OP 301HJOP
Database
This is the content currently stored in the post and postmeta tables.
object(Timber\Post)#3874 (44) {
["ImageClass"]=>
string(12) "Timber\Image"
["PostClass"]=>
string(11) "Timber\Post"
["TermClass"]=>
string(11) "Timber\Term"
["object_type"]=>
string(4) "post"
["custom"]=>
array(5) {
["_wp_attached_file"]=>
string(14) "OP_301HJOP.pdf"
["wpmf_size"]=>
string(6) "198286"
["wpmf_filetype"]=>
string(3) "pdf"
["wpmf_order"]=>
string(1) "0"
["searchwp_content"]=>
string(16714) "__Occasional Papers__ The Demography of California Immigrants Hans Johnson Paper based on testimony before the Little Hoover Commission Hearing on Immigrant Integration March 22, 2001 Public Policy Institute of California Preface This paper documents a briefing given to the Little Hoover Commission to better inform the Commission about the demographic and socioeconomic characteristics of immigrants in California. The paper begins with a brief summary of the presentation and then contains copies of the Powerpoint slides used in the briefing. The research presented here is part of a much larger body of ongoing work on California demography and on immigrants and immigration that is being conducted by the Public Policy Institute of California. In addition to the Little Hoover Commission, this work should be of interest to others such as the California Department of Finance, the Employment Development Department, and others interested in California's large and growing immigrant population. This briefing and Occasional Paper were prepared before 2000 Census data were available. Although the data presented in this paper are drawn from many sources, the author is solely responsible for the accuracy and content of this document. -i- Summary of Presentation Demographic Context The population of California is among the most diverse and complex in the world. No other developed region the size of California has undergone such rapid and tremendous population growth over the past several decades. As recently as 1950, California was home to only 10 million people, or about one out of every 15 United States residents. By 2000, California's population had more than tripled to almost 34 million people. Today, one out of every eight United States residents is a Californian. The California Department of Finance projects that by the year 2030 over 50 million people will reside in California. California’s population growth is unique and noteworthy, but equally remarkable is the nature and composition of that growth. As recently as 1970, almost 80 percent of the state's residents were non-Hispanic white. By 1998, that number had dropped to 52 percent, with Hispanics then comprising 30 percent of the state's population, Asians 11 percent, and African Americans 7 percent. Thus, in 1998, the minority population reached a point of near parity with the majority population. Indeed, the California Department of Finance projects that shortly after the turn of the century, no race/ethnic group will constitute a majority of the state's population. The 2000 Census might find that this has already occurred. If current patterns of immigration and fertility rates persist, by the year 2025 Hispanics will represent the single largest ethnic group in the state. Over the past few decades, much if not most of California’s population growth and increasing diversity can be attributed to large increases in immigration. To understand California’s population, it is essential to understand its large immigrant population. Demographic Characteristics of California’s Immigrants California’s immigrant population is large, diverse, and increasing rapidly, growing from just over 1 million in 1950 to over 8 million by 1997. California has not only the greatest number of immigrants of any state, it has more than twice as many as the next leading state (New York, with 3.6 million immigrants in 1997). The share of California’s population that consists of immigrants grew from 8.5 percent in 1960 to 25 percent in 1997. In the entire United States, immigrants comprised only 9.7 percent of the population in 1997. California’s immigrants are diverse, coming to the state from dozens of countries. In 1990, the state was home to at least 10,000 immigrants from each of 66 different countries. The largest single country of origin of immigrants to California is Mexico, yielding five times as many immigrants as the next leading country of origin, the Philippines. The Philippines, in turn, is the country of origin of twice as many immigrants as the next leading countries: El Salvador and Vietnam. Although immigrants in California are concentrated in the state’s largest urban areas, particularly Los Angeles, many live in other areas of the state, including rural areas. The presence of sizable numbers of immigrants throughout the state is in direct contrast to geographic distributions in other states. For example, in New York, immigrants are concentrated in the New York City metropolitan area, with very small populations in the rest of the state; in Illinois, the vast majority of immigrants live in the Chicago area. -1- Most immigrants in California are not citizens of the United States. In 1990 in California, only 43 percent of the adults who had lived in the United States at least five years had naturalized. Naturalization rates vary tremendously by country of origin, with immigrants from Italy, Ireland, Germany, Hong Kong, and the Philippines all having naturalization rates in excess of 70 percent (in 1990), and immigrants from Nicaragua, Mexico, Cambodia, Guatemala, Laos, and El Salvador all having naturalization rates of less than 30 percent. Since 1990, naturalization rates have risen substantially for Mexican immigrants in California. This increase can be attributed to INS efforts to encourage citizenship, amnesty which legalized the status of many formerly unauthorized immigrants, and a response to Proposition 187, which sought to deny social services to illegal immigrants. Socioeconomic Characteristics of California’s Immigrants Immigrants in California tend to be less educated and to have lower incomes than other residents of the state. However, a substantial proportion are college graduates, and labor force participation rates tend to be quite high. Many of the socioeconomic measures vary greatly by country of origin. Proficiency in English varies tremendously by generation, with first generation immigrants tending to have low rates of proficiency and second generation U.S born descendants of immigrants having high levels of proficiency. In general, immigrants from Asia, Canada, and Europe have relatively high levels of education and income. Southeast Asians are a notable exception. One of the fastest growing groups of immigrants in California in the 1980s, most Southeast Asians came to the United States as refugees of the Vietnam War. They have among the lowest levels of educational attainment and among the lowest incomes of any immigrant group in California. For example, in 1990 only about 5 percent of immigrants from Laos and Cambodia had graduated from college, compared to over 60 percent of immigrants from Taiwan and India. Immigrants from Latin America also tend to be poorly educated and to earn low wages. Still, their labor force participation rates are quite high. Indeed, the working poor in California are likely to be immigrants from Latin America. About 90 percent of male immigrants ages 25 to 54 from Latin America are in the labor force. Despite their high levels of labor force participation and employment, over 25 percent of Mexican immigrants lived at or below the poverty level in 1990. Conclusion To understand the opportunities and challenges facing immigrants in California, it is first necessary to understand that they are not a monolithic group. They originate from a diverse set of countries and come to the United States with a diverse set of skills. The geographic spread of immigrants to almost every part of California suggests that the successful integration of immigrants is not a localized issue but a statewide concern. In this testimony, I present an array of statistics and measures that illustrate the diversity of immigrants in the state and point out some of the challenges to their successful integration. The substantial population of immigrants in California means that the future of immigrants and their descendants will largely determine the future of California. -2- The Demography of California’s Immigrants Hans Johnson Public Policy Institute of California PPPIICC 1 Outline • The California Context • Demographic Characteristics • Socioeconomic Characteristics PPPIIC 2 -3- California Has Experienced Tremendous Population Growth 35 30 Population in millions 25 20 15 10 5 0 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, California Department of Finance PPPIIC 3 California’s Growth is Unique for a Developed Region Comparisons of Population Change, 1950 = 100 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 Mexico California Rest of U.S. Japan Germany 1950 1954 1958 1962 1966 1970 1974 1978 1982 1986 1990 1994 1998 PPPIIC 4 -4- Thousands Source of Population Growth Has Changed Components of Population Change 900 800 Net Migration Natural Increase 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 -100 1995 PPPIIC 5 1940 1945 1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 Annual net flow in thousands 19901111111111111999999999999966655788767586042748951137 Immigration Now More Important Than Domestic Migration 600 Domestic 500 International 400 300 200 100 0 -200 -300 -400 111999999936 Source: California Department of Finance, unofficial estimates to 1980; Public Policy Institute of California, 1980-1993; DOF 1993-1999, with CB for international migration PPPIIC 6 -5- Hispanic and Asian Populations Have Grown Rapidly Population in millions White Hispanic Asian/Other African American 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 1970 1980 1990 2000 Source: California Department of Finance PPPIIC 7 Population in millions Projections for California Diverge Widely Total Population Projections for California 70 65 60 55 50 45 40 35 30 25 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 UCLA CCSCE High CB Preferred DOF 98 CCSCE Medium BEA CCSCE Low CB Alternative PPPIIC 8 -6- Population in millions Projections Agree That Latino Population Growth Will Be Rapid Projected Change in Population, 1995-2025 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 -2 -4 White -6 Latino Asian and Pacific Islander Black DOF CB Preferred CB Alternative PPPIIC 9 Percent Hispanics Will Become Single Largest Ethnic Group 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 2000 2010 2020 2030 American Indian Black Asian and Pacific Islander Hispanic White 2040 PPPIIC 10 -7- Outline • The California Context • Demographic Characteristics • Socioeconomic Characteristics PPPIIC 11 Rapid Increase in the Foreign-Born Population 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 1997 PPPIIC 12 -8- Millions Percent Growth Rates by Decade U.S. born 120 Foreign born 100 80 60 40 20 0 1900s 1910s 1920s 1940s 1950s 1960s 1970s 1980s 1990s -20 1930s PPPIIC 13 Percent immigrant Share of Immigrants Exceeds Levels Seen in Early 1900s 25 California U.S. 20 15 10 5 0 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 1997 PPPIIC 14 -9- Countries of Origin Have Changed Percent 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Before 19501950-591960-641965-691970-741975-791980-841985-90 Source: 1990 census Africa Europe/Canada Middle East Latin America Asia PPPIIC 15 Eight in Ten Immigrants Are Asian or Hispanic White 18% Other 2% Asian 28% Hispanic 52% Source: 1990 census - 10 - PPPIIC 16 Percent Asian Countries of Origin Have Changed 100 90 SE Asia 80 India 70 Korea Japan 60 Philippines 50 China 40 30 20 10 0 Before 1950 1950-59 1960-64 1965-69 1970-74 1975-79 11998805--9840 Source: 1990 census PPPIIC 17 Mexico Remains Leading Origin for Latin American Immigrants 100 90 Other 80 Caribbean 70 South America 60 Central America 50 Mexico 40 30 20 10 0 Percent Befo1111111r9999999e7758866150000559-------5986677504494909 Source: 1990 census - 11 - PPPIIC 18 Mexico is the Leading Source of Immigrants Source: 1990 Census Mexico..……… 2,524,000 Philippines……. 525,000 El Salvador……. 282,240 Vietnam………... 276,000 China…………… 216,000 Korea…………… 179,000 Canada…………. 165,000 Germany……….. 156,000 United Kingdom.. 150,000 Guatemala……….137,000 PPPIIC 19 Immigrants Come to California from Dozens of Countries Countries of origin for places with at least 10,000 immigrants in California Mexico Korea Japan Hong Kong Italy Lebanon Indonesia Romania Yugoslavia Belize Australia Austria Switzerland Philippines Canada Iran Laos Australia Colombia Israel Egypt Panama Chile Iraq Turkey Jamaica El Salvador Germany Taiwan Cambodia Thailand Poland Argentina Hungry Pakistan Syria Czech. Burma Azores Vietnam England India Cuba Peru Portugal Honduras Ecuador Spain Greece Denmark Costa Rica China Guatemala USSR Nicaragua France Netherlands Scotland Ireland Fiji Brazil Afghan. Sweden Source: 1990 Census PPPIIC 20 - 12 - Population by Immigrant Generation, 1997 Percent 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 U.S. 1st Generation 2nd Generation 3rd+ Generation California PPPIIC 21 Percent Immigrants are Concentrated in Young Adult Age Groups 14 All immigrants 12 U.S. born 10 8 6 4 2 0 0-4 5-9 10- 15- 20- 25- 30- 35- 40- 45- 50- 55- 60- 65+ 14 19 24 29 34 39 44 49 54 59 64 Age PPPIIC 22 - 13 - Percent Percentage of Immigrants Naturalized 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 PPPIIC 23 Living Arrangements of Non-Citizen Immigrants in California, 1990 Texas UniteCadlifStoartneisa New York Illinois Florida New Jersey With child citizens 33% Alone or with other non-citizens 36% With adult citizens 31% PPPIIC 24 - 14 - Regional Definitions North Coast Bay Area Mountains Upper Sacramento Valley Sacramento Metro Foothills Central Coast Inland Empire South Coast San Diego PPPIIC 25 Most Regions Receive Substantial Flows of Immigrants 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Rate per thousand residents UpperSSSaaanccrSrJIiaaoenClramSemrNaqeoneaontMSnurunritdtattoFBanohnholuoaEynoVVCDCttCMmiSaaaootlhoAlepeiillrtiaaalagrnrelteesssesstytooetya - 15 - PPPIIC 26 Outline • The California Context • Demographic Characteristics • Socioeconomic Characteristics – Education – Labor force – Poverty PPPIIC 27 Percentage of College Graduates Among Adult Immigrants 70 60 Females 50 Males 40 30 20 10 0 Percent UniteEGdlNCuiGSKaacietCaVarlinmeaMrvegbCeanmtLmaCdohxaagnaaiiduloddnauocinobaayasraamoma PHhoilniTgpJAUaKpifaiKSIroirwpnorScaaaeenRansnnag India - 16 - PPPIIC 28 H.S. Completion Rates of Asians, Ages 25-29, by Ethnicity & Immigrant Status Percent U.S. born 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Immigrants 1980 1990 JaCFpihlaiinnpieenssoee AsiJSaaCFEKinphliiIoaArnpnniseeideniasasaoneenn PPPIIC 29 H.S. Completion Rates of Hispanics, Ages 25-29, by Subgroup & Immigrant Status Percent U.S. born 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 100 Immigrants 1980 1990 CariSbobuetahn Mexican & CariSbobuetahn Mexican & Central Central PPPIIC 30 - 17 - English Language Ability, Asians, Age 5 and Older, 1990 Percent U.S. born 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Immigrants Speak English Not well Not at all JaCphainneessee Filipino JaCphianneessee IFnilAdiisipaiannno Korean SE Asian PPPIIC 31 English Language Ability, Hispanics, Age 5 and Older, 1990 60 U.S. born 50 Immigrants Speak English Not well Not at all Percent 40 30 20 10 0 AamnMCedreeixncSitarcoaanultnh Caribbean AaCmnaMCerdireeixbncSitbarcoeaanulatnnh PPPIIC 32 - 18 - Immigrants as Share of Labor Force by Industry, 1990 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Percent ForestryA,grFiicsuhlitnurge, FiCnAoHaTdOPerntmrMamaclhiaoCmtnefRen,noiushreeIunsnspaftinlSSssoartciseerrcaErrtaoTuMPtttuisirrvvainiiuuttcnaaoiroaticcabilinldtno,neeninoceensscg,gen, PPPIIC 33 Labor Force Participation Rates, Hispanics, Ages 25-54, by Subgroup/Immigrant Status Men 100 U.S. Born % 80 60 40 Mexican Central/ Caribbean Women South American 100 % 80 60 40 Mexican Central/ Caribbean South American Immigrants 1980 1990 Mexican Central/ Caribbean South American Mexican Central/ Caribbean South American PPPIIC 34 - 19 - Labor Force Participation Rates, Asians, Ages 25-54, by Ethnicity/Immigrant Status Men U.S. Born 100 80 % 60 Women 40 ChineJsaepaneseFilipino 100 Immigrants ChinesJeapanesFeilipAinsioan IndiaKnoreaSnE Asian 1980 1990 80 % 60 40 ChinesJeapaneseFilipino ChinesJeapaneseFilipAinsoian IndianKoreanSE Asian PPPIIC 35 Percent Poverty Rates for Individuals in Selected Hispanic Groups Immigrants 25 1969 1979 U.S. Born 1989 20 15 10 5 0 Mexican Central/ Caribbean South American Mexican Central/ Caribbean South American PPPIIC 36 - 20 - Percent Poverty Rates for Individuals in Selected Asian Groups 50 Immigrants 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0ChinesJeapanese Filipino AIsnidanian KoreaSnE Asian 1969 1979 1989 U.S. Born ChineseJapaneseFilipino PPPIIC 37 Summary • Immigrants are a large and growing population in California • California’s immigrants are diverse • California’s future depends on successful integration of immigrants and their children PPPIIC 38 - 21 -"
}
["___content":protected]=>
string(106) "
"
["_permalink":protected]=>
string(84) "https://www.ppic.org/publication/the-demography-of-california-immigrants/op_301hjop/"
["_next":protected]=>
array(0) {
}
["_prev":protected]=>
array(0) {
}
["_css_class":protected]=>
NULL
["id"]=>
int(8191)
["ID"]=>
int(8191)
["post_author"]=>
string(1) "1"
["post_content"]=>
string(0) ""
["post_date"]=>
string(19) "2017-05-20 02:35:36"
["post_excerpt"]=>
string(0) ""
["post_parent"]=>
int(3329)
["post_status"]=>
string(7) "inherit"
["post_title"]=>
string(10) "OP 301HJOP"
["post_type"]=>
string(10) "attachment"
["slug"]=>
string(10) "op_301hjop"
["__type":protected]=>
NULL
["_wp_attached_file"]=>
string(14) "OP_301HJOP.pdf"
["wpmf_size"]=>
string(6) "198286"
["wpmf_filetype"]=>
string(3) "pdf"
["wpmf_order"]=>
string(1) "0"
["searchwp_content"]=>
string(16714) "__Occasional Papers__ The Demography of California Immigrants Hans Johnson Paper based on testimony before the Little Hoover Commission Hearing on Immigrant Integration March 22, 2001 Public Policy Institute of California Preface This paper documents a briefing given to the Little Hoover Commission to better inform the Commission about the demographic and socioeconomic characteristics of immigrants in California. The paper begins with a brief summary of the presentation and then contains copies of the Powerpoint slides used in the briefing. The research presented here is part of a much larger body of ongoing work on California demography and on immigrants and immigration that is being conducted by the Public Policy Institute of California. In addition to the Little Hoover Commission, this work should be of interest to others such as the California Department of Finance, the Employment Development Department, and others interested in California's large and growing immigrant population. This briefing and Occasional Paper were prepared before 2000 Census data were available. Although the data presented in this paper are drawn from many sources, the author is solely responsible for the accuracy and content of this document. -i- Summary of Presentation Demographic Context The population of California is among the most diverse and complex in the world. No other developed region the size of California has undergone such rapid and tremendous population growth over the past several decades. As recently as 1950, California was home to only 10 million people, or about one out of every 15 United States residents. By 2000, California's population had more than tripled to almost 34 million people. Today, one out of every eight United States residents is a Californian. The California Department of Finance projects that by the year 2030 over 50 million people will reside in California. California’s population growth is unique and noteworthy, but equally remarkable is the nature and composition of that growth. As recently as 1970, almost 80 percent of the state's residents were non-Hispanic white. By 1998, that number had dropped to 52 percent, with Hispanics then comprising 30 percent of the state's population, Asians 11 percent, and African Americans 7 percent. Thus, in 1998, the minority population reached a point of near parity with the majority population. Indeed, the California Department of Finance projects that shortly after the turn of the century, no race/ethnic group will constitute a majority of the state's population. The 2000 Census might find that this has already occurred. If current patterns of immigration and fertility rates persist, by the year 2025 Hispanics will represent the single largest ethnic group in the state. Over the past few decades, much if not most of California’s population growth and increasing diversity can be attributed to large increases in immigration. To understand California’s population, it is essential to understand its large immigrant population. Demographic Characteristics of California’s Immigrants California’s immigrant population is large, diverse, and increasing rapidly, growing from just over 1 million in 1950 to over 8 million by 1997. California has not only the greatest number of immigrants of any state, it has more than twice as many as the next leading state (New York, with 3.6 million immigrants in 1997). The share of California’s population that consists of immigrants grew from 8.5 percent in 1960 to 25 percent in 1997. In the entire United States, immigrants comprised only 9.7 percent of the population in 1997. California’s immigrants are diverse, coming to the state from dozens of countries. In 1990, the state was home to at least 10,000 immigrants from each of 66 different countries. The largest single country of origin of immigrants to California is Mexico, yielding five times as many immigrants as the next leading country of origin, the Philippines. The Philippines, in turn, is the country of origin of twice as many immigrants as the next leading countries: El Salvador and Vietnam. Although immigrants in California are concentrated in the state’s largest urban areas, particularly Los Angeles, many live in other areas of the state, including rural areas. The presence of sizable numbers of immigrants throughout the state is in direct contrast to geographic distributions in other states. For example, in New York, immigrants are concentrated in the New York City metropolitan area, with very small populations in the rest of the state; in Illinois, the vast majority of immigrants live in the Chicago area. -1- Most immigrants in California are not citizens of the United States. In 1990 in California, only 43 percent of the adults who had lived in the United States at least five years had naturalized. Naturalization rates vary tremendously by country of origin, with immigrants from Italy, Ireland, Germany, Hong Kong, and the Philippines all having naturalization rates in excess of 70 percent (in 1990), and immigrants from Nicaragua, Mexico, Cambodia, Guatemala, Laos, and El Salvador all having naturalization rates of less than 30 percent. Since 1990, naturalization rates have risen substantially for Mexican immigrants in California. This increase can be attributed to INS efforts to encourage citizenship, amnesty which legalized the status of many formerly unauthorized immigrants, and a response to Proposition 187, which sought to deny social services to illegal immigrants. Socioeconomic Characteristics of California’s Immigrants Immigrants in California tend to be less educated and to have lower incomes than other residents of the state. However, a substantial proportion are college graduates, and labor force participation rates tend to be quite high. Many of the socioeconomic measures vary greatly by country of origin. Proficiency in English varies tremendously by generation, with first generation immigrants tending to have low rates of proficiency and second generation U.S born descendants of immigrants having high levels of proficiency. In general, immigrants from Asia, Canada, and Europe have relatively high levels of education and income. Southeast Asians are a notable exception. One of the fastest growing groups of immigrants in California in the 1980s, most Southeast Asians came to the United States as refugees of the Vietnam War. They have among the lowest levels of educational attainment and among the lowest incomes of any immigrant group in California. For example, in 1990 only about 5 percent of immigrants from Laos and Cambodia had graduated from college, compared to over 60 percent of immigrants from Taiwan and India. Immigrants from Latin America also tend to be poorly educated and to earn low wages. Still, their labor force participation rates are quite high. Indeed, the working poor in California are likely to be immigrants from Latin America. About 90 percent of male immigrants ages 25 to 54 from Latin America are in the labor force. Despite their high levels of labor force participation and employment, over 25 percent of Mexican immigrants lived at or below the poverty level in 1990. Conclusion To understand the opportunities and challenges facing immigrants in California, it is first necessary to understand that they are not a monolithic group. They originate from a diverse set of countries and come to the United States with a diverse set of skills. The geographic spread of immigrants to almost every part of California suggests that the successful integration of immigrants is not a localized issue but a statewide concern. In this testimony, I present an array of statistics and measures that illustrate the diversity of immigrants in the state and point out some of the challenges to their successful integration. The substantial population of immigrants in California means that the future of immigrants and their descendants will largely determine the future of California. -2- The Demography of California’s Immigrants Hans Johnson Public Policy Institute of California PPPIICC 1 Outline • The California Context • Demographic Characteristics • Socioeconomic Characteristics PPPIIC 2 -3- California Has Experienced Tremendous Population Growth 35 30 Population in millions 25 20 15 10 5 0 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, California Department of Finance PPPIIC 3 California’s Growth is Unique for a Developed Region Comparisons of Population Change, 1950 = 100 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 Mexico California Rest of U.S. Japan Germany 1950 1954 1958 1962 1966 1970 1974 1978 1982 1986 1990 1994 1998 PPPIIC 4 -4- Thousands Source of Population Growth Has Changed Components of Population Change 900 800 Net Migration Natural Increase 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 -100 1995 PPPIIC 5 1940 1945 1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 Annual net flow in thousands 19901111111111111999999999999966655788767586042748951137 Immigration Now More Important Than Domestic Migration 600 Domestic 500 International 400 300 200 100 0 -200 -300 -400 111999999936 Source: California Department of Finance, unofficial estimates to 1980; Public Policy Institute of California, 1980-1993; DOF 1993-1999, with CB for international migration PPPIIC 6 -5- Hispanic and Asian Populations Have Grown Rapidly Population in millions White Hispanic Asian/Other African American 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 1970 1980 1990 2000 Source: California Department of Finance PPPIIC 7 Population in millions Projections for California Diverge Widely Total Population Projections for California 70 65 60 55 50 45 40 35 30 25 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 UCLA CCSCE High CB Preferred DOF 98 CCSCE Medium BEA CCSCE Low CB Alternative PPPIIC 8 -6- Population in millions Projections Agree That Latino Population Growth Will Be Rapid Projected Change in Population, 1995-2025 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 -2 -4 White -6 Latino Asian and Pacific Islander Black DOF CB Preferred CB Alternative PPPIIC 9 Percent Hispanics Will Become Single Largest Ethnic Group 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 2000 2010 2020 2030 American Indian Black Asian and Pacific Islander Hispanic White 2040 PPPIIC 10 -7- Outline • The California Context • Demographic Characteristics • Socioeconomic Characteristics PPPIIC 11 Rapid Increase in the Foreign-Born Population 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 1997 PPPIIC 12 -8- Millions Percent Growth Rates by Decade U.S. born 120 Foreign born 100 80 60 40 20 0 1900s 1910s 1920s 1940s 1950s 1960s 1970s 1980s 1990s -20 1930s PPPIIC 13 Percent immigrant Share of Immigrants Exceeds Levels Seen in Early 1900s 25 California U.S. 20 15 10 5 0 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 1997 PPPIIC 14 -9- Countries of Origin Have Changed Percent 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Before 19501950-591960-641965-691970-741975-791980-841985-90 Source: 1990 census Africa Europe/Canada Middle East Latin America Asia PPPIIC 15 Eight in Ten Immigrants Are Asian or Hispanic White 18% Other 2% Asian 28% Hispanic 52% Source: 1990 census - 10 - PPPIIC 16 Percent Asian Countries of Origin Have Changed 100 90 SE Asia 80 India 70 Korea Japan 60 Philippines 50 China 40 30 20 10 0 Before 1950 1950-59 1960-64 1965-69 1970-74 1975-79 11998805--9840 Source: 1990 census PPPIIC 17 Mexico Remains Leading Origin for Latin American Immigrants 100 90 Other 80 Caribbean 70 South America 60 Central America 50 Mexico 40 30 20 10 0 Percent Befo1111111r9999999e7758866150000559-------5986677504494909 Source: 1990 census - 11 - PPPIIC 18 Mexico is the Leading Source of Immigrants Source: 1990 Census Mexico..……… 2,524,000 Philippines……. 525,000 El Salvador……. 282,240 Vietnam………... 276,000 China…………… 216,000 Korea…………… 179,000 Canada…………. 165,000 Germany……….. 156,000 United Kingdom.. 150,000 Guatemala……….137,000 PPPIIC 19 Immigrants Come to California from Dozens of Countries Countries of origin for places with at least 10,000 immigrants in California Mexico Korea Japan Hong Kong Italy Lebanon Indonesia Romania Yugoslavia Belize Australia Austria Switzerland Philippines Canada Iran Laos Australia Colombia Israel Egypt Panama Chile Iraq Turkey Jamaica El Salvador Germany Taiwan Cambodia Thailand Poland Argentina Hungry Pakistan Syria Czech. Burma Azores Vietnam England India Cuba Peru Portugal Honduras Ecuador Spain Greece Denmark Costa Rica China Guatemala USSR Nicaragua France Netherlands Scotland Ireland Fiji Brazil Afghan. Sweden Source: 1990 Census PPPIIC 20 - 12 - Population by Immigrant Generation, 1997 Percent 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 U.S. 1st Generation 2nd Generation 3rd+ Generation California PPPIIC 21 Percent Immigrants are Concentrated in Young Adult Age Groups 14 All immigrants 12 U.S. born 10 8 6 4 2 0 0-4 5-9 10- 15- 20- 25- 30- 35- 40- 45- 50- 55- 60- 65+ 14 19 24 29 34 39 44 49 54 59 64 Age PPPIIC 22 - 13 - Percent Percentage of Immigrants Naturalized 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 PPPIIC 23 Living Arrangements of Non-Citizen Immigrants in California, 1990 Texas UniteCadlifStoartneisa New York Illinois Florida New Jersey With child citizens 33% Alone or with other non-citizens 36% With adult citizens 31% PPPIIC 24 - 14 - Regional Definitions North Coast Bay Area Mountains Upper Sacramento Valley Sacramento Metro Foothills Central Coast Inland Empire South Coast San Diego PPPIIC 25 Most Regions Receive Substantial Flows of Immigrants 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Rate per thousand residents UpperSSSaaanccrSrJIiaaoenClramSemrNaqeoneaontMSnurunritdtattoFBanohnholuoaEynoVVCDCttCMmiSaaaootlhoAlepeiillrtiaaalagrnrelteesssesstytooetya - 15 - PPPIIC 26 Outline • The California Context • Demographic Characteristics • Socioeconomic Characteristics – Education – Labor force – Poverty PPPIIC 27 Percentage of College Graduates Among Adult Immigrants 70 60 Females 50 Males 40 30 20 10 0 Percent UniteEGdlNCuiGSKaacietCaVarlinmeaMrvegbCeanmtLmaCdohxaagnaaiiduloddnauocinobaayasraamoma PHhoilniTgpJAUaKpifaiKSIroirwpnorScaaaeenRansnnag India - 16 - PPPIIC 28 H.S. Completion Rates of Asians, Ages 25-29, by Ethnicity & Immigrant Status Percent U.S. born 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Immigrants 1980 1990 JaCFpihlaiinnpieenssoee AsiJSaaCFEKinphliiIoaArnpnniseeideniasasaoneenn PPPIIC 29 H.S. Completion Rates of Hispanics, Ages 25-29, by Subgroup & Immigrant Status Percent U.S. born 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 100 Immigrants 1980 1990 CariSbobuetahn Mexican & CariSbobuetahn Mexican & Central Central PPPIIC 30 - 17 - English Language Ability, Asians, Age 5 and Older, 1990 Percent U.S. born 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Immigrants Speak English Not well Not at all JaCphainneessee Filipino JaCphianneessee IFnilAdiisipaiannno Korean SE Asian PPPIIC 31 English Language Ability, Hispanics, Age 5 and Older, 1990 60 U.S. born 50 Immigrants Speak English Not well Not at all Percent 40 30 20 10 0 AamnMCedreeixncSitarcoaanultnh Caribbean AaCmnaMCerdireeixbncSitbarcoeaanulatnnh PPPIIC 32 - 18 - Immigrants as Share of Labor Force by Industry, 1990 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Percent ForestryA,grFiicsuhlitnurge, FiCnAoHaTdOPerntmrMamaclhiaoCmtnefRen,noiushreeIunsnspaftinlSSssoartciseerrcaErrtaoTuMPtttuisirrvvainiiuuttcnaaoiroaticcabilinldtno,neeninoceensscg,gen, PPPIIC 33 Labor Force Participation Rates, Hispanics, Ages 25-54, by Subgroup/Immigrant Status Men 100 U.S. Born % 80 60 40 Mexican Central/ Caribbean Women South American 100 % 80 60 40 Mexican Central/ Caribbean South American Immigrants 1980 1990 Mexican Central/ Caribbean South American Mexican Central/ Caribbean South American PPPIIC 34 - 19 - Labor Force Participation Rates, Asians, Ages 25-54, by Ethnicity/Immigrant Status Men U.S. Born 100 80 % 60 Women 40 ChineJsaepaneseFilipino 100 Immigrants ChinesJeapanesFeilipAinsioan IndiaKnoreaSnE Asian 1980 1990 80 % 60 40 ChinesJeapaneseFilipino ChinesJeapaneseFilipAinsoian IndianKoreanSE Asian PPPIIC 35 Percent Poverty Rates for Individuals in Selected Hispanic Groups Immigrants 25 1969 1979 U.S. Born 1989 20 15 10 5 0 Mexican Central/ Caribbean South American Mexican Central/ Caribbean South American PPPIIC 36 - 20 - Percent Poverty Rates for Individuals in Selected Asian Groups 50 Immigrants 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0ChinesJeapanese Filipino AIsnidanian KoreaSnE Asian 1969 1979 1989 U.S. Born ChineseJapaneseFilipino PPPIIC 37 Summary • Immigrants are a large and growing population in California • California’s immigrants are diverse • California’s future depends on successful integration of immigrants and their children PPPIIC 38 - 21 -"
["post_date_gmt"]=>
string(19) "2017-05-20 09:35:36"
["comment_status"]=>
string(4) "open"
["ping_status"]=>
string(6) "closed"
["post_password"]=>
string(0) ""
["post_name"]=>
string(10) "op_301hjop"
["to_ping"]=>
string(0) ""
["pinged"]=>
string(0) ""
["post_modified"]=>
string(19) "2017-05-20 02:35:36"
["post_modified_gmt"]=>
string(19) "2017-05-20 09:35:36"
["post_content_filtered"]=>
string(0) ""
["guid"]=>
string(52) "http://148.62.4.17/wp-content/uploads/OP_301HJOP.pdf"
["menu_order"]=>
int(0)
["post_mime_type"]=>
string(15) "application/pdf"
["comment_count"]=>
string(1) "0"
["filter"]=>
string(3) "raw"
["status"]=>
string(7) "inherit"
["attachment_authors"]=>
bool(false)
}