Demographic Profile of Jean Kayitsinga Michigan’s Latino … · 2013-06-20 · Puerto Ricans (61.9), Cubans (61.7), and other Latinas from South and Central America (91.2) respectively

NUMBER #2July 2007

Demographic Profile ofMichigan’s Latino Population

A Summary of the 2000 Census

Jean KayitsingaLori PostFrancisco Villarruel

Established in 1989 at MichiganState University, the JulianSamora Research Institute(JSRI) is committed to thegeneration, transmission, andapplication of knowledge to servethe needs of Latino Communitiesin Michigan and the Midwest.JSRI was established to honorthe legacy of the LatinoResearch Pioneer JulianSamora, who was also a co-founder of the National Councilof La Raza, the nation’s largestLatino civil rights organization.

Commensurate with the landgrant philosophy of MichiganState University, JSRI iscommitted to engaged scholarlyactivities that are responsive tothe needs of Latinos, arecollaborative with university andlocal communities, andultimately enhance the capacityand well being of Latinos inMichigan and the Midwest.

JSRIJSRI301 Nisbet, MSU301 Nisbet, MSU1407 S. Harrison Road1407 S. Harrison RoadE. Lansing, MI 48823-5286E. Lansing, MI 48823-5286

517.432.1317517.432.1317www.jsri.msu.edu

Executive Summary

This report, based on an analysis of the U.S. Census Bureau Summary TapeFiles 4 (U.S. Census Bureau 2000) and data from the Centers for Disease Controland Prevention (CDC), National Vital Statistics System), examines thedemographic composition by age and sex, demographic processes, includingfertility, mortality, migration, and residential mobility of the Latino population,focusing on Latino’s residing in Michigan. We find that:

• The Latino population in the United States is younger than the non-LatinoWhite population. In 2000, 35% of Latino population in U.S. were under18 years of age, compared with 22.6% of non-Latino White population.Few Latinos were 65 years of age and older (4.9%), in contrast with non-Latino White (15%). The median age for Latino was 25.8 years (25.4years for males and 26.3 years for females);

• In 2003, the fertility rate in the United States was 66.1 live births per1,000 women of childbearing age (15-44 years). Latinos had a higherfertility rate than other racial and ethnic groups. The fertility rate forLatinos was 96.9 live births per 1,000 women aged 15-44 years, higherthan 58.5 live births per 1,000 women aged 15-44 years for non-LatinoWhites. In Michigan, the Latino fertility rate was 90.2 live births per 1,000women aged 15-44 years, and 58.2 for non-Latino Whites;

• In 2003, the crude death rate in the United States was 841.9 per 100,000population. The age-adjusted rate was 822.7 per 100,000 U.S. population.The age-adjusted mortality rates for the Latino population was 621.2 per100,000 population, lower than 826.1 per 100,000 population for non-Latino whites;

• Latinos are more likely than non-Latino white to die from diabetesmellitus, hypertension and hypertensive renal disease, and homicide;

Mexico aloneaccounted for29.5% of theforeign-born totalpopulation in theU.S. and 11.2% ofthe foreign-borntotal population inMichigan

22

• The infant mortality rate for 2003 was 6.85 infant deaths per 1,000 livebirths. The 2003 infant mortality rate for Latino infants was 5.79 infantdeaths per 1,000 live births;

• More than 31 million people in the United States were foreign born,representing 11.1% of the total population in 2000. Among the foreignborn population in the United states in 2000, 51.7% were born in LatinAmerica. Mexico alone accounted for 29.5% of the foreign-born totalpopulation in the United States and 11.2% of the foreign-born totalpopulation in Michigan;

• Between 1995 and 2000, 42.7% of population in Michigan reported livingin a different residence in 2000 than in 1995, compared with 57.3% whostayed in the same residence since 1995 (non-movers).

Age and Sex Composition

For both the U.S. and Michigan, the Latino1 population is younger whencompared to non-Latino White population. In 2000, 35% of Latino population inU.S. were under 18 years of age, compared with 22.6% of non-Latino Whitepopulation. Comparatively, few Latinos were 65 years of age and older (4.9%), incontrast with non-Latino White (15%). In addition, 60.1% of Latinos were 18 to64 years of age compared with 62.3% of non-Latino population, respectively (seeFigure 1). A larger proportion of Latino population than non-Latino Whitepopulation were 25 to 44 years: 33.0% compared to 29.4% respectively. Incontrast, 13.7% of Latino population was 45 to 64 years while 24.4% of non-Latino Whites were in that age group.

Figure 1. U.S. Latino Population by Age Group, 2000

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000 Summary File 1 (SF 1) 100 Percent 2000

33

In 2000, 38.1% of Latino population in Michigan was under 18 years of age,compared with 24.1% of non-Latino White population. Few Latinos in Michiganwere 65 years of age and older (4.0%), in contrast with non-Latino White(13.7%). In addition, 57.9% of Latino were 18 to 64 years of age compared with62.3% of non-Latino population, respectively (see Figure 2). A larger proportionof Latino population than non-Latino White population in Michigan were 25 to44 years: 31.1% compared to 29.5% respectively. In contrast, 12.4% of Latinopopulation in Michigan was 45 to 64 years while 23.8% of non-Latino Whiteswere in that age group.

Figure 2. Michigan Latino Populationsby Age Groups, 2000

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000 Summary File 1 (SF 1) 100 Percent 2000:

Table 1. Median Age, 2000RACE & ETHNIC ORIGIN UNITED STATES MICHIGAN

Both Sexes Male Female Both Sexes Male Female

All Races 35.3 34.0 36.5 35.5 34.3 36.6

White Alone, Not Latino 38.6 37.4 39.8 37.5 36.4 38.6

Black Alone 30.2 28.5 31.7 29.9 28.3 31.3

American Indian & Alaska Native 28.0 27.2 28.9 29.7 29.1 30.3

Asian Alone 32.7 31.7 33.8 29.4 29.2 29.6

Native Hawaiian and

Other Pacific Islander 27.5 27.0 28.1 26.7 25.9 27.3

Other Races 24.6 24.5 24.6 23.9 24.2 23.5

Two or More Races 22.7 22.3 23.1 19.9 19.8 20.1

Latino of Any Race 25.8 25.4 26.3 23.8 23.9 23.7

Source: U.S. Census, Census 2000 Summary File 1 (SF 1) — 100 Percent 2000

The median age forthe Latinopopulation inMichigan was 23.8years (23.9 years formales and 23.7years for females).

44

Fig. 3. United States Population Pyramids, 2000Latino Population (Percent) Non-Latino White Population (Percent)

by Age & Sex by Age & Sex


Fig. 3b. Michigan Population Pyramids, 2000Latino Population (Percent) Non-Latino White Population (Percent)

by Age & Sex by Age & Sex

Table 1 displays the median age by sex, race, and ethnicity in 2000 for theUnited States and Michigan. The median age in 2000 for the United States was35.3 years (34 years for males and 36.5 years for females). For Michigan, themedian age was 35.5 years (34.3 years for males and 36.6 years for females). Themedian age for Latino was 25.8 years (25.4 years for males and 26.3 years forfemales) and was lower than that the median age of any other racial or ethnicgroup. The Latino population in Michigan was even younger. The median age forthe Latino population in Michigan was 23.8 years (23.9 years for males and 23.7years for females).


55

Figure 4. Birth Rates by Race and Latino OriginBirth Rates per 1,000 Women

Source: CDC, National Vital Statistics Reports, Vol. 54, No. 8

Figure 5. Age-Adjusted U.S. Death Ratesby Race and Latino Origin, 2003

Death Rates per 1,000 Population


Latino populationsare much youngerthan non-LatinoWhite populations.

66

Figure 6. Age-Adjusted U.S. Death RatesBy Race and Latino Origin and Sex, 2003

Death Rates per 1,000 Population

CDC, National Vital Statistics Reports, Vol. 54, Number 19

Figure 7. Age-Adjusted Death Rates forthe 15 Leading Causes of Death

United States, 2003


The age and sex distributions for the Latino and non-Latino Whitepopulations for 2000 in both United States and Michigan are shown by thepopulation pyramids (Figure 3). The shapes of the pyramids indicate that Latinopopulations are much younger than non-Latino White populations. The Latinopopulation pyramids show larger proportions at younger ages and progressivelysmaller proportions at older age. The wider base of the pyramid reflects arelatively younger Latino population. In contrast, the non-Latino White pyramidhas a much more rectangular shape, which indicates an older population. Thebase of the non-Latino pyramid is narrower, and the proportion of the populationin the older age groups is much higher.

77

Among Latinogroups, Mexicans

had higher fertilityrates than PuertoRicans, Cubans,

and other Latinasfrom South and

Central America.

The Latino pyramid also reveals a larger proportion of individuals,particularly males, in the age range of 20-39 years. This is likely to be the resultof continued migration to the United States. The non-Latino White pyramidreveals the aging of the baby-boom generation (age 35-54 years). The pyramidsalso reveal that non-Latino Whites had a much greater proportion of older groups(65 years and older) than Latinos.

Demographic Processes

Fertility

In 2003 there were 4,089,950 live births reported in the United States. Thefertility rate was 66.1 live births per 1,000 women of childbearing aged 15-44years. In 2003, Latinas had a higher fertility rate than other racial and ethnicgroups. In the United States, the fertility rate for Latinas was 96.9 live births per1,000 women aged 15-44 years, 58.5 live births per 1,000 women aged 15-44years for non-Latino White, 67.1 live births per 1,000 women aged 15-44 yearsfor non-Latino Black, 58.4 live births per 1,000 women aged 15-44 yearsAmerican Indian, and 66.3 live births per 1,000 women aged 15-44 years forAsians or Pacific Islanders, respectively. Among Latino groups, Mexicans had ahigher fertility rates (105.5 live births per 1,000 women aged 15-44 years) thanPuerto Ricans (61.9), Cubans (61.7), and other Latinas from South and CentralAmerica (91.2) respectively (see Figure 4).

In 2003, there were 131,094 live births reported in Michigan. The fertilityrate was 61.7 live births per 1,000 women aged 15-44 years. In Michigan, thefertility rate for Latinas was 90.2 live births per 1,000 women aged 15-44 years,58.2 live births per 1,000 women aged 15-44 years for non-Latino White, 67.3live births per 1,000 women aged 15-44 years for non-Latino Black, 49.4 livebirths per 1,000 women aged 15-44 years American Indian, and 81.5 live birthsper 1,000 women aged 15-44 years for Asians or Pacific Islanders respectively.

Mortality and Morbidity

The crude death rate in the United States was 841.9 per 100,000 populationin 2003. The age-adjusted rate, which accounts for the age distribution of thepopulation was 822.7 per 100,000 U.S. population. Comparing non-Latino andLatino origin groups, the lowest age-adjusted mortality rate was for the Asians orPacific Islanders (465.7 per 100,000 population) and the highest was for non-Latino Blacks (1083.2 per 100,000 population). The age-adjusted mortality ratesfor the Latino population was 621.2 per 100,000 population, 685 per 100,000population for American Indians or Alaska Natives, and 826.1 per 100,000population for non-Latino whites respectively (see Figure 5).

Age-adjusted mortality rates are higher for males than for females across allmajor race and Hispanic/Latino origin groups. Non-Latino black males have thesignificantly highest age-adjusted mortality rate (1319.1 per 100,000 population).The lowest age-adjusted mortality rate was for the Asian or Pacific Islanderfemales (392.7 per 100,000 population), followed by Latino females (515.8 per100,000 population) (see Figure 6).

88

Table 2. Deaths and Death Ratesby Sex, Race and Hispanic/Latino Origin for the 15 Leading Causes of Death, U.S., 2003

AGE-ADJUSTED DEATH RATE

Causes Percent of 2003 Crude Male to Black Latino to

Rank of Death Number Total deaths Death Rate 2003 Female to White Non-Latino

All Causes 2448288 100.0 841.9 832.7 1.4 1.3 0.8

1 Diseases of Heart 685089 28.0 235.6 232.3 1.5 1.3 0.8

2 Malignant Neoplasms (Cancer) 556902 22.7 191.5 190.1 1.5 1.2 0.7

3 Cerebrovascular Diseases (Stroke) 157689 6.4 54.2 53.5 1.0 1.5 0.8

4 Chronic Lower Respiratory Diseases 126382 5.2 43.5 43.3 1.4 0.7 0.4

5 Unintentional Injury Accidents 109277 4.5 37.6 37.3 2.2 1.0 0.8

6 Diabetes Mellitus 74219 3.0 25.5 25.3 1.3 2.1 1.6

7 Influenza & Pneumonia 65163 2.7 22.4 22.0 1.4 1.1 0.8

8 Alzheimer’s Disease 63457 2.6 21.8 21.4 0.8 0.8 0.6

9 Nephritis, Nephrotic Syndrome & Nephrosis 42453 1.7 14.6 14.4 1.4 2.3 1.0

10 Septicemia 34069 1.4 11.7 11.6 1.2 2.3 0.8

11 Intentional Self-harm (Suicide) 31484 1.3 10.8 10.8 4.3 0.4 0.4

12 Chronic Liver Disease & Cirrhosis 27503 1.1 9.5 9.3 2.2 0.9 1.6

13 Hypertension and Hypertensive Renal Disease 21940 0.9 7.5 7.4 1.0 2.8 1.0

14 Parkinson’s Disease 17997 0.7 6.2 6.2 2.2 0.4 0.5

15 Assault (Homicide) 17732 0.7 6.1 6.0 3.6 5.7 2.9

All other causes 416932 17.0 143.4


The 15 leading causes of death in 2003 are displayed in Figure 7. The leadingcauses of death were diseases of heart, malignant neoplasms, cerebrovasculardiseases, chronic lower respiratory diseases, unintentional injury accidents,diabetes mellitus, Alzheimer’s disease, influenza and pneumonia, nephritis,nephritic syndrome and nephrosis, septicemia, suicide, chronic liver disease andcirrhosis, hypertension and hypertensive renal disease, Parkinson’s disease, andpneumonitis due to solids and liquids.

Latinos are more likely than non-Latino whites to die from diabetes mellitus,hypertension and hypertensive renal disease, and homicide. The age-adjusteddeath rates’ ratio of Latino to non-Latino white was 1.6 for diabetes mellitus, 1.6for hypertension and hypertensive renal disease, and 2.9 for homicide,respectively. Considering all causes of death, blacks are more likely to die thanwhites. Blacks are more likely than whites to die of homicide, hypertension andhypertensive renal disease, nephritis, nephritic syndrome and nephrosis,septicemia, diabetes mellitus, diseases of heart, malignant neoplasms, andcerebrovascular diseases (see Table 2).

Infant Mortality

The infant mortality rate for 2003 was 6.85 infant deaths per 1,000 livebirths. There are striking racial and ethnic differences in infant mortality rates.African American infants have the highest mortality rate and are more than twiceas likely as white infants to die. The 2003 infant mortality rate for black infantswas 14.01 infant deaths per 1,000 live births, more than double the rate for whiteinfants. The 2003 infant mortality rate for Latino infants was 5.79 infant deathsper 1,000 live births2 (see Figure 8).

The top threeleading causes ofdeath for Latinos/Hispanics in2003 were HeartDisease, MalignantNeoplasms, andCerebrovascularDiseases.

99


Figure 8. Infant Mortality RateBy Race and Hispanic or Latino Origin, 2003

Table 3. Population by Citizenship Status, 2000UNITED STATES MICHIGAN

Number Percent Number Percent

Total Population 281,421,906 100.0 9,938,444 100.0

Native 250,314,017 88.9 9,414,855 94.7

Foreign born 31,107,889 11.1 523,589 5.3

Naturalized Citizen 12,542,626 4.5 239,955 2.4

Not a Citizen 18,565,263 6.6 283,634 2.9

Table 4. Michigan Residential Mobility,1995-2000

NUMBER PERCENT

Population in 2000 9,268,782 100.0

Same House in 1995 (non-movers) 5,307,228 57.3

Different House in 1995 (movers) 3,961,554 42.7

Within the United States 3,804,203 41.0

Same County 2,324,137 25.1

Different County (same state) 1,010,117 10.9

Different State 467,638 5.0

From Abroad 157,351 1.7

There are strikingracial and ethnic

differences in infantmortality rates.

African Americanshave the highestinfant mortality

rate… more thantwice that of

Whites.

Source: U.S. Census, Census 2000 Summary Files (SF4)


Latinos are morelikely than non-Latino Whites todie from diabetesmellitus, homicide,and hypertensionand hypertensiverenal disease.

1100

Figure 9. Michigan Foreign-Born PopulationBy World Region of Birth, 2000


Figure 10. United States Foreign-Born PopulationBy World Region of Birth, 2000


Migration/Immigration Patterns

According to the 2000 U.S. Census, 31.1 million people in the United Stateswere foreign born, representing 11.1% of the total population in 2000. InMichigan, the foreign-born population was 583,589 in 2000, representing 5.5%of the total population in Michigan (see Table 3). Among the foreign bornpopulation in the United States in 2000, 51.7% were born in Latin America,26.4% in Asia, 15.8% in Europe, 2.8% in Africa, 2.7% in Canada, and theremaining 0.5% in other regions of the world (Oceania or born at sea). Mexicoaccounted for 29.5% of the foreign-born total population in the United States (seeFigure 9).

1111

Among Michigan’sforeign-born

population, 10.6%were Mexicans,

24.6% were Asians,and 50.6%

were Asians.

Comparatively, 40% of foreign-born population in Michigan in 2000 wasborn in Asia, 30% in Europe, 16.9% in Latin America, 9.5 in Canada, 3.2 inAfrica, and 0.4% in other regions of the world. The majority of foreign-bornpopulation from Latin America came from Mexico, representing 11.2% of theforeign-born total population in Michigan (see Figure 9).

Among the foreign-born population in 2000, 29.1% had entered Michigansince 1995, nearly 16% arrived between 1990 and 1994, 17.5% entered in the1980s, 13.0% entered in the 1970s, and the remaining 24.7% arrived before 1970(see Figure 10).

Residential Mobility

Between 1995 and 2000, 42.7% of the Michigan population reported living ina different residence in 2000 than in 1995, compared with 57.3% of those whostayed in the same residence since 1995 (non-movers). Among those who moved,41% moved within the United States, 25.1% moved from within the same county,10.9% from a different county within the state, 5% from another state, and 1.7%moved from abroad, respectively (see Table 4).

According to the U.S. Census special report on the migration of Natives andthe foreign born, Michigan experienced a net outmigration to other statesbetween 1995 and 2000 (Perry and Schachter, 2003). This outmigration fromMichigan was made up primarily of Michiganders. However, Michigan receivedimmigrants from abroad and of foreign born individuals. Among the Michiganforeign born population in 2000, 15.2% were Latino. Among the entire foreign-born population in Michigan, 10.6% were Mexicans, 24.6% were Asians, and50.6% were Asians (see Figure 11).

Figure 11. Michigan Foreign-Born PopulationBy Race or Latino Origin, 2000


Among theMichigan foreignborn population in2000, 15.2% wereLatino. AmongMichigan’s entireforeign-bornpopulation, 10.6%were Mexicans,24.6% were Asians,and 50.6% wereAsians

1122

References

Hamilton, Brady E. et al. 2005. National Vital Statistics Reports, Vol. 54, 8.National Center for Health Statistics, Centers for Disease Control andPrevention (CDC). Available from www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr54/nvsr54_08.pdf.

Miniño, Arialdi et al. 2006. National Vital Statistics Reports, Vol. 54, 19.National Center for Health Statistics, Centers for Disease Control andPrevention (CDC). Available from www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr54/nvsr54_19.pdf

Perry, Marc J. and Jason P. Schachter. August 2003. “Migration of Natives andForeign Born: 1995-2000.” Census 2000 Special Reports.

Rosenberg H.M. et al., 1999. Quality of Death Rates by Race and HispanicOrigin: A Summary of Current Research. National Center for HealthStatistics. Vital Health Statistics 2 (128).

Endnotes

1 Latino may be of any racial group.

2 Because of inconsistencies in the reporting of some race groups and Hispanicorigin on birth and death certificates, infant mortality rates for some groupsare likely to be underestimated (Rosenbberg HM et al., 1999).

About the Authors

Jean Kayitsinga

Dr. Jean Kayitsinga is a sociologist demographer for JSRI and Visiting AssistantProfessor in the Department of Counseling Educational Psychology and SpecialEducation, Measurement and Quantitative Methods (MQM) program at MSU, where hereceived his Ph.D. in sociology in 1999. His areas of specialization include ruralsociology, sociology of families, demography, research methods and statisticalmethodologies.

Lori Post

Dr. Lori Post is Assistant Dean for Research in the College of Communication Artsand Sciences. She is a trained demographer and her research focus is violenceprevention.

Francisco Villarruel

Dr. Francisco A. Villarruel, a University Outreach Fellow and a Professor of Familyand Child Ecology at MSU, is the Acting Director of MSU’s Latino research center— theJulian Samora Research Institute. His research focus is generalized into three areas:Latino youth and families, positive youth development, and developmental contextualism.He is also the chair of the National Hispanic Education Alliance (NAHE).

Documents

Demographic Profile of Jean Kayitsinga Michigan’s Latino … · 2013-06-20 · Puerto Ricans (61.9), Cubans (61.7), and other Latinas from South and Central America (91.2) respectively