Transcript Geography and the Journey to Adulthood: Parental proximity, mobility sequences and outcomes

Geography and the
Journey to Adulthood:
Parental proximity, mobility sequences
and outcomes
Suzanne Davies Withers
Elise Bowditch
University of Washington
Transition to Adulthood






Idealized American norm – growing up, moving out,
going to college, career
Upward social mobility and geographic mobility
Just over half of families with college age children
do not have children enrolled in college
How typical is this pathway?
Where are the rest of young adults as they navigate
the path to independence?
Class differences – economic constraints and
expectations
Process not event






Traditional rites of passage: graduation, job,
marriage, home
It is a process rather than a single event
Life course perspective – voluminous of work
documenting the various pathways into adulthood
Variable sequencing of events
Missing is the role that spatial mobility and parental
proximity serve in the timing of transition and the
range of successful outcomes
the geographic aspects of the transition to adulthood
From Aspatial to Spatial





Spatial studies are scarce
Frontiers of Adulthood (2004) – no reference to
migration or residential mobility
Geographic studies to date are mostly regional
(Mitchell ’94, Settersen ’98, Garasky ’02, Buck and Scott ’93,
Gutmann et al ’02, Iacovou ’02)
Or State (Mulder and Clark ’02, ’00)
Neighborhood effects as causal agents (Corcoran ’92,
Solon et al ’00)
Parental Proximity








What does parental proximity mean?
What does it mean for different groups?
Extended family and social networks for support
Intergenerational care – children and grandparents
Spatial diverge and spatial converge (Silverstein, ‘95)
Expect gender and class differences in meaning
Urban hierarchy – spatial opportunity structure
The route to adulthood is a means of establishing a
geographic relationship with one’s parents
Research Questions
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
What is the timing of leaving home?
What are the different Pathways and Geographic
Destinations?
Can we predicting parental proximity in adulthood?
What is the influence of parental proximity on
adult outcomes (economic) ?
How do adult offspring compare to their parents
regarding economic outcomes?
Are there differences based on the sequences of
parental proximity over the transition?
Data Source






Panel Study of Income Dynamics (PSID)
Followed families and members annually since 1968
The children of original families are now middle aged
PSID now an excellent source for intergenerational
life-course studies
We follow young adults as they mature and leave the
parental home
A key advantage is that we have information on the
parental home during adolescence and throughout the
transition
Methodology






Follow a cohort of dependents aged 12-16 in 1970
Examine their residential location and living
arrangement as they traverse to adulthood
Sample of 2,096 (unweighted) in 1970
We follow their location and characteristics in fiveyear intervals 1975, 1980, 1985, and 1990.
Merge the PSID with geocodes and track the
relative location of individuals and their parents
Differentiate: same zip code, same county, out-ofcounty and out-of state
Research Questions I

What is the timing of leaving home?

by gender, race, city size

combinations of each
Dependent’s Survival Curves
by Race and Gender
White Men
Minority Men
White Women
Minority Women
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
1975 (17-21)
1980 (22-26)
1985 (27-31)
Year (ages)
1990 (32-36)
Dependent’s Survival Curves
by City Size
All
Metropolitan
Urban
Rural
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
1975 (17-22)
1980 (22-26)
1985 (27-31)
Year (ages)
1990 (32-36)
Survival Curves by Race and Gender
for Metropolitan Areas
White Men
Minority Men
White Women
Minority Women
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
1975 (17-21)
1980 (22-26)
1985 (27-31)
Year (ages)
1990 (32-36)
Survival Curves by Race and Gender
for Urban Areas
White Men
White Women
Minority Men
Minority Women
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
1975 (17-21)
1980 (22-26)
1985 (27-31)
Year (ages)
1990 (32-36)
Survival Curves by Race and Gender
for Rural Areas
White Men
Minority Men
White Women
Minority Women
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
1975 (17-21)
1980 (22-26)
1985 (27-31)
Year (ages)
1990 (32-36)
Research Questions II

What are the different Pathways and Geographic
Destinations?

Immediate and ultimate destinations by
demographics
Geographic Variation in Residential
Independence by Gender
Zip
32-36
('90)
27-31
('85)
22-26
('80)
17-21
('75)
0%
Men
20%
33.8%
Men
35.7%
Men
29.6%
32.0%
State
40%
Out
60%
44.9%
Women
Women
County
80%
27.0%
26.0%
29.1%
24.4%
Women
27.4%
25.5%
Men
27.0%
23.0%
Women
27.1%
23.9%
13.4% 14.7%
21.1%
28.7%
100%
16.6%
23.8%
19.9%
26.5%
23.6%
26.0%
19.1%
18.9%
17.5%
23.7%
20.6%
26.5%
23.1%
Geographic Variation in Residential
Independence by Race
Zip
32-36
('90)
27-31
('85)
22-26
('80)
17-21
('75)
0%
White
Minority
White
Minority
White
Minority
20%
County
40%
37.0%
60%
80%
19.5%
27.9%
24.5%
45.0%
9.9%
7.3%
22.7%
35.4%
100%
18.4%
35.5%
45.3%
27.1%
Out
25.0%
47.3%
30.3%
State
19.1%
12.3%
7.0%
25.9%
22.4%
28.1%
19.5%
7.4%
White
Minority
24.0%
46.7%
23.4%
26.5%
23.6%
26.1%
14.1% 15.6%
Research Questions III

Can we predicting parental proximity in adulthood?


Use a logit model to predict geographic
proximity by 1990
On the basis of individual and parental traits
Variables
Original Family
No Disability
Many High Attitude Traits
Few Low Attitude Traits
Few Low Coherence Traits
Few High Coherence Traits
Financial Insecurity
Financial Security
p
SE
-0.1068
0.2192
0.0026
0.0106
0.1890
0.0135
0.1014
0.0178
0.0212
0.0189
0.0166
0.0263
0.0418
0.0196
Individual
Men
0.0121
White
0.2386
Education:omitted=college degree
High School
-1.1470
Post HS
-0.7757
1990 Family
Employment:omitted=employed
Unemployed
Retired/Dis
Marital Status:omitted=married
Single
Widowed
Divorced
ep
**
**
**
0.90
1.25
1.00
1.01
1.21
1.01
1.11
0.0326
0.0603 **
1.01
1.27
0.0542 **
0.0363 **
0.32
0.46
**
-1.5189
-0.0489
0.1082 **
0.0951 **
0.22
0.95
0.1441
-1.0138
0.0395
0.0539 **
0.1445 **
0.0444
1.15
0.36
1.04
Variables
p
Money Income:omitted=lower 25% income
Mid 50% Income
0.2525
Upper 25% Income
0.4788
1990 Parent's Family
Marital Status:omitted=married
Parent Single
0.2112
Parent Widowed
-0.2128
Parent Divorced
-0.0830
Parent employment status:omitted=employed
Parent Unemployed
0.4619
Parent Ret/Dis
1.0344
Parent Family Structure:omitted=extended
Nuclear
0.6121
Other Geographic
Region:omitted=northeast
Upper Midwest
-0.0126
South
0.0464
West
0.1310
City Size:omitted=urban
Metropolitan
-0.6026
Rural
0.0735
Note: significance; + = p < 0.05, ** = p < 0.01
SE
ep
0.0561 **
0.0611 **
1.29
1.61
0.0924 **
0.0580 **
0.0685 +
1.24
0.81
0.92
0.0334 **
0.1283 **
1.59
2.81
0.0594 **
1.84
0.0437
0.0483
0.0539 +
0.99
1.05
1.14
0.0417 **
0.0437
0.55
1.08
Research Questions IV

What is the influence of parental proximity on
adult economic outcomes ?


Compare income-to-needs ratios of adult
offspring who live near (same county) with those
who live far (out of county)
Compare for each demographic group
Research Questions V

How do adult offspring compare to their parents
regarding economic outcomes?

Compare income-to-needs ratios with those of
their parents

Compare for each demographic group
Offspring Mean Need
Ratio far vs. near
Offspring mean need / Parent mean need
Same Zip Same County Out of County
Overall
1.30
0.75
0.72
0.89
White
Minority
1.21
1.53
0.73
0.87
0.72
0.78
0.87
1.25
Men
Women
1.39
1.22
0.70
0.80
0.68
0.76
0.93
0.84
Metropolitan (100k+)
White
Minority
1.20
1.36
0.61
0.66
0.84
0.77
0.88
0.89
Urban (25k-99,999)
White
Minority
1.15
1.67
0.85
1.09
0.58
0.77
0.79
2.33
Rural (<25k)
White
Minority
1.37
1.85
0.76
1.37
0.85
1.04
0.97
2.01
Metropolitan (100k+)
Men
Women
1.40
1.18
0.48
0.74
0.84
0.83
0.95
0.80
Urban (25k-99,999)
Men
Women
1.50
1.06
0.85
0.89
0.43
0.69
0.86
0.76
Rural (<25k)
Men
Women
1.33
1.57
0.79
0.82
0.87
0.85
0.99
1.01
Research Question VI

Are there differences based on the sequences of
parental proximity over the transition?

Compare the outcomes for different sequences
(trajectories)
Comparative outcomes by sequence
Sequence
Category
Always near
Near then Far
Near-Far-Near
Near-Far-Near-Far
Always Far
Far then Near
Far-Near-Far
Far-Near-Far-Near
Offspring Mean Offspring Mean Need /
Income-to-Need
Parent Mean Need
Ratio 1990
Ratio 1990
12.15
15.58
11.49
8.82
12.88
10.77
11.18
9.67
1.08
1.29
1.27
0.74
1.32
1.18
1.30
1.33
Sequences by gender
Sequence
Category
Always near
Near then Far
Near-Far-Near
Near-Far-Near-Far
Always Far
Far then Near
Far-Near-Far
Far-Near-Far-Near
Offspring
Income-to-Need
Ratio 1990
Men
Women
12.33
16.95
10.34
6.56
14.06
14.64
11.08
n/a
11.96
14.22
12.53
14.55
12.42
10.38
11.37
9.67
Offspring Mean Need /
Parent Mean Need
Ratio 1990
Men
Women
1.11
1.33
1.21
0.81
1.14
2.27
1.60
n/a
1.06
1.24
1.33
0.55
1.39
1.07
0.74
1.33
Sequences by race
Sequence
Category
Offspring
Income-to-Need
Ratio 1990
White Minority
Always near
Near then Far
Near-Far-Near
Near-Far-Near-Far
Always Far
Far then Near
Far-Near-Far
Far-Near-Far-Near
13.66
16.19
12.33
8.74
12.97
11.47
11.26
9.67
6.96
9.03
6.60
10.09
11.64
2.47
1.86
n/a
Offspring Mean Need /
Parent Mean Need
Ratio 1990
White Minority
1.07
1.23
1.28
0.69
1.21
1.24
1.30
1.33
1.14
1.86
1.24
1.51
2.77
0.42
0.60
n/a
Conclusion





Spatial mobility, social mobility and the transition to
adulthood are intertwined
Typical paths predicts urban white men well but
women and minorities show different social and
spatial patterns and outcomes
Geographic: what does proximity mean for specific
geographic areas?
Theoretically: promising venue to unpack how spatial
mobility is racialized and gendered
Conceptually: broader issue of intergenerational
proximity in a rapidly aging, hyper-mobile society