The enduring significance of race and ethnicity in urban communities

In the spring of 2020, urban populations and landscapes across the globe were shaken to the core by a series of sweeping and devastating crises, notably the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic and countless racial justice–related protests and riots. In the United States, the death toll from the coronavirus pandemic surpassed 100,000 during a 4-month period, with urban centers such as New York City and Detroit being hardest hit, and their African American and Latinx residents disproportionately affected. Across the Atlantic in London, the pandemic took over 6,000 lives with mortality rates among Blacks and Asians reaching two to three times that of Whites. In France, in the midst of the crippling pandemic, a police incident involving an “ethnic minority” resident of the Paris suburb of Villeneuve-la-Garenne set off a series of protests and riots across French cities. In the United States, an escalation of police brutality, racist acts by private citizens, and the videotaped murder of a handcuffed Black man in Minneapolis set off a wave of mass protests that expanded to cities across the globe. Unlike the civil rights marches of the 1960s, these protest groups were more racially diverse with a higher concentration of young adult Whites.

The dual crises of a pandemic and mass social unrest revealed the ugly realities of persistent patterns of discrimination, violations of civil rights, and unequal access to opportunities experienced by marginalized racial and ethnic groups. In each instance, public calls were made for (a) better analyses of racial disparities to “explain” the differential lived experiences of racial and ethnic groups, and (b) policy proposals to address inequalities. These calls suggest a lack of understanding or knowledge about racial and ethnic factors in the marginalization of certain groups, and the types of policies that could be enacted to address these inequalities. But these calls (like those before in the 1960s) have been responded to by scholars. The perception of limited knowledge suggests a continuing gap between research findings and the translation of insights into public debates, strategic policies, and action.

Race and ethnicity as fundamental elements of urban life

Societies across the globe persist in the use of race and ethnicity as social markers and determinants of civil rights. Studies have shown how social constructs stratify groups and differentially allocate resources and power. Researchers have examined how Whites and dominant ethnic groups accrue privilege and rights automatically at birth. These racialized affordances are a double-edged sword: they can affirm and solidify cultural identities in one vein, yet simultaneously disempower and marginalize readily identifiable groups. These tendencies have been heightened through urbanization and the globalization of production and capital accumulation. As population groups become spatially concentrated, institutionalized bias restricts access to key resources in employment, health, education, and housing along racial and ethnic lines. Correspondingly, marginalized racial and ethnic groups acquire little political capital, thus lacking the power to make changes in their status.

The most recent protests for racial justice are part of a much longer history. What this history shows is that contestations and periodic disruptions (e.g., riots) are treated as episodic disturbances while the status quo is maintained. Windows of opportunity for meaningful change and advancement of social justice open for brief periods and, of late, are followed by a reactionary shift to neopopulism that eschews rights for certain groups as antinationalistic. The sequential presidential elections of an African American (Barack Obama) followed by a neopopulist (Donald Trump) in the United States are a clear example of this pattern.

Significant advances in civil rights for racial and ethnic groups have occurred only when public-facing debates raise the awareness and broaden the support base for change, and strategic actions engage and challenge institutional structures. Research has a role to play by infusing the larger debates with knowledge and timely analyses. Moreover, researchers have unique opportunities to translate that knowledge into practical policy recommendations. The challenge is to push research insights into the public debate and even further into political and policy arenas. To meet this challenge, research on race and ethnicity must overcome some of its current limitations.

What needs to change about research on race and ethnicity?

A vast multidisciplinary literature in urban studies depicts, quite adroitly, the realities of injustices and life disadvantages for marginalized groups. The challenge is to craft and disseminate research that informs intellectual discourse, public awareness, and policy debates. How can we best accomplish this goal? The short answer is that we need to build on the existing empirical and theoretical work; create timely, strategic, and policy-relevant analyses; and then push it into the policy and decision-making arenas. The launch of the Journal of Race, Ethnicity and the City seeks to address five serious barriers that limit the strategic and policy relevance of current social science scholarship on race and ethnicity:

1. The obfuscation of race and ethnicity in intellectual discourse

The goal of explaining social/economic/political dynamics, conflicts, and differential outcomes has resulted in a plethora of theories and conceptualizations such as social stratification, marginalization, and intersectionality. While these are helpful ideas that have explanatory power, they are all too often used in ways that obscure or minimize the direct discussion of race. As verbal surrogates, these terms allow discussions to occur without regarding race as a fundamental organizing principle of societies. The uncomfortable topic of race can be adeptly avoided or used among other differentiating traits such as class, without treating race as an overarching factor.

• (2) The regional silos of scholarship on race and ethnicity

Studies of racial and ethnic factors in urban life are almost always regionalized. This is understandable in practical terms since researchers tend to look in their “own backyards” first and foremost. Engaging in research on accessible places and institutions is valuable in that it allows for an in-depth analysis that can yield a fuller understanding of how context factors affect research outcomes. However, studies bound to specific locales limit the transfer and exchange of knowledge on racial and ethnic dynamics across regions and national contexts. Comparative analyses and discussions of national patterns of racial and ethnic inequalities are critical to building a coherent body of knowledge and creating policy strategies to address nationalized and globalized structures of racism.

• (3) The marginalization of scholarship on race and ethnicity within disciplines

For decades, there has been a fundamental tension between scholarship on race and ethnicity being viewed as a “special topics” area of discourse, as opposed to being seen as a key organizing principle, a central and framing element. Part of this stems from the fundamental discomfort felt by intellectual stakeholders and powerbrokers within disciplines who lack knowledge in the subject area and are personally uncomfortable addressing it. This is an intellectual form of power speaking to truth. By classifying research on race and ethnicity as somehow “special” or at best “subfields,” the topics are relegated to the equivalent of intellectual sidelines. In this way, such research may grow richly and yield profound insights, but those intellectual advances are largely ignored by the established disciplinary orthodoxy.

• (4) The limitations of traditional research methods

To expand research in this manner also requires a reconsideration of research methods. Traditional research methodologies have their utility, but they are also value-driven in ways that limit their effectiveness in studies of race and ethnicity. The almost sacred criteria of objectivity obscure the many subjective decisions made by researchers throughout their analyses. For example, how does the race or ethnic background of the researcher influence those decisions? How does human bias affect research outcomes when each researcher belongs to a specific racial or ethnic group? Additionally, some social questions do not lend themselves to the strict requirements of traditional methods. Should those questions go unanswered? Obviously, the answer is no. To overcome the limits of traditional methods, it is particularly important to infuse research with new theoretical/conceptual frameworks and innovative methodologies.

• (5) The shortcomings of research disseminated to academic audiences only

The potential audience for research on race and ethnicity is large, particularly when issues of inequality and injustice are thrust into the public spotlight. Yet only a fraction of studies is cited in public discussions. Most policy discussions take place formally in legislative houses, and informally within media spaces (both social media and traditional televised programs). The content of these discussions is often bereft of research insights. Instead, powerful lobbyists and think tanks provide briefs and arguments based on their own analyses. While some think tanks are engaged in rigorous research, they represent a small portion of the broader research community. The larger body of work done by individuals and collaborating researchers is disseminated through outlets (e.g., conference panels, journals, and books) that have primarily academic audiences. This tendency is understandable given academic reward structures that assign value to such outputs. But if research is to influence policy and public discourse, it is imperative that researchers and academic organizations engage in a research plus agenda. The plus would require both a translation of research findings into readily accessible language, and the pushing out of work beyond academic audiences. In an age of social media, this is easier. Researchers and their professional organizations can build relationships with policy-engaged organizations and elected officials to inform and advocate on issues related to their research topics.

To address these issues, the Journal of Race, Ethnicity and the City will welcome research from a broad range of methodologies, across all disciplinary fields, and from researchers across the globe. At the same time, the journal’s sponsor, the Urban Affairs Association (UAA), is building its capacity to support multidisciplinary research on race and ethnicity in urban areas and developing opportunities for wider dissemination of research findings.

Why is the Urban Affairs Association launching a journal about race and ethnicity?

The launch of the Journal of Race, Ethnicity and the City (JRE) is an important benchmark for urban research and a significant expansion of opportunities for critical analyses of race and ethnicity. It is also a realization of part of the mission of UAA. UAA began in the context of the 1960s. In the aftermath of turbulent summers of social unrest in America’s urban centers, a wave of initiatives was launched to address the compelling problems of cities. One distinct set of efforts involving urban researchers was funded by the Ford Foundation. The foundation’s efforts had two primary objectives:

1) to promote research on a wide range of urban problems by scholars from a variety of disciplines, and 2) to encourage closer contact between university scholars and city decision-makers in order that research results could be directly applied to the ills of the city. (Pendleton, 1974, p. 4)

Between 1959 and 1974, the foundation expended over $36 million in support of these objectives. One outgrowth of the grants made to various universities and colleges was the development of urban research and outreach centers. Some of the directors of these centers formed a group that became known as the Council of University Institutes for Urban Affairs (CUIUA), later renamed the Urban Affairs Association.

UAA is dedicated to “creating interdisciplinary spaces for engaging in intellectual and practical discussions about urban life. Through theoretical, empirical, and action-oriented research, the UAA fosters diverse activities to understand and shape a more just and equitable urban world” (Urban Affairs Association, 2010). UAA has a long tradition of welcoming and nurturing scholarship that asks tough questions and grapples with the most pressing issues confronting urban communities. Not surprisingly, the topics of race and ethnicity have been ever present in UAA-sponsored activities (e.g., its annual conference, the Journal of Urban Affairs, scholarly awards).

In the spring of 2018, an exploratory discussion with a representative of Taylor & Francis led me to develop the idea for a new journal focused on race and ethnicity. I presented the idea to the UAA Governing Board, whose members were quick and unanimous in their support. An ad hoc committee was formed to develop a formal proposal and the Call for Editors was launched in the fall of 2018. In April 2019, after an international search, the two editors—Yasminah Beebeejaun (University College London) and Ali Modarres (University of Washington Tacoma)—were appointed. The development of the journal plan was a collaborative effort involving several individuals, including UAA members Susan Clarke, Jonathan Davies, Arturo Flores, Roger Keil, Cathy Yang Liu, Gregory Squires, Jocelyn Taliaferro, J. Rosie Tighe, and Igor Vojnovic, as well as support staff members Deidre Beadle and Casey Wagner. The journal initiative was enthusiastically maintained under two UAA Board chairs, Robert Silverman and Mai Thi Nguyen, and two Taylor & Francis editors, Emma Sanders and Katie Gezi.

With the launch of our new journal, we continue the UAA tradition of supporting the development of knowledge and policy actions that create just communities and societies. For UAA, the new journal reflects our organizational origins, our awareness that race and ethnicity have enduring significance, and our goal to promote research and discourse that advances equality for all.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Margaret Wilder

Margaret Wilder is the Executive Director of the Urban Affairs Association (UAA). She began her academic career in the School of Public and Environmental Affairs at Indiana University, where she taught land use planning and urban studies after completing a PhD in Geography and Planning at the University of Michigan. Prior to her Michigan days, she had spent all of her life in Texas attaining MA and BA degrees from the University of Texas at Arlington. After accepting a new position at Cornell University and earning tenure there, Dr. Wilder served on several UAA committees and was elected to the Governing Board, eventually becoming Board Chair. Subsequent positions at SUNY-Albany and University of Delaware led to administrative roles as Department Chair and Graduate Program Director. Her early research on neighborhood redevelopment strategies in impoverished communities formed the basis for several UAA conference presentations that cemented her attachment to the organization. Her research garnered best paper awards from both UAA and the Journal of the American Planning Association. In 2005, she chose to leave a tenured full professorship to become UAA’s fifth Executive Director. In 2013, she was inducted into the UAA Service Honor Roll. In April 2020, she received UAA’s highest service honor as the recipient of the Mary Helen Callahan Distinguished Service Award. Dr. Wilder is committed to advancing UAA’s mission of promoting social justice and equity in all forms.