scholarly journals A Statistical and Demographic Profile of the US Temporary Protected Status Populations from El Salvador, Honduras, and Haiti

2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 577-592 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Warren ◽  
Donald Kerwin
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
El Salvador ◽  
Participation Rate ◽  
The United States ◽  
Grocery Stores ◽  
Food Services ◽  
Foreign Born ◽  
Environmental Disaster ◽  
Executive Summary ◽  
The Us

Executive Summary1 This report presents detailed statistical information on the US Temporary Protected Status (TPS) populations from El Salvador, Honduras, and Haiti. TPS can be granted to noncitizens from designated nations who are unable to return to their countries because of armed conflict, environmental disaster, or other extraordinary and temporary conditions. In January 2017, an estimated 325,000 migrants from 13 TPS-designated countries resided in the United States. This statistical portrait of TPS beneficiaries from El Salvador, Honduras, and Haiti reveals hardworking populations with strong family and other ties to the United States. In addition, high percentages have lived in the United States for 20 years or more, arrived as children, and have US citizen children. The paper finds that: • The labor force participation rate of the TPS population from the three nations ranges from 81 to 88 percent, which is well above the rate for the total US population (63 percent) and the foreign-born population (66 percent). • The five leading industries in which TPS beneficiaries from these countries work are: construction (51,700), restaurants and other food services (32,400), landscaping services (15,800), child day care services (10,000), and grocery stores (9,200). • TPS recipients from these countries live in 206,000 households: 61,000 of these households (about 30 percent) have mortgages. • About 68,000, or 22 percent, of the TPS population from these nations arrived as children under the age of 16.

scholarly journals Nativity Status and Poly Tobacco Use among Young Adults in the United States

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peace C. Okpala ◽  
Carrie Rosario ◽  
Melissa J. Dupont-Reyes ◽  
Michelle Y. Martin Romero ◽  
Md Towfiqul Alam ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Young Adults ◽  
Tobacco Use ◽  
Regression Models ◽  
The United States ◽  
Foreign Born ◽  
Tobacco Products ◽  
Targeted Interventions ◽  
Nativity Status ◽  
The Us

Introduction: Young adults are the second largest segment of the immigrant population in the United States (US). Given recent trends in later age of initiation of tobacco use, we examined variation in use of tobacco products by nativity status for this population group. Methods: Our study included young adults 18-30 years of age sampled in the National Health Interview Survey (2015-2019), a nationally representative sample of the US population. We calculated prevalence of use of any and 2 or more tobacco products (cigarettes, cigars, pipes, e-cigarettes, and smokeless tobacco) for foreign-born (n=3,096) and US-born (n=6,811) young adults. Logistic regression models adjusted for age, sex, race-ethnicity, education, and poverty, while accounting for the complex survey design. Results: Foreign-born young adults were significantly less likely to use any tobacco product (Cigarette = 7.3% vs 10.7%; Cigar= 1.8% vs 4.8%; E-cigarette= 2.3% vs 4.5%, respectively; p<0.01) or poly tobacco use (1.9% vs. 4.2%; p<0.01) than US-born young adults. Adjusted regression models showed lower odds of poly tobacco use among the foreign-born than their US-born counterparts (Odds Ratio = 0.41, (95% Confidence Interval: 0.26-0.63)). Conclusion: Findings highlight the importance of targeted interventions by nativity status and further tobacco prevention efforts needed for the US-born.

Managing E-business

2011 ◽  
pp. 254-269
Author(s):  
Keng Siau ◽  
Shane Meakim
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Web Sites ◽  
Credit Cards ◽  
The United States ◽  
Security And Privacy ◽  
Grocery Stores ◽  
Electronic Business ◽  
The Us ◽  
The World ◽  
Near Future

What would you do if I told you that I could read your mind? Given that I am not a psychic, but a Web site administrator, you would probably not believe me. There are organizations that maintain databases of almost every consumer in the United States and even the world. One organization claims to have a database that encompasses 90% of all US consumers. Once an organization was given the name of a man and was told he lived in the US. In less than 48 hours they found where he worked, where he lived, who he was married to, how many times he was married, the contents of his financial portfolio, what credit cards he had, and what he bought at grocery stores. Amazingly, this information was obtained legally from various Web sites. The fact that you use a computer at home does not ensure your anonymity. You are being tracked in more ways than you could possibly think. As you surf the Net, facts are compiled about you. These pieces of information can range from the places or sites you visit and how long you stayed there to where you come from. These issues concerning trust, security, and privacy in cyberspace must be addressed in the near future and are critical to the growth of electronic business (Siau & Whitacre, 2001; Keen et al., 2000; Turban et al., 2000; Fingar et al., 2000; Kaufman et al., 1995; Ford & Baum, 1997).

scholarly journals What’s Wrong with Temporary Protected Status and How to Fix It: Exploring a Complementary Protection Regime

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 42-53 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bill Frelick
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Asylum Seekers ◽  
Attorney General ◽  
The United States ◽  
Executive Summary ◽  
Refugee Convention ◽  
Foreign Countries ◽  
Real Risk ◽  
The Us ◽  
Degrading Treatment

Executive Summary Temporary Protected Status (TPS) became part of the US protection regime in 1990 to expand protection beyond what had been available under the US Refugee Act of 1980, which had limited asylum to those who met the refugee definition from the United Nations’ 1951 Refugee Convention. The TPS statute authorized the attorney general to designate foreign countries for TPS based on armed conflict, environmental disasters, and other extraordinary and temporary conditions that prevent designated nationals from returning in safety. While providing blanket protection that very likely has saved lives, TPS has nonetheless proven to be a blunt instrument that has frustrated advocates on both sides of the larger immigration debate. This article evaluates the purpose and effectiveness of the TPS statute and identifies inadequacies in the TPS regime and related protection gaps in the US asylum system. It argues that TPS has not proven to be an effective mechanism for the United States to protect foreigners from generalized conditions of danger in their home countries. It calls for changing the US protection regime to make it more responsive to the risks many asylum seekers actually face by creating a broader “complementary protection” standard and a more effective procedure for assessing individual protection claims, while reserving “temporary protection” for rare situations of mass influx that overwhelm the government’s capacity to process individual asylum claims. The article looks at alternative models for complementary protection from other jurisdictions, and shows how the US asylum and TPS system (in contrast to most other jurisdictions) fails to provide a mechanism for protecting arriving asylum seekers who do not qualify as refugees but who nevertheless would be at real risk of serious harm based on cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment or because of situations of violence or other exceptional circumstances, including natural or human-made disasters or other serious events that disturb public order, that would threaten their lives or personal security. The article proposes that the United States adopt an individualized complementary protection standard for arriving asylum seekers who are not able to meet the 1951 Refugee Convention standard but who would face a serious threat to life or physical integrity if returned because of a real risk of (1) cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment; (2) violence; or (3) exceptional situations, for which there is no adequate domestic remedy.

scholarly journals A Study of Organic Food Labeling In the United States Compared to Denmark

2019 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Abigail Vlasak
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Global Scale ◽  
Grocery Stores ◽  
Organic Certification ◽  
Food Pyramid ◽  
The Us ◽  
Food Economy ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Labeling Requirements

Organic farming practices produce foods that avoid manufactured fertilizers, pesticides, growth regulators (GMOs), and livestock additives. The definition of what is considered organic in the United States is that 95 percent of the ingredient list must be free of synthetic additives and must not be processed using industrial solvents. The goal of the study was to compare organic labeling and certification between the United States and Denmark. The hypothesis is that labeling and regulation will be similar because the food economy is built on a global scale.   Researching organic labeling was required in both the United States and Denmark. A study of one food item from each section of the US food pyramid was completed. Then, labeling data was collected in both Danish and American grocery stores. The work required visiting three grocery stores in both countries. The results were organic labeling requirements are different in the US and Denmark. Denmark has a much more stringent level of organic certification, store labels of studied products confirm these differences. The study demonstrated that organic labeling, is very complicated in both the US and Denmark, and there is not a common standard of organic labeling and certification between these two countries.

scholarly journals Reverse Migration to Mexico Led to US Undocumented Population Decline: 2010 to 2018

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 32-41 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Warren
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
New York ◽  
Large Population ◽  
Population Decline ◽  
New York State ◽  
The United States ◽  
Executive Summary ◽  
Reverse Migration ◽  
The Us ◽  
Almost All

Executive Summary This report presents estimates of the undocumented population residing in the United States in 2018, highlighting demographic changes since 2010. The Center for Migration Studies of New York (CMS) compiled these estimates based primarily on information collected in the US Census Bureau’s American Community Survey (ACS). The annual CMS estimates of undocumented residents for 2010 to 2018 include all the detailed characteristics collected in the ACS. 1 A summary of the CMS estimation procedures, as well as a discussion of the plausibility of the estimates, is provided in the Appendix . The total undocumented population in the United States continued to decline in 2018, primarily because large numbers of undocumented residents returned to Mexico. From 2010 to 2018, a total of 2.6 million Mexican nationals left the US undocumented population; 2 about 1.1 million, or 45 percent of them, returned to Mexico voluntarily. The decline in the US undocumented population from Mexico since 2010 contributed to declines in the undocumented population in many states. Major findings include the following: The total US undocumented population was 10.6 million in 2018, a decline of about 80,000 from 2017, and a drop of 1.2 million, or 10 percent, since 2010. Since 2010, about two-thirds of new arrivals have overstayed temporary visas and one-third entered illegally across the border. The undocumented population from Mexico fell from 6.6 million in 2010 to 5.1 million in 2018, a decline of 1.5 million, or 23 percent. Total arrivals in the US undocumented population from El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras — despite high numbers of Border Patrol apprehensions of these populations in recent years — remained at about the same level in 2018 as in the previous four years. 3 The total undocumented population in California was 2.3 million in 2018, a decline of about 600,000 compared to 2.9 million in 2010. The number from Mexico residing in the state dropped by 605,000 from 2010 to 2018. The undocumented population in New York State fell by 230,000, or 25 percent, from 2010 to 2018. Declines were largest for Jamaica (−51 percent), Trinidad and Tobago (−50 percent), Ecuador (−44 percent), and Mexico (−34 percent). The results shown here reinforce the view that improving social and economic conditions in sending countries would not only reduce pressure at the border but also likely cause a large decline in the undocumented population. Two countries had especially large population changes — in different directions — in the 2010 to 2018 period. The population from Poland dropped steadily, from 93,000 to 39,000, while the population from Venezuela increased from 65,000 to 172,000. Almost all the increase from Venezuela occurred after 2014.

scholarly journals Statelessness in the United States: A Study to Estimate and Profile the US Stateless Population

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 150-213
Author(s):  
Donald Kerwin ◽  
Daniela Alulema ◽  
Michael Nicholson ◽  
Robert Warren
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
At Risk ◽  
New York ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
The United States ◽  
Census Bureau ◽  
Executive Summary ◽  
Public And Private ◽  
Data Limitations ◽  
The Us

Executive Summary In October 2017, the Center for Migration Studies of New York (CMS) initiated a study to map the stateless population in the United States. This study sought to: Develop a methodology to estimate the US stateless population; Provide provisional estimates and profiles of persons who are potentially stateless or potentially at risk of statelessness in the United States; Create a research methodology that encouraged stateless persons to come forward and join a growing network of persons committed to educating the public on and pursuing solutions to this problem; and Establish an empirical basis for public and private stakeholders to develop services, programs, and policy interventions to prevent and reduce statelessness (UNHCR 2014g, 6), and to safeguard the rights of stateless persons ( UNHCR 2014d ). This report describes a unique methodology to produce estimates and set forth the characteristics of US residents who are potentially stateless or potentially at risk of statelessness. The methodology relies on American Community Survey (ACS) data from the US Census Bureau, supplemented by very limited administrative data on stateless refugees and asylum seekers. 1 As part of the study, CMS developed extensive, well-documented profiles of non–US citizen residents who are potentially stateless or potentially at risk of statelessness. It then used these profiles to query ACS data to develop provisional estimates and determine the characteristics of these populations. The report finds that the population in the United States that is potentially stateless or potentially at risk of statelessness is larger and more diverse than previously assumed, albeit with the caveat that severe data limitations make it impossible to provide precise estimates of this population. Stateless determinations require individual screening, which the study could not undertake. Individuals deemed potentially stateless or potentially at risk of statelessness in this report may in fact have been able to secure nationality in their home countries or in third countries. They may also be on a path to citizenship in the United States, although nobody in CMS’s estimates had yet to obtain US citizenship. According to CMS’s analysis, roughly 218,000 US residents are potentially stateless or potentially at risk of statelessness. These groups live in all 50 states, 2 with the largest populations in California (20,600), New York (18,500), Texas (15,200), Ohio (13,200), Minnesota (11,200), Illinois (8,600), Pennsylvania (8,200), Wisconsin (7,300), Georgia (6,600), and Virginia (6,500). The report recommends ways to improve data collection and, thus, develop better estimates in the future. It also lifts up the voices and challenges of stateless persons, and outlines steps to reduce statelessness and safeguard the rights of stateless persons in the United States. As it stands, the paucity of reliable federal data on the stateless, the lack of a designated path to legal status for them under US law, and the indifference of government agencies contribute to the vulnerability and isolation of these populations.

scholarly journals Fixing What’s Most Broken in the US Immigration System: A Profile of the Family Members of US Citizens and Lawful Permanent Residents Mired in Multiyear Backlogs

2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 36-41 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donald Kerwin ◽  
Robert Warren
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Family Relationship ◽  
Family Members ◽  
The United States ◽  
Executive Summary ◽  
The Public ◽  
Permanent Resident ◽  
The Us ◽  
Family Based ◽  
Us Immigration

Executive Summary The US Department of State (DOS) reports that as of November 2018, nearly 3.7 million persons had been found by US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) to have a close family relationship to a US citizen or lawful permanent resident (LPR) that qualified them for a visa, but were on “the waiting list in the various numerically-limited immigrant categories” ( DOS 2018 ). These backlogs in family-based “preference” (numerically capped) categories represent one of the most egregious examples of the dysfunction of the US immigration system. They consign family members of US citizens and LPRs that potentially qualify for a visa and that avail themselves of US legal procedures to years of insecurity, frustration, and (often) separation from their families. Often criticized in the public sphere for jumping the visa queue, it would be more accurate to say that this population, in large part, comprises the queue. While they wait for their visa priority date to become current, those without immigration status are subject to removal. In addition, most cannot adjust to LPR status in the United States, but must leave the country for consular processing and, when they do, face three- or 10-year bars on readmission, depending on the duration of their unlawful presence in the United States. This population will also be negatively affected by the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) proposed rule to expand the public charge ground of inadmissibility ( Kerwin, Warren, and Nicholson 2018 ). In addition, persons languishing in backlogs enjoy few prospects in the short term for executive or legislative relief, given political gridlock over immigration reform and the Trump administration’s support for reduced family-based immigration.

Stressful Life Events and Obesity in the United States: The Role of Nativity and Length of Residence

2021 ◽  
pp. 089011712110344
Author(s):  
Adolfo G. Cuevas ◽  
Michael V. Stanton ◽  
Keri Carvalho ◽  
Natalie Eckert ◽  
Kasim Ortiz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Life Events ◽  
Stressful Life Events ◽  
The United States ◽  
Stressful Life ◽  
Foreign Born ◽  
Length Of Residence ◽  
Nativity Status ◽  
The Us

Purpose: Obesity is a public health issue in the United States (US), that disproportionately affects marginalized group members. Stressful life events (SLE) have been implicated as an obesogenic risk factor. However, there is scant research examining of the role of nativity status and length of residence in the relationship between SLE and obesity. Design: Cross-sectional survey. Setting: Wave 2 of the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions. Sample: A total of 34,653 participants were included in these analyses, of whom 10,169 (29.39%) had obesity. Measures: Obesity (measured using body mass index), stressful life events, race/ethnicity, gender, educational attainment, family income, marital status, current smoking status, and alcohol abuse. Analysis: Weighted logistic regression analysis. Results: A total of 10,169 (29.39%) had obesity. There was a significant interaction between SLE and nativity status/length of residence [F (3, 34,642) = 60.50, p < 0.01]. Based on stratified analyses, SLE were associated with greater odds of obesity for US-born individuals (OR = 1.07; 95% CI [1.05, 1.08]) and foreign-born individuals living in the US for ≥ 20 years (OR = 1.17; 95% CI [1.10, 1.25]). There was no evidence that SLE were associated with greater odds of obesity for foreign-born individuals living in the US <10 years (OR = 1.06; 95% CI [0.94, 1.21]) and 11-19 years (OR = 1.00; 95% CI [0.91, 1.09]). Conclusions: Number of SLE may be a risk factor for obesity, particularly for US-born adults and foreign-born adults living the US >20 years. Further research is needed to understand the pathways that may link SLE to obesity among these groups.

scholarly journals Interesting Patterns Found When Academic and Public Library Use by Foreign-born Students Is Assessed Using ‘Super-Diversity’ Variables

2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
pp. 182-184
Author(s):  
Brittany Richardson
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
First Generation ◽  
Public Libraries ◽  
Public Library ◽  
The United States ◽  
Median Income ◽  
Foreign Born ◽  
Library Use ◽  
The Us ◽  
Mean Differences

A Review of: Albarillo, F. (2018). Super-diversity and foreign-born students in academic libraries: A survey study. portal: Libraries and the Academy, 18(1), 59-91. https://doi.org/10.1353/pla.2018.0004 Abstract Objective – To evaluate the relationship between academic and public library usage and various characteristics of foreign-born students. Design – Survey questionnaire. Setting – Medium-sized public liberal arts college in the northeastern United States. Subjects – 123 foreign-born students enrolled at the institution in fall 2014. Methods – The researcher emailed a five-part survey to participants who indicated on a screening survey that they were foreign-born students currently enrolled at the college. Of the participants emailed, 94 completed the survey. The survey used a super-diversity lens to assess academic and public library use by foreign-born students in relationship to multiple variables, including student status, race and ethnicity, immigration status, first-generation student status, gender, age, age of arrival in the United States (US), years living in the US, and ZIP Code (used to approximate median income based on the US Census Bureau’s 2014 American Community Survey). Respondents reported frequency of use on a Likert-type scale of 1=Never to 6=Always. The author adapted items from the In Library Use Survey Instrument (University of Washington Libraries, 2011). Usage types included: computer, Wi-Fi, staff assistance, electronic resources, physical resources, printing/scanning/photocopying, program attendance, and physical space. Independent sample t-tests were used to evaluate mean differences in reported library usage based on demographic variables. The author used Somers’ d statistical tests to explore the relationship between library use and age, age on arrival in the US, years lived in the US, and median income. The survey asked participants to describe both academic and public libraries in five words. To show term frequency, the author used word clouds as a visualization technique. Main Results – The study reported on the results of the library use survey section. Overall, foreign-born students used college libraries more frequently than public libraries. The author reported on findings that were statistically significant (p ≤ 0.5), focusing on those with mean differences ≥ 0.5. Key findings included: undergraduate students used public libraries and Wi-Fi/e-resources onsite at college libraries more often than graduate students; first-generation students gathered at the library with friends more frequently; no significant difference was reported in library resource use by gender; and non-white students used the college library more frequently as a study space and for printing. The author was surprised no significant differences in usage were found between participants with permanent vs. temporary immigration status. Somers’ d associations showed an inverse relationship between age and Wi-Fi use and age of arrival in the United States and likelihood of eating in the library. Overall, both library types were positively described in open-ended responses as places with social and academic value. Conclusion – The author suggested the concept of super-diversity equips librarians with a more inclusive approach to studying library user perspectives and behaviors. The author used survey data and the Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL) Diversity Standards (2012) to highlight library service considerations for foreign-born students. Examples of suggested service improvements included supporting printing in Unicode non-English fonts, cultivating a diverse library staff, and providing culturally appropriate library orientations and outreach. The author recommended that more research with foreign-born students was needed to assess culturally appropriate areas for eating and socializing, unique information needs, and expectations and awareness of library services. The author suggested first-generation students’ use of the library for socializing and non-white students’ higher use of libraries for studying as two areas for further qualitative study. The author also suggested creating services and partnerships between public and academic libraries could support foreign-born students, even recommending cross-training of library staff.

scholarly journals US Foreign-Born Workers in the Global Pandemic: Essential and Marginalized

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 282-300
Author(s):  
Donald Kerwin* ◽  
Robert Warren*
Keyword(s):  
Labor Force ◽  
Homeland Security ◽  
New York State ◽  
National Level ◽  
The United States ◽  
Economic Security ◽  
Foreign Born ◽  
Poverty Level ◽  
Executive Summary ◽  
The Us

Executive Summary This article provides detailed estimates of foreign-born (immigrant) workers in the United States who are employed in “essential critical infrastructure” sectors, as defined by the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) of the US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) (DHS 2020). Building on earlier work by the Center for Migration Studies (CMS), the article offers exhaustive estimates on essential workers on a national level, by state, for large metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs), and for smaller communities that heavily rely on immigrant labor. It also reports on these workers by job sector; immigration status; eligibility for tax rebates under the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act); and other characteristics. It finds that: Sixty-nine percent of all immigrants in the US labor force and 74 percent of undocumented workers are essential workers, compared to 65 percent of the native-born labor force. Seventy percent of refugees and 78 percent of Black refugees are essential workers. In all but eight US states, the foreign-born share of the essential workforce equals or exceeds that of all foreign-born workers, indicating that immigrant essential workers are disproportionately represented in the labor force. The percentage of undocumented essential workers exceeds that of native-born essential workers by nine percentage points in the 15 states with the largest labor force. In the ten largest MSAs, the percentages of undocumented and naturalized essential workers exceed the percentage of native-born essential workers by 12 and 6 percent, respectively. A total of 6.2 million essential workers are not eligible for relief payments under the CARES Act, as well as large numbers of their 3.8 million US citizen children (younger than age 17), including 1.2 million US citizen children living in households below the poverty level. The foreign-born comprise 33 percent of health care workers in New York State, 32 percent in California, 31 percent in New Jersey, 28 percent in Florida, 25 percent in Nevada and Maryland, 24 percent in Hawaii, 23 percent in Massachusetts, and 19 percent in Texas. Section I of the article describes the central policy paradox for foreign-born workers during the COVID-19 pandemic: that they are “essential” at very high rates, but many lack status and they have been marginalized by US immigration and COVID-19-related policies. Section II sets forth the article’s main findings. Section III outlines major policy recommendations.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document