Is Social Mobility Spatial? Characteristics of Immigrant Metros and Second Generation Outcomes: 1940-1970 and 1970-2000.

Research on immigrant and second generation outcomes has often examined their locations, following ideas that geographic dispersion facilitates social mobility, and that characteristics of the ethnic environment enable or constrain progress. I contend that second generation socioeconomic outcomes depend in part on the location choices and characteristics of a previous immigrant generation. Further, I suggest that this relationship reflects the changing geography of immigrants and labour markets, rather than geographically unfolding assimilation. Using the 1940, 1970, and 2000 Integrated Public Use Microdata Series files from the US Census, I regress second and 1.5 generation wage and educational outcomes in 1970 and 2000 on metro-area characteristics of a previous generation (1940 and 1970, respectively). Current labour market and second generation characteristics are included as controls and to facilitate interpretation. Characteristics of a previous immigrant generation's location were more important for second generation outcomes in the 1940-1970 period, while current place characteristics become more significant by 2000. There is evidence of selection operating through the positive intergenerational effects of places where immigrants' educational levels were high a generation ago. Metro-level immigrant concentration and manufacturing employment also have generally positive effects, although variations across generations and by nationality suggest their significance for social mobility is inadequately understood. The historical immigrant geographies of the US, and the ways in which metro labour market conditions intersect with immigrants' locational choices, both within and between generations, are thus a critical piece of the economic and spatial assimilation puzzle.