Disparities in access to opportunities across neighborhoods types: a case study from the Los Angeles region
- 24 Downloads
This study investigates the disparities in access to various types of opportunities in ethnic neighborhoods, as compared to wealthy white neighborhoods (the reference). Focusing on the heterogeneity within ethnic neighborhoods, I distinguish between different types of neighborhoods based on their racial/ethnic makeup and median household income. The Los Angeles region provides an interesting empirical setting because of its racial diversity and its auto-centric spatial structure. The results show that the various types of ethnic neighborhoods differ not only in spatial patterns within the region but also in terms of relative access to opportunities. Nevertheless, I find that all types of the low-income ethnic neighborhoods have higher levels of access to jobs and non-work opportunities, except for access to parks/open spaces, than do the reference neighborhoods. This holds true regardless of accessibility measures and travel modes. However, the relative access to opportunities for middle-to-high-income ethnic neighborhoods varies by accessibility measure. Considering that each accessibility measure has its own set of meanings and planning implications, diverse measures should be taken into account for policy interventions. The present study also adds further evidence of modal disparities, which are much greater than spatial disparities, in access to opportunities.
KeywordsAccessibility Neighborhood disparities Modal disparities Ethnic neighborhoods Non-work opportunities
The author would like to thank Dr. Genevieve Giuliano for her constructive feedback and support. Valuable comments from Dr. Marlon Boarnet and Dr. Manuel Pastor are very much appreciated. The author would like to thank Dr. Horner and four anonymous reviewers for their valuable suggestions. Thanks to the Southern California Association of Governments for sharing data. The author also thanks participants at the 2016 ACSP annual meeting and the 2017 AAG annual meeting for helpful comments. All errors and omissions are the responsibility of the author.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The author states that there is no conflict of interest.
- Boarnet, M.G., Giuliano, G., Hou, Y., Shin, E.J.: Transportation and Access to Employment in City Heights. USC Center for Social Innovation. https://socialinnovation.usc.edu/files/2016/11/Baornet-and-Giuliano-Final-Reportformatted-.pdf (2014). Accessed 1 June 2017
- Easley, J.: Spatial mismatch beyond black and white: levels and determinants of job access among Asian and Hispanic subpopulations. Urb. Stud. (2017). https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098017696254
- Frey, W.H.: The New Metro Minority Map: Regional Shifts in Hispanics, Asians, and Blacks from Census 2010. Brookings Institute, Washington (2011)Google Scholar
- Kenyon, S.: Reshaping patterns of mobility and exclusion? The impact of virtual mobility upon accessibility, mobility and social exclusion. In: Sheller, M., Urry, J. (eds.) Mobile Technologies of the City, pp. 102–120. Routledge, London (2006)Google Scholar
- Logan, J.R., Stults, B.J.: The Persistence of Segregation in the Metropolis: New Findings from the 2010 Census. Russell Sage Foundation and Brown University, New York (2011)Google Scholar
- Schuetz, J., Giuliano, G., Shin, E. J.: Does zoning help or hinder transit-oriented (re) development? Urb. Stud. (2017). https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098017700575
- Scott, D., Horner, M.: Examining the role of urban form in shaping people’s accessibility to opportunities: an exploratory spatial data analysis. J. Transp. Land Use 1(2), 89–119 (2008)Google Scholar
- Zhou, M.: Chinatown: The Socioeconomic Potential of an Urban Enclave. Temple University Press, Philadelphia (1992)Google Scholar