Võrdle meetodeid

	Spatial Assimilation Model	Ethnic Enclave Effect Estimation
Valdkond	Migration Studies	Migration Studies
Perekond	Regression model	Regression model
Tekkeaasta	1985	1989
Looja	Douglas S. Massey & Nancy A. Denton	Alejandro Portes & Leif Jensen
Tüüp	Locational-attainment regression of residential outcomes	Earnings regression of returns to enclave-economy participation
Algallikas	Massey, D. S., & Denton, N. A. (1985). Spatial Assimilation as a Socioeconomic Outcome. American Sociological Review, 50(1), 94-106.	Portes, A., & Jensen, L. (1989). The Enclave and the Entrants: Patterns of Ethnic Enterprise in Miami before and after Mariel. American Sociological Review, 54(6), 929-949.
Rööpnimetused	Locational Attainment Model, Residential Attainment Regression, Massey-Denton Spatial Assimilation, Spatial Assimilation Theory Test	Enclave Economy Wage Effect, Ethnic Economy Returns Estimation, Portes-Jensen Enclave Model, Enclave Participation Effect Analysis
Seotud	3	3
Kokkuvõte	The spatial assimilation model, articulated by Douglas Massey and Nancy Denton in 1985, treats where immigrants and minorities live as a measurable outcome of their social mobility. Its core proposition is that as group members acquire human capital and cultural familiarity — rising income, more schooling, English fluency, and longer settlement — they convert these gains into residential mobility, moving out of co-ethnic enclaves into suburban, majority, and higher-quality neighborhoods closer to members of the dominant group. The model is operationalized as a locational-attainment regression: individual residential outcomes are regressed on acculturation and socioeconomic predictors to see whether the expected spatial payoff materializes. Crucially, it doubles as a test of discrimination, because if a minority group earns a smaller residential return on the same income and education than the majority, the shortfall signals barriers that pure assimilation cannot explain. Massey and Denton used this logic to show that spatial assimilation operated for some groups but stalled for others, especially African Americans. The framework became the workhorse for studying how socioeconomic advancement does or does not translate into residential integration.	Ethnic enclave effect estimation measures the economic consequences of working within a co-ethnic enclave economy — a spatially concentrated cluster of immigrant-owned firms employing co-ethnic workers — rather than in the open secondary labor market. The framework was forged in the debate launched by Alejandro Portes and Leif Jensen's 1989 study of Miami's Cuban enclave before and after the Mariel boatlift, which asked whether enclave participation rewards immigrants and, crucially, whether it lets them convert their human capital into earnings the way the mainstream economy does. The central empirical object is the coefficient on an enclave-participation indicator in a log-earnings equation, together with the interaction between participation and human capital that reveals whether education and experience pay off inside the enclave. Because immigrants are not randomly sorted into the enclave, selection correction is essential, and how 'enclave' is defined — by residence, by ownership, or by employment in co-ethnic firms — sharply affects the conclusion. Portes and Zhou later folded the enclave into the broader theory of selective acculturation, where co-ethnic economies serve as a mobility ladder. The method remains the standard tool for testing whether ethnic economies trap or uplift their participants.