Is spatial mismatch really spatial, and really a mismatch? Recent evidence on employment among Hispanic and Black people in the U.S.

Abstract

ABSTRACT In 1968, John Kain hypothesized that Black residential suburbanization had not accompanied suburbanizing jobs, leading to poor employment outcomes for young Black men. This paper reinvestigates spatial mismatch in the 2000s and 2010s, focusing on differences between urban and suburban White, Black, and Hispanic residents of the U.S. We find some evidence for spatial mismatch when pooling data across all years, and stronger evidence for mismatch among Black people than among Hispanic people. First, both urban Black and Hispanic people earn lower wages than equivalent suburbanites, all else equal. Second, urban Black people have a higher probability of un- and under-employment relative to their suburban counterparts. Third, Black and Hispanic people have longer commutes than equivalent Whites do, but suburban residence mitigates this effect. Yet we also find evidence that in recent years, spatial mismatch may not be as serious a problem as many people believe. For example, the wage premium for suburban people—White, Black, and Hispanic—has fallen. Further, urban Hispanic people are not more likely to be unemployed than equivalent suburbanites. Finally, urban and suburban Black and Hispanic people do not work in different types of occupations, so location is not associated with suburbanites of color holding more or less “desirable” jobs.