Ethnic Neighborhoods and Juvenile Arrest Patterns Among Five Asian Ethnic Subgroups

Purpose: Southeast Asians (e.g., Cambodian, Vietnamese) are overrepresented in the juvenile justice system. Not all ethnicities that comprise the overarching Asian racial category are similar, and this study encompasses the context of juvenile offending among Asian subgroups.  First, Southeast Asians are recent refugees and survivors of trauma compared to their counterparts who voluntarily immigrated; hence these groups’ migration histories may play out in the severity of their children’s arrests.  Second, while immigrant groups initially resided in ethnic enclaves, which are theorized to be protective for adolescents, they will relocate to more diverse areas with higher socioeconomic status over subsequent generations.  Conceptualized as the ethnoburb, the relationship between living in this ethnic neighborhood and juvenile arrest type is unknown. In considering the type of neighborhood in which five Asian ethnic groups (i.e., Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Filipino, Southeast Asian) reside, this study assesses 1) Ethnic differences in charge severity (i.e., violence, weapon, property, substance, or other), and 2) Whether ethnic neighborhood type (i.e., ethnic enclave, ethnoburb, non-ethnic neighborhood) is related to the charge for which a youth is arrested.

Method: This study used a cross-sectional, multilevel design to assess the relationship between ethnicity (N = 989) and ethnic neighborhood (N = 189 zip codes) and charge type.  Los Angeles County Probation provided arrest data for the sample, which comprised of 35% Chinese, 10% Korean, 4% Japanese, 40% Filipino, and 11.5% Southeast Asian youth ages 11 to 20. The American Community Survey provided data for neighborhood type, in which 16 ethnic enclaves and 62 ethnoburbs were represented across the zip codes where youth lived at the time of arrest. Multinomial regression models were estimated to predict charge type for which each ethnic group was arrested, and a multilevel model predicted charge based on neighborhood type. 

Results: At the individual level, Korean youth were two times more likely to become arrested for a violent crime (p <.05) compared to Chinese youth, relative to property crimes.  Both Filipinos (p <.01) and Southeast Asians (p <.05) were about 50% less likely to be arrested for weapons crimes relative to property compared to Chinese.  Filipino youth were also 50% less likely to be arrested for substance crimes compared to Chinese (p <.01).  Finally, youth who live in ethnic enclaves were about 80% less likely to be arrested for a substance charge (relative to a property charge) compared to those in non-ethnic neighborhoods (p <.05).

Conclusions: While Southeast Asian youth are overrepresented in the juvenile justice system, results suggest that Korean and Chinese groups are likely to be arrested for more severe charges. Further, because youth in ethnic enclaves are less likely to be arrested for substance relative to property charges, this may speak to the low-income nature of enclave communities; they may be more likely to be patrolled, with property crimes being among the most visible.  It is crucial to consider context for research and programming in order to understand the nuanced differences between ethnic groups and how that may contribute to disparities in risk and well-being.