BUFFALO REGION. NET DISPLACEMENT (Low-Income Change in Tracts with Strong Expansion, )

Transcription

1 BUFFALO REGION Poverty concentration and neighborhood abandonment are commonplace in the Buffalo region, while economic growth and displacement are rare. Regionally, about 3 percent of residents live in an area that has experienced strong economic expansion, compared to about 30 percent who live in a strongly declining neighborhood. Those declining areas have experienced powerful demographic changes, losing approximately 20 percent of their white population since 2000; meanwhile, their Hispanic population has increased by over two-thirds, and their population living in extreme poverty has increased by nearly 30 percent. These trends are each more intense in the region s suburbs than in Buffalo proper. In Buffalo proper, immigrants have concentrated in strongly declining neighborhoods, where the foreignborn population has grown by over 120 percent while the native-born population have declined by almost 20 percent. To the small extent it has been present in the region, displacement has been focused in the Lower West Side of Buffalo, while the downtown area has experienced overall growth. Significant swaths of the remainder of Buffalo have undergone poverty concentration, while the city s East Side has seen population changes indicative of neighborhood abandonment. Regional Total Population: 1,135,503 Regional Low-Income Population: 339,144 Regional Nonwhite Population: 247,507 Central City Population: 258,989 Central City Low-Income Population: 133,115 Central City Nonwhite Population: 143,406 NET DISPLACEMENT (Low-Income Change in Tracts with Strong Expansion, ) Central City: Suburbs: -2,134-1,814 NET CONCENTRATION (Low-Income Change in Tracts with Strong Decline, ) Central City: 3,646 Suburbs: 20,460 1

2 DETAILS ON TABLES The following tables depict aggregated population and housing change in two categories of neighborhoods across the metropolitan area, its central cities, and its suburbs. The categories are: Economically expanding neighborhoods, which are those experiencing the kind of population changes associated with growth and displacement. These are neighborhoods where the low-income * share of population has fallen since 2000 (indicating that an area has grown less poor overall) and the absolute number of non-low-income residents has grown since 2000 (indicating that middle-income residents see the area as an attractive place to live). Economically declining neighborhoods, which are those experiencing the kind of population changes associated with abandonment and poverty concentration. These are neighborhoods where the lowincome share of population has grown since 2000 (indicating that an area has more less poor overall) and the absolute number of non-low-income residents has fallen since 2000 (indicating that middle-income residents do not see the area as an attractive place to live). Two variants of this measure exist, and a separate table is provided for each. They are: In the upper set of tables, a strong, narrow measure, which only includes census tracts that have a change of +/-5 percent or greater in low-income population share, and a change of +/-10 percent for nonlow-income population. This approach classifies fewer neighborhoods overall, excluding areas with only small changes in their income profile. This is the more robust and preferred measure. It is also the measure used in the accompanying maps. In the lower set of tables, a weak, broad measure, which includes all census tracts with any change that meet the criteria for the two categories above, with no cutoffs for scale. This approach classifies more neighborhoods overall, but is noisier, because it includes tracts with very small population changes. In addition, because this report relies on American Community Survey sampling data with margins of error, this measure is more likely to include erroneously classified tracts. However, this broad measure can provide a useful outer estimate of the scale of neighborhood economic expansion and decline. Three sets of tables are provided. They are: Figures for the entire metropolitan region, aggregating central cities and suburbs into one set of tables. Figures for central cities. Figures for suburban areas, defined as any area in the metropolitan region not included in a central city. This includes incorporated and unincorporated communities. Each table depicts the number of people in each of the two neighborhood categories, both overall and in various population subsets. It also shows the number of housing units of various types in each neighborhood category Share indicates what share of the regional, city, or suburban population of a given group live in expanding or declining tracts. The box is shaded in accordance with the size of the share Total indicates the absolute number of individuals in a given group that live in expanding or declining census tracts. Net Change since 2000 indicates the change of population of a subgroup in expanding or declining tracts since 2000, both in percentage and in absolute terms. These have been colored to indicate the type of change. In economically expanding tracts, green indicates net growth while blue indicates net displacement. In economically declining tracts, red indicates net poverty concentration while purple indicates net abandonment. Darker shades indicate larger percentage changes. * For the purposes of this report, low-income is classified as individuals at 200 percent of poverty line or less. 2

3 DETAILS ON MAPS Neighborhood change has also been mapped by individual census tracts, incorporating the same data used to create the tables above. The map incorporates the strong measure of neighborhood change used to create the tables. In the maps, tracts have been subdivided into four categories: Economically expanding areas with low-income displacement, indicated in blue, where a neighborhood s income profile is improving while low-income population declines on net. These are typically places undergoing changes traditionally associated with gentrification, in which economic pressures push out lower incomes while higher income residents arrive. Economically expanding areas with overall growth, indicated in green, where a neighborhood s income profile is improving while low-income population increases on net. These are typically places with significant new housing construction, where residents across the income spectrum are arriving. Economically declining areas with abandonment, indicated in purple, where a neighborhood s income profile is worsening while low-income population declines on net. These are typically places experiencing the worst neighborhood economic decline, with people across the income spectrum leaving and outright depopulation occurring. Economically declining areas with poverty concentration, indicated in red, where a neighborhood s income profile is worsening while low-income population increases on net. These are typically places where higher-income flight and eroding housing stocks are causing rapid demographic and economic transition, contributing to the impoverishment of the area. The categories are also shaded to indicate the scale of low-income population change within the census tracts. The maps allow intra-regional comparisons of observed neighborhood change. However, because these classifications have been made using American Community Survey data with margins of error, precise measures are not possible and it is likely that some individual tracts are erroneously classified. As a consequence, readers are advised to focus more on clusters of tracts undergoing similar changes rather than individual outliers, particularly outliers with smaller-scale changes. 3

4 TABLES FOR METROPOLITAN AREA - Buffalo Region ECONOMICALLY EXPANDING NEIGHBORHOODS Experiencing Strong Economic Expansion ECONOMICALLY DECLINING NEIGHBORHOODS Experiencing Strong Economic Decline 3.4% 39, % % 345, % -31,248 Low-Income 3.2% 10, % -3,948 Low-Income 45.5% 154, % +24,106 Poverty 3.6% 5, % -1,168 Poverty 49.0% 78, % +17,840 Extreme Poverty 3.6% 2, % -669 Extreme Poverty 49.6% 36, % +8,162 American Indian 1.9% % -119 American Indian 59.1% 3, % -684 Asian 1.4% % +118 Asian 42.0% 13, % +9,500 Black 3.5% 4, % -1,047 Black 54.5% 73, % +4,059 Hispanic 7.8% 4, % -245 Hispanic 42.2% 22, % +8,901 White 3.3% 29, % +784 White 25.0% 222, % -57,307 College-Educated 3.1% 7, % +2,550 College-Educated 19.6% 47, % +8,376 Non-College 3.6% 19, % -1,848 Non-College 32.6% 178, % -27,267 Families 3.4% 4, % -749 Families 31.6% 39, % -9,797 Families in Poverty 4.4% 1, % -207 Families in Poverty 53.7% 12, % +1,607 Non-Poor Families 3.1% 3, % -542 Non-Poor Families 26.7% 27, % -11,404 Single Mothers 5.0% % -54 Single Mothers 54.1% 8, % +881 Children (Under 18) 3.3% 7, % -2,181 Children (Under 18) 33.0% 77, % -17,375 Young Adults (18-34) 3.5% 9, % +410 Young Adults (18-34) 34.4% 89, % +4,052 Adults (35 to 64) 3.5% 15, % -12 Adults (35 to 64) 28.4% 127, % -8,599 Seniors (65 and up) 3.4% 6, % +1,023 Seniors (65 and up) 26.5% 50, % -9,476 U.S.-Born 3.5% 37, % -1,105 U.S.-Born 30.0% 319, % -41,575 Foreign-Born 2.6% 1, % +455 Foreign-Born 36.8% 25, % +10,329 Owner Units 3.3% 10, % +1,234 Owner Units 26.5% 82, % -9,944 Renter Units 4.1% 6, % -584 Renter Units 37.6% 59, % -972 Vacant Units 4.1% 2, % -614 Vacant Units 41.8% 20, % +2,682 with Any Indicators of Economic Expansion* with Any Indicators of Economic Decline* 11.5% 130, % +2, % 693, % -45,792 Low-Income 9.0% 30, % -6,443 Low-Income 73.6% 249, % +31,810 Poverty 9.5% 15, % -930 Poverty 75.9% 121, % +26,168 Extreme Poverty 9.7% 7, % -537 Extreme Poverty 76.1% 56, % +11,341 American Indian 3.9% % -704 American Indian 76.9% 4, % -1,027 Asian 8.4% 2, % +1,557 Asian 66.0% 21, % +13,041 Black 8.1% 10, % -1,147 Black 75.6% 102, % +5,943 Hispanic 13.7% 7, % +118 Hispanic 68.4% 35, % +13,900 White 12.1% 107, % +2,794 White 57.9% 513, % -82,999 College-Educated 14.2% 34, % +10,592 College-Educated 51.8% 124, % +24,753 Non-College 11.1% 60, % -3,507 Non-College 63.5% 347, % -44,345 Families 10.3% 12, % -2,271 Families 62.9% 79, % -17,215 Families in Poverty 8.0% 1, % -593 Families in Poverty 80.4% 18, % +2,125 Non-Poor Families 10.8% 11, % -1,678 Non-Poor Families 58.9% 60, % -19,340 Single Mothers 8.6% 1, % -389 Single Mothers 80.8% 13, % +1,227 Children (Under 18) 9.7% 22, % -5,833 Children (Under 18) 63.6% 149, % -32,493 Young Adults (18-34) 12.7% 33, % +4,332 Young Adults (18-34) 63.4% 165, % +7,217 Adults (35 to 64) 11.7% 52, % +2,455 Adults (35 to 64) 59.3% 267, % -11,837 Seniors (65 and up) 11.7% 22, % +2,040 Seniors (65 and up) 58.8% 111, % -8,675 U.S.-Born 11.6% 123, % +1,469 U.S.-Born 60.9% 648, % -59,097 Foreign-Born 9.9% 6, % +1,503 Foreign-Born 63.9% 44, % +13,310 Owner Units 11.4% 35, % +4,106 Owner Units 59.2% 184, % -10,092 Renter Units 13.8% 21, % -1,049 Renter Units 65.9% 104, % -1,400 Vacant Units 11.0% 5, % -101 Vacant Units 67.8% 33, % +4,874 *The figures in the lower set of tables may include many neighborhoods with very slight demographic changes, and are especially sensitive to sampling error. These tables are best understood as depicting an aggressive outer estimate of population shifts, as compared to the estimates in the upper set of tables, which are more robustly observed. Data: U.S. Census. 4

5 TABLES FOR CENTRAL CITY ONLY - Buffalo ECONOMICALLY EXPANDING NEIGHBORHOODS Experiencing Strong Economic Expansion ECONOMICALLY DECLINING NEIGHBORHOODS Experiencing Strong Economic Decline 5.9% 15, % -1, % 113, % -17,207 Low-Income 5.4% 7, % -2,134 Low-Income 53.1% 70, % +3,646 Poverty 6.0% 4, % -1,139 Poverty 54.3% 42, % +6,150 Extreme Poverty 5.6% 2, % -723 Extreme Poverty 53.6% 20, % +3,171 American Indian 6.9% % -87 American Indian 45.4% % -541 Asian 2.7% % +29 Asian 54.1% 6, % +5,358 Black 4.6% 4, % -1,323 Black 55.6% 52, % -3,521 Hispanic 14.0% 3, % -190 Hispanic 46.7% 13, % +3,980 White 5.4% 6, % +223 White 31.9% 36, % -23,764 College-Educated 8.6% 3, % +1,241 College-Educated 24.3% 10, % +1,053 Non-College 5.5% 6, % -1,891 Non-College 46.3% 57, % -11,864 Families 5.8% 1, % -203 Families 50.3% 15, % -3,773 Families in Poverty 7.1% % -170 Families in Poverty 56.5% 6, % +59 Non-Poor Families 4.9% % -33 Non-Poor Families 46.2% 8, % -3,832 Single Mothers 8.3% % -54 Single Mothers 54.4% 4, % -577 Children (Under 18) 5.2% 3, % -836 Children (Under 18) 53.2% 31, % -6,792 Young Adults (18-34) 6.1% 4, % +43 Young Adults (18-34) 39.4% 30, % -996 Adults (35 to 64) 5.9% 5, % -640 Adults (35 to 64) 43.4% 39, % -5,374 Seniors (65 and up) 6.7% 2, % -94 Seniors (65 and up) 39.1% 12, % -3,973 U.S.-Born 5.9% 13, % -1,965 U.S.-Born 43.1% 101, % -23,944 Foreign-Born 5.7% 1, % +467 Foreign-Born 52.7% 12, % +6,737 Owner Units 4.3% 1, % +183 Owner Units 40.4% 18, % -6,166 Renter Units 8.2% 5, % -366 Renter Units 42.0% 27, % -1,052 Vacant Units 5.2% 1, % -741 Vacant Units 48.9% 10, % -565 with Any Indicators of Economic Expansion* with Any Indicators of Economic Decline* 19.2% 49, % -2, % 170, % -23,399 Low-Income 13.5% 17, % -4,328 Low-Income 74.1% 98, % +2,559 Poverty 13.3% 10, % -1,939 Poverty 75.7% 59, % +7,753 Extreme Poverty 13.2% 5, % -997 Extreme Poverty 76.9% 29, % +4,862 American Indian 11.7% % -433 American Indian 66.0% % -692 Asian 13.5% 1, % +832 Asian 77.5% 9, % +7,231 Black 9.7% 9, % -2,190 Black 73.8% 69, % -5,597 Hispanic 22.7% 6, % -8 Hispanic 68.4% 19, % +5,412 White 26.8% 31, % -1,126 White 57.0% 65, % -31,121 College-Educated 38.5% 16, % +4,236 College-Educated 46.0% 19, % +3,082 Non-College 15.9% 19, % -4,191 Non-College 69.0% 85, % -16,719 Families 14.5% 4, % -1,214 Families 72.9% 22, % -5,404 Families in Poverty 10.5% 1, % -632 Families in Poverty 78.7% 9, % +151 Non-Poor Families 17.3% 3, % -582 Non-Poor Families 69.1% 12, % -5,555 Single Mothers 11.4% 1, % -485 Single Mothers 77.9% 6, % -515 Children (Under 18) 12.9% 7, % -3,037 Children (Under 18) 74.7% 44, % -10,744 Young Adults (18-34) 22.5% 17, % +1,957 Young Adults (18-34) 61.4% 47, % +1,010 Adults (35 to 64) 20.2% 18, % -719 Adults (35 to 64) 65.1% 59, % -7,461 Seniors (65 and up) 19.9% 6, % -1,053 Seniors (65 and up) 62.1% 19, % -6,106 U.S.-Born 19.3% 45, % -3,963 U.S.-Born 65.2% 153, % -31,765 Foreign-Born 17.7% 4, % +1,131 Foreign-Born 72.4% 16, % +8,367 Owner Units 19.7% 8, % +536 Owner Units 64.4% 29, % -7,591 Renter Units 23.1% 14, % -1,353 Renter Units 62.8% 40, % -2,093 Vacant Units 15.0% 3, % -466 Vacant Units 67.2% 14, % -1,072 *The figures in the lower set of tables may include many neighborhoods with very slight demographic changes, and are especially sensitive to sampling error. These tables are best understood as depicting an aggressive outer estimate of population shifts, as compared to the estimates in the upper set of tables, which are more robustly observed. Data: U.S. Census. 5

6 TABLES FOR REGIONAL SUBURBS - Buffalo Region ECONOMICALLY EXPANDING NEIGHBORHOODS Experiencing Strong Economic Expansion ECONOMICALLY DECLINING NEIGHBORHOODS Experiencing Strong Economic Decline 2.7% 23, % % 231, % -14,041 Low-Income 1.7% 3, % -1,814 Low-Income 40.6% 83, % +20,460 Poverty 1.3% 1, % -29 Poverty 44.0% 36, % +11,690 Extreme Poverty 1.5% % +54 Extreme Poverty 45.3% 16, % +4,991 American Indian 1.0% % -32 American Indian 61.7% 3, % -143 Asian 0.5% % +89 Asian 34.4% 6, % +4,142 Black 0.8% % +276 Black 52.0% 21, % +7,580 Hispanic 0.6% % -55 Hispanic 37.0% 8, % +4,921 White 3.0% 23, % +561 White 24.0% 185, % -33,543 College-Educated 2.0% 3, % +1,309 College-Educated 18.7% 37, % +7,323 Non-College 3.1% 13, % +43 Non-College 28.6% 121, % -15,403 Families 2.6% 2, % -546 Families 25.6% 24, % -6,024 Families in Poverty 1.3% % -37 Families in Poverty 50.5% 5, % +1,548 Non-Poor Families 2.8% 2, % -509 Non-Poor Families 22.4% 18, % -7,572 Single Mothers 1.1% % 0 Single Mothers 53.8% 4, % +1,458 Children (Under 18) 2.6% 4, % -1,345 Children (Under 18) 26.2% 45, % -10,583 Young Adults (18-34) 2.4% 4, % +367 Young Adults (18-34) 32.2% 59, % +5,048 Adults (35 to 64) 2.9% 10, % +628 Adults (35 to 64) 24.6% 88, % -3,225 Seniors (65 and up) 2.8% 4, % +1,117 Seniors (65 and up) 24.0% 37, % -5,503 U.S.-Born 2.8% 23, % +860 U.S.-Born 26.3% 217, % -17,631 Foreign-Born 1.1% % -12 Foreign-Born 28.8% 13, % +3,592 Owner Units 3.1% 8, % +1,051 Owner Units 24.2% 64, % -3,778 Renter Units 1.3% 1, % -218 Renter Units 34.6% 32, % +80 Vacant Units 3.3% % +127 Vacant Units 36.4% 10, % +3,247 with Any Indicators of Economic Expansion* with Any Indicators of Economic Decline* 9.3% 81, % +5, % 522, % -22,393 Low-Income 6.1% 12, % -2,115 Low-Income 73.2% 150, % +29,251 Poverty 5.9% 4, % +1,009 Poverty 76.1% 62, % +18,415 Extreme Poverty 5.9% 2, % +460 Extreme Poverty 75.3% 26, % +6,479 American Indian 2.4% % -271 American Indian 78.9% 4, % -335 Asian 5.2% 1, % +725 Asian 58.9% 11, % +5,810 Black 4.5% 1, % +1,043 Black 79.6% 32, % +11,540 Hispanic 3.4% % +126 Hispanic 68.4% 16, % +8,488 White 9.9% 76, % +3,920 White 58.0% 447, % -51,878 College-Educated 9.1% 18, % +6,356 College-Educated 53.0% 105, % +21,671 Non-College 9.7% 41, % +684 Non-College 61.9% 262, % -27,626 Families 8.9% 8, % -1,057 Families 59.7% 56, % -11,811 Families in Poverty 5.2% % +39 Families in Poverty 82.2% 8, % +1,974 Non-Poor Families 9.4% 7, % -1,096 Non-Poor Families 56.7% 47, % -13,785 Single Mothers 5.3% % +96 Single Mothers 84.0% 6, % +1,742 Children (Under 18) 8.7% 15, % -2,796 Children (Under 18) 59.8% 105, % -21,749 Young Adults (18-34) 8.5% 15, % +2,375 Young Adults (18-34) 64.3% 117, % +6,207 Adults (35 to 64) 9.6% 34, % +3,174 Adults (35 to 64) 57.9% 207, % -4,376 Seniors (65 and up) 10.1% 15, % +3,093 Seniors (65 and up) 58.2% 92, % -2,569 U.S.-Born 9.4% 78, % +5,432 U.S.-Born 59.6% 494, % -27,332 Foreign-Born 6.0% 2, % +372 Foreign-Born 59.7% 27, % +4,943 Owner Units 9.9% 26, % +3,570 Owner Units 58.3% 155, % -2,501 Renter Units 7.4% 6, % +304 Renter Units 68.0% 63, % +693 Vacant Units 8.0% 2, % +365 Vacant Units 68.2% 19, % +5,946 *The figures in the lower set of tables may include many neighborhoods with very slight demographic changes, and are especially sensitive to sampling error. These tables are best understood as depicting an aggressive outer estimate of population shifts, as compared to the estimates in the upper set of tables, which are more robustly observed. Data: U.S. Census. 6

7 BUFFALO (CENTRAL) REGION: Gentrification and Economic Decline by Census Tract with Net Change in Low Income Population, Lewiston V Lewiston T Tuscarora Indian Reserv. Cambria Lockport C NIAGARA Niagara Lockport T Pendleton Wheatfield 420 Niagara Falls North Tonawanda Grand Island ERIE 990 Clarence 190 Tonawanda C Amherst CANADA Tonawanda T 290 Williamsville Economic Decline: Abandonment: < -700 Low Income (4) Kenmore 90-1 to -699 Low Income (8) Lancaster T Low Income Concentration: 1 to 699 Low Income > 700 Low Income (86) (5) 3 Buffalo Sloan Depew Lancaster V Economic Expansion: Low Income Displacement: Cheektowaga < -700 Low Income (1) to -699 Low Income (9) Overall Growth: 1 to 699 Low Income > 700 Low Income (1) (0) Lake Erie Lackawanna West Seneca 400 Elma Economic expansion/decline is defined if a tract has a +/- 10% change in middlehigh-income population and a -/+ 5% change in low-income population share, respectively. Blasdell Orchard Park V C - City T - Town V - Village East Aurora 5 Hamburg T Aurora 0 5 Hamburg V Orchard Park T Miles Data Sources: Geolytics, U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 SF3; U.S. Census Bureau, 2016 American Community Survey (5-year data). 7