Indicator HH.3.a Multi-group diversity index

Data Source

Environmental Systems Research Institute Business Information Solutions (ESRI BIS), 2007.

Map and table created by San Francisco Department of Public Health, Environmental Health Section using ArcGIS software.

Map data is presented at the level of the census block. The map also includes planning neighborhood names, in the vicinity of their corresponding census blocks.

Table data is presented by planning neighborhood. Planning neighborhoods are much larger geographic areas then census blocks. SF DPH used ArcGIS software and a "centroids within" methodology to convert census blocks to geographic mean center points. We then assigned census blocks to planning neighborhoods based on the spatial location of those geographic mean center points and calculated the planning neighborhood totals for the table.

Detailed information regarding census data, geographic units of analysis, their definitions, and their boundaries can be found in the HDMT at the following links:

http://www.thehdmt.org/etc/Geographic_Units_of_Analysis.pdf

http://www.thehdmt.org/data_map_methods.php

Explanation and Limitations

Developed by Environmental Systems Research Institute (ESRI), the Diversity Index represents the likelihood that two persons, chosen at random from the same area, belong to different race or ethnic groups. Ethnic diversity as well as racial diversity is included in their definition of the Diversity Index. ESRI's diversity calculations accommodate up to seven race groups: six single-race groups (White, Black, American Indian, Asian, Pacific Islander, Some Other Race) and one multiple-race group (two or more races). Each race group is divided into two ethnic origins, Hispanic and non-Hispanic. If an area is ethnically diverse, then racial diversity is compounded.

The Diversity Index can be viewed as a measure of segregation, ranging from 0 (no diversity) to 100 (complete diversity). If an area's entire population belongs to one race group and one ethnic group, then an area has zero diversity. An area's diversity index increases to 100 when the population is evenly divided into race/ethnic groups.

The 2007 Diversity Index for the United States stands at 59.3 but varies from 8.9 to 82.6 by state. A Diversity Index of 59.3 translates to a probability of 59.3% that two people randomly chosen from the U.S. population would belong to different race or ethnic groups.

Why is this a Community Health Indicator?

Racially segregated neighborhoods create conditions adverse to health in a number of ways. As places, these neighborhoods typically have fewer assets and resources such as schools, libraries, and public transportation.a Segregated low-income neighborhoods host unwanted land uses such as power plants, solid and hazardous waste sites, and bus yards.b Freeways and other busy roadways often run through low-income neighborhoods resulting in disproportionately higher exposure to noise and air pollution. Residents are often isolated from economic opportunities and marginalized in political decision-making, limiting their ability to effect change in their circumstances.c,d The attributes of segregated neighborhoods have profound and diverse impacts on health.e,f,g Residents of high-poverty neighborhoods live about eight fewer years than non-poverty neighborhoods; they also suffer more preventable events like infant mortality, pedestrian injuries, and homicide. Research also demonstrates a relationship between residential segregation and teenage childbearing, tuberculosis, cardiovascular disease, availability of food establishments serving healthy foods, and exposure to toxic air pollutants.h

For additional information on the health impacts of displacement and poor housing conditions, visit: http://www.sfphes.org/house_displacement.htm.

  1. Kawachi I, Berkman LF. Neighborhoods and Health. New York: Oxford University Press; 2003.
  2. Maantay J. Zoning, equity, and public health. Am J of Pub Health. 2001;91:1033-1041.
  3. Wilson WJ. The Truly Disadvantaged: The Inner City, the Underclass, and Public Policy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1987.
  4. Bullard RD. Dumping in Dixie: Race, class, and environmental quality. Boulder: Westview; 1990
  5. Sampson RJ, Raudenbush SW, Earls F. Neighborhoods and violent crime: a multilevel study of collective efficacy. Science. 1997;277:918-924.
  6. Schulz AJ, Williams DR, Israel BA, Lempert LB. Racial and spatial relations as fundamental determinants of health in Detroit. The Milbank Quarterly. 2002; 80:677-707.
  7. Williams DR, Collins C. Racial residential segregation: a fundamental cause of racial disparities in health. Public Health Reports. 2001;116:404-416.
  8. Acevedo-Garcia D, Lochner KA, Osypuk TL, Subramanian SV. Future Directions in Residential Segregation and Health Research: A Multilevel Approach. Am J of Pub Health. 2003;93:215-221