Skip to main content
Log in

Ethnic Classification in Global Perspective: A Cross-National Survey of the 2000 Census Round

  • Published:
Population Research and Policy Review Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Academic interest in official systems of racial and ethnic classification has grown in recent years, but most research on such census categories has been limited to small case studies or regional surveys. In contrast, this article analyzes a uniquely global data set compiled by the United Nations Statistical Division to survey the approaches to ethnic enumeration taken in 141 countries. The motives for this analysis combine theoretical, applied, and policy objectives. I find that 63% of the national censuses studied incorporate some form of ethnic enumeration, but their question and answer formats vary along several dimensions that betray diverse conceptualizations of ethnicity (for example, as “race” or “nationality”). Moreover, these formats follow notably regional patterns. Nonetheless, the variety of approaches can be grouped into a basic taxonomy of ethnic classification approaches, suggesting greater commonality in worldwide manifestations of the ethnicity concept than some have recognized.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Kertzer and Arel (2002b) note, however, that even culturalist interpretations of ethnicity can take on an essentialist, almost biological quality, as in 19th-century depictions of culture as physically inheritable, e.g., “in the blood.” For descriptions of contemporary forms of cultural essentialism, see Balibar and Wallerstein (1991) and Taguieff (1991).

  2. The only other nation to suggest such a distinction is Zambia, whose census instructs, “If Zambian enter ethnic grouping, if not mark major racial group.” But by combining the two terms in one question, this formulation departs from the U.S. presumption that the same individual must be classified simultaneously along two different dimensions of identity: an “ethnic” one and a “racial” one.

  3. This emphasis on phenotype is found on only one other census in this sample, that of another former Portuguese colony: Mozambique. Mozambique’s census asks for “tipo somático/origem” and features response categories similar to Brazil’s (Negro; Misto; Branco; Indiano; Outro).

  4. The census questionnaire for El Salvador is missing, and Cuba and Germany did not conduct censuses in the 2000 round (Germany maintains a population register instead).

  5. Note that the American Anthropological Association (1997) has also recommended that the term “ethnicity” replace “race” in federal classification, for the same reason.

References

  • Alba, R. (1990). Ethnic identity: The transformation of white America. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Almey, M., Pryor, E. T., & White, P. M. (1992). National census measures of ethnicity in the Americas. Conference on the Peopling of the Americas, Vera Cruz, Mexico, May 23: International Union for the Scientific Study of Populations.

  • American Anthropological Association (1997). Response to OMB Directive 15: Race and ethnic standards for federal statistics and administrative reporting. September. Retrieved from: http://www.aaanet.org/gvt/ombdraft.htm. Accessed 27 February 2006.

  • American Sociological Association (2002). Statement of the American Sociological Association on the importance of collecting data and doing social scientific research on race. Adopted by the elected Council of the American Sociological Association, August 9. Retrieved from: http://www.asanet.org/media/racestmt02.pdf. Accessed 27 February 27 2006.

  • Anderson, M. J. (1988). The American census: A social history. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Balibar, E., & Wallerstein, I. (1991). Race, nation, class: Ambiguous identities. London, England and New York: Verso.

    Google Scholar 

  • Banton, M. (1983). Chapter 3: Changing conceptions of race. In Racial and ethnic competition (pp. 32–59). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

  • Bean, F. D., & Tienda, M. (1987). The Hispanic population of the United States. New York: Russell Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blum, A. (2002). Resistance to identity categorization in France. In D. I. Kertzer & D. Arel (Eds.), Census and identity: The politics of race, ethnicity, and language in national censuses (pp. 121–147). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blum, A., & Gousseff, C. (1996). Statistiques Ethniques et Nationales dans l’Empire Russe et en URSS. In J. L. Rallu & Y. Courbage (Eds.), Démographie et Ethnicité. Paris, France: INED.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brubaker, R. (1996). Nationalism reframed: Nationhood and the national question in the new Europe. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • del Pinal, J., & Ennis, S. (2005). The racial and ethnic identity of Latin American immigrants in Census 2000. Annual meeting of the Population Association of America, Philadelphia, PA, March 31–April 2.

  • Eberhardt, P. (2003). Ethnic groups and population changes in twentieth-century central-eastern Europe: History, data, and analysis. Armonk, NY and London, England: M.E. Sharpe.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fenton, S. (2003). Ethnicity. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fredrickson, G. M. (2002). Racism: A short history. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gans, H. (1979). Symbolic ethnicity: The future of ethnic groups and cultures in America. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 2(1), 1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldberg, D. T. (2002). The racial state. Malden, MA: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hannaford, I. (1996). Race: The history of an idea in the West. Washington, DC: Woodrow Wilson Center Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hollinger, D. A. (1998). National culture and communities of descent. Reviews in American History, 26(1), 312–328.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jenkins, R. (1997). Rethinking ethnicity: Arguments and explorations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jewell, E. J., & Abate, F. (Eds.) (2001). The new Oxford American dictionary. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kertzer, D. I., & Arel, D. (Eds.) (2002a). Census and identity: The politics of race, ethnicity, and language in national censuses. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

  • Kertzer, D. I., & Arel, D. (2002b). Censuses, identity formation, and the struggle for political power. In D. I. Kertzer & D. Arel (Eds.), Census and identity: The politics of race, ethnicity, and language in national censuses (pp. 1–42). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, S. M. (1993). Racial classifications in the U.S. Census: 1890–1990. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 16(1), 75–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malone, N., Baluja, K. F., Costanzo, J. M., & Davis, C. J. (2003). The foreign-born population: 2000. U.S. Census Bureau, U.S. Department of Commerce, Census 2000 Brief CENBR/01-1, C2KBR-34.

  • Marx, A. W. (1998). Making race and nation: A comparison of South Africa, the United States, and Brazil. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morning, A. (2003). New faces, old faces: Counting the multiracial population past and present. In H. DeBose & L. Winters (Eds.), New faces in a changing America: Multiracial identity in the 21st century (pp. 41–67). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morning, A., & Sabbagh, D. (2005). From sword to plowshare: Using race for discrimination and antidiscrimination in the United States. International Social Science Journal, 57(183), 57–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nobles, M. (2000). Shades of citizenship: Race and the census in modern politics. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Office of Management and Budget (1997). Revisions to the standards for the classification of federal data on race and ethnicity. Retrieved from: http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/fedreg/ombdir15.html. Accessed 27 February 27 2006.

  • Omi, M. A. (2001). The changing meaning of race. In N. J. Smelser, W. J. Wilson, & F. Mitchell (Eds.), America becoming: Racial trends and their consequences (pp. 243–263). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prewitt, K. (2005). Racial classification in America: Where do we go from here? Daedalus, 134(1), 5–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rallu, J.-L., Piché, V., & Simon, P. (2004). Démographie et Ethnicité: Une Relation Ambiguë. In G. Caselli, J. Vallin, & G. Wunsch (Eds.), Démographie: Analyse et Synthèse (pp. 481–515). Paris, France: Institut National d’Etudes Démographiques.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rodríguez, C. E. (2000). Changing race: Latinos, the census, and the history of ethnicity in the United States. New York: New York University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, P., & Stavo-Debauge, J. (2004). Les Politiques Anti-Discrimination et les Statistiques: Paramètres d’une Incohérence. Sociétés Contemporaines, 53, 57–84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skerry, P. (2000). Counting on the census? Race, group identity, and the evasion of politics. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smelser, N. J., Wilson, W. J., & Mitchell, F. (Eds.) (2001). America becoming: Racial trends and their consequences. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Statistics Canada, U.S. Census Bureau (1993). Challenges of measuring an ethnic world: Science, politics, and reality. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taguieff, P.-A. (1991). Les Métamorphoses Idéologiques du Racisme et la Crise de l’Antiracisme. In P.-A. Taguieff (Ed.), Face au Racisme (pp. 13–63). Paris, France: Éditions la Découverte.

    Google Scholar 

  • Telles, E. E. (2004). Race in another America: The significance of skin color in Brazil. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • United Nations Statistical Division (1998). Principles and recommendations for population and housing censuses. ST/ESA/STAT/SER.M/67/Rev.1, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Statistics Division.

  • United Nations Statistical Division (2003). Ethnicity: A review of data collection and dissemination. Unpublished document, Demographic and Social Statistics Branch, United Nations Statistical Division.

  • Wagley, C. (1965). On the concept of social race in the Americas. In D. B. Heath & R. N. Adams (Eds.), Contemporary cultures and societies in Latin America (pp. 531–545). New York: Random House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Washington, S. L. (2005). Principles of racial taxonomy. Unpublished manuscript, Department of Sociology, Princeton University.

  • Waters, M. (1990). Ethnic options: Choosing identities in America. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waters, M. C. (1999). Black identities: West Indian immigrant dreams and American realities. New York and Cambridge, MA: Russell Sage Foundation and Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weber, M. (1978). Economy and society. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wolfe, P. (2001). Land, labor, and difference: Elementary structures of race. The American Historical Review, 106(3), 866–905.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zuberi, T. (2005). The limits of racial and ethnic data. Demographic and Social Statistics Branch Seminar, New York, June 9, United Nations Statistical Division.

Download references

Acknowledgments

The author warmly thanks the following people and institutions for their contributions: Kevin Deardorff (U.S. Census Bureau); United Nations Statistical Division (Department of Economic and Social Affairs), Demographic and Social Statistics Branch (particularly Mary Chamie, Jeremiah Banda, Yacob Zewoldi, Margaret Mbogoni, Lisa Morrison-Puckett, and intern Julia Alemany); International Programs Center, U.S. Census Bureau; Adrian Hayes (Australian National University); Caroline Persell and Sylvia Simson (New York University); Leslie Stone (Inter-American Development Bank); Gerald Haberkorn (Secretariat of the Pacific Community); Patrick Corr (Australian Bureau of Statistics); and anonymous reviewers. I also wish to thank the attendees at the following presentations of this research: U.S. Census Bureau Migration Speaker Series; Population Association of America; International Union for the Scientific Study of Population; American Sociological Association; and the Demographic and Social Statistics Branch (United Nations) Speaker Series. The initial version of this research was funded by the U.S. Census Bureau Immigration Statistics Branch. However, the conclusions—and the shortcomings—are solely those of the author.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ann Morning.

Appendix

Appendix

Table A Countries included in regional groupings

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Morning, A. Ethnic Classification in Global Perspective: A Cross-National Survey of the 2000 Census Round. Popul Res Policy Rev 27, 239–272 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11113-007-9062-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11113-007-9062-5

Keywords

Navigation