BackgroundReview of the LiteratureSupportNo SupportMethodologyDissimilarity IndexEstimates on Median Commute TimesTable 1. Median Auto and Transit Commute Times by Race in MinutesEstimates for Black/White Auto and Transit Accessibility in ZonesTable 2. Job Accessibility by Race and ModeTable 4. Job Accessibility by Race, Mode and Mode ShareInterpretation of ResultsBibliographyLueke Appendix.pdfAppendixIs the Dissimilarity Index with Multi-modal Accessibility a Useful Tool for Measuring Spatial Mismatch? An Analysis of the Spatial Structure Between Residential and Employment Opportunities for Black and White Twin Cities Residents Introduction The dissimilarity index is a useful tool for understanding the spatial mismatch, or geographic separation, between groups. Specifically the measure is often used to show patterns of residential segregation between racial and ethnic groups in a geographic area. Steven Raphael and Michael Stoll in “Modest Progress: The Narrowing Spatial Mismatch Between Blacks and Jobs in the 1990s” use the index of dissimilarity to show the disproportionate separation of blacks from employment opportunities. The authors contend that blacks remain the most residentially segregated from employment opportunities than any other racial or ethnic group, despite declines in dissimilarity over the last decade. The goal of this paper is to utilize the dissimilarity index to determine its relevance as a measure of accessibility by providing an analysis of the segregation between blacks and whites and employment opportunities in the Twin Cities metropolitan area. Specifically, the 1990 Census Transportation Planning Package1 is used to gather information on population, employment opportunities, and median auto and transit commute times in Traffic Analysis Zones in the central city and developed suburbs. The background section of the paper provides information on the dissimilarity index and its relation to the jobs/housing balance and spatial mismatch; the use of the dissimilarity index as a measure of accessibility and spatial mismatch; and the effects a jobs/housing imbalance might have on behavior. The paper goes on to 1) review a sampling of the extensive literature on spatial mismatch, 2) explain the methodology employed in this study, 3) present an interpretation of the results, and 4) ends with concluding remarks. Background The dissimilarity index is a measure that is often used to determine the residential separation of two groups in a geographic region. A measure of zero indicates that an area is perfectly integrated, while a measure of one indicates that an area is entirely segregated. Raphael and Stoll (2002) employ this method instead to measure the degree of residential separation between racial groups and employment opportunities in over 300 metropolitan areas in the United States. They conclude that blacks remain the most residentially segregated from employment opportunities than any other group (in this case whites, Asians and Hispanics). 1 The 2000 data was not available at the time of this writing.The use of the dissimilarity index to determine residential isolation from employment opportunities is akin to the growing volumes of literature related to spatial mismatch and jobs-housing balance. The spatial mismatch hypothesis advanced by Kain in 1968, states that there is an imbalance between the number of jobs in a given area and the number of workers residing in that area. This is particularly true for poor minority groups residing in the inner city. In other words, there are fewer jobs per worker in areas that are disproportionately made up of black residents than in areas that are disproportionately made up of white residents (Ihlanfeldt and Sjoquist 1997). The negative consequences of the imbalance are multitudinous, but the extent to which a spatial mismatch exists in urban areas in inconclusive. To date, many studies have been conducted to test the spatial mismatch hypothesis, employing variables such as commute times and distances, the ratio of jobs to workers in a given area, accessibility measures, and a variety of neighborhood and employment characteristics. A sampling of these articles and their results is reviewed in further detail below. Review of the Literature Studies that test the spatial mismatch hypothesis vary greatly in the methods employed and variables used. Proponents of the measure contend that residential areas with high degrees of imbalance between jobs and housing are likely to have higher rates of unemployment, lower wages, longer commute times and distances and the residents are likely to live in lower-income housing, have been victims of employment and housing discrimination, and are likely isolated from a variety of employment and other opportunities. Areas, therefore, that have high indices of dissimilarity should also ail under some or all of the above conditions. The following section highlights some of the major studies done on spatial mismatch and their findings. Studies that found support for the spatial mismatch hypothesis are reviewed first followed by studies that found no support or were inconclusive with respect to the existence of a spatial mismatch. Support As mentioned, John Kain’s seminal work in 1968 on the imbalance between employment opportunities and places of residence for low-income minorities in Chicago and Detroit was the first ripple in a wave of articles testing the spatial mismatch hypothesis. Kain used several variables to run multiple regressions on the percentage of black employment including the percentage of the black population residing in workplace zones, airline distance from the workplace to the nearest black residence and the airline distance from the workplace to the nearest point in the black ghetto (p.180). He used the results to show that racial discrimination in the housing market led to fewer job opportunities and higher rates of unemployment for blacks. Kain also argued that the movement of low-income jobs into suburban areas further aggravated the employment problems of blacks in the central city particularly because housing segregation prevented blacks from moving to suburban areas or to areas served by transit. Kainconcludes that housing segregation does contribute to the distribution of employment opportunities for blacks. Thirty years later, Kain (1992), in a review of the literature on spatial mismatch, still believes in its