabilization of society in numerous countries (e.g., Korea, Vietnam, Angola, Somalia, Cuba, Nicaragua); and led to refugee movement from these countries. Moreover, at the end of the Vietnam War (1975), Vietnamese refugees fled to Hong Kong, the Philippines, Indonesia, Thailand, and Malaysia; at times, Thai and Malaysian authorities refused to take in these populations. In 1979 the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees organized a more orderly settlement of these populations, and a majority of Vietnamese then found refuge in the US, with smaller numbers accepted by Australia, Canada, and Western European states. Refugees from Laos and Cambodia also sought refuge in the US at this time (Spellman 2002). There were also continued refugee movements from communist countries in Eastern Europe (Siddique and Appleyard 2001). Many of these refugee movements continued through the mid1990s (Population Reference Bureau 2005). The five largest refugee origin countries in 2002 were all African: Liberia, D.R. Congo, Burundi, Somalia, and the Ivory Coast (see Table A.1 in Appendix A for the full list, in addition to the countries of destination). As colonies continued to gain their independence (e.g., Morocco in 1956, Tunisia in 1956, Algeria in 1962), emigrants from former European colonies continued to migrate to the former mother countries, namely England, France, the Netherlands, and Portugal (Rystad 1992). For example, more than a half a million former subjects of the British Empire from the Caribbean (e.g., Barbados, Jamaica, and the West Indies) and from South Asia (e.g., India) were resident in the United Kingdom by 1961; and by 1981 there were over 1.5 million UK
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
Previous Research on Migration
15
residents who had moved from Commonwealth countries around the world, 60 percent from Asia or Africa. Additionally, France became the home to Algerians, Moroccans, and Tunisians – by 1970 there were 850,000 emigrants to France from these countries. And by the early 1960s, the Netherlands accepted 300,000 emigrants from the Dutch East Indies (Indonesia). It is estimated that in 1973 “foreigners” made up 10 to 12 percent of the labor force in France and Germany (Spellman 2002). As mentioned previously, foreign labor did not come only from former colonies. For example, Turkish migration to European countries began in the late 1950s and continues to the present. In fact, it is estimated that in 1993 there were almost 2 million Turkish citizens living in Germany (Abadan-Unat 1995). As petroleum prices skyrocketed in the 1970s, oil rich countries in the Middle East sought to modernize and industrialize. However, they did not have enough skilled and unskilled workers to complete the work at an acceptable pace. To solve this labor shortage they recruited workers from around the world. For example, emigrants from Egypt, Jordan, and Yemen were recruited to work within the expanding oil economies of the Gulf States, particularly in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and the United Arab Emirates. Later in the 1980s, as the need for labor increased, workers from South and East Asia also contributed. In 1990 there were over 7 million foreigners in this region. Indians comprised the largest group of migrants at one million, while emigrants from Indonesia, Korea, the Philippines, and Thailand made up approximately half of this number at 3.5 million (Spellman 2002). Bangladeshis, too, migrated to the Gulf States, though in smaller numbers (Abella 1995). On the eve of the Gulf War, foreign workers constituted a majority of the labor force in all of the oil states, reaching nearly 80 percent of the workforce in Kuwait, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia in 1991. As the Gulf States recruited labor to work within their oil industries, so too did Venezuela and Nigeria – a variety of South American emigrants settled in Venezuela, while a great majority of the workers in Nigeria came from Ghana (Spellman 2002). By the 1980s, international migration spread into Asia. Singapore, Hong Kong, South Korea, and Taiwan recruited unskilled workers from Indonesia, the Philippines, and Thailand. In the early 1990s, 20 percent of Singapore’s labor force consisted of emigrants from Thailand and the Philippines; and almost one million Filipino migrants immigrated to the US. Chinese emigration also increased during this period. In the
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
16
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States
wake of the Tiananmen Massacre in 1992, the US passed legislation allowing students to apply for permanent resident status. As a result, in recent decades Chinese overseas emigration has been dominated by skilled laborers, entrepreneurs, and students who bring a great deal of intellectual and financial capital. In fact, the largest Chinese community outside mainland China today is located in the US, and Chinese migrants are also by far the largest Asian group resident in the US, making up 0.7 percent of the US population in the mid-1990s (Spellman 2002). There was also increased migration to Canada from East Asia, and from 1989 to 1992 Hong Kong was the single largest source country (Lam and Richmond 1995). Migration from Latin America also increased significantly during the 1980s as a result of population growth, declining economies, and regional conflicts or civil war. Since the 1960s, military struggles in Cuba, Guatemala, El Salvador, and Nicaragua led to outflows of millions of emigrants from these countries to the US. The advent of military governments in Argentina, Chile, and Uruguay was linked to a movement of roughly 80,000 migrants from these countries to the US during the 1980s. Additionally, undocumented emigration from Mexico to the US was particularly high during the 1980s, at around 300,000 emigrants per year. Later, with the adoption of the North American Free Trade Agreement in 1994, came an even bigger increase in the numbers of illegal emigrants from Mexico to the US, as this agreement allowed for free trade of goods, but not unfettered transfer of human capital (Spellman 2002). Adherents to segmented labor market theory explain Mexican migration patterns by noting that international migration stems from the intrinsic labor demands of modern industrial societies; international migration is caused by a permanent demand inherent to the economic structure of developed nations and the chronic and, in particular, More specifically, unavoidable need for low wage workers. undocumented labor in the US has undermined the bargaining power of organized labor and helped to depress wages. Moreover, undocumented labor has become quite functional. In fact, the employment of undocumented foreign labor has, in some instances, actually become a condition for the continued existence of small- and medium-sized firms in the US. This has created a substantial economic interest in continued illegal migration to the US. Within this context it is the pull factors in the US that led to Mexican migration movements during this period (Piore 1979; Massey 1999; Overbeek 2002).
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
Previous Research on Migration
17
Overall, when considering the entire period from 1960 to 1995, the top immigrant sending nations are, in rank order (for total numbers, see Table A.2 in Appendix A: Mexico, Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Philippines, Pakistan, China, Vietnam, and Colombia (Zlotnick 2004). With the exception of the sources of refugees mentioned previously, international migration tends to originate in rapidly growing nations (Massey 2003), where population exceeds available employment opportunities. Additionally, the top immigrant-receiving nations for the period between 1960 and 1995 are, in order of rank (for total numbers, see Table A.3 in Appendix A): US, Germany, Canada, Saudi Arabia, France, India, Former USSR, and Australia (Zlotnick 2004). These are countries with an inherent need for skilled and unskilled workers. With regard to purely refugee populations, at the start of 2003 the total world population of refugees was around 10.4 million people. Asia hosted the largest overall refugee population (4.2 million), followed by Africa (3.5 million) and then Europe (2.5 million). The five countries hosting the most refugees as of 2002 were: Iran, Pakistan, Germany, US, and Tanzania (for a list of the top ten countries with total numbers, see Table A.4 in Appendix A) (United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees 2003). Current international migration is now at an all-time high in terms of absolute numbers. About 145 million people lived outside their native countries in the mid-1990s, and this number is increasing from 2 million to 4 million each year (Population Reference Bureau 2005). Summary of Global Migration Patterns Global migration patterns have changed through history. In the earliest period, movements stemmed from the process of colonization and resulted in the movement of Europeans and African slaves to large portions of the Americas, Africa (slaves were also forcibly moved internally within Africa), Asia, and Oceania. Subsequently, from 1800 to WWI, European movement increased with industrial development, and Eastern and Southern Europeans replaced Western and Northern Europeans in the 1880s, during the beginning of the great migration. Additionally, in the late 1800s, with the abolition of the slave trade throughout the world, African slave labor was replaced by indentured servants from Asia. Between WWI and the 1960s, migration was limited as countries throughout the world set quotas, restricting the
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
18
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States
number of migrants that were allowed entrance. Finally, the most recent period of migration, from the 1960s to the present, marks a break from previous trends as the variety of sending regions has increased and shifted from Europe to third world countries. While refugee movements developed following WWI and WWII, it is during this period that refugee movements from Africa, Asia, and Latin America developed. Resettlement agencies which had been created to aid earlier European refugees now began to aid with the resettlement of these new groups. New agencies also formed during this time. The next section details the history of migration to the US from the 1500s to the present, clarifying whether or not US patterns mirror global ones, and considering the cities where immigrants have concentrated through history. Migration Patterns to the US
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
1500s – WWI The first European emigrants to arrive in what ultimately became the US, came before entries began to be recorded in 1820. For example, Italian-born Giovanni da Verrazano discovered the New York Harbor in 1524. A majority of US immigrants before 1880, though, were drawn from the countries of northwestern Europe, particularly from the United Kingdom, Germany, and Ireland; emigrants from Scotland, the Netherlands, France, and Spain came in smaller numbers. It is estimated that the English made up 60 percent of the population in 1790. Between 1820 and 1840, more than 750,000 German, British, and Irish immigrants arrived; and another 4.3 million emigrants from these countries arrived during the next 20 years. The French settled in the St. Lawrence Valley and nearby areas, in addition to the Gulf of Mexico; the English settled in Virginia and South Carolina; the Dutch settled in what is now New York; the English Quakers and Germans settled in Pennsylvania; and the Spanish settled in the Southwest. These migrants came to the US for a variety of reasons, including religious, political, and economic factors. German sectarians sought religious freedom in Pennsylvania; Spaniards sought Christian converts in Florida and the Southwest; and the Puritans in Massachusetts sought to establish a community restricted to members of their faith. Moreover, slave labor from Africa was imported to the US from the late seventeenth century to the mid-nineteenth century to work within
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
Previous Research on Migration
19
the sugar, tobacco, coffee, cotton, and gold industries (Castles and Miller 2003; Martin and Midgley 2003). In the 1850s and 1860s, smaller numbers of Southern Europeans and West Africans, recruited by the whaling industry, settled in the Northeast (State of Rhode Island General Assembly undated). In the 1880s, the proportion of immigrants from Southern and Eastern Europe increased. And, during the period from 1880 to 1914, between 70 and 75 percent of Slav, Lithuanian, Latvian, and Jewish (included as a separate group) immigrants settled in just seven major urban-industrial centers – Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, New York, Chicago, Detroit, Cleveland, and Boston; Only modest percentages settled outside of what were the largest US metropolitan areas. 10 to 15 percent of this group settled in smaller cities and towns of Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and New England (approximately 1.1 to 1.3 million Poles; 250,000 Ukrainians; 100,000 to 150,000 ethnic Russians; 300,000 Lithuanians; 10,000 to 15,000 Latvians; and 1.8 million Jews settled in the US between 1880 and 1914) (Morawska 1995). These populations found work as common laborers in iron and steel production, coal mining, construction, slaughtering, meatpacking, textile-garment manufacturing, and the like. Western Asians also settled in Eastern and Midwestern parts of the US during this time (Hassoun 1999, Morawska 1995). By the early 1900s, Italy, Russia, Hungary, and Poland were among the top source countries of immigrants. The largest emigration flows during this period were from Europe. However, despite the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882, there were also smaller flows from Asia. Chinese populations moved to the West Coast in the mid-nineteenth century to provide labor for completing the transcontinental railroad, and Japanese arrived to the West Coast in the 1890s to work in the railroad and coal mining industries (Dinnerstein and Reimers 1999). In the early 1900s, Filipinos migrated to Hawaii and California to work as sugar planters and later, between the first and second World Wars, both San Francisco and Seattle emerged as regional centers where Asian immigrants provided an essential labor supply for agribusiness (Fujita-Rony 2003). Educational institutions also attracted Asian populations in the early 1900s. Filipinos took advantage of the University of Washington, the premier educational institution of the Northwest Region, while San Francisco was a pivotal site of study for scholars from Chinese-American communities (FujitaRony 2003; Dinnerstein and Reimers 1999).
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
20
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States
Immigration provided an enormous impetus of population growth of American cities of the 19th and early twentieth century, particularly New York, Chicago, and San Francisco, in addition to the gateways of Cleveland and St. Louis (Singer 2004).
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
WWI –1960s The discriminatory immigration laws of 1921 and 1924, along with the great depression and World War II, led to a drastic reduction of immigration in the next four decades beginning in 1930 (Min 2002). Exceptions, though, were made for certain populations. After WWI, the League of Nations created a special High Commission for Refugees that facilitated their movement from Europe. The US, though, did not admit large numbers of refugees until after WWII (Martin and Midgley 2003). Polish, Turkish, Russian, and Balkan refugees that were aided in this manner settled in major industrial centers of the Eastern and Midwestern parts of the US, where previous groups of the same nationalities had settle during the late-nineteenth and early twentieth centuries (Morawska 1995). Moreover, the Bracero program, which was active from 1942 to 1964, permitted Mexican males to migrate to the US temporarily to work in agriculture (Zolberg 1999). The dominant destinations for Mexicans were, and continue to be, from between California to Texas, where the former Mexican territories had been, although smaller communities do stretch to Chicago and the Midwest (Vargas 1993) After WWII, the US passed the Displaced Persons Act of 19487 and as a result, large clusters of immigrants from Europe settled in existing centers of population for its various nationalities; Cleveland, for example, experienced an influx of emigrants from Poland, Slovenia, Croatia, and Hungary, among others (Cizmic 1994; Pozun 2001; Smith 2002). By 1951, 24,200 Polish newcomers settled in Pennsylvania, with Pittsburgh gaining nearly 2,500 of these (Burstin 1989). And in response to the Hungarian Uprising in 1956, the first of a series of 7
This act was the first expression of U.S. policy for admitting persons fleeing persecution and aimed at reducing the problem created by the presence in Germany, Austria, and Italy of more than one million displaced persons. It allowed the admission of up to 205,000 displaced persons during the two-year period beginning July 1, 1948 (US Department of Homeland Security 2003a).
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
Previous Research on Migration
21
refugee acts were passed (Lynch and Simon 2003). A large number of these refugees moved to Cleveland and Pittsburgh, cities where Hungarians had previously moved after the suppression of Hungary’s war of independence in 1848 (Papp 1981). The Cuban Refugee Emergency Center was created under President Eisenhower in 1959, and then later in 1961 the Cuban Refugee Program was created under President Kennedy. The Migration and Refugee Assistance Act was passed in 1962. The majority of Cuban refugees were resettled in Miami/Dade County, where there were strong existing Cuban communities. It later became apparent, though, that this area could not support such a heavy increase in population. Accordingly, the federal government began to direct refugees away from Miami, assisted by programs that helped Cuban immigrants adapt to living conditions in the US through job placement and welfare assistance. If individuals or households refused to settle in areas other than south Florida, they were denied further federal assistance, and 61 percent of the 495,000 new Cubans registered between 1961 and 1981 were relocated in this manner. Cuban groups were resettled in, for example, New York City; Elizabeth, Union City, West New York, and other New Jersey cities; Chicago; New Orleans; and Los Angeles. However, once Cuban-Americans adapted to living in the US, learned English, and were able to become independent of federal assistance, many relocated back to Miami (Thomas 1967; Boswell 1985). 1960s – Present In 1965, immigration laws were liberalized, leading to a renewal of substantial immigration flows. The Hart-Cellar Act established a system whereby visas were distributed according to a preference list that favored close relatives of US citizens and those with desired occupational skills. During this period, the US had been seen as draining off the best of the population from other countries, particularly lesser-developed ones, a phenomenon referred to as the brain drain (Grubel 1966; Grubel and Scott 1966). Indeed, by the mid-1970s, onefifth of all US physicians were immigrants, and there were more medical graduate students from India and the Philippines than American black physicians. By the mid-1980s, over half of all doctoral degrees in engineering awarded by US universities were earned by
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
22
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States
foreign-born students (Rumbaut 1994). Moreover, as mentioned previously, in the wake of the Tiananmen Massacre of 1992, the US passed legislation allowing students to apply for permanent resident status, leading to the in-migration of Chinese and students (Spellman 2002). Education in the US remains a strong draw for people from all countries. The Hart-Cellar Act also broadened the definition of refugees to include victims of natural disasters and religious and political persecution (Min 2002). Later, the Refugee Act of 1980 more formally defined “refugee”, as (A) any person who is outside any country of such person's nationality or, in the case of a person having no nationality, is outside any country in which such person last habitually resided, and who is unable or unwilling to return to, and is unable or unwilling to avail himself or herself of the protection of, that country because of persecution or a well-founded fear of persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion, or (B) in such circumstances as the President after appropriate consultation may specify, any person who is within the country of such person's nationality or, in the case of a person having no nationality, within the country in which such person is habitually residing, and who is persecuted or who has a well-founded fear of persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion (US Department of Homeland Security 2003b). The Refugee Act of 1980 also established criteria for refugee admission, institutionalized executive branch consultation as an aspect of the admissions procedure, dealt with the adaptation of refugee status, and dealt with resettlement (Zucker 1983). 8 These acts resulted in a variety of refugee movements during this period and refugee programs today are resettling refugees from significantly different economic and ethnic backgrounds; refugees from Asia, Africa, and Latin America have been added to the flows (Stein 1983). While refugees fled to the US from all over the world, the top countries of origin during this period were Vietnam, Cuba, Laos, the Soviet Union, Cambodia, and Ukraine (for the top 25 sending countries between 1961 and 1980 and 1981 and 2001, see Appendix A) 8
This Refugee Act of 1980 established the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) (Zucker 1983).
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
Previous Research on Migration
23
(US Department of Justice 2003). Because of the past experiences in Miami, where the city had become inundated with Cubans, the US government policy with the Indochinese, for example, was to distribute refugees evenly about the country, to minimize the impact on specific labor markets and communities. Vietnamese and Cambodians were dispersed in this manner – of the initial groups (at the end of 1975), 21 percent were resettled in California, 7 percent in Texas, 5.5 percent in Pennsylvania, 4 percent in Florida, and the remaining widely dispersed elsewhere in the US. Over time, social networks (e.g., family reunification) came to govern the resettlement pattern of newly arriving refugees (Gordon 1996). In 1986, the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) offered amnesty to illegal residents who had entered the US before 1982. This created a pool of some three million permanent residents and prospective citizens, who would eventually stimulate more Mexican immigration by way of family reunion (Zolberg 1999). When considering the post-1965 era overall, it would be characterized by an enormous shift in the ethnic mix of immigration flows to the US. A vast majority of post-1965 immigrants had origins in Latin America, the Caribbean Basin, and Asia. The major source countries included Mexico, Dominican Republic, Jamaica, El Salvador, Cuba, Haiti, the Philippines, China, India, Vietnam, and South Korea (Min 2002; Lynch and Simon 2003). The urban focus of immigrants also shifted to include Los Angeles, Miami, San Diego, and Houston, while New York, Chicago, and San Francisco continued as primary urban gateways (Singer 2004). Summary of US Migration Patterns Because the US continues to be a dominant receiving nation of immigrants, US migration patterns have mirrored global ones. World systems theory, neoclassical economic theory, the new economics of migration, social capital (also known as network) theory, segmented labor market theory, and institutional theory (to be introduced within my conceptual framework, in Chapter Four) are all relevant to explaining the history of US migration patterns, as they explain the history of global ones. The previous section demonstrated that distinct patterns have formed throughout the history of US immigration. As Europeans settled in the US, beginning in the 1500s, the French settled in the St.
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
24
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
Lawrence Valley and nearby areas, in addition to the Gulf of Mexico; the English settled in Virginia and South Carolina; the Dutch settled in what is now New York; the English Quakers and Germans settled in Pennsylvania; and the Spanish settled in the Southwest. Migrants from these same origin areas continue to settle in these areas today as a result of social networks that have formed over generations. During the great migration (1880 to WWI), Eastern and Southern Europeans settled in Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, New York, Chicago, Detroit, Cleveland, Boston, and St. Louis, in addition to the smaller cities and towns of Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and New England. Smaller numbers of Asian migrants also settled in San Francisco and Seattle. After WWI, smaller numbers of Europeans, refugees from the War continued to settle in the cities of the East and Midwest. In the early twentieth century Mexicans settled from California to Texas, where the former Mexican territories had been; although smaller communities also settled in Chicago and other areas in the Midwest. In the 1960s, Cubans settled in Miami, and in smaller numbers to areas throughout New York and New Jersey; as well as Chicago, New Orleans, and Los Angeles. In the post-1965 era overall, immigrants from a wide variety of ethnic origins have concentrated in Los Angeles, Miami, San Diego, Houston, New York, Chicago, and San Francisco. Data Sources and Related Caveats Before the analysis of secondary data is considered in the next chapter, this section introduces the different types of data that were considered for use in this analysis. Further, advantages and disadvantages of each data source are considered. There are a variety of data sources that can be used to describe and analyze immigration movements to the US. When deciding on the most appropriate data source to use, it is important to understand the differences among the sources available, as well as the limitations of each data set. Before the introduction of some preliminary analyses a review the major data sources available for public use are presented. The benefits and limitations of each data source are highlighted. United States Bureau of the Census During the decennial censuses, international migration-related data are collected for the entire U.S. resident population. Furthermore, 1 in 6
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
Previous Research on Migration
25
households that receive the census “long form” are asked additional questions. In the 2000 Census, information from these additional questions makes up the Summary File 3 (SF3). It is here where immigration data can be obtained. The SF3 data include, for example, the place of birth, citizenship status, year of entry, ancestry, residence five years ago, and language spoken at home of respondents. SF3 census data were utilized to study immigration, for example, by Suro and Singer (2002) to study Latino growth in metropolitan America and by Frey (2002) to study new foreign-born shifts across the US. Summary File 4 from the 2000 Census (SF4) includes additional tabulations of the foreign-born data from the SF3. The American Community Survey (ACS), initiated in 2005, asks the same questions as the decennial census (including the questions that provide the data for Census 2000 SF3 and SF4 files, such as place of birth and citizenship), but is done over a longer time period, with ongoing survey collection (every year), for selected geographies (Costanzo, Davis, and Malone 2002). The ACS selects a random sample from its file of housing unit addresses. An address has about one chance in 480 of being selected in any month. No address is selected more than once every five years. ACS data collected replaces the long form and provides estimates of demographic, housing, social, and economic characteristics every year for all states, as well as for all cities, counties, metropolitan areas, and population groups of 65,000 people or more. For smaller areas, it will take three to five years to accumulate sufficient sample to produce data for areas as small as census tracts. Eventually, the ACS will enable researchers to measure changes over time for small areas and population groups (US Census Bureau 2004a). Greico (2004), for example, utilized data from the ACS to study African foreign-born immigrants to the US. Public Use Microdata Samples (PUMS) provide the full range of responses from the long-form questionnaires (and from the ACS) and these microdata (the basic unit is an individual housing unit and people who live in it) can be used to look at relationships among variables – in this case, foreign-born variables -- not shown in the summary file products offered by the census. Two sets of PUMS files are produced: 1) the one percent national characteristics files which provides a fuller range of detailed characteristics (e.g., social, housing, and economic characteristics) and 2) the 5 percent state files which provides greater geographic detail, but less characteristic detail (to protect
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
26
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States
confidentiality) (US Census Bureau 2003). Clark and Patel (2004) are among the researchers who have utilized the PUMS files to study immigration – more specifically, in their case, to study the residential choices of newly arrived foreign-born. Furthermore, Newbold (2002) utilized the PUMS file in conjunction with the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) data to estimate the refugee population in the US. The Current Population Survey (CPS), which is a joint project between the Bureau of Labor Statistics and Bureau of the Census, regularly asks questions useful to the analysis of international migration. The CPS is an interviewer-administered, monthly survey of approximately 50,000 households (multistage-stratified sample). Its primary reason for being is to provide monthly estimates of employment and unemployment in the US. The basic CPS includes questions on nativity of respondent and parental nativity, citizenship status, and year of entry into the US. Selected monthly supplements include questions about poverty status, money income received, health insurance, household and family characteristics, marital status, geographic mobility in the previous 12 months (including moves from abroad), and a question identifying the main reason for moving (Costanzo, Davis, and Malone 2002). Enchautegui (1998) used the CPS data to study low-skilled immigrants and the changing labor market in the US. The Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP) is a national longitudinal survey of the U.S. population done by the US Census Bureau. The survey design consists of a continuing series of national panels, with sample size ranging from approximately 14,000 to 36,700 interviewed households. The duration of each panel ranges from 2 ½ years to 4 years. The SIPP sample is a multistage-stratified sample. Since 1984, the SIPP has included a Migration History Topical Module asking respondents when they moved to their current residence, the location of any previous residence, and place of birth. For respondents born in a foreign country, questions are asked, for example, on citizenship status, year of entry, immigration status, adaptation of status, and time of adaptation of status. The SIPP is the only source of such detailed international migration-related questions available from the Census Bureau. However, the sample size, considerably smaller than that of the CPS, and restricts its usefulness (Costanzo, Davis, and Malone 2002).
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
Previous Research on Migration
27
The National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) is a joint project between the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) and the US Census Bureau. It is a cross-sectional household interview. Its core questionnaire includes items on place of birth, citizenship status, year of entry, and length of U.S. residence. This is the only Census Bureau survey that asks a residence duration-type question in this form (Costanzo, Davis, and Malone 2002). Face-to-face interviews are conducted with 43,000 households (or 106,000 persons) every year (US Census Bureau 2004b). Leclere, Jensen, and Biddlecom (1994) have used the NHIS to study immigration. They study the health care utilization patterns of immigrants in the US. Identifying refugee populations is difficult within US Census files, such as the PUMS. These files do not include information about admission category (e.g., refugee, asylee), and treat the immigrant population as an aggregate. In cases where refugee populations are of particular interest, data from the INS/Office of Immigration Statistics (to be discussed below) can be used to identify countries that produce large proportions of refugees. These populations could then be transposed into the PUMS files to get an estimate of the refugee population, as well as evaluation of population distributions and personal characteristics, information that is not available within the INS datasets. While this is not a perfect approach, as there is inevitably some overlap between the immigrant refugee populations, it is helpful in understanding the general trends of refugee populations (Newbold 2002). Population estimates of refugees are very difficult to obtain. According to Potocky-Tripodi (2000), the census can be used to estimate the total population of persons from a given refugeegenerating country currently residing in a given locality, but there are some limitations. The Internal Revenue Service and the Office of Refugee Resettlement collect some of the census data, but most of these data are just for numbers of arrivals and state of initial resettlement. Moreover, since refugees often make secondary migrations, initial resettlement data only provide limited information (Potocky-Tripodi, 2000). Caution is needed when interpreting these statistics. For this reason, when discussing refugee populations, it may be that the percent distributions based on these Census Bureau estimates are more meaningful than the actual numbers. Using supplemental data (e.g., Office of Refugee Resettlement data, local
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
28
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States
agency data, data from the Associated Press) may help clarify the size of refugee populations in a certain locale). Office of Refugee Resettlement The Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) maintains statistics on refugee arrivals, and includes estimates of secondary migrations within the US. ORR estimates migration patterns through the first three digits of the social security number, assigned on a state-by-state basis. Coverage does not extend to all refugees, but is biased toward the most recent arrivals. These data are disaggregated down to the zip code level (although not publicly available in this form), and include very limited personal attributes (Newbold 2002). Zavodny (1999), for example, utilized ORR data to examine the location choices of new refugees.
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
Immigration Naturalization Service/Office of Immigration Statistics Until the period following September 11, 2001, the US Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) provided to the public data disaggregated down to the zip-code level. Data through the year 2000 are still available in this format. These data were used, for example, by Singer et al. (2001) to study immigration to the Washington D.C area and by Scott, Coomes, and Izyumov (2005) to study the location choice of employment-based immigrants to US metro areas. These datasets contain information on the characteristics of aliens who became legal permanent residents of the US. More specifically, data are available for two types of immigrants: 1) new arrivals arriving from outside the US with valid immigration visas issued by the INS and 2) adaptations to status for immigrants, who were already in the US with temporary status and were adjusted to legal permanent residence through petition to the INS. Variables within these datasets include port of entry, month and year of admission, class of admission, and state and area to which the immigrants were admitted. Demographic information such as age, sex, marital status, occupation, country of birth, country of last permanent residence, and nationality is also available. More recent datasets are also available to the public, but the zip code of intended residence is no longer available, replaced by the metropolitan area of residence. Note that as of March 3, 2003 the INS transitioned from the Department of Justice to the Department of Homeland Security. Immigration data are now provided through the Office of Immigration
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
Previous Research on Migration
29
Statistics within the Department of Homeland Security (US Department of Justice 2002, US Department of Homeland Security 2005).
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
Summary of Data Sources In summary, because of its large sample size, (disaggregated down to the zip code and census tract), and its questions about the personal attributes of the foreign-born population, the US Census data are the best data choice when examining general immigration patterns. When needing more updated data, the ACS data may be the appropriate choice, as this data contain the same foreign-born data as does the census, collected at times yearly (depending on the size of the area you are studying). When needing the full range of the responses from the US Census or the ACS, the PUMS can be utilized. When looking at country of birth, for example, the PUMS always provides the country of birth (e.g., Somalia) and never just the region of birth (e.g., other East Africa), providing more detailed information. The INS data, too, provide immigration information, for each country of origin and dividing immigrants into different classes of admission (e.g., refugee, temporary worker), which are not available via the Census, ACS, or PUMS data. The INS data do not, though, include detailed foreign-born variables, and are now (since 9-11-01) only disaggregated down to the MSA. When needing just refugee numbers, the ORR data are the best option. These data are disaggregated down to the zip code level (though only disaggregated down to the MSA for public use), but include only include limited personal attributes. When studying refugee populations in greater detail (e.g., considering personal attributes of refugees), it is better to use INS or ORR data in combination with the Census, ACS, or PUMS data. Finally, the remaining data sources are best used when examining more specific characteristics of foreign-born populations – the CPS when examining labor market characteristics; the SIPP when examining the adaptation status of immigrants; and the NHIS when examining, for example, health care utilization patterns or when researching the residence duration of immigrant populations.
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved. African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
CHAPTER 2
Quantitative Analysis of the US Foreign Born
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
Geographic Characteristics of Immigrant Movements to US Urban Areas, 2000 Immigrants settling in the US have always concentrated in urban areas, and continue to do so. By 1990, Los Angeles had become the immigrant capital of the world with 2.9 million foreign-born residents; New York followed with 2.1 million immigrants (Rumbaut 1994). While immigrants continue to cluster in larger cities like these, beginning in the last quarter of the twentieth century, the realities of immigration have been seeping into the urban rung below large-sized cities and into the heartlands of the US (Clark 2003). More specifically, mid-sized MSAs, particularly those in the South and Midwest, have seen an influx of foreign-born populations in the last ten years. While the number of immigrants and resettlement resources within these smaller cities may be less, the impact on the local community may be as great or greater than on larger cities. Yet, there is virtually no systematic knowledge of these more recent movements. Thus, considering mid-sized, non-gateway MSAs will aid our understanding of the post-World War II impact of immigration on the US. In the next section, utilizing 2000 Census Bureau data (Table A.6 in App. A), as the census data are the most comprehensive data for studying broad immigration patterns, these movements are examined in more detail. First, aggregated census data are used and provide general US foreign-born demographics; then trends from all sending regions to the forty-nine largest MSAs in the 31
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
32
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States
US are explored (Table 2.1 displays these cities in order of total population). Examining clusters of immigrant groups within general regions of the US provides only one story, however. Taking the examination further, and using the disaggregated census data, smaller scale sending regions are also studied. In certain instances the census data are supplemented by outside sources to obtain a more accurate picture of the size of populations, particularly refugee populations, in certain locales. Table 2.1: Foreign-Born Population in Large and Mid-sized MSAs, 20009
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
MSA New York Los Angeles Chicago Washington San Francisco Philadelphia Boston Detroit Dallas Houston Atlanta Miami Seattle Phoenix Minneapolis Cleveland San Diego St. Louis Denver San Juan Tampa Pittsburgh Portland Cincinnati Sacramento Kansas City Milwaukee Orlando Indianapolis San Antonio Norfolk Las Vegas
Total Population 21,199,865 16,373,645 9,157,540 7,608,070 7,039,362 6,188,463 5,819,100 5,456,428 5,221,801 4,669,571 4,112,198 3,876,380 3,554,760 3,251,876 2,968,806 2,945,831 2,813,833 2,603,607 2,581,506 2,450,292 2,395,997 2,358,695 2,265,223 1,979,202 1,796,857 1,776,062 1,689,572 1,644,561 1,607,486 1,592,383 1,569,541 1,563,282
Foreign
% Foreign
Born 5,182,255 5,067,615 1,466,940 980,621 1,902,304 433,919 721,060 383,970 784,642 895,944 423,105 1,558,152 414,355 457,483 210,344 135,397 606,254 80,945 277,127 97,866 233,907 62,286 248,068 51,236 260,111 80,539 89,284 197,119 54,343 161,924 70,370 258,494
Born 24% 31% 16% 13% 27% 7% 12% 7% 15% 19% 10% 40% 12% 14% 7% 5% 22% 3% 11% 4% 10% 3% 11% 3% 14% 5% 5% 12% 3% 10% 4% 17%
9
Note: San Juan was removed from the 50 largest MSAs, as it is an outlier within the groups of MSAs studied and more ambiguous from the perspective of being a US MSA.
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
Quantitative Analysis of the US Foreign Born MSA Columbus Charlotte New Orleans Salt Lake City Greensboro Austin Nashville Providence Raleigh Hartford Buffalo Memphis West Palm Bch Jacksonville Rochester Grand Rapids Oklahoma City Louisville
Total Population 1,540,157 1,499,293 1,337,726 1,333,914 1,251,509 1,249,763 1,231,311 1,188,613 1,187,941 1,183,110 1,170,111 1,135,614 1,131,184 1,100,491 1,098,201 1,088,514 1,083,346 1,025,598
33
Foreign
% Foreign
Born 71,417 99,760 64,169 114,508 71,565 152,834 57,614 142,784 108,803 120,355 51,381 37,670 196,852 59,586 62,794 56,066 61,810 27,933
Born 5% 7% 5% 9% 6% 12% 5% 12% 9% 10% 4% 3% 17% 5% 6% 5% 6% 3%
Source: US Census Bureau, 2000
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
US Foreign-Born Demographics The 2000 US total foreign-born population of approximately 31 million (11% of the total population) was up from approximately 20 million (8% of the total population) in 1990. The distribution of the number of foreign-born in the specific locale is not a direct correlate of community population size. Indeed, the statistics provided in Table 2.2 appear to support the notion that immigrants are pulled less toward small cities and non-metropolitan areas than toward large, and to a lesser extent, mid-sized MSAs. The mid-sized MSAs within our sample, though, include 32% of the US population and 31% of the foreign-born. Table 2.2: US Total Population and Foreign-Born Distribution, 2000 Total Population Foreign Born Large and Mid-sized MSAs 58% 82% Small-sized MSAs 23% 13% Non-metro areas 19% 5% Note: Data collected by the US Census indicates that the total US population in 2000 was 281,421,906 and that the total foreign-born population in 2000 was 31,107,889. Source: US Census Bureau 2000
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
34
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States
Between 1850 and 2000, as discussed in previous sections, the profile of the US foreign-born changed significantly (table 2.3). The number of European foreign-born decreased steadily since 1910, while the numbers of foreign-born from Latin America and Asia increased dramatically, particularly after 1965, with the creation of the HartCellar Act (refer to section 2.3 for a definition of this Act). More specifically, between 1990 and 2000 the US has seen increases in foreign-born population from Latin America and Africa, and decreases in the foreign-born from Europe and North America. The number of Asian foreign-born has remained stable during this period. Foreignborn from Latin America in 2000 comprised 52% of all foreign-born in the US.
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
Table 2.3: Region of Birth of the Foreign-Born Population: 1850 to 1930 and 1960 to 2000 Region of Birth Reported Year
Europe
Asia
Africa
Oceania
Latin America
Northern America
2000 1990 1980 1970 1960 1930 1920 1910 1900 1890 1880 1870 1860 1850
15.7% 22.9% 39% 61.7% 75% 83% 85.7% 87.4% 86% 86.9% 86.2% 88.8% 92.1% 92.2%
26.2% 26.3% 19.3% 8.9% 5.1% 1.9% 1.7% 1.4% 1.2% 1.2% 1.6% 1.2% 0.9% 0.1%
2.6% 1.9% 1.5% 0.9% 0.4% 0.1% 0.1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
0.5% 0.5% 0.6% 0.4% 0.4% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1%
52% 44.3% 33.1% 19.4% 9.4% 5.6% 4.2% 2.1% 1.3% 1.2% 1.3% 1% 0.9% 0.9%
2.6% 4% 6.5% 8.7% 9.8% 9.2% 8.2% 9% 11.4% 10.6% 10.7% 8.9% 6% 6.7%
Note: Data for 1940 and 1950 are not included because data on the foreignborn population by country of birth in the census publications for these years are limited almost entirely to the white population. Source: Gibson and Lennon 1999
With regard to settlement locations, the largest percent of foreignborn in 2000 were found in the Washington, Miami, and Los Angeles MSAs. The MSAs with the largest percent increase of foreign-born between 1990 and 2000 varied depending on the region of origin of the
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
Quantitative Analysis of the US Foreign Born
35
foreign-born population.10 The largest percent increases of African foreign-born were found in Austin, Miami, Cleveland, San Francisco, and Minneapolis. The largest percent increases of foreign-born from the Americas were found in Chicago, Washington, Charlotte, Norfolk, and Tampa. The largest percent increases of foreign-born from Asia/Australia/Oceania were found in Jacksonville, Cincinnati, St. Louis, Columbus, Salt Lake City, Philadelphia, and San Antonio. And, finally, despite declining percentages of European foreign-born nationwide, the largest percent increases of foreign-born from Europe was found in Raleigh-Durham, Portland (Oregon), Las Vegas, Sacramento, and Louisville.
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
Distribution of the Foreign-Born from each Region as a Percent of the Total Population Table 2.4 presents the top quartile of the number of the foreign-born from each continental region as a percent of the total population in each large and mid-sized MSA. The overall US percentages are also included. The general patterns are as follows: The largest proportion of African foreign-born, although admittedly small, is found in the East and Midwest, with the highest percentages in Washington and Providence. The largest percentages from the Americas/Caribbean (including Mexico) are found in Miami and the Western MSAs, as well as in New York. The largest percentages of foreign-born from Asia/Australia/Oceania are found along the West Coast, with the highest percentages in San Francisco and Los Angeles. And, finally, the largest percentage of European foreign-born are found in the East and Midwest, the same areas where Europeans concentrated during the earliest immigrant flows, with the highest proportions being in New York and Providence. Many of the MSAs represented in Table 2.4 are large-sized (i.e., over 5.5 million), though mid-sized MSAs (e.g., Providence) are also present.
10
Larger changes are more likely in MSAs starting with a smaller base.
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
36
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States
Table 2.4: Percentage of Foreign-Born from Each World Region of the Total Population in Selected MSAs, 2000 Asia/ Americas/ Australia/ Europe Africa Caribbean Oceania Wash DC Providence Minn. Atlanta Boston New York Columbus Raleigh Houston Dallas Seattle San Diego US
1.4% 1% 1% 0.9% 0.8% 0.8% 0.7% 0.7% 0.6% 0.5% 0.5% 0.4% 0.3%
Miami LA Houston New York W. Palm Bch San Diego Las Vegas Phoenix Dallas San Fran. Austin San Antonio US
35.7% 19.6% 13.5% 12.2% 12.1% 11.9% 10.7% 10.5% 10.4% 9.5% 8.1% 8% 6%
San Fran. LA San Diego Sacramento Seattle New York Wash DC Houston Las Vegas Chicago Portland Boston US
14% 9.1% 7.1% 6.4% 6% 5.9% 4.8% 4.1% 3.9% 3.7% 3.5% 3.4% 3%
New York Providence Hartford Chicago Boston W. Palm Bch San Fran. Sacramento Tampa Miami Seattle Cleveland US
5.5% 4.8% 4.2% 4.1% 3.6% 3.5% 3.1% 2.7% 2.6% 2.6% 2.5% 2.4% 1.7%
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
Distribution of the Foreign-Born from each Region as a Percent of the Total Foreign-Born Population As may be seen in Table 2.5, the concentration of African foreign-born, while generally quite small is highest in the Midwest, with the highest proportions in Columbus and Minneapolis. High American/Caribbean foreign-born percentages are scattered throughout the US, with the highest numbers in Miami and along the West coast. Foreign-born from the Americas/Caribbean region outnumber, by far, all other groups of foreign-born in the US. Therefore, it is not surprising that they have located in a relatively large number and variety of MSAs. The percentages of foreign-born from Asia/Australia/Oceania are highest along the West Coast, including areas that are somewhat more contiguous to their areas of origin. The highest proportions are found in San Francisco and Seattle, though high foreign-born populations from these origins also are found in the Midwestern US. High European foreign-born percentages are concentrated in the Northeast and Midwest. The highest proportions are found in Cleveland and Pittsburgh.
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
Quantitative Analysis of the US Foreign Born
37
Table 2.5: Percentage of Foreign-Born from Each Region of the Total Foreign-Born Population in Selected MSAs Asia/ Americas/ Australia/ Europe Africa Caribbean Oceania Columbus Minn. Wash DC Providence Atlanta Nashville Raleigh Cincinnati Boston Ind. Charlotte Memphis US
15.6% 14.4% 10.9% 8.7% 8.7% 8.5% 7.3% 7% 6.5% 6.2% 6% 5.9% 2.8%
Miami San Antonio Phoenix Houston W.Palm Bch Dallas Austin Orlando Las Vegas LA Greensboro Denver US
88.9% 78.6% 74.5% 70.4% 69.4% 69.3% 65.8% 65.1% 64.5% 63.4% 63.4% 60.3% 54.4%
San Fran. Seattle Norfolk Columbus Detroit Sacramento. Minn. St. Louis Cincinnati Ok. City Phil. Memphis US
51.8% 51.7% 48% 45.1% 44.1% 44% 42.9% 39.7% 39.5% 38.3% 38.2% 37.4% 27%
Cleveland Pitts. Buffalo Rochester Hartford Providence St. Louis Detroit Cincinnati Phil. Milwaukee Boston US
52.6% 47.5% 44.7% 42% 41.6% 40.3% 35.8% 31.6% 31% 30.8% 30% 29.2% 15.8%
Note: Table 2.5 presents the top quartile of the number of the foreign-born in each region as a percent of the total foreign-born population for the large and mid-sized MSAs. The overall US percentages are also included. Source: US Census Bureau 2000. A majority of the MSAs presented in Table 2.5 are midsized, rather than larger MSAs.
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
African Foreign-Born: Columbus and Minneapolis Midwest MSAs are most likely to have a significant proportion of their foreign-born of African origin, and might be referred to as the “Africa group”. Columbus and Minneapolis have the largest percentages of African foreign-born per total foreign-born (Table 2.5). Additionally, a majority of the African foreign-born in both of these mid-sized MSAs are from East Africa. West Africans also settle in these MSAs, though in substantially smaller numbers. According to the Minnesota Department of Administration, Minnesota’s share of total US immigration in 2002 was 1.3%. But 7% of all African immigrants came to this state, including 35% of Somalis, 12% of Ethiopians, and 13.5% of Liberians (Ronningen 2004). Population estimates from 2003 suggest that Minneapolis-St. Paul has the nation’s largest concentration of Somali immigrants in the US, with approximately fifty thousand
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
38
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States
persons.11 Columbus is estimated to have the second largest concentration of Somali immigrants in the US at approximately thirty thousand persons (Associated Press 2002; El Nasser 2003). Columbus also is home to large African immigrant communities from Ethiopia, Nigeria, and Mauritania (Williams 2004). American/Caribbean Foreign-Born: Miami and San Antonio
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
The Western and Southern MSAs make up what one might call the “America group”. Miami and San Antonio have the largest percentage of their foreign-born being from the Americas/Caribbean (Table 2.5). A majority of these populations in Miami are from the Caribbean, while in San Antonio they are from Central America. The largest group in Miami is from Cuba, approximately 558,000. Latinos make up more than half of Miami’s two million people. Moreover, approximately 66% of these Latinos are Cuban (Dinnerstein and Reimers 1999). The largest foreign-born group in San Antonio is from Mexico, at approximately 113,000. It is clear that the various Latino representatives are closely linked with the distance from their home country. Asian/Australia/Oceania Columbus, and Detroit
Foreign-Born:
San
Francisco,
Seattle,
The “Asia group” is more dispersed, with large percentages in San Francisco, Seattle, Norfolk, Columbus, and Detroit (Table 2.5). As discussed previously, Chinese and Japanese populations began arriving in the West Coast of the US in the mid- and late-nineteenth century to provide labor for completing the transcontinental railroad and coal mining industries (Dinnerstein and Reimers 1999). Later, in the early 1900s, Filipinos arrived to work as sugar planters. Between the first and second World Wars, both San Francisco and Seattle emerged as regional centers where Asian immigrants provided an essential labor supply for agribusiness (Fujita-Rony 2003). Educational institutions 11
Note that the definition of immigrant here is not the same as the one that this paper uses (foreign-born populations). This author may define immigrants as individuals with a certain ancestry or ethnic origin (i.e., Italian, Jamaican, Korean, African America), possibly beyond the first generation.
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
Quantitative Analysis of the US Foreign Born
39
also attracted Asian populations in the early 1900s. Filipinos took advantage of the University of Washington, while San Francisco was a pivotal site of study for scholars from Chinese-American communities (Fujita-Rony 2003, Dinnerstein and Reimers 1999). Asian communities (e.g., Chinatowns) formed, and continue to thrive along the west coast. Large numbers of Asians continue to emigrate from Asia to these communities to join family and friends. Similarly, though at smaller scale, Columbus is where Honda’s North American operations were established in the late 1970s; and therefore has received a marked influx of East Asians. Ohio State University is a major attraction for Asians. The earliest Arab immigrants (while from southwest Asia, are admittedly different from other Asian immigrant groups settling in other cities) settled in the Northeastern states of the US; though they gradually migrated to the cities of Detroit, Los Angeles, and Houston. The largest group of foreign-born in Detroit from Asia/Australia/Oceania is from Western Asia and of Arabic origin. The 2000 census estimated that there were approximately thirty-one thousand foreign-born residing in Detroit from Iraq; two thousand from Israel; three thousand from Jordan; and seven thousand from Lebanon. Current day metropolitan Detroit has the largest population of Arab Americans in North America, approximately two hundred-fifty thousand (Hassoun 1999). European Foreign-Born: Cleveland and Pittsburgh The Midwest and East Coast MSAs have the bulk of the “Europe group”. Cleveland and Pittsburgh have the largest percentage of foreign-born per total foreign-born from Europe (Table 2.5). When examining these cities in more detail, it can be seen that the majority of this group in Cleveland is from Eastern Europe. In 2000, the total number of foreign-born from Eastern Europe in Cleveland was fortythree thousand. Large clusters of immigrants from Poland, Slovenia (the most in the US, at almost eighty thousand; Pozun 2001), Croatia, and Hungary have settled in Cleveland (Cizmic 1994; Smith 2002). Pittsburgh’s population is representative of all of the regions, with the largest proportions from Southern and Eastern Europe. As of 2000, there were approximately ninety-five hundred foreign-born from Southern Europe in Pittsburgh, of which eight thousand were from
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
40
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States
Italy. Moreover, there were approximately nine thousand foreign-born from Eastern Europe, of which two thousand were from Russia.
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
Foreign-Born Profiles of US Urban Areas The following section takes the previous analysis further and introduces a classification of MSAs based on the foreign-born profile of each. This provides an urban geography of the foreign-born, but also serves as a touchstone for examining resettlement programs. Again, the forty-nine continental MSAs in 2000 with population greater than one million were viewed, this time in terms of sixteen origin regions from the US Census of Population -- North, West, South, East Europe; East, South Central, Southeast, West Asia; East, Middle, North, South, West Africa; Caribbean; Central and South America (Table A.6 in app. A); major origin countries indicated).12 Observations encompass the full range of MSAs from Louisville at one million to New York at more than twenty-one million. Variables used in analyses are the percentage of an MSA’s foreign-born represented by each of the sixteen regions-of-origin, plus the percentage of MSA population that is foreign-born. On average, 10.6% of all MSA’s populations are foreign-born, but this ranges from 2.6% in Cincinnati, Louisville, and Pittsburgh to 40.2 % in Miami. The most dominant origin region is Central America, which primarily consists of Mexicans; this averages 29.1% and ranges from 1.7%of the foreign-born in Buffalo to 73.2% in San Antonio. The next most important origin is Southeast Asia, dominated by the Philippines and Vietnam; this averages 11.2% of the foreign-born and ranges from 1.0% in Miami to 29.8% in Norfolk. East Europe (dominated by Poland, Russia, Ukraine), East Asia (China), South Central Asia (India), and the Caribbean (dominated by Cuba, Dominican Republic, Jamaica, Haiti) fall at the 6-8% level.13 The 12
The need to know more about the urban geography of the foreign-born also is seen by others. Scott, Coomes, and Izyumov (2005), for example, examine more cities (298) but only for employment-based migrants and the top ten source-countries within that group. Also, their focus is on destination choice in terms of MSA characteristics that attract immigrants, rather than foreign-born profiles. 13
The US Census of Population includes Hong Kong and Taiwan with China.
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
Quantitative Analysis of the US Foreign Born
41
ranges on these are, for East Europe, from 1.2% in San Antonio to 31.0% in Cleveland; East Asia, from 0.9% in Miami to 19.1% in Seattle; South Central Asia, from 1.1% in Miami to 13.0% in Cincinnati; for the Caribbean, from 0.6% in San Francisco to 55.2% in Miami. In short, some MSAs are exceedingly low for most foreignborn groups but with high concentrations of particular groups, e.g., Miami; while a broader range of foreign-born are found in others, e.g., Cincinnati, Providence. Also relevant is the coefficient of variation, a ratio of the standard deviation to the mean. Values less than 0.67 (one standard deviation), indicate wide representation of the foreign-born group among MSAs; values greater than or equal to 0.67 indicate clumps of representation. Seven of the sixteen groups are below 0.67, nine above; but some are extreme. The latter include South Europe (1.4), West Asia (1.0), East Africa (1.2), Middle Africa (1.0), West Africa (1.0), Caribbean (1.5). In short, some foreign-born groups appear only in some places, not others; other groups are more ubiquitous. In summary, the urban geography of the foreign-born is highly complex. To address this, generalized MSA profiles are derived, employing, as noted, the percentage of an MSA’s foreign-born that is represented by each of the sixteen regions-of-origin, and the percentage of MSA population that is foreign-born. Subjecting these to principal components analysis yielded five dimensions accounting for 75% of data set variance. SPSS’s Quick Cluster algorithm was then used to group MSAs on the basis of their principal component scores. The result was six clusters, which are further grouped into four profiles that serve as a reference for the remainder of this paper (see fig 2.1a-2.1d). Profile I pertains to urban areas that have been prominent over a long time span; are located primarily in the American Manufacturing Belt; have a low percentage of foreign-born; were the target of preWWII immigration from Europe, especially South and East Europe; were an early focus of resettlement agencies such as the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society (HIAS); and subsequently received large immigrant flows through the resulting social networks. This profile encompasses three MSA clusters – Cleveland-Detroit; Providence; and Boston-Buffalo-Hartford-Jacksonville-Louisville-NorfolkPhiladelphia-Pittsburgh-Rochester-St Louis-Seattle (Figure 2.1). Distinctions between the three clusters are as follows.
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
42
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
Figure 2.1: MSA Profile I
Detroit has the largest Arab-American population in North America (Hassoun 1999), and 17.5% of its foreign-born are West Asians, a group originally recruited for automobile industry employment (Seikaly 1999). Cleveland also has a high proportion of West Asians, 5.1% of its foreign-born, but it is dominated by East Europeans 31%. Building on a strong base from immigration in the early twentieth century, there were large influxes after WWII related to that war, to the 1956 Hungarian Revolution, and to the breakup of Yugoslavia (Papp 1981, Smith 2002). Providence contains a strong South European component, largely Portuguese, initially recruited by the whaling industry in the late-1800s and early twentieth century (State of Rhode Island General Assembly nd). Likewise strong is West Africa, which includes Cape Verdeans, also recruited for whaling, and Liberians who came as refugees in the late twentieth century (Corkery 2003; Smith 2003).14 14
Cape Verde became independent from Portugal in 1975, and most Cape Verdeans have both African and Portuguese ancestry (Central Intelligence Agency 2005).
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
Quantitative Analysis of the US Foreign Born
43
The largest cluster – Boston, Buffalo, Hartford, Jacksonville, Louisville, Norfolk, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Rochester, St Louis, Seattle – is similar to Cleveland-Detroit and Providence, but lacks a strong representation of West Asians and/or Portuguese.
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
Figure 2.2: MSA Profile II
Profile II pertains to urban areas, which experienced a marked inflow of Caribbean and South American immigrants beginning in the 1960s. Nationalities include Cubans, Dominicans, and Haitians, oftenfleeing poverty and political oppression. Agencies played an important role in resettlement. Profile II – represented by Miami, New York, Orlando, Tampa, West Palm Beach (Figure 2.2) – also has a high percentage of foreign-born. In addition, Profile II is differentiated by a lack of East Asians, Southeast Asians, and South Central Asians. Proximity of these MSAs to the Caribbean and South America is an obvious factor. It is interesting indeed that immigration from Central America takes a different route than that from the Caribbean, reflecting overland accessibility across the US-Mexico border, compared to the proximity of Florida when crossing the Caribbean – leading to different destination choices and different MSA profiles.
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
44
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
Figure 2.3: MSA Profile III
Profile III encompasses urban areas associated with high levels of Central American, primarily Mexican, immigrants. These flows strengthened over time and became notable initially in the 1960s. But their roots date to earlier labor movements focused on agriculture, such as the Bracero Program and illegal crossings (Hancock 1959), and to corporate recruitment efforts. Between 1900 and 1930 more than one million Mexicans entered the US (Meier and Ribera 1993). Among these, forty-five thousand went to Colorado, most were recruited to work as laborers; in the early 1900s Mexicans were recruited as railroad laborers; during World War I (WWI) they were recruited for Chicago industries (e.g., steel mills, packing houses, railroads) to replace American workers in the military; and in 1919 Mexicans were brought into these same industries to replace Americans on picket lines (Broadbent 1941; Grossman 2004; Portes and Bach 1985). This theme is represented by twenty-one MSAs -- Austin, Chicago, Dallas, Denver, Grand Rapids, Greensboro, Houston, Kansas City, Las Vegas, Los Angeles, Memphis, Milwaukee, New Orleans, Oklahoma City, Phoenix, Portland, Sacramento, Salt Lake City, San Antonio, San Diego, San Francisco (fig 2.3). These cities are among the twenty-six highest MSAs when ordered by the percentage of their population from
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
Quantitative Analysis of the US Foreign Born
45
Central America (Mexico).15 Further, no principal component stands out for this group, suggesting a set of MSAs where Central AmericansMexicans are mixed with a breadth of other regions-of-origin and thus permeate US society in a way that other groups do not.
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
Figure 2.4: MSA Profile IV
Profile IV pertains to urban areas that have become immigrant destinations more recently, since the 1980s, often are the target of current-day refugee resettlement programs, and often have major Asian business establishments and/or strong universities. South Central Asian, East Asian, and African immigrants are notable. This profile is represented by nine MSAs – Atlanta, Charlotte, Cincinnati, Columbus, Indianapolis, Minneapolis, Nashville, Raleigh, Washington (Figure
15
Among the top twenty-six MSAs in terms of Central American foreign-born, only Charlotte, Raleigh, Atlanta, Nashville, and Indianapolis (in that order) are not in Profile III, but all these appear in Profile IV, indicating a symbiosis between them.
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
46
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
2.4). As mentioned previously, Columbus, for example, is where Honda’s North American operations were established in the late 1970s; it received a marked influx of East Africans; and Ohio State University is a major attraction for Asians. Similarly, Nissan’s operations in Nashville were established in 1983; Toyota’s operations in Lexington, not overly distant from Cincinnati, in 1988; and these occurrences were followed by “a very substantial wave of ... Japanese automotive supplier firms” creating a “transplant corridor” (Mair, Florida, and Kenney 1988: 357, 361). Nashville and Cincinnati also have been a target of refugee resettlement programs. That Profile IV MSAs, except for Cincinnati, also appear as New Latino Destinations (Suro and Singer 2002), indicates an affinity with Profile III and emergence of these MSAs as significant destinations for new immigrants in their own right. For Profile IV, furthermore, the African portion of the foreignborn is higher than for any other profile. Findings reported in this section are important given our lack of information about variation in the foreign-born profiles of US MSAs. To embellish this, consider general differences among the profiles. ● Era of immigration: This falls out as Pre-WWII, Early Twentieth Century (Profile I); post-1960s (Profiles II and III), and post1980s (Profile IV). ● Origin areas of immigrants: This differentiates Europe, especially South and East Europe (Profile I), Caribbean and South America (Profile II), Central America, largely Mexico (Profile III), and South Central Asia, East Asia, Africa (Profile IV). ● Destination region of immigrants: This distinguishes the American Manufacturing Belt (Profile I), Florida (Profile II), West of the Mississippi, particularly the Great Plains and West (Profile III), and East of the Mississippi, particularly the Midwest and Southeast (Profile IV). ● Place characteristics that draw immigrants: This falls out as industrial centers and related employment opportunities (Profile I), accessibility and contiguity (Profile II), accessibility and contiguity initially combined with intervention programs to recruit labor for agriculture and industry (Profile III), and refugee resettlement programs, foreign direct investment, and educational opportunities (Profile IV). ● Larger MSAs differ noticeably in their foreign-born profiles, contrary to expectations and implicit assumptions of earlier research.
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
Quantitative Analysis of the US Foreign Born
47
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
Chicago, Dallas, Los Angeles, and San Francisco share a strong Central American/Mexican component; Miami and New York are characterized by Caribbean and South American immigrants; Boston, Detroit, and Philadelphia by Europeans; and Washington is characterized by South Central Asian, African, and East Asian immigrants. ● Labor procurement or refugee resettlement intermediaries have a significant role in all profiles, historically in III, post-WWII in II and IV and I. Since the inception of the United States, there have been continued influxes of foreign-born, though the origin countries and size of these groups have varied depending on political, social, and economic conditions around the world. More recently, between 1990 and 2000, the US has seen increases in foreign-born from Latin America and Africa; meanwhile other group flows have remained the same (Asia) or decreased significantly (Europe). While the overall largest percentages of foreign-born are found in traditional gateways – Washington D.C., Miami, and Los Angeles – beginning in the last quarter of the twentieth century, the realities of immigration have been seeping into the urban rung below large-sized cities and into the heartlands of the US. Taking this analysis a step further, utilizing principal components analysis and SPSS’s quick cluster algorithm, MSAs were divided into six clusters, and then four profiles. This analysis again illustrates how the geography of foreign-born is dependent on the country of origin, but also notes that the urban geography of the foreign-born is more complex than this. In fact, MSAs are differentiated by the following: 1) era of immigration, 2) immigrant origins, 3) US regions represented in each profile, and 4) place characteristics that draw migrants. With this four-profile classification as a backdrop, it is important to turn again to the role of resettlement agencies, in the migration process. They have been largely neglected in understanding the geography of immigration. This is done, first, through the analysis of ORR data (US Department of Health and Human Services 1998, 1999, 2001a, 2002a, 2003a, 2006). After the introduction of the conceptual framework (Chapter Three) and research design (Chapter Four), this is then also done through the analyses of interviews done with refugees, agency representatives, among others (chapters five through ten). These analyses demonstrate that VOLAGs play a major role in creating settlement patterns, and the urban geography of the foreign-born.
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
48
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States
Geographic Characteristics of Refugee Movements to and Within the US When considering total numbers of refugees resettled in US states (Figure 2.5), the pattern of refugee resettlement mimics the resettlement patterns of the foreign-born in general; highest receiving states being California, Florida and New York (See also Table 2.7). Things look different, though, when one considers the refugee arrivals from 19832004 out of the total foreign-born (Figure 2.6 and Table 2.6). One can see that there are many states receiving refugees that have not historically received large numbers of foreign-born – e.g., North Dakota, South Dakota, and Iowa.16
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
Figure 2.5: African Refugee Arrivals by State: 1983-2004
Source: US Department of Health and Human Services 2006 16
Recent refugees resettling in North Dakota are natives of Bosnia, Sudan, Somalia, and Liberia. Most refugees coming to North Dakota are joining family members who are established in the community (http://www.lssnd.org/htmls/newamerican.asp). South Dakota has received refugees from Sudan, while Iowa has received refugees from Southeast Asia.
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
Quantitative Analysis of the US Foreign Born
49
Table 2.6: Refugee Arrivals by State, 1983-2004
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
State Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware Dist of Columbia Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisconsin
Wyoming
Foreignborn, 2004
Refugee Arrivals, 1983-2004
Refugee Arrivals, 1983-2004/ Foreign-born, 2004
110,364 38,794 811,296 96,331 9,394,801 436,365 393,180 61,212 67,868 3,041,243 720,845 226,996 80,249 1,647,939 236,298 88,386 127,366 96,747 127,046 38,362 596,406 849,594 601,393 302,484 36,465 178,756 14,430 83,129 414,215 61,837 1,598,619 171,381 3,913,211 537,552 15,242 390,383 150,137 323,266 562,021 127,551 158,334 12,605 218,438 3,308,737 164,463 23,425 686,234 685,124 14,163 219,378
4,503 847 34,332 1,873 426,740 20,033 19,940 727 12,460 256,608 48,799 4,046 8,681 73,421 8,186 18,930 10,106 18,024 12,657 4,892 29,986 57,390 42,688 53,398 1,477 33,182 970 10,269 9,581 6,359 37,205 6,956 246,942 19,751 6,335 29,835 7,001 33,861 56,982 6,855 2,272 5,150 20,242 99,703 16,588 4,505 37,204 86,856 401 21,855
4% 2% 4% 2% 5% 5% 5% 1% 18% 8% 7% 2% 11% 4% 3% 21% 8% 19% 10% 13% 5% 7% 7% 18% 4% 19% 7% 12% 2% 10% 2% 4% 6% 4% 42% 8% 5% 10% 10% 5% 1% 41% 9% 3% 10% 19% 5% 13% 3% 10%
14,776
156
1%
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
50
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States
Figure 2.6: Refugee Arrivals (1983-2004) / Total Foreign-Born 2004
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
Source: American Community Survey 2004, US Department of Health and Human Services 2006 When considering the total flows of African refugees to the US between 1983 and 2004, as with the total refugee population, Florida and California have received the largest numbers of African refugees (Figure 2.5 and Table 2.7). But, if one considers more recent flows, the pattern looks slightly different. Minnesota and Ohio have received the largest number of Africans refugees between the years 2000-2004. Large flows of Somalis have arrived in the US during this period; Minneapolis, Minnesota is home to the largest Somali community in the US; while Columbus, Ohio is home to the second largest Somali community in the US. For a summary of African refugees’ arrivals between 1983-2004 and 2000-2004 to US states, see Table 2.7. When looking at the make-up of African refugee arrivals to the US between 1946 and 2004, the largest numbers have come from Ethiopia (43,302 arrivals), Somalia (29,278 arrivals), Sudan (12,125 arrivals), Egypt (9,982), and Liberia (8,857) (US Department of Homeland Security 2005).
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
Quantitative Analysis of the US Foreign Born
51
Table 2.7: African Refugee Arrivals by State, 1983-2004
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
State Minnesota California Florida Texas New York Georgia Virginia Pennsylvania Arizona Washington Maryland Massachusetts Illinois Ohio Tennessee Missouri Michigan New Jersey North Carolina Utah Kentucky Colorado Oregon Iowa DC South Dakota Wisconsin Rhode Island New Hamp. Connecticut Nebraska Nevada Maine North Dakota Indiana Louisiana Idaho Kansas Vermont New Mexico Alabama South Carolina Mississippi Oklahoma Delaware Alaska Arkansas Hawaii Montana West Virginia Wyoming
African Refugee Arrivals: 1983-2000 18,124 20,888 21,369 14,815 12,371 10,095 8,414 6,684 6,054 7,366 5,888 4,944 4,632 3,843 4,105 3,994 3,422 3,281 2,738 2,305 2,443 2,297 2,694 2,196 2,648 2,038 2,181 1,360 1,118 1,236 1,055 1,433 1,229 1,256 913 852 576 546 353 302 254 193 157 194 131 42 29 27 17 11 2
African Refugee Arrivals: 2000-2004 10,230 3,876 1,425 6,572 5,792 4,696 3,507 3,740 3,560 2,234 2,695 2,249 2,445 2,679 1,930 1,432 1,648 1,650 1,160 1,503 1,081 1,211 772 1,045 372 749 467 909 1,033 769 909 401 587 541 539 430 358 250 344 110 144 97 122 73 106 0 7 0 0 1 0
Total African Refugee Arrivals: 1983 - 2004 28,354 24,764 22,794 21,387 18,163 14,791 11,921 10,424 9,614 9,600 8,583 7,193 7,077 6,522 6,035 5,426 5,070 4,931 3,898 3,808 3,524 3,508 3,466 3,241 3,020 2,787 2,648 2,269 2,151 2,005 1,964 1,834 1,816 1,797 1,452 1,282 934 796 697 412 398 290 279 267 237 42 36 27 17 12 2
Source: US Department of Health and Human Services 2006
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
52
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States
The geography of African refugees in the US does vary by country of origin (Table 2.8).17 Refugees from Ethiopia and Somalia have been resettled to similar locations, with large clusters in Georgia (Atlanta, Decatur), Minnesota (Minneapolis-St. Paul), Texas (Dallas, Houston), and California (San Diego, Los Angeles, San Jose, Oakland, San Francisco). These statistics, though, do not take into consideration secondary migration (Figure 2.7, Table 2.9). When looking at ORR state data from 2000 to 2005, one sees the largest flows of refugee secondary migrants of all origins (this data is not available for African refugees only) have been to Minnesota and Ohio (USDHHS 2006); the first and second largest Somali communities in the US are in Minneapolis-St. Paul and Columbus respectively, which cannot be seen from the ORR state data. Further, there have been significant flows out of California, Texas, and Georgia, top primary resettlement states for Ethiopians and Somalis. The primary resettlement patterns of Liberians and Sudanese differ from their east African counterparts (Table 2.8). The Sudanese are the most uniformly distributed, with resettlement locations in the south/southwest – Texas (Dallas, Houston), Arizona (Phoenix, Tucson), California (San Diego, San Jose), Tennessee (Nashville, Memphis), Georgia (Atlanta, Decatur), Virginia (Richmond, Alexandria, Arlington); in addition to Iowa (Des Moines) and New York (Buffalo, Syracuse, Rochester, New York, Utica). The largest numbers of Liberians have been resettled to the East Coast – New York (New York, Rochester, Buffalo, Syracuse), Pennsylvania (Philadelphia), New Jersey (Trenton, Newark), Rhode Island (Providence), Maryland (Baltimore), and Washington D.C. – in addition to Minnesota (Minneapolis-St. Paul) and Texas (Houston, Dallas); almost entirely absent from the interior of the US. When one looks at this data in its entirety, and as demonstrated by the previous figures and tables, some states are characterized by one or 17
Note that there are discrepancies between the US Department of Homeland Security and the US Department of Health and Human Services Data – e.g., according to the US Department of Homeland Security, twenty-nine thousand Somalis arrived in the US between 1946 and 2004; according to the Department of Health and Human Services, forty thousand Somali refugees arrived between 1983 and 2004.
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
Quantitative Analysis of the US Foreign Born
53
two origin groups, while a few states – California, Minnesota, Texas, Georgia, and New York – have concentrations of refugees from all four groups (Ethiopia, Somalia, Liberia, and Sudan) (these are also states where significant secondary flows are originating from). Clearly, primary refugee resettlement, in addition to the secondary migration of refugees, is changing the geography of the foreign-born in the US. Analysis of ORR data provides evidence that refugee populations are being resettled to locations that have not historically received foreign-born – e.g., North Dakota, South Dakota, Iowa, Vermont, Kentucky, and Missouri. Analysis of more recent flows of African refugees to the US shows that they are being resettled, and moving on their own as secondary migrants, to states like Minnesota and Ohio, and not to the historically more common states, like California and Florida. Further the initial resettlement locations of African refugees in the US do vary by country of origin. Refugees from Ethiopia and Somalia have been resettled to similar locations, with large clusters in California, Texas, Minnesota, and Georgia. The patterns of Liberians and Sudanese differ from their east African counterparts. The Sudanese have been placed in the south/southwest – Texas, Arizona, Tennessee, Georgia – and New York. The largest numbers of Liberians have been resettled in the east coast – New York, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Maryland – and in Minnesota. Finally, when considering the more recent secondary migration of refugees in the US, in general, states like Minnesota and Ohio are receiving large flows, while the more traditional receiving states like California, New York, Texas, Georgia, New Jersey, and Virginia are actually losing more secondary migrants than they are gaining.
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
Source: US Department of Health and Human Services 2006
Figure 2.7: Secondary Migration: Top Refugee Flows, 2000-2005
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
54 African Refugee Resettlement in the United States
Quantitative Analysis of the US Foreign Born
55
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
Table 2.8: Resettlement of Ethiopian, Somali, Sudanese, and Liberian Refugees to US States, 1946-2004 State Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware Wash DC Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hamp. New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Puerto Rico Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming
Ethiopia 71 0 778 7 7,056 617 167 11 1,300 717 2,054 3 18 1,272 142 176 42 61 55 147 1,686 644 443 3,036 13 1,032 9 15 420 10 430 12 1,517 201 106 651 33 448 859 0 17 10 640 342 3,613 48 7 1,052 1,841 2 66 2
Somalia 3 0 1,208 0 5,407 373 227 1 757 151 3,980 0 44 689 96 317 202 575 179 369 886 1,634 702 6,431 32 1,233 0 15 93 50 117 46 1,914 628 409 1,278 1 502 544 0 0 0 191 1,375 2,809 612 13 3,724 1,906 1 282 0
Sudan 66 0 1,221 0 909 413 226 3 212 490 944 0 79 635 56 944 150 265 177 434 277 392 654 666 99 479 0 487 174 386 127 34 1,057 349 448 151 27 47 591 0 0 9 836 1,102 2,887 757 58 875 463 0 72 0
Liberia 13 0 239 0 396 47 58 83 104 169 555 0 31 390 83 134 10 25 30 12 999 512 137 1,863 1 145 1 19 7 74 1,249 1 2,939 320 33 168 41 62 2,575 0 1,026 14 14 170 784 31 0 437 63 8 43 0
Source: US Department of Health and Human Services 2006
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
56
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States
Table 2.9: Secondary Migration: Top Refugee Flows, 2000-2005
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
From State California California Oregon Georgia District of Columbia Georgia California Texas Texas Virginia Virginia New York New York Texas New Jersey New York Virginia New Jersey Washington Texas New York Ohio Minnesota Utah Illinois Georgia Texas California New York New Jersey California Tennessee District of Columbia
To State Minnesota Washington Washington Ohio Maryland Minnesota Ohio Minnesota California Maryland Minnesota Minnesota Florida Florida Texas Ohio Ohio Florida California Ohio California Minnesota Ohio Ohio Minnesota Maine Washington Georgia Georgia Pennsylvania Florida Ohio Virginia
Count 1,168 774 705 540 489 469 458 442 428 387 371 369 362 355 336 334 326 323 307 277 272 268 262 257 242 236 227 223 212 211 207 201 200
Source: US Department of Health and Human Services 2006
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
Quantitative Analysis of the US Foreign Born
57
Table 2.10: Secondary Migration: In/Out-migration, 2000-2005
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
To State Minnesota Ohio Washington California Florida Georgia Texas Maryland Maine Pennsylvania Iowa Missouri Idaho Michigan Virginia S. Dakota Connecticut Illinois N. Carolina Mass. Wisconsin Colorado Arizona Utah Nebraska Tennessee Kentucky New York Nevada N. Dakota Kansas DC Rhode Island Oregon Louisiana New Jersey Oklahoma New Mexico New Hamp. Delaware Arkansas Vermont Alaska S. Carolina Mississippi Hawaii Indiana Alabama Montana
Count 5,790 4,519 3,593 3,303 2,942 2,210 1,377 1,240 1,200 1,106 941 890 790 750 726 618 577 573 544 536 530 511 504 394 326 312 299 277 214 192 178 172 162 157 119 87 81 75 72 62 54 39 35 34 30 14 10 9 6
% Total In-mig. 15% 12% 9% 8% 8% 6% 4% 3% 3% 3% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
From State California New York Texas Georgia New Jersey Virginia Florida Illinois Oregon Minnesota Arizona Pennsylvania Washington Wash DC Mass. Maryland Michigan Tennessee Utah Ohio Missouri Louisiana N. Carolina Kentucky N. Dakota Iowa Colorado Connecticut Indiana Idaho Wisconsin Nevada S. Dakota New Hamp. Mississippi New Mexico Nebraska Hawaii Kansas Rhode Island Alabama Oklahoma Arkansas Vermont S. Carolina Maine Delaware Montana Alaska W. Virginia Wyoming
Count 4,113 3,248 3,068 2,242 2,058 1,876 1,662 1,338 1,228 1,221 1,195 1,163 1,087 1,023 979 914 862 855 723 694 586 584 581 516 494 475 390 361 290 289 268 262 257 243 240 239 217 190 178 172 136 134 126 98 93 92 42 33 25 16 4
% Total Out-mig. 10% 8% 8% 6% 5% 5% 4% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
Source: US Department of Health and Human Services 2006
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved. African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
CHAPTER 3
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
The Role of Intermediaries in US Immigration
There are many known mechanisms by which immigrants have arrived in the US and in particular cities. Most have been written about extensively, and were discussed in the preceding chapters (e.g., pull forces being employment opportunities, and networks are formed; push forces being economic and political turmoil). By contrast, the role of the numerous immigrant intermediaries, particularly resettlement programs, which have expanded dramatically in the half-century since World War II, have been given little attention. This chapter will consider the impact of immigrant intermediaries on the dispersal of immigrants across the US. First, the processes of immigration throughout US history and the role of intermediaries within these processes are considered. Then, more specifically, the impact of employers and headhunters, in addition to smugglers, also known as “coyotes,” on the settlement patterns of immigrants will be explored. The history of resettlement agencies and their role in the resettlement of refugees to the US will be discussed, and the current process of refugee resettlement is described. Finally, the adaptation of refugees in the US, with particular attention to the role of resettlement agencies in this process, will be considered. The Immigrant Process: From Castle Garden to Present Day In 1808 New York built the first immigration depot, Castle Garden. Castle Garden’s primary purpose was to protect newcomers from crooks, prostitutes, and swindlers. In the 1880s, during the great migration, the federal government took over the regulation of 59
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
60
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States
immigration from the states. Castle Garden’s successor, Ellis Island, was opened on January 1, 1892. Prior to its establishment, New York had been America’s chief port of entry, receiving over 70 percent of the immigrants. This remained true during Ellis Island’s busiest years of operation from 1892 to 1924. But while New York continued to receive a majority of the immigration flow, other American ports that had steamships and railroad connections (e.g., Boston, Philadelphia, Baltimore) were also busy. After 1910, immigrants, particularly Chinese immigrants, were processed in San Francisco on Angel Island. To avoid interrogations resulting from the 1882 Exclusion Act, a small number of Chinese sailed to New Orleans. Other ports that received a small stream of new immigrants included Key West, Florida; Galveston, Texas; Seattle, Washington; and New Bedford, Massachusetts. Immigrants also simply crossed the border from Canada and Mexico into the US during this time. Following the great migration (1880 to WWI), a variety of port of entry cities emerged. In November of 1954, Ellis Island was closed (Chermayeff, Wasserman, and Shapiro 1991). Today most immigrants coming to New York enter through the gates of John F. Kennedy Airport (Foner 2000). Immigrant intermediaries played a role during the times of Castle Garden and Ellis Island. By the late nineteenth century the majority of immigrants headed to the industrial northern states. At the same time, local chambers of commerce, immigrant aid societies, and railroad companies tried, often unsuccessfully, to attract newcomers to the less populated regions of the Midwest, West, and South. The railroad companies were the most aggressive. They sold land in distant areas as incentives to extend the railroad into every corner of the nation. And, to boost their sales, they printed brochures in many languages and distributed them throughout Europe. Furthermore, in railroad stations and seaports, colorful posters of, for example, Nebraska, Texas, or California were hung. One such sign referred to Minnesota as “one immense empire of mineral, timbered and agricultural wealth, waiting only to be occupied” (Chermayeff, Wasserman, and Shapiro 1991, 51). Czechs were pulled to Nebraska as a result of a steady stream of advertisements like these. Many companies employed overseas agents who aggressively sold land abroad. Prospective buyers were given rebates on their tickets and free room and board while they inspected property for sale (Chermayeff, Wasserman, and Shapiro, 1991). The number and ways by which immigrants enter the US has increased drastically since the days of Ellis Island. Immigrants of
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
.
The Role of Intermediaries in US Immigration
61
different categories (e.g., family sponsored, employment based, or refugees) are processed differently. In some cases, such as with family sponsored admissions, destination locations may be known; in other instances, for example with refugees, this may or may not be the case. Intermediaries, particularly recruiters when considering employment based admissions, and government and voluntary agencies when considering refugees, continue to impact destination decisions. Voluntary agencies have particularly been a dominant force with recent refugee migrations. Recruiters and Smugglers
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
As mentioned in previous chapters, labor immigration to the US occurs in response to demand for labor, and labor demand is mediated by employers’ preferences and hiring practices. Research has explored the long tradition of US employers or their agents, recruiting foreign labor – both legally and illegally. In fact, when introducing institutional theory18, Massey et al. (1993) assert: Once international migration has begun, private institutions and voluntary organizations arise to satisfy the demand created by an imbalance between the large number of people who seek entry into capital-rich countries and the limited number of immigrant visas these countries typically offer. This imbalance, and the barriers that core countries erect to keep people out, create a lucrative economic niche for employers and institutions dedicated to promoting international movement for profit, yielding a black market in migration (450). This black market consists of the following: smuggling across borders, underground transport to internal destinations, labor contracting between employers and migrants, counterfeit documents and visas, arranged marriages between migrants and legal residents or citizens of 18
Institutional Theory certainly existed prior to Massey et. al’s use here (for a history of institutional theory see Scott 2001). Massey et al., though, apply institutional theory to immigration.
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
62
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States
the destination country; and lodging, credit, or other assistance in countries of destination. Moreover, as these processes and institutions become recognized and gain support, the international movement of migrants becomes more and more institutionalized and independent of the factors that originally caused it (Massey et al. 1993). While international migration has been facilitated through the existence of social networks, paramount among these social networks has been the role of labor recruitment agents (Tyner 2000). The presence of these intermediaries can be found throughout history, as mentioned previously. Other historical examples include the movement of indentured servants to British North America, the Atlantic slave trade, the transatlantic migrations of the nineteenth century, and the immigration of Japanese, Chinese, and Philippine laborers into the US (Tinker 1974; Galenson 1981; Moriyama 1985; Northrup 1995). Tyner (2000) found that current global circuits of labor operate within three stages: 1) contract procurement, 2) labor recruitment, and 3) worker deployment; he illustrates this process using the case study of Manila. Portes and Bach (1985) assert that labor migration from Mexico, later attributed to wage differences between the Mexico and the US, was initiated by recruiters sent by railroad companies. They point to reports which note that in 1916 five or six weekly trains full of Mexican workers hired by agents were being run from Laredo. Other reports note that competition in El Paso during this time became so competitive that recruiters pounced on immigrants as they crossed the border. Portes and Bach (1985) further note that some scholars argue that the push-pull theories do not explain migration flows accurately and that differentials of advantage between sending and receiving countries determine only the potentiality for migration. It is deliberate labor recruitment that is paramount, as the push-pull forces could not be actualized without the activities of labor recruiters. Massey et al. (1994) found that, more recently, in the US, Mexican immigrant farm workers have not been hired by growers themselves, but by labor contractors, nearly all of whom are Mexican. These contractors pay significantly lower wages, offer few benefits, and provide less security compared to workers hired directly by growers. It is through these contractors that growers are able to secure access to workers to fill the lowest-skilled jobs for the lowest pay. The contractors that are hired by the growers are usually legal immigrants, but the labor contractors may hire a workforce that is entirely made up
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
The Role of Intermediaries in US Immigration
63
of illegal immigrants. Therefore, it is the contractors that absorb the risk of possible sanctions. Abella (2004) also notes that profit-seeking intermediaries have become significant players in the global labor market and that the growing involvement of firms and individuals in labor recruitment is probably more responsible than any other factor for determining immigration patterns. Moreover, he notes that private firms serve as recruitment intermediaries for 80 to 90 percent of the labor migrants from Asia. He further examines how recruitment fees are determined – e.g. with the consideration of the recruitment market, wage differentials. Recruiting efforts of employers have extended to distant geographical locations. For example, in Storm Lake, Iowa, companypaid agents search aggressively for employees in southern border-states and hire recruiters who find workers in Mexico, workers who are willing to work in dangerous meatpacking plants for low wages (Hedges and Hawkins 1996; Cooper 1997). The John H. Daniel Co. in Knoxville sends recruiters to Turkey to hunt down master tailors needed in order for the firm to stay in business (Phillips 2005). Furthermore, Johnson-Webb (2002) explored the attitudes and recruiting behavior of employers in the Triangle region of North Carolina – an area where there has been a chronic labor shortage since the 1980s – and found that employers’ labor recruitment practices have played a role in the migration and settlement of Hispanics to this area over the last 20 years. Employers utilize social networks (word-ofmouth recruiting) of their Hispanic employees to recruit new workers. This stemmed from the belief that native-born workers were inferior employees when compared to the Hispanic workers. Additional recruiting methods consisted of the use of newspaper, radio, and television advertising in local and distant areas and the use of employment intermediaries – formal labor recruiters, unemployment offices, and temporary agencies. Moreover, the North Carolina Growers’ Association and the Migrant and Seasonal Farm Workers Association used the H-2A visa program, which enabled employers to legally bring in foreign workers (in this case Mexicans, Haitians, and Puerto Ricans) to do a particular job if they could establish that there were no indigenous workers to do that type of work. Currently, illegal migrants employ a variety of methods to make it across the border. For example, as touched upon earlier, smugglers,
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
64
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
also known as “coyotes” aid illegal migrants (Conover 1987). In fact, it is believed that there may be several hundred “coyotes” in the Arizona area; and, in recent years, these smuggling organizations have changed and become more organized and sophisticated. At times, these organizations (a.k.a. gangs) are known to exploit illegal migrants and use them as “mules” to carry drugs over the border, as payment for their passage (The Economist 2005). Other illegal migrants have been known to mail-order brides, buy forged green cards, work for lowpaying employers and sleep in eight-to-fifteen-person apartments (Marshall 2002). Each year an estimated 800,000 to 900,000 human beings are being bought, sold or forced across the world’s borders; and hundreds of thousands of these humans are teenage girls and others as young as five who fall victim to the sex trade. This trade has infiltrated the US and, as a result, in April of 2003 President Bush signed into law the “Prosecutorial Remedies and Other Tools to End the Exploitation of Children Today Act of 2003” (also known as the “PROTECT Act”). This act states that any person who enters the US, as well as any US national that travels abroad, for the purposes of engaging in sexual acts with children can be prosecuted in the US for such acts (Enactment of PROTECT Act against Sex Tourism 2004). National and Local Resettlement Agencies Because refugees lack networks and ties in host countries, they may end up in a destination region simply by accident of government policy or the intervention of sponsor agencies and groups (Newbold 2002). Groups in charge of settling new refugees may determine where refugees initially settle, rather than refugees themselves choosing where to live (Zavodny 1999). In fact, financial assistance from these sources is an important component of the early experiences of refugees that is absent among other immigrants. Voluntary agencies, often referred to as VOLAGs, have long played a major role in US immigration, acting as intermediaries between government and individuals (Winkler 1981). Particularly since World War II, there has been a proliferation of humanitarian agencies; and some of the larger voluntary agencies have promoted the development of smaller, more specialized agencies which they fund through their own budgets (Harrell-Bond 1985). The oldest international migration and refugee resettlement agency in the US is the
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
The Role of Intermediaries in US Immigration
65
Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society (HIAS) (Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society 2004). It was founded in 1881 in New York City, in response to the pogroms of Russia and Eastern Europe. Many Jews from this area were relocated to the Midwest, originally with a rural farming focus, but increasingly to urban areas. HIAS later played a major role in the rescue and relocation of Jewish survivors of the Holocaust, and of Jews from Morocco, Ethiopia, Egypt, and communist Eastern Europe. Most of the Jewish African populations were resettled in Israel (Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society 2004), while Eastern European and Russian Jews have been resettled both there and in the US – particularly in the Midwest and East Coast, where communities from earlier resettlement efforts, and spontaneous migrations, had already formed (Morawska 1995). The six largest cities in 1999 that participated in HIAS’ program to resettle refugees from the former Soviet Union were New York City, San Francisco, Chicago, Los Angeles, Philadelphia, and Boston (USDHHS 2002b). Other religious organizations followed the example of HIAS. In 1934 the Protestant Churches created the American Committee for Christian German Refugees, and in 1936 the National Catholic Welfare Conference established the Catholic Committee for Refugee Victims of Nazi Persecution. This Catholic organization also aided immigrants at Ellis Island and along the Mexican border where, in the 1930s, refugees were escaping religious persecution in Mexico. The American Fund for Czechoslovak Relief, the Tolstoy Foundation, and the Polish Immigration and Refugee Committee were created following WWII. Moreover, in 1975 the American Council for Nationalities Service, and in 1979 the World Relief Organization (a branch of the Evangelical Churches) and Young Men’s Christian Association (YMCA) became involved in refugee resettlement. While many of these agencies gave assistance to refugees of their denomination that were escaping persecution and resettling in the US, they ultimately opened the doors to their services to all denominations (Wright 1981). Currently, most refugee resettlement in the US is handled by ten voluntary agencies (for a list of these agencies, see Table 3.1). In recent years, the United States Catholic Conference has resettled the most cases ((by a large margin) of all VOLAGs; followed by World Relief Corporation and Lutheran Immigrant and Refugee Services (see Figure 3.1). Since September 11, 2001, refugee arrivals to the US have decreased dramatically (See Figure 3.2). Further, HIAS’ numbers are
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
66
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States
drastically lower in 2002 when compared to 1997. This is due to the fact that the numbers of Jewish refugees from Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union needing resettlement has decreased dramatically – these flows have even halted to some cities in the US that had historically received large flows.
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
Table 3.1: Ten National Voluntary Agencies Church World Service (CWS) Ethiopian Community Development Council (ECDC) Episcopal Migration Ministries (EMM) Hebrew Immigration Aid Society (HIAS) International Rescue Committee (IRC) Immigration and Refugee Services (IRSA) Lutheran Immigration on Refugees Services (LIRS) United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) World Relief Corporation (WR) State of Iowa, Bureau of Refugee Services Source: USDHHS 2003c National voluntary agencies, such as those just described, have, over the years, played a major role in the dispersal of refugees throughout the US. Newbold (2002) has even alluded to a purposeful goal of these agencies being to disperse refugee populations so as to speed adaptation to American society. This is more evident with certain refugee populations. Eastern Europeans were resettled in Eastern cities where they had disembarked – New York, Philadelphia, and Baltimore. Polish populations favored the newer cities of industrializing America – Buffalo, Detroit, Milwaukee, Chicago, and Cleveland, in that order, and hence moved there (Golab 1977). Immigrants from Hungary and Czechoslovakia also migrated inland to these cities (Ward 1971). Poles, Slovaks, Croatians, Slovenes, and Ukrainians found their way to Pennsylvania than any other state. This influx coincided with Pennsylvania’s industrialization. This included the consolidation and technological advances in coal mining, the beginning of iron and steel production, the demand for railroads; and the manufacturing of glass, cement, and chemicals (Golab 1977). Additionally, Pittsburgh was one of 100 US cities linked to a national and international network to resettle Jewish displaced persons after WWII (Burstin 1989).
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
The Role of Intermediaries in US Immigration
67
Figure 3.1: Refugees Resettled by National Voluntary Agencies World Relief Corporation United States Catholic Conference Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Services Iowa Department of Human Services International Rescue Committee, Inc. Immigration and Refugee Services of America Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society Ethiopian Community Development Council Episcopal Migration Ministries Church World Services
0
20,000
40,000
60,000
80,000
Source: USDHHS 1997, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003 Figure 3.2: Number of Refugees Resettled by National Agencies Number of Resettlement Cases
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
100,000
80,000
60,000
40,000
20,000
0
1997
1999
2000
2001
2002
Year
Source: USDHHS 1997, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
68
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States
During the Cuban Revolution, the Catholic Welfare Bureau, Children’s Service Bureau, Jewish Family and Children’s Service, and the United HIAS services resettled Cubans in the Miami/Dade County. Later, the National Catholic Welfare Conference, Church World Service, International Rescue Committee, and United HIAS Services were asked to help direct the resettlement of Cubans outside the Miami area. As discussed previously, these groups were then settled in Chicago, New Orleans, Los Angeles, New York City; and cities in New Jersey (Thomas 1967). The Indochinese resettlement process was also a responsibility of the voluntary agencies, beginning at about 1975. They operated as autonomous entities and used networks throughout the US to find sponsors for these refugee populations. States west of the Mississippi received the highest refugee densities, as did the four states where the transit camps were located – California, Pennsylvania, Arkansas, and Florida. Nineteen percent of all refugees were settled in California (Desbarats 1985). Refugees did not only settle in large cities; smaller cities also received refugees. The planning for Cambodian placement in the 1980s was organized by the Cambodian Cluster Project or Khmer Guided Placement (KGP) Project. Federal officials working with voluntary agencies identified 12 favorable sites in 9 states.19 These states were prepared for the arrival of the refugees by obtaining the cooperation of local officials and identifying housing and employment opportunities. The refugee groups were generally resettled in mediumsized cities without existing large refugee populations. Approximately 8,000 Cambodian refugees were resettled in this manner. As a result of this project, Cambodian refugees are more dispersed than any other refugee groups in the US (Gordon 1996). The Diocese of Green Bay, an agency associated with the US Conference of Catholic Bishops, has resettled approximately 5,400 refugees since 1975, mainly from Vietnam and Laos, but also from Russia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Ukraine, Somalia, Cuba, and Bosnia. Agencies in Lowell (Cambodian MAA of Greater Lowell) and Fall River (Cambodian Community of Greater Fall River, Inc.) Massachusetts have received grants to resettle Cambodian refugees in 19
Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Massachusetts, New York, Ohio, Texas, and Virginia.
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
The Role of Intermediaries in US Immigration
69
their cities, while agencies in Milwaukee, Wisconsin (Lao Family Community Inc.) and in the Twin Cities of Minneapolis-St. Paul, Minnesota (Association for the Advancement of Hmong Women) have received grants to aid with the resettlement of Laotian and Hmong refugees (USDHHS 2001b). With regard to African refugees, major urban centers of Atlanta, Nashville, Louisville, Columbus, Minneapolis, and Memphis have served as the primary Somali refugee settlement areas. Smaller cities such as Portland (Maine) also have received Somali refugees. In fact, between 1982 and 2000, the Catholic Charities Maine office of Refugee/Immigrant Services resettled approximately 315 Somalis in the greater Portland area (Nadeau 2003). Ethiopian refugees have also been sponsored by the United Methodist Church in Northern California, congregations in Reno, and resettlement agencies in San Francisco, Seattle, and San Jose – leading to an influx to these locales (McSpadden 1987). The ability of agencies to resettle refugees is dependent on their being able to find local sponsors, money, and human assistance for resettlement efforts. They also receive support from the US State Department through their Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR). After WWII, the State Department began to aid with resettlement by giving voluntary agencies small per capita reception and placement grants for the refugees’ immediate needs (Zucker 1983). In considering what national agencies to allocate monies to, the State Department considers the following objectives (US Department of State 2005), among others: • Can the agency provide a language-appropriate reception and placement program? • Is the location where the agency is located conducive to the attainment of economic self-sufficiency for the refugee populations? • Does the agency maximize the use of private resources and programs? • Does the agency coordinate with ethnic and other communitybased organizations or through consultation with state and local public agencies involved in assisting refugees? • Can the agency provide all required services (e.g., case management, medical treatment, language training, and housing placement) within the appropriate time frame?
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
70
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States
Where refugees are resettled in the US depends on what type of refugee they are. For example, family-reunification cases are cases in which refugees are reunited with relatives already residing in the US. This was the case for many refugees that arrived in the US following WWII – the large influx of refugees following WWII largely mimicked settlement patterns of earlier European migrants; likewise for more recent immigrants from Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union. If a refugee/refugee groups have few or no precursors, also known as free cases, geographic patterns are often altered as agencies target nontraditional immigrant destinations. This applies to the many post-1960s refugees from Asia, Africa, and the Caribbean. Further, as time passes, secondary migration might occur, especially among refugees who are not represented by earlier migrants, not in culturally-comfortable communities, and/or not near other family or community members. Salient examples include the Hmong (Miyares 1998), Vietnamese (Airriess and Clawson 2000; Hardwick and Meacham 2005; Wood 1997), Somalis (Nadeau 2003), and Cubans (Boswell 1985; Thomas 1967). In this instance, well-studied mechanisms come into play such as wage/job opportunity differentials, the cost of living, and social networks, e.g., the location of friends and family members. To demonstrate the impact of resettlement programs on the geography of the foreign-born, consider Figure 3.3. This maps a refugee resettlement index computed as the percentage of refugees for the years 1983 through 2004 for each US state divided by the percentage of the foreign-born for the same state in 1980, which is similar to the familiar location quotient. Hence, if refugee resettlement mirrored existing settlements of the foreign-born, the latter pattern would be maintained, but if refugee resettlement proportions did not follow foreign-born proportions, the pattern would be altered, albeit at a pace dependent on the ratio of refugees to other categories of foreignborn. The year 1980 is used as the base year because it represents the situation that the refugee data would be impacting.
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
71
Source: Office of Refugee Resettlement, 1983 - 2005; US Census 1980, 2000
Figure 3.3: Refugee Resettlement Index by State, Based on Refugee Resettlement 1983 -2001
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
The Role of Intermediaries in US Immigration
The map in Figure 3.3 shows four categories. Those capped by 1.0 indicates that a designated state is, at best, matching its foreign-born proportion; 1.75 indicates 75 percent more resettlement than expected by its level of foreign-born; 3.0 indicates 300 percent more. Also available are data pertaining to allocations given to states by the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) which assists refugees in obtaining economic and social self-sufficiency, largely by funding programs run
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2009. ProQuest Ebook Central,
72
African Refugee Resettlement in the United States
Copyright © 2009. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.
by voluntary, non-governmental agencies (VOLAGs, Wright 1981).20 Figure 3.3 also shows this in terms of dollars per foreign-born, an indicator of the (disproportional) economic impact/consequences of resettlement for 1997-2005 can be calculated. The largest impacts are on states not traditionally thought of as immigrant destinations – South Dakota (RRI = 3.8; $ = 53), Georgia (3.8; 15), Kentucky (3.7; 18), Minnesota (3.5; 38), North Dakota (3.0; 136), Missouri (2.8; 33), Iowa (2.8; 31), Washington (2.6, 29); and the lowest impact states include ones that are traditional destinations and highly studied – California (RRI = 0.9; $ =