Engaging Non-Citizens in an Age of Uncertainty

Abstract

Problem, research strategy, and findings: Arnstein’s ladder has informed how planners redistribute power among constituents and increase citizen participation. Since the late 1960s, the non-citizen population has increased in the United States. This demographic shift has affected planning and community engagement because many immigrants experience disparate access to public goods and services more so than native-born residents. Non-citizens are also particularly vulnerable to shifting political landscapes due to citizenship status. I use 29 interviews with immigrant-serving nonprofits to identify unique challenges in serving non-citizen clients after the 2016 election. Immigrant nonprofit experiences are informative because they may be the first and only organization to provide non-citizens with services and resources in times of uncertainty. The interviews inform how planners can improve non-citizen engagement practices and redistribute political power. In particular, interviewees highlight how non-citizens experience barriers to public services and spaces due to fear of deportation and abrupt changes in their citizenship status. As a result, non-citizens are selective in how and where they engage. Thus, they connect to informal and formal spaces that may exist beyond their neighborhoods. These experiences also increase non-citizen dependency on nonprofits.

Takeaway for practice: Non-citizens engage with planners differently than do native-born residents because of legal status, disparate access to spaces and resources, and varying relationships with government agencies. The results of this study offer implications for planners, such as spending more time to build trust with non-citizens through frequent outreach and offering small incentives, using alternative spaces for engagement and pushing for policies that decouple public institutions from immigration services, and partnering with nonprofits to support non-citizens and immigrant-friendly policies. As planners improve immigrant incorporation through these considerations, they can improve how they balance power, constituent representation, and meeting residents’ needs.

Keywords:

• civic engagement
• demographics
• immigrants
• nonprofits
• participatory planning

Acknowledgments

Thanks to Bryce Lowery, Dwayne Baker, and the three anonymous reviewers for their comments and feedback.

Research Support

This article was partially funded through the support of the Institute on Inequality and Democracy at the UCLA Luskin School of Public Affairs. Rachel B. Wells, Susan Baik, and Silvia R. Gonzalez provided additional research support.

Notes

Notes

1 About 4% of non-Hispanic Whites were foreign born according to the 2017 5-year American Community Survey (U.S. Census Bureau, 2017). The following cases use the category “White” to describe non-Hispanic Whites. However, there is evidence that some Latinos may identify or mark the category “White” (see Golash-Boza & Darity, 2008; Tafoya, 2004).

2 The Internal Revenue Service categorizes nonprofits by the NTEE system (Guidestar, 2019). Categories include health care; environment; civil rights, social action, and advocacy; community improvement and capacity building; employment; and human services. NTEE categories that specify immigrants are subcategories under human services (P84) and minority civil rights (R22). Many immigrant-serving nonprofits are then categorized based on other functions, such as housing, health care, human services, or education. Nonprofits can also be categorized by multiple NTEE categories. Many nonprofits in Los Angeles also service immigrants because their service area or target geography has a large foreign-born population.

3 There are some unique cases where non-citizens can be appointed to planning boards.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

C. Aujean Lee

C. AUJEAN LEE ([email protected]) is an assistant professor in regional and city planning at the University of Oklahoma.