Article 14 - Annual Editions Book- Brittingham and De La Cruz

Article 14 - Annual Editions Book- Brittingham and De La Cruz

Info icon This preview shows pages 1–8. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Image of page 1

Info icon This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Image of page 2
Image of page 3

Info icon This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Image of page 4
Image of page 5

Info icon This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Image of page 6
Image of page 7

Info icon This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Image of page 8
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: Article 14 Ancestry: 2000 Census 2000 Brief ANGELA BRITTINGHAM AND G. PATRICIA DE LA CRUZ 10 What is this person's ancestry or ethnic origin? (For example: Italian, Jamaican, African Am., Cambodian, Cape Verdean, Norwegian, Dominican, French Canadian, Haitian, Korean, Lebanese, Polish, Nigerian, Mexican, Taiwanese, Ukrainian, and so on.) ncestry is a broad concept that can mean different Athings to different people; it can be described alter— nately as where their ancestors are from, where they or their parents originated, or simply how they see themselves ethnically. Some people may have one distinct ancestry, while others are descendants of several ancestry groups, and still oth- ers may know only that their ancestors were from a particular region of the world or may not know their ethnic origins at all. The Census Bureau defines ancestry as a person’s ethnic origin, heritage, descent, or “roots,” WhiCh may reflect their‘plac'e'of Figure 1 Reproduction of the Question on Ancestry from birth, place of birth of parents or ancestors, and ethnic identities Census 2000 that haVe eVOIVCd Within the Ummd States- Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000 questionnaire. This report is part of a series that presents population and housing data collected by Census 2000, where 80 percent of respondents to the long form specified at least one ancestry. (About one—sixth of households received the long form.) It presents data on the most frequently reported ancestries and describes population distributions for the United States, includ— ing regions, states, counties, and selected cities.1 The listed ancestries were reported by at least 100,000 people, and the numbers cited in this report represent the number of people who reported each ancestry either as their first or second response. The question on ancestry first appeared on the census ques- tionnaire in 1980, replacing a question on where a person’s par— ents were born. The question on parental birthplace provided foreign—origin data only for people with one or both parents born outside the United States. The current ancestry question allows everyone to give one or two attributions of their “ances— try or ethnic origin” (Figure l), and in doing so, enables people to identify an ethnic background, such as German, Lebanese, M f f . | 'f' d Nigerian, or Portuguese, which was not otherwise identified in ore than OUI’ 0"“ 0 five peop e SpeCl '9 the race or Hispanic‘origin questions. at leaSt one anceStry- The ancestries in this report also include the groups covered in the questions on race and Hispanic origin, such as African American, Mexican, American Indian, and Chinese. For these In 2000, 58 percent of the population specified only one groups, the results from the ancestry question and the race and ancestry, 22 percent provided two ancestries, and l per- Hispanic-origin questions differ, but the latter are the official cent reported an unclassifiable ancestry such as “mixture” or nearly 12 million fewer people specified “African American” as their ancestry than gave that response to the race question. One reason for this large difference is that some people who reported Black or African American on the race question reported their ancestry more specifically, such as Jamaican, Haitian, or Nigerian, and thus were not counted in the African American ancestry category. Similarly, more than 2 million fewer peo- ple reported Mexican ancestry than gave that answer to the Hispanic-origin question.2 In other cases, the ancestry ques- tion produced higher numbers, such as for Dominicans, whose estimated totals from the ancestry question were over 100,000 higher than from the Hispanic—origin question, where many Dominicans may have reported a general term (like Hispanic) or checked “other” without writing in a detailed response:l sources of data for race and Hispanic groups. In some cases, the “adopted.” Another 19 percent did not report any ancestry at totals reported on the ancestry question are lower than the num- all, a substantial increase from 1990, when 10 percent of the bers from the race or Hispanic-origin question. For instance, population left the ancestry question blank (Table l). 48 Tabli (Data 1: CENSUS Ances To Ancesi Sing Mult Ancest Uncl Not ‘1990 es Source: Near ance In tion) c ancesl (Figur incluc (24.9 Amer or 7 p on Polisl Scotc from u as One rted heir , or ican 360- the ues- rose 000 iany nic) one per— ” or y at ' the Article 14. Ancestry: 2000 Table 1 Ancestry Reporting: 1990 and 2000 (Data based on sample. For information on confidentiality protection, sampling error, nonsampling error, and definitions, see www. census. gov/prod/cen2000/doc/sf3. pdf) 1990‘ 2000 Change, 1990 to 2000 Ancestry Number Percent Number Percent Numerical Percent Total population ...................... 248,709,873 100.0 281,421,906 100.0 32,712,033 13.2 Ancestry specified ......................... 222,608,257 89.5 225,310,411 80.1 2,702,154 1.2 Single ancestry ......................... 148,836,950 59.8 163,315,936 58.0 14,478,986 9.7 Multiple ancestry ........................ 73,771,307 29.7 61,994,475 22.0 —11,776,832 — 16.0 Ancestry not specified ..................... 26,101,616 10.5 56,111,495 19.9 30,009,879 115.0 Unclassified ............................ 2,180,245 0.9 2,437,929 0.9 257,684 11.8 Not reported ............................ 23,921,371 9.6 53,673,566 19.1 29,752,195 124.4 ‘1990 estimates in this table differ slightly from 1990 Summary Tape File 3 in order to make them fully consistent with data from Census 2000. Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000 Summary File 3 and 1990 special tabulation. In total. 7 ancestries were reported by more than 15 million Nearly one of Six people reported their people in 2000, 37 ancestries were reported by more than ancestry as German. 1 million people, and 92 ancestries were reported by more than 100,000 people (Table 2). In 2000, 42.8 million people (15 percent of the popula— tion) considered themselves to be of German (or part-German) The largest European ancestries have ancestry, the most frequent response to the census question . _ . , , , decreased in population, while African (Figure 2).4 Other ancestries With over 15 million people in 2000 . . . . . 4 .. a . . , American, Hispanic, and ASIan ancestries included Irish (30.5 million, or 11 percent). African American _ (24.9 million. or 9 percent), English (24.5 million, or 9 percent), have Increased' American (20.2 million, or 7 percent), Mexican (18.4 million. or7 percent), and Italian (15.6 million, or 6 percent). Other ancestries with 4 million or more people included The highest growth rates between 1990 and 2000 occurred in Polish, French, American Indian, Scottish, Dutch, Norwegian, groups identified by a general heritage rather than a particular Scotch—Irish. and Swedish. country of ancestry. For example, the number of people who German (15.2%) 42.8 irish (10.8%) 30.5 African American (8.8%) 24.9 English (8.7%) 24.5 American (7.2%) 20.2 Mexican (6.5%) 18.4 itaiian (5.6%) 15.6 Polish (32%) 9.0 French (3.0%) 8.3 American lndian (2.8%) 7.9 Scottish (1 7%) 49 Dutch (1.6%) 4.5 Norwegian (1.6%) 4.5 Scotch-lrish (1.5%) 4‘3 Swedish (1.4%) 4.0 Figure 2 Fifteen Largest Ancestries: 2000. (In millions. Percent of total population in parentheses. Data based on sample. For information on confidentiality protection, sampling error, nonsampling error, and definitions, see ) Source: US. Census Bureau, Census 2000 special tabulation. ANNUAL EDITIONS Table 2 Ancestries with 100,000 or More People in 2000: 1990 and 2000 (Data based on sample. For information on confidentiality protection, sampling error, nonsampling error, and definitions, see www. census. gov/prod/cen2000/doc/sf3. pdf) 1990 2000 Change, 1990 to 2000 Percent of Percent of total total Ancestry Number population Number population Numerical Percent Total population ........................ 248,709,873 100.0 281,421,906 100.0 32,712,033 13.2 African* .................................. 245,845 0.1 1,183,316 0.4 937,471 381.3 African American”2 ....................... 23,750,256 9.5 24,903,412 8.8 1,153,156 4.9 Albanian ................................. 47,710 — 113,661 — 65,951 138.2 American* ................................ 12,395,999 5.0 20,188,305 7.2 7,792,306 62.9 American Indian* .......................... 8,689,344 3.5 7,876,568 2.8 7812,776 79.4 Arab‘ .................................... 127,364 0.1 205,822 0.1 78,458 61.6 Armenian ................................. 308,096 0.1 385,488 0.1 77,392 25.1 Asian* .................................... 107,172 — 238,960 0.1 131,788 123.0 Asian Indian .............................. 569,338 0.2 1,546,703 0.5 977,365 171.7 Austrian .................................. 864,783 0.3 730,336 0.3 7134,447 715.5 Belgian ................................... 380,403 0.2 348,531 0.1 731,872 28.4 Brazilian .................................. 65,875 — 181,076 0.1 115,201 174.9 British .................................... 1,119,140 0.4 1,085,718 0.4 733,422 73.0 Cambodian2 .............................. 134,955 0.1 197,093 0.1 62,138 46.0 Canadian ................................. 549,990 0.2 638,548 0.2 88,558 16.1 Chinese .................................. 1,505,229 0.6 2,271,562 0.8 766,333 50.9 Colombian ................................ 351,717 0.1 583,986 0.2 232,269 66.0 Croatian‘ ................................. 544,270 0.2 374,241 0.1 7170,029 731.2 Cuban ................................... 859,739 0.3 1,097,594 0.4 237,855 27.7 Czech .................................... 1,296,369 0.5 1,258,452 0.4 737,917 22.9 Czechoslovakian .......................... 315,285 0.1 441,403 0.2 126,118 40.0 Danish ................................... 1,634,648 0.7 1,430,897 0.5 7203,751 712.5 Dominican“2 .............................. 505,690 0.2 908,531 0.3 402,841 79.7 Dutch .................................... 6,226,339 2.5 4,541,770 1.6 71,684,569 727.1 Ecuadorian‘ .............................. 197,374 0.1 322,965 0.1 125,591 63.6 Egyptian ................................. 78,574 — 142,832 0.1 64,258 818 English ................................... 32,651,788 13.1 24,509,692 8.7 78,142,096 —24.9 European* ................................ 466,718 0.2 1,968,696 0.7 1,501,978 321.8 Filipino ................................... 1,450,512 0.6 2,116,478 0.8 665,966 45.9 Finnish ................................... 658,854 0.3 623,559 0.2 735,295 75.4 French ................................... 10,320,656 4.1 8,309,666 3.0 72,010,990 719.5 French Canadian‘v2 ........................ 2,167,127 0.9 2,349,684 0.8 182,557 8.4 German1 ................................. 57,947,171 23.3 42,841,569 15.2 715,105,602 726.1 Greek .................................... 1,110,292 0.4 1,153,295 0.4 43,003 3.9 Guatemalan .............................. 241,559 0.1 463,502 0.2 221,943 91.9 Guyanese ................................ 81,665 — 162,425 0.1 80,760 98.9 Haitian“2 ................................. 289,521 0.1 548,199 0.2 258,678 89.3 Hawaiian ................................. 256,081 0.1 334,858 0.1 78,777 30.8 Hispanic* ................................. 1,113,259 0.4 2,451,109 0.9 1,337,850 120.2 Hmong ................................... 84,823 — 140,528 — 55,705 65.7 Honduran ................................ 116,635 — 266,848 0.1 150,213 128.8 Hungarian ................................ 1,582,302 0.6 1,398,702 0.5 7183,600 711.6 Iranian ................................... 235,521 0.1 338,266 0.1 102,745 43.6 Irish1 ..................................... 38,735,539 15.6 30,524,799 10.8 78,210,740 721.2 Israeli .................................... 81,677 7 106,839 — 25,162 30.8 Italian“2 .................................. 14,664,189 5.9 15,638,348 5.6 974,159 6.6 Jamaican“2 ............................... 435,024 0.2 736,513 0.3 301,489 69.3 Japanese ................................. 1,004,622 0.4 1,103,325 0.4 98,703 9.8 Korean‘v2 ................................. 836,987 0.3 1,190,353 0.4 353,366 42.2 Laotian ................................... 146,947 0.1 179,866 0.1 32,919 22.4 (continued) (See footnotes on next page) 50 Tal (Dat wwv Anc Latir Lebe LithL Mex Nica Nige Nort NOI’V Paki Pan; Penr Peru Polis Porti Puei Rorr Russ Salv Scar Scot Scot Serb Slav Slov, Slovi Spar Spar Swei Swis Syriz Taiw Thai Trinii Turki Ukra Unite Vietr Wels Wes Wes Whit Yugc Othe — R01 * Ger Negr< ‘lnclu 2Inclu Notes who re to the panic- Island Sourci Article 14. Ancestry: 2000 Table 2 Ancestries with 100,000 or More People in 2000: 1990 and 2000—Continued lllata based on sample. For information on confidentiality protection sampling error, nonsampling error, and definitions see www. census. gov/prod/cen2000/doc/sf3. pdf) 3 2000 1990 2000 Change, 1990 to 2000 Percent of Percent of total total arcent Ancestry Number population Number population Numerical Percent 13-2 Latin American" ........................... 43,521 — 250,052 0.1 206,531 4746 381-3 Lebanese“? .............................. 394,180 0.2 440,279 0.2 46,099 11.7 4-9 Lithuanian ................................ 811,865 0.3 659,992 0.2 7151,873 718.7 138-2 Ilexicani-2 ................................ 11,580,038 4.7 18,382,291 6.5 6,802,253 58.7 62-9 Nicaraguan ............................... 177,077 0.1 230,358 0.1 53,281 30.1 79.4 Nigerian” ................................ 91,499 — 164,691 0.1 73,192 80.0 61.6 Northern European* ........................ 65,993 — 163,657 0.1 97,664 148.0 25.1 Noni/egian2 ............................... 3,869,395 1.6 4,477,725 1.6 608,330 15.7 123.0 Pakistani ................................. 99,974 7 253,193 0.1 153,219 153.3 171.7 Panamanian .............................. 88,649 - 1 19,497 — 30,848 34.8 —15_5 Pennsylvania German ..................... 305,841 0.1 255,807 0.1 750,034 716.4 28.4 Peruvian ................................. 161,866 0.1 292,991 0.1 131,125 81.0 174_9 Polish‘v2 .................................. 9,366,051 3.8 8,977,235 3.2 7388,816 74.2 _3.0 Portuguese ............................... 1,148,857 0.5 1,173,691 0.4 24,834 2.2 46.0 Puerto Rican .............................. 1,955,323 0.8 2,652,598 0.9 697,275 35.7 16.1 Romanian ................................ 365,531 0.1 367,278 0.1 1,747 (NS) 509 Russian .................................. 2,951,373 1.2 2,652,214 0.9 7299,159 710.1 66.0 Salvadoran ............................... 499,153 0.2 802,743 0.3 303,590 60.8 731 2 Scandinavian ............................. 678,880 0.3 425,099 0.2 7253,781 737.4 27'7 Scotch-lrish ............................... 5,617,773 2.3 4,319,232 1.5 71,298,541 723.1 22'9 Scottish .................................. 5,393,581 2.2 4,890,581 1.7 7503,000 79.3 ‘ Serbian .................................. 116,795 — 140,337 — 23,5422 0. 2 40-0 Slavic .................................... 76,923 — 127,136 — 50,213 65. 3 ‘125 Slovak‘ .................................. 1,882,897 0.8 797,764 0.3 71,085,133 757.6 79-7 Slovene .................................. 124,437 0.1 176,691 0.1 52,254 42.0 727-1 Spaniard ................................. 360,858 0.1 299,948 0.1 760,910 716. 9 63-6 Spanish .................................. 2,024,004 0.8 2,187,144 0.8 163,140 8.1 81-8 Swedish .................................. 4,680,863 1.9 3,998,310 1.4 7682,553 714.6 '24-9 Swiss .................................... 1,045,492 0.4 911,502 0.3 7133,990 712.8 321.8 Syrian .................................... 129,606 0.1 142,897 0.1 13,291 10.3 45.9 Taiwanese“2 .............................. 192,973 0.1 293,568 0.1 100,595 52.1 75.4 Thai‘ .................................... 112,11 — 146,577 0.1 34,460 30.7 4195 Trinidadian and Tobagonian ................ 76,270 — 164,738 0.1 88,468 116.0 8.4 Turkish ................................... 83,850 7 117,575 — 33,725 40.2 726.1 Ukrainian“2 ............................... 740,723 0.3 892,922 0.3 152,199 20.5 39 United States* ............................ 643,561 0.3 404,328 0.1 7239,233 737.2 919 Vietnamese ............................... 535,825 0.2 1,029,420 0.4 493,595 92.1 98.9 Welsh .................................... 2,033,893 0.8 1,753,794 0.6 7280,099 713. 8 89.3 West Indian* .............................. 159,167 0.1 147,222 0.1 711,945 77. 5 30.8 Western European‘ ........................ 42,409 — 125,300 82,891 195. 5 120 2 White" .................................... 1,799,711 0.7 3,834,122 1. 4 2,034,411 113.0 65.7 Yugoslavian .............................. 257,986 0.1 328,547 0. 1 70,561 27.4 128.8 Other ancestries .......................... 3,989,728 1.6 4,380,380 1.6 390,652 9.8 711'6 -Rounds to 0.0. 43'6 “General response which may encompass several ancestries not listed separately (i.e., African American includes Black and “21-2 Negro). NS Not statistically different from zero at the 90-percent confidence level. 30-8 ‘lncluded in the list of examples on the census questionnaire in 1990. 6-6 included in the list of examples on the census questionnaire in 2000. 6:: Notes: Because of sampling error, the estimates in this table may not be significantly different from one another or from other ancestries not listed in this table. People ' who reported two ancestries were included once in each category, The estimates in this table differ slightly in some cases from the estimates in other data products due 42-2 to the collapsing schemes used. For example, here German does not include Bavarian. Some groups correspond to groups identified separately in the race and His- 22,4 panic-origin questions. The race item provides the primary source of data for White, Black, American Indian, Alaska Native, Asian groups, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific atinued) lslandergroups, The Hispanic-origin question is the primary identifier for Mexican, Puerto Rican, Cuban, and other Hispanic groups. Source: US. Census Bureau, 1990 Census and Census 2000 special tabulations. 51 ANNUAL EDITIONS reported Latin American, African, or European all more than quadrupled (Latin American increased from 44,000 in 1990 to 250,000 in 2000. African grew from 246,000 to 1.2 million, and European rose from 467,000 to 2.0 million). Other general heritage groups that at least doubled in size included Western European, Northern European, Asian, Hispanic, and White. The three largest ancestries in 1990 were German, Irish, and English. In 2000, these groups were still the largest European ancestries, but each had decreased in size by at least 8 million and by more than 20 percent (Table 2). As a proportion of the population, German decreased from 23 percent in 1990 to 15 percent in 2000, while Irish and English decreased from 16 percent to 11 percent, and from 13 percent to 9 percent, respectively. Several other large European ancestries also decreased over the decade, including Polish, French, Scottish. Dutch. and Swedish. The number of people who reported African American ances- try increased by nearly 1.2 million, or 4.9 percent, between 1990 and 2000, making this group the third largest ancestry. However, the proportion ofAf'rican Americans decreased slightly over the decade, from 9.5 percent to 8.8 percent. The population of many ancestries, such as Mexican, Chinese, Filipino. and Asian Indian, increased during the decade. reflecting sizable immigration, especially from Latin America and Asia. Several small ancestry populations, includ— ing Brazilian, Pakistani, Albanian, Honduran, and Trinidadian and Tobagonian, at least doubled. Seven percent of the U.S. population reported their ancestry as American. The number who reported American and no other ancestry increased from 12.4 million in 1990 to 20.2 Inillion in 2000, the largest numerical growth of any group during the 1990s.5 This figure represents an increase of 63 percent, as the proportion rose from 5.0 percent to 7.2 percent of the population. The Geographic Distribution of Ancestries In each of the four regions, a different ancestry was reported as the largest. Among the four regions, the lar...
View Full Document

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

What students are saying

  • Left Quote Icon

    As a current student on this bumpy collegiate pathway, I stumbled upon Course Hero, where I can find study resources for nearly all my courses, get online help from tutors 24/7, and even share my old projects, papers, and lecture notes with other students.

    Student Picture

    Kiran Temple University Fox School of Business ‘17, Course Hero Intern

  • Left Quote Icon

    I cannot even describe how much Course Hero helped me this summer. It’s truly become something I can always rely on and help me. In the end, I was not only able to survive summer classes, but I was able to thrive thanks to Course Hero.

    Student Picture

    Dana University of Pennsylvania ‘17, Course Hero Intern

  • Left Quote Icon

    The ability to access any university’s resources through Course Hero proved invaluable in my case. I was behind on Tulane coursework and actually used UCLA’s materials to help me move forward and get everything together on time.

    Student Picture

    Jill Tulane University ‘16, Course Hero Intern