NEW ORLEANS REGION · 2019-01-11 · NEW ORLEANS REGION . In the wake of Hurricane Katrina, the New...

NEW ORLEANS REGION

In the wake of Hurricane Katrina, the New Orleans region has experienced significant population loss and dramatic neighborhood change. It should be noted that the metrics used for this report cannot distinguish gradual changes from those caused by discrete shock.

Within New Orleans itself, 22 percent of residents live in a strongly economically expanding area, while 29 percent live in a strongly declining area. The potentially gentrifying areas have seen their low-income and black population both drop by approximately 34 percent, while white population has grown by 26 percent. Areas affected by strong displacement include Freret, West Riverside, and the Irish Channel.

Outside of New Orleans proper, neighborhoods have shown powerful indicators of decline. Regionally, strongly declining areas have lost nearly 18 percent of their population; within the central city, they’ve lost 23 percent of population. In both instances, the population in poverty is simultaneously increasing, causing poverty concentration. These areas have seen their black population decline by 10 percent since 2000, and their white population fall by 37 percent. As might be expected, the areas with the strongest abandonment are some that experienced the worst effects of Katrina, such as the Lower Ninth Ward.

Regional Total Population: 1,250,247

Regional Low-Income Population: 455,634

Regional Nonwhite Population: 597,034

Central City Population: 382,922

Central City Low-Income Population: 171,579

Central City Nonwhite Population: 265,750

NET DISPLACEMENT (Low-Income Change in Tracts with Strong Expansion, 2000-2016)

Central City: -14,820

Suburbs: -3,980

NET CONCENTRATION (Low-Income Change in Tracts with Strong Decline, 2000-2016)

Central City: No net concentration (-2,230)

Suburbs: 14,594

1

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 changesassociated with growth and displacement. These are neighborhoods where the low-income* share ofpopulation has fallen since 2000 (indicating that an area has grown less poor overall) and the absolutenumber of non-low-income residents has grown since 2000 (indicating that middle-income residents seethe area as an attractive place to live).

• Economically declining neighborhoods, which are those experiencing the kind of population changesassociated with abandonment and poverty concentration. These are neighborhoods where the low-income share of population has grown since 2000 (indicating that an area has more less poor overall) andthe absolute number of non-low-income residents has fallen since 2000 (indicating that middle-incomeresidents 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 achange of +/-5 percent or greater in low-income population share, and a change of +/-10 percent for non-low-income population. This approach classifies fewer neighborhoods overall, excluding areas with onlysmall changes in their income profile. This is the more robust and preferred measure. It is also themeasure used in the accompanying maps.

• In the lower set of tables, a weak, broad measure, which includes all census tracts with any change thatmeet the criteria for the two categories above, with no cutoffs for scale. This approach classifies moreneighborhoods overall, but is noisier, because it includes tracts with very small population changes. Inaddition, 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 canprovide 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.

• 2016 Share indicates what share of the regional, city, or suburban population of a given group live inexpanding or declining tracts. The box is shaded in accordance with the size of the share.

• 2016 Total indicates the absolute number of individuals in a given group that live in expanding ordeclining census tracts.

• Net Change since 2000 indicates the change of population of a subgroup in expanding or declining tractssince 2000, both in percentage and in absolute terms. These have been colored to indicate the type ofchange. In economically expanding tracts, green indicates net growth while blue indicates netdisplacement. In economically declining tracts, red indicates net poverty concentration while purpleindicates 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

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’sincome profile is improving while low-income population declines on net. These are typically placesundergoing changes traditionally associated with gentrification, in which economic pressures push outlower incomes while higher income residents arrive.

• Economically expanding areas with overall growth, indicated in green, where a neighborhood’s incomeprofile is improving while low-income population increases on net. These are typically places withsignificant new housing construction, where residents across the income spectrum are arriving.

• Economically declining areas with abandonment, indicated in purple, where a neighborhood’s incomeprofile is worsening while low-income population declines on net. These are typically places experiencingthe worst neighborhood economic decline, with people across the income spectrum leaving and outrightdepopulation occurring.

• Economically declining areas with poverty concentration, indicated in red, where a neighborhood’sincome profile is worsening while low-income population increases on net. These are typically placeswhere higher-income flight and eroding housing stocks are causing rapid demographic and economictransition, 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

10.9% 136,750 4.6% +6,041 24.1% 301,060 -17.8% -65,3659.4% 42,680 -30.6% -18,800 33.0% 150,185 9.3% +12,724

10.4% 23,367 -31.7% -10,834 35.4% 79,324 19.0% +12,67810.6% 11,106 -38.3% -6,891 36.2% 37,919 16.8% +5,46711.1% 390 46.1% +123 22.3% 782 -37.4% -4686.6% 2,359 24.7% +468 23.9% 8,507 19.8% +1,405

10.9% 46,792 -24.3% -14,989 34.8% 149,931 -9.7% -16,0678.1% 8,554 79.7% +3,793 26.4% 27,862 75.8% +12,015

11.7% 76,352 26.8% +16,159 16.6% 108,342 -36.5% -62,33917.5% 42,707 87.5% +19,934 16.4% 39,854 -6.7% -2,8719.6% 58,661 -7.3% -4,611 25.8% 157,818 -16.3% -30,8129.2% 13,157 -17.4% -2,766 24.8% 35,504 -34.4% -18,6367.0% 2,115 -59.5% -3,102 39.2% 11,885 0.5% +549.8% 11,042 3.1% +336 21.0% 23,619 -44.2% -18,6907.3% 1,634 -57.5% -2,211 39.6% 8,891 6.5% +5458.7% 24,507 -20.5% -6,327 27.1% 76,702 -23.0% -22,857

12.6% 37,976 7.9% +2,777 24.0% 72,222 -14.8% -12,50511.3% 56,022 13.3% +6,556 23.1% 114,514 -17.4% -24,10310.7% 18,245 20.9% +3,155 22.0% 37,622 -13.4% -5,83211.1% 128,841 3.1% +3,845 23.9% 276,301 -20.9% -72,9958.6% 7,909 38.5% +2,199 26.8% 24,759 44.5% +7,628

10.5% 30,882 19.2% +4,985 21.6% 63,399 -25.3% -21,49915.2% 28,271 0.9% +254 26.8% 49,734 -5.1% -2,68414.9% 11,092 40.1% +3,176 24.4% 18,211 69.0% +7,435

24.5% 306,184 8.9% +24,997 39.6% 494,685 -14.3% -82,30819.8% 90,247 -20.5% -23,281 48.5% 221,150 7.0% +14,50919.7% 44,147 -23.1% -13,229 50.5% 113,416 15.1% +14,90621.1% 22,052 -26.5% -7,939 51.1% 53,473 12.8% +6,08221.9% 767 -5.0% -40 40.4% 1,415 -32.0% -66620.1% 7,160 52.9% +2,476 39.0% 13,877 17.8% +2,09418.8% 80,920 -19.1% -19,049 50.4% 217,149 -8.0% -18,82521.6% 22,799 91.8% +10,912 42.1% 44,423 77.2% +19,36029.0% 189,197 18.1% +29,044 32.1% 209,475 -28.8% -84,57732.2% 78,317 71.9% +32,745 30.3% 73,841 1.7% +1,25223.0% 140,987 2.4% +3,264 42.0% 257,174 -13.2% -39,04923.1% 33,082 -11.1% -4,127 40.4% 57,706 -31.3% -26,24014.9% 4,520 -49.5% -4,437 55.0% 16,697 -2.8% -47325.4% 28,562 1.1% +310 36.4% 41,009 -38.6% -25,76714.5% 3,252 -47.9% -2,988 55.7% 12,514 3.1% +37921.9% 61,791 -12.1% -8,483 42.4% 119,964 -21.7% -33,33225.7% 77,268 7.0% +5,053 38.9% 116,841 -11.3% -14,84625.3% 125,403 15.7% +16,977 38.4% 190,338 -14.1% -31,32224.4% 41,722 36.1% +11,067 39.5% 67,542 -3.8% -2,65624.7% 285,814 6.5% +17,332 39.4% 456,137 -17.0% -93,34422.0% 20,370 60.3% +7,659 41.7% 38,548 40.1% +11,03925.5% 74,716 18.1% +11,432 37.6% 110,486 -19.6% -26,95826.6% 49,337 2.0% +981 41.4% 76,878 -4.7% -3,76926.5% 19,797 49.4% +6,542 36.8% 27,431 61.1% +10,404

*The figures in the lower set of tables may include many neighborhoods with very sl ight 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.

Owner Units Owner UnitsRenter Units Renter UnitsVacant Units Vacant Units

Seniors (65 and up) Seniors (65 and up)U.S.-Born U.S.-Born

Foreign-Born Foreign-Born

Children (Under 18) Children (Under 18)Young Adults (18-34) Young Adults (18-34)

Adults (35 to 64) Adults (35 to 64)

Families in Poverty Families in PovertyNon-Poor Families Non-Poor Families

Single Mothers Single Mothers

College-Educated College-EducatedNon-College Non-College

Families Families

Black BlackHispanic Hispanic

White White

Extreme Poverty Extreme PovertyAmerican Indian American Indian

Asian Asian

TOTAL TOTALLow-Income Low-Income

Poverty Poverty

Population Change by Subgroup in Neighborhoods with Any Indicators of Economic Expansion*

Population Change by Subgroup in Neighborhoods with Any Indicators of Economic Decline*

(New Orleans Metro) (New Orleans Metro)

2016 Share 2016 Total Net Change Since 2000 2016 Share 2016 Total Net Change Since 2000









Families Families


White White


Asian Asian


Poverty Poverty


TABLES FOR METROPOLITAN AREA - New Orleans Region

ECONOMICALLY EXPANDING NEIGHBORHOODS ECONOMICALLY DECLINING NEIGHBORHOODS

Population Change by Subgroup in Neighborhoods Experiencing Strong Economic Expansion

Population Change by Subgroup in Neighborhoods Experiencing Strong Economic Decline

(New Orleans Metro) (New Orleans Metro)

4

21.8% 83,618 -3.5% -3,068 29.2% 111,668 -23.1% -33,49016.5% 28,258 -34.4% -14,820 36.7% 62,988 -3.4% -2,23016.9% 16,458 -35.9% -9,201 38.1% 37,027 6.9% +2,40116.7% 8,238 -41.2% -5,771 40.0% 19,778 14.0% +2,43621.4% 99 -59.6% -146 11.3% 52 -85.8% -31518.1% 1,998 37.6% +546 15.9% 1,759 -8.6% -16613.5% 30,676 -33.5% -15,450 41.5% 94,183 -18.4% -21,28026.7% 5,597 82.8% +2,536 15.4% 3,218 -4.1% -13637.1% 43,451 25.8% +8,918 9.6% 11,221 -49.2% -10,88334.9% 33,461 82.4% +15,121 17.2% 16,480 -15.0% -2,90718.9% 32,008 -20.1% -8,048 32.9% 55,669 -19.7% -13,65317.4% 6,444 -31.7% -2,994 34.1% 12,642 -43.5% -9,73310.1% 1,186 -67.4% -2,454 44.2% 5,213 -17.5% -1,10620.8% 5,258 -9.3% -540 29.3% 7,429 -53.7% -8,6279.9% 944 -66.5% -1,872 45.1% 4,307 -11.0% -535

14.8% 11,687 -36.9% -6,823 37.2% 29,310 -29.7% -12,40224.1% 26,398 5.2% +1,315 25.2% 27,590 -16.7% -5,53123.5% 34,805 7.0% +2,274 28.3% 41,941 -21.2% -11,31123.1% 10,728 4.0% +413 27.6% 12,827 -25.8% -4,46921.6% 77,844 -5.6% -4,628 29.9% 107,793 -23.3% -32,77425.6% 5,774 37.1% +1,563 17.2% 3,875 -15.7% -71923.2% 16,644 14.0% +2,047 29.1% 20,867 -31.1% -9,42327.7% 23,004 -1.3% -303 25.2% 20,935 -8.6% -1,96823.4% 8,795 31.4% +2,104 24.6% 9,238 74.7% +3,949

28.4% 108,587 -6.0% -6,978 41.8% 160,076 -21.0% -42,61122.1% 37,976 -33.3% -18,951 50.5% 86,580 -5.0% -4,51622.1% 21,470 -34.4% -11,278 51.6% 50,175 4.5% +2,18022.7% 11,225 -37.4% -6,714 52.1% 25,777 8.7% +2,06032.5% 150 -61.9% -244 19.9% 92 -80.9% -39024.7% 2,728 38.4% +757 35.1% 3,887 4.5% +16817.3% 39,152 -34.3% -20,435 56.2% 127,564 -17.8% -27,59436.1% 7,559 61.6% +2,882 27.2% 5,694 8.3% +43748.3% 56,551 19.8% +9,335 17.8% 20,903 -41.3% -14,69145.5% 43,619 70.8% +18,076 26.0% 24,921 -10.3% -2,86524.1% 40,825 -22.2% -11,642 46.4% 78,600 -18.8% -18,14522.7% 8,430 -32.6% -4,082 48.7% 18,074 -41.9% -13,03613.5% 1,595 -65.2% -2,992 60.8% 7,171 -16.4% -1,40427.0% 6,835 -13.8% -1,090 43.1% 10,903 -51.6% -11,63212.8% 1,219 -65.3% -2,299 62.4% 5,957 -9.6% -63019.3% 15,218 -37.2% -9,000 52.8% 41,572 -27.9% -16,11832.1% 35,216 4.2% +1,410 35.7% 39,130 -16.1% -7,48329.8% 44,126 2.5% +1,097 40.7% 60,294 -19.1% -14,21930.1% 14,027 -1.4% -201 41.0% 19,080 -20.9% -5,02927.9% 100,634 -8.1% -8,908 42.6% 153,374 -21.5% -41,91435.3% 7,953 32.1% +1,933 29.7% 6,702 -9.5% -70129.4% 21,125 8.6% +1,678 41.6% 29,885 -28.2% -11,73235.9% 29,849 -6.5% -2,066 35.8% 29,755 -11.6% -3,90431.0% 11,628 36.3% +3,096 34.7% 13,000 71.4% +5,417


Data: U.S. Census.









Families Families


White White


Asian Asian


Poverty Poverty



(New Orleans) (New Orleans)










Families Families


White White


Asian Asian


Poverty Poverty


TABLES FOR CENTRAL CITY ONLY - New Orleans




(New Orleans) (New Orleans)

5

6.1% 53,132 20.7% +9,109 21.8% 189,392 -14.4% -31,8755.1% 14,422 -21.6% -3,980 30.7% 87,197 20.7% +14,9545.4% 6,909 -19.1% -1,633 33.3% 42,297 32.1% +10,2775.2% 2,868 -28.1% -1,120 32.8% 18,141 20.1% +3,0319.6% 291 1222.7% +269 24.0% 730 -17.3% -1531.5% 361 -17.8% -78 27.5% 6,748 30.3% +1,5717.9% 16,116 2.9% +461 27.3% 55,748 10.3% +5,2133.5% 2,957 73.9% +1,257 29.1% 24,644 97.3% +12,1516.1% 32,901 28.2% +7,241 18.1% 97,121 -34.6% -51,4566.3% 9,246 108.6% +4,813 15.8% 23,374 0.2% +366.0% 26,653 14.8% +3,437 23.0% 102,149 -14.4% -17,1596.3% 6,713 3.5% +228 21.6% 22,862 -28.0% -8,9035.0% 929 -41.1% -648 36.0% 6,672 21.0% +1,1606.6% 5,784 17.8% +876 18.5% 16,190 -38.3% -10,0635.3% 690 -32.9% -339 35.5% 4,584 30.8% +1,0806.3% 12,820 4.0% +496 23.2% 47,392 -18.1% -10,4556.1% 11,578 14.5% +1,462 23.4% 44,632 -13.5% -6,9746.1% 21,217 25.3% +4,282 20.9% 72,573 -15.0% -12,7926.0% 7,517 57.4% +2,742 19.9% 24,795 -5.2% -1,3636.4% 50,997 19.9% +8,473 21.1% 168,508 -19.3% -40,2213.1% 2,135 42.4% +636 29.9% 20,884 66.6% +8,3476.4% 14,238 26.0% +2,938 19.2% 42,532 -22.1% -12,0765.1% 5,267 11.8% +557 28.1% 28,799 -2.4% -7166.2% 2,297 87.5% +1,072 24.2% 8,973 63.5% +3,486

22.8% 197,597 19.3% +31,975 38.6% 334,609 -10.6% -39,69718.4% 52,271 -7.7% -4,330 47.4% 134,570 16.5% +19,02517.8% 22,677 -7.9% -1,951 49.7% 63,241 25.2% +12,72619.6% 10,827 -10.2% -1,225 50.1% 27,696 17.0% +4,02220.3% 617 49.4% +204 43.5% 1,323 -17.3% -27618.1% 4,432 63.4% +1,719 40.7% 9,990 23.9% +1,92620.5% 41,768 3.4% +1,386 43.9% 89,585 10.9% +8,76918.0% 15,240 111.4% +8,030 45.8% 38,729 95.5% +18,92324.7% 132,646 17.5% +19,709 35.2% 188,572 -27.0% -69,88623.5% 34,698 73.2% +14,669 33.1% 48,920 9.2% +4,11722.6% 100,162 17.5% +14,906 40.3% 178,574 -10.5% -20,90423.3% 24,652 -0.2% -45 37.4% 39,632 -25.0% -13,20415.8% 2,925 -33.1% -1,445 51.3% 9,526 10.8% +93124.9% 21,727 6.9% +1,400 34.5% 30,106 -32.0% -14,13515.7% 2,033 -25.3% -689 50.8% 6,557 18.2% +1,00922.8% 46,573 1.1% +517 38.4% 78,392 -18.0% -17,21422.1% 42,052 9.5% +3,643 40.8% 77,711 -8.7% -7,36323.4% 81,277 24.3% +15,880 37.4% 130,044 -11.6% -17,10322.2% 27,695 68.6% +11,268 38.9% 48,462 5.1% +2,37323.2% 185,180 16.5% +26,240 38.0% 302,763 -14.5% -51,43017.8% 12,417 85.6% +5,726 45.6% 31,846 58.4% +11,74024.2% 53,591 22.3% +9,754 36.4% 80,601 -15.9% -15,22619.0% 19,488 18.5% +3,047 45.9% 47,123 0.3% +13522.0% 8,169 73.0% +3,446 38.9% 14,431 52.8% +4,987


Data: U.S. Census.









Families Families


White White


Asian Asian


Poverty Poverty



(New Orleans Suburbs) (New Orleans Suburbs)










Families Families


White White


Asian Asian

TABLES FOR REGIONAL SUBURBS - New Orleans Region


Poverty Poverty





(New Orleans Suburbs) (New Orleans Suburbs)

6

New Orleans

610

90

Kenner

Gretna

Westwego

Harahan

10

9010

39

23

Data Sources: Geolytics, U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 SF3; U.S. Census Bureau, 2016 American Community Survey (5-year data).

LakePontchartrain

PLAQUEMINES

ST.BERNHARDS

JEFFERSON

ORLEANS

NEW ORLEANS (CENTRAL) REGION:Gentrification and Economic Decline by Census Tractwith Net Change in Low Income Population, 2000-2016

Mississippi River

Miles

0 3

Key

Swamp/WetlandExtent of Persistent 2005 Katrina Flooding

Abandonment:(7)< -700 Low Income

Economic Decline:

(26)-1 to -699 Low IncomeLow Income Concentration:

(61)1 to 699 Low Income(10)> 700 Low Income

Low Income Displacement:(10)< -700 Low Income

Economic Expansion:

(39)-1 to -699 Low IncomeOverall Growth:

(5)1 to 699 Low Income(0)> 700 Low Income

Economic expansion/decline isdefined if a tract has a +/- 10%change in middle-high-incomepopulation and a -/+ 5% changein low-income population share,respectively.

7

Date post:	11-Jul-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	0 times
Download:	0 times

NEW ORLEANS REGION · 2019-01-11 · NEW ORLEANS REGION . In the wake of Hurricane Katrina, the New...

Documents