Changing Numbers, Changing Needs American Indian Demography and Public Health (1996) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
4 The Growing American Indian Population, 1960-1990: Beyond Demography
4 The Growing American Indian Population, 1960-1990: Beyond Demography
Pages 79-102
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 79... ...
The average annual growth rate of 4.3 percent, extending over a 30-year period, is demographically impossible without immigration. Previous research (Passel, 1976; Passel and Berman, 1986)
|
From page 80... ...
In addition, the American Indian population has undergone rapid demographic change, including sizeable population growth coupled with substantial geographic redistribution. Many of these decadal changes have already been documented Passel (1976)
|
From page 81... ...
for 1980-1990. Overview of the Chapter This chapter expands on previous work by using various demographic measures to illustrate the magnitude of changing self-identification among the American Indian population and draws some implications for data analysis.
|
From page 82... ...
showed average annual growth exceeding 1.1 percent. In fact, for the 1890s and 1910s, the growth rates were negative as the enumerated American Indian population decreased.
|
From page 83... ...
They appear to have resulted from increases in the population caused by changes in self-identification, that is, individuals who previously did not choose to call themselves American Indian, but did so in more recent censuses. Table 4-2 shows the growth of the American Indian population and errors of closure for the last four decades (1950-1960 through 1980-1990~.
|
From page 85... ...
This leaves almost 645,000 persons, or 33 percent of the 1990 census count of American Indians, that cannot be accounted for by demographic factors, but must be explained by the changing nature of American Indian self-identification during the 30 years. SOURCES OF NONDEMOGRAPHIC INCREASE The 1980 and 1990 censuses provide some data that point to the source of the shifts in American Indian self-identification.
|
From page 86... ...
Thus, there is very large pool of "potential" American Indians, i.e., persons with some American Indian ancestry who may or may not choose to identify as American Indian by race. In this context, the errors of closure in 1980 and 1990 represent very small fractions of the "potential" American Indian population 5 percent in 1980 and only 2 percent in 1990.
|
From page 87... ...
Since the American Indian population experiences negligible immigration, the CSRs should all be less than 1.0 because the population in an age cohort can only decrease through mortality. If CSRs are greater than 1.0, they indicate movement into a cohort, in the case of American Indians through shifts in self-identification.
|
From page 88... ...
All birth cohorts of American Indians reaching adulthood in the post-World War II era have participated in the accretions from changing self-identification. Birth Statistics The exceptions to census survival ratios greater than 1.0 are the cohorts born in the decade before the census, i.e., at ages 0-9.
|
From page 89... ...
However, by the time the 1970s birth cohorts had reached their teens in 1990, even this rough comparability had disappeared as the 1990 census counts greatly exceeded the numbers of births. Thus, registration data on births of American Indians from NCHS cannot be considered comparable with decennial census figures and must clearly be used with caution.
|
From page 90... ...
Alternative race assignment rules: Old NCHS Rule Race of birth is assigned to nonwhite parent in white/nonwhite couple; assigned Hawaiian if either parent is Hawaiian; otherwise, assigned race of father, if known. Mother Rule Race of birth is assigned to mother's race.
|
From page 91... ...
However, most of the Reconcentration is actually attributable to changes in self-identification because increased reporting as American Indian, as measured by error of closure, has occurred disproportionately in the states that did not have large American Indian populations in 1950. We first divide the states into two groups: 19 states that historically have had large American Indian populations, i.e., more than 3,000 American Indians in 1950, and are designated "Historical Indian" states6 or simply "Indian states;" and the remaining 31 states plus the District of Columbia, which historically have not had large American Indian popu 6The 19 states are New York, Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Montana, Idaho, Wyoming, New Mexico, Arizona, Utah, Nevada, Washington, Oregon, and Alaska.
|
From page 92... ...
49,90035,00014,1002,100 33.1 Iowa7,3005,5001,600200 25.6 Missouri19,80012,3001,900200 11.9 North Dakota* 25,90020,2008,5001,600 36.8 South Dakota*
|
From page 93... ...
THE GROWING AMERICAN INDIAN POPULATION, 1960-1990 ange, 93 Error of Closure Average Annual Ratea Estimated (Implied Migration)
|
From page 94... ...
* Indian states include all states with 3,000+ Indians in the 1950 census, except California.
|
From page 95... ...
THE GROWING AMERICAN INDIAN POPULATION, 1960-1990 95 Error of Closure Average Annual RateaEstimated (Implied Migration)
|
From page 96... ...
Thus, the large increase from changing self-identification in 1970 was completely confined to the states that historically had not had significant American Indian populations. Similar patterns occurred in the next two decades, although not to the extreme shown in the 1960-1970 decade.
|
From page 97... ...
These patterns imply that shifts in identification are more likely to occur in areas without large concentrations of American Indians or significant reservation popu lations. In the "Indian" areas, which have reservations and large concentrations, identification as American Indian is more established by both self and community and so is less likely to change over time.
|
From page 98... ...
In the United States, high crude birth rates in states are normally associated with low crude death rates and vice versa, because of age-structure effects. In other words, the high crude birth rates usually lead to a relatively young population with large concentrations of children and adults of child-bearing age, i.e., low-death-rate age groups.
|
From page 99... ...
crude death rates. Conversely, states with high crude death rates tend to have high percentages of elderly persons and thus low crude birth rates.
|
From page 100... ...
The very large denominators in "non-Indian" states artificially lower the computed crude birth rates and crude death rates because of the fundamental inconsistency between census data and vital statistics. CONCLUSION In general, the 1990 census data on American Indians appear to capture the basic demographic features of this population, such as the age structure and size, but shifts in self-identification suggest some caution in analyses of this population.
|
From page 101... ...
101 FIGURE 4-5 Birth and death rates by state for American Indians, 1980-1990. NOTE: Populations based on census counts.
|
From page 102... ...
S 1976 Provisional evaluation of the 1970 Census count of American Indians.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.