Content uploaded by Ira M. Sheskin
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Ira M. Sheskin on Jan 12, 2016
Content may be subject to copyright.
Metadata of the chapter that will be visualized online
Chapter Title Global Dispersion of Jews: Determinants and Consequences
Copyright Year 2015
Copyright Holder Springer Netherlands
Corresponding Author Family Name DellaPergola
Particle
Given Name Sergio
Suffix
Division The Avraham Harman Institute of
Contemporary Jewry
Organization The Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Address Mt. Scopus, Jerusalem, Israel
Email sergioa@huji.ac.il
Author Family Name Sheskin
Particle
Given Name Ira M.
Suffix
Division Department of Geography and
Regional Studies
Organization University of Miami
Address Coral Gables, FL, 33124, USA
Email isheskin@miami.edu
Abstract Jews and geography have been inextricably related for millennia. We
examine changes in the geographic distribution of Jews at different
geographic scales, from worldwide to intra-urban. The chapter relies on
data from surveys of the American Jewish population, the Israeli census,
and other sources about issues of migration, demography, and religiosity.
Being Jewish is both a religion and an ethnicity, which complicates
enumeration efforts since there is no widely accepted definition of who
is a Jew and who is not. We focus on the U.S. and Israel, which
account for over 80 % of the world’s 14 million Jews. Mass migration
of Jews to the U.S., the Holocaust, creation of the State of Israel, and
mass migration from the Arab and Muslim world to Israel significantly
changed the geographic distribution. Migration of Jews to the U.S.
occurred during four periods: the Sephardic Migration (1654–1820); the
German Migration (1820–1880); the Eastern European Migration (1880–
1920s); and the Modern Period of Migration (1930s to the present). A
major shift has occurred away from the Northeast to the South and West
since WWII. The Jewish population of Israel is composed almost entirely
of immigrants and their descendants. In 1951, after mass immigration
following Israel’s independence, three-quarters were foreign-born and
about half had lived in the country for 5 years or less. The share of Israeli-
born in the Jewish population rose from 47 % in 1972 to 71 % in 2010
– after absorbing more than 1.3 million new immigrants. Jews remain
a highly urbanized population; more than half live in five metropolitan
areas: Tel Aviv, New York, Jerusalem, Los Angeles, and Haifa. U.S. Jews
have remained a clustered population even as they suburbanized after
WWII.
Keywords
(separated by “-”)
Israel - American Jews - Jewish population - International
migration - Urbanization - Jewish neighborhoods
© Springer Netherlands 2015
S.D. Brunn (ed.), The Changing World Religion Map,
DOI 10.1007/978-94-017-9376-6_70
Chapter 70
Global Dispersion of Jews: Determinants
and Consequences
Sergio DellaPergola and Ira M. Sheskin
S. DellaPergola (*)
The Avraham Harman Institute of Contemporary Jewry, The Hebrew University
of Jerusalem, Mt. Scopus, Jerusalem, Israel
e-mail: sergioa@huji.ac.il
I.M. Sheskin
Department of Geography and Regional Studies, University of Miami,
Coral Gables, FL 33124, USA
e-mail: isheskin@miami.edu
Take ye sum of all the congregation of the children of Israel, by
their families, by their fathers’ houses, according to the number
of names. (Numbers 1:2)
70.1 Introduction
The art of counting Jews, describing their geographical distribution and other char-
acteristics – and projecting their future – is as old as the Bible. Any serious discus-
sion of Jewish demographic trends should proceed from an understanding of the
broader processes that generally impact population development.
Population is a collective, macro-social concept, but population changes reflect
events that mostly occur at the individual, micro-social level. All changes in world
population size result from the balance between births and deaths (reflecting fertil-
ity rates, life expectancy, and a population’s age composition). When examining a
given geographic area where in- and out-migration is possible, population change
also reflects geographical mobility. And when a subpopulation is further defined by
cultural characteristics (such as religion, ethnicity, or language), a somewhat more
complex balancing equation becomes necessary to incorporate identification
changes (for example, religious conversions) over time. The important underlying
principle is the continuity of a human aggregate that is not created from a vacuum
(besides quite rare cases of ethnogenesis – the initial act of a new group coming into
existence), but constantly evolves following a circumscribed set of drivers.
Demography and geography of the Jews may thus serve as a paradigm for the more
[AU1]
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
general case of subpopulations whose unfolding over time is determined not only by
demographic and biological factors, but also by social, cultural, and ideational
factors.
Jews and geography have been inextricably related for millennia. The story of
the Jewish people can hardly be told without repeated reference to geographic loca-
tion, from the story of Abraham until modern times. This chapter examines changes
in the geographic distribution of the Jewish population at a number of different
geographic scales (worldwide, regionally within the U.S., metropolitan, and intrau-
rban). This chapter will be “data based” in the sense that it will rely on data from
surveys of the American Jewish population and the Israeli census as well as numer-
ous other sources from other countries, and will examine issues of migration,
demography, and religiosity.
70.2 Definition of Jewish Identity
The problem of defining who is, and who is not, a Jew is discussed in thousands of
books and articles (DellaPergola 2010). Unlike for most other religious groups dis-
cussed in this volume, being Jewish is both a religious and an ethnic identity. One
does not cease to be a Jew even if one becomes an atheist or agnostic and/or ceases
to participate in religious services or rituals, unless, by most opinions, the same
person has espoused another monotheistic religion. The 2000–01 National Jewish
Population Survey (NJPS 2000–01) (Kotler-Berkowitz et al. 2003) suggests that
about one-fifth of American Jews do not identify as Jewish in terms of religion.
Recognizing the difficulties of defining Jewish identity, historically the Canadian
Census asks a religion question in which “Jewish” is one response printed on the
form and a question about ethnicity, in which “Jewish” is also one response printed
on the form (Norland and Freedman 1977).
During biblical times, Jewish identity was determined by patrilineal descent.
During the rabbinic period, this was changed to matrilineal descent. In the contem-
porary period, Orthodox and Conservative rabbis officially recognize only matrilin-
eal descent, while Reform (as of 1983) and Reconstructionist rabbis recognize, under
certain circumstances, both matrilineal and patrilineal descent. Furthermore,
Orthodox rabbis only recognize as Jewish those Jews-by-Choice who have been con-
verted by Orthodox rabbis. In Israel, the Orthodox establishment follows the matri-
lineal descent criterion, but the government, for the purpose of the Law of Return
(which only determines immigration and citizenship rights, not religious identity),
defines as eligible any person with at least one Jewish grandparent, regardless of cur-
rent religion, and their spouses. In general, social scientists conducting survey
research with American Jews, do not wish to choose from the competing definitions
of who is a Jew, and have adopted the convention that all survey respondents who
“consider themselves to be Jewish” are counted as such. Operationally, the core
Jewish population concept, originally introduced by the NJPS 1990 analysts (Kosmin
et al. 1991), addresses the self-declared or otherwise identified aggregate of persons
of Jewish origin who do not hold an alternative religious identification. The underlying
S. DellaPergola and I.M. Sheskin
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
hypothesis is that, with all due caution and caveats, Jews can be counted at any given
moment in time, through mutually exclusive definitional criteria that avoid the double
count of persons with multiple identities. The enlarged Jewish population is the total
population in households with at least one, currently or formerly, core Jewish indi-
vidual. But, clearly the estimate of the size of the Jewish population of an area can
differ depending who one counts as Jewish – and also to some extent also upon
who is doing the counting. These definitional issues are one reason why differing
counts of Jews, particularly in the US, are presented below.
70.2.1 Data Sources
The U.S. and Israel combined account for more than 80 % of world Jewry
(DellaPergola 2010). While Israel has accurate data on its Jewish population, the
situation in the US and most other countries is considerably more problematic, with
recent US estimates ranging from 5.2 million to more than 6.5 million (DellaPergola
2005, 2010, 2012; Sheskin and Dashefsky 2006, 2012; Tighe, Saxe and Kadushin
2011). The main difficulty stems from the scarcity of national sources that classify
population by religion (or by ethnic groups), where “Jewish” is one of the possible
options. In some cases, like in the U.S., this is not feasible because of the separation
of church and state. On the other hand, a growing acknowledgment exists in the
social sciences that religio-ethnic identities constitute a powerful variable for ana-
lytic purposes, as such and as a correlate or determinant of other demographic,
social, economic and cultural features. Hence there is a growing interest in collect-
ing data on religious and ethnic groups in contemporary societies.
70.2.2 Estimates of the US Jewish Population
In contemporary social surveys, the most common and most reliable method of
estimating the US Jewish population is to use random digit dialing (RDD) (Waksberg
1978). This technique basically involves generating four digit random numbers
which are placed after all area code/telephone exchange code combinations in the
country. These numbers are then dialed and the percentage of households reached
that are Jewish is calculated. This percentage can then be applied to the number of
households from the U.S. Census to derive an estimate of the number of Jewish
households in the country (Sheskin 2001: 6). NJPS 2000–01 (Kotler-Berkowitz et al
2003) and the American Religious Identification Surveys (ARIS 2001 and ARIS
2008) (Mayer et al. 2001; Kosmin and Keysar 2009) have used this RDD methodol-
ogy. Caution needs to be applied in these extrapolations since the percentage of
households with Jewish respondents is not the same as the percentage of Jews
among the total population. Differences in family size, namely a lower proportion
below age 18 and intermarried households, usually require downward weighting of
the original findings.
[AU2]
70 Global Dispersion of Jews: Determinants and Consequences
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
Recently Tighe, Saxe, and Kadushin (2011) performed a meta-analysis of numer-
ous surveys completed by governmental and private groups using RDD in which a
question on religion was asked. Their study suggests a total of 6.5 million Jews in
2010. Two major national studies, NJPS 2000–01 and ARIS 2001, suggested a total
of 5.2 million Jews. A new reading of NJPS 2000–01, correcting for evident under-
coverage of certain adult age cohorts, lead DellaPergola (2012) to an updated esti-
mate of 5,367.000 in 2000, and 5,425,000 in 2010, with the upper boundary of the
confidence interval at about 5.6 million. An alternative methodology, used by
Sheskin and Dashefsky (2012), sums RDD estimates from local Jewish community
studies and informant estimates from hundreds of small Jewish communities who
cannot afford the RDD methodology to derive an estimate of about 6.5 million.
Because the national studies were not designed to produce estimates for the
Jewish population of states and metropolitan areas, we rely here on the Sheskin &
Dashefsky data for US regional estimates, noting that Sheskin and Dashefsky (2006)
present reasons to believe that their data somewhat overestimate the total US Jewish
population. On the other hand, because local surveys were not designed to provide
national estimates, data consistently derived and compared from national surveys,
including the US Census 1957 Current Population Survey (CPS), NJPS 1970–71,
and NJPS 1990, and systematic review of international migration to the US, Jewish
birth rates and death rates result in a more reliable profile of total Jewish population
change over the 65 years between 1945 and 2010 (Rosenwaike 1980; DellaPergola
2012). These alternative methodologies are a second reason why differing estimates
of the US Jewish population are shown in Fig. 70.1. Note that the latest estimates of
US Jewish population can be found at www.jewishdatabank.org.
[AU3]
Fig. 70.1 World Jewish population by major region, 1700–2010 (Source: DellaPergola 2013: 214,
used with permission)
this figure will be printed in b/w
S. DellaPergola and I.M. Sheskin
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
70.2.3 Estimates of Jewish Population in Israel
and Other Countries
In Israel, the Jewish population is much better documented, as Israel has a reliable
Central Bureau of Statistics (CBS) which performs periodic population censuses
and social surveys, including questions both on religion and ethnicity, and system-
atically collects data on international migration, births, deaths, and marriages, as
well as on changes of religion. Several other countries have population censuses
addressing religion and/or ethnicity, among these Canada, Australia, South Africa,
the United Kingdom (UK), and the Republics of the former Soviet Union (FSU). On
the other hand, countries with important Jewish communities like France and
Argentina have long discontinued such questions from their national censuses.
Jewish population estimates thus have to rely on a wide array of different sources,
like membership records and vital statistics in some communities, as well as inde-
pendent sample surveys similar to those routinely undertaken in the U.S. The avail-
ability and comparability of Jewish population data for global synthesis are thus far
from satisfactory. Nevertheless, through a keen effort of analysis and standardiza-
tion, a general and quite reliable picture can be displayed of the changing Jewish
population distribution worldwide.
70.3 The Global Scale
Across Jewish history, an intriguing overlap exists between Jewish peoplehood and
population. History cannot be reduced to a sequence of demographic events, but the
political, social, and cultural impact of mass migration and other major moments of
Jewish population reduction or increase cannot be undervalued. Since the begin-
nings of transmitted Jewish collective memory, textual, archeological and other evi-
dence exemplify three leading principles affecting Jewish demography in the
long run:
1. significant increases and decreases in Jewish population size and the unequal
pace of growth as a whole over time;
2. a differential growth of Jewish subpopulations, occasionally affecting sociode-
mographic composition of the whole; and
3. large scale international migration repeatedly shaping the geography and charac-
teristics of the Jews and location of the main Jewish civilization centers.
70.3.1 Antiquity
World Jewish population in antiquity was predominantly Middle Eastern. Since the
early Middle Ages it significantly expanded to Western Europe and North Africa,
and after the twelfth century to Eastern Europe. The size and structure of world
70 Global Dispersion of Jews: Determinants and Consequences
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
Jewry during the Middle Age and early Modern Period cannot be accurately
assessed, but available evidence points to a range between less than one million to
two million persons. While population size tended to be stable in the long term,
major fluctuations reflected occasional catastrophic events such as epidemics, famine
and wars – usually shared by Jews and non-Jews. Jewish population also periodi-
cally declined following massacres, mass expulsions, and forced conversions in
different times and places.
70.3.2 Modern Period
Since the second half of the seventeenth century a weakening of these negative
factors and modest improvements in living standards allowed for Jewish popula-
tion growth. World Jewry increased from an estimated one million around 1700 to
2.5 million around 1800 and 10.6 million around 1900 (Fig. 70.2). Jewish popula-
tion during this period grew faster than most other national populations in Western
and Eastern Europe, Asia, and Africa. Most of the increase after 1850 occurred in
Eastern Europe. This demographic transition determined a rapid shift from an
early balanced split between Ashkenazi (Eastern European), and Sephardi/Oriental
(or Mizrahi) (Spanish, Middle Eastern, African, and Asian) communities, to an
overwhelming numerical predominance of Ashkenazi Jewry. Central for the onset
of Jewish population growth was a comparatively early decline in mortality and
low infant mortality rates in particular, in the context of nearly universal, rela-
tively young, and homogamous Jewish marriage and high fertility levels. These
demographic features reflected the influence of traditional Jewish norms, institu-
tions and behaviors in the daily life of individuals and communities before the
start of modernization. Population growth increased socioeconomic pressure
among impoverished Eastern European Jewry and decisively stimulated mass
westward migration from the 1880s. Eventually, cultural and social transforma-
tions of Jewish society – especially geographical and occupational mobility set
into motion since the Emancipation Period (following Napoleon) – led to a dimin-
ished impact of religious norms in the life of the Jewish Diaspora (all Jews who
live outside Israel are said to be living in the Diaspora). As in the case of mortality,
Jews followed the surrounding population in the transition from higher to lower
fertility levels. Jewish migrants to western countries imported the demographic
models of their communities of origin, but rapidly adjusted to their new modern
environments. Rates of natural increase declined, though in absolute terms, Jewish
population growth was still substantial. By about 1940, the world Jewish popula-
tion was estimated at 16.5 million.
Six million victims of the Shoah (Holocaust) during World War II meant the
destruction of 36 % of prewar world Jewry, more than 60 % of European Jewry, and
the virtual annihilation of large Jewish communities in Central/Eastern Europe and
the Balkans. World Jewry still has not recovered its pre-World War II size. Long-
lasting population imbalances reflected high Jewish child mortality and low birth
rates during the Shoah. After 11 million Jews had survived World War II, the total
S. DellaPergola and I.M. Sheskin
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
number increased to 12.1 million in 1960, 12.6 million in 1970, 12.8 million in
1980, 12.9 million in 1990, 13.1 million in 2000, and 13.7 million in 2011. The
more recent increase reflects the augmented role of Israel in the world total and
Israel’s comparatively high Jewish fertility rate and rate of natural increase.
Waves of international migration after World War II intensely affected the geog-
raphy of world Jewry in subsequent decades. During the 1950s and 1960s more than
500,000 Jews left North Africa and Southwest Asia; between the late 1960s and late
1980s more than 250,000 left the FSU. Since 1990, a major exodus from the FSU
involved more than a million Jews and members of their households, while the total-
ity of Ethiopian Jewry left Ethiopia. An absolute majority of these migrants went to
Israel. Of the 11 million Jews remaining in 1945, 500,000 lived in Palestine. Since
Israel’s independence in 1948, its Jewish population grew rapidly to one million in
1949, two million in 1962, three million in 1976, four million in 1991, five million
in 2001, and 5.9 million in 2012. Mass immigration was the major determinant of
growth until the 1960s, when natural increase commenced to predominate as the
engine of growth. The total size of Diaspora Jewry declined from 10.8 million in
1948 to 10.1 million in 1970, 9.1 million in 1990, and 7.8 million in 2011. Until
about 1970, in spite of mass immigration to Israel (aliyah), the number of Jews in
the Diaspora did not diminish. World Jewish population, after some postwar recovery,
was approaching zero-population-growth. Natural increase in Israel only slightly
overcame the natural decrease in the Diaspora.
70.3.3 Current Size of World Jewish Population
At the onset of the twenty first century, world society, and world Jewry within it, witnessed
intensive transformations. Far reaching political, economic, and cultural globalization
processes involved contraction of time and space, greater interdependence among dif-
ferent and distant components of world society, such as political- military interven-
tions, industrial competition, international trade, and most significantly media and
communication networks. Continuing gaps in standards of living and human opportu-
nities stimulated large waves of geographical mobility and generated growing ethno-
cultural heterogeneity in local societies. While, as part of the continuing drive of
modernization, society became increasingly secularized, large masses of people,
including Jews, were more than ever involved in a keen quest for spiritual meaning
and sought gratification in religious values and ethnic identities.
In 2011, of a world total of about 13.7 million Jews, 95 % lived in nine countries
with 100,000 Jews or more: Israel (5,803,000), United States (5,425,000), France
(482,000), Canada (375,000), UK (292,000), Russia (199,000), Argentina (182,000),
Germany (119,000), and Australia (108,000). Other significant communities were
in Brazil (95,000), South Africa (70,000), Ukraine (69,000), Hungary (48,000),
Mexico (39,000), and Belgium and the Netherlands (30,000 each) (Table 70.1).
Smaller Jewish communities were found in another 80 countries with at least 100
Jews. Parallel socio-demographic trends prevailed across the Diaspora: intense con-
centration in major metropolitan areas, suburbanization, high educational levels, spe-
[AU4]
70 Global Dispersion of Jews: Determinants and Consequences
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
cialization in liberal and managerial professions, low fertility, frequent intermarriage,
and aging. Recent international migrants became significantly absorbed and accul-
turated in the context of the receiving countries. The changing distribution of world
Jewish population by major regions is displayed in Fig. 70.2. Note that the latest
estimates of Jewish population worldwide can be found at www.jewishdatabank.org.
About 45 % of the world’s Jews in 2011 resided in the Americas, with more than
42 % in North America. About 43 % lived in Asia – mostly in Israel – including the
Asian republics of the FSU, but not the Asian parts of the Russian Federation and
Turkey. Europe, including the Asian territories of the Russian Federation and
Turkey, accounted for about 11 % of the total. Fewer than 2 % of the world’s Jews
lived in Africa and Oceania.
70.3.4 World Jewish Population Distribution
Reflecting global Jewish population stagnation along with an increasing concen-
tration in few countries, in 2011 97.9 % of world Jewry lived in the largest 16
communities, and excluding Israel from the count, 96.3 % of World Jewry lives in
Table 70.1 Jewish population estimates, by country, 1970 and 2011
Country 1970 2011 % Change
WORLD TOTAL 12,665,200 13,657,800 8
AMERICAS TOTAL 6,219,800 6,185,800 0
Canada 286,000 375,000 31
United States 5,420,000 5,425,000 0
Central America, Caribbean 46,800 54,300 16
South America 467,000 331,500 −29
EUROPE TOTAL 3,231,900 1,437,700 −56
European Union 27a1,333,250 1,112,400 −17
Former Soviet Republics 1,831,100 284,600 −84
Other West Europe 21,450 19,400 −10
Former Soviet Union in Europeab[1,896,700] [295,800] [−84]
ASIA TOTAL 2,936,400 5,843,000 99
Total Israel 2,582,000 5,802,900 125
Israel 2,581,000 5,498,700 113
West Bank 1,000 304,200 30,320
Former USSR in Asia 254,100 20,500 −92
Other Asia 100,300 19,600 −80
AFRICA 207,100 75,700 −63
Northern Africa 82,600 3,700 −96
Sub-Saharan Africa 124,500 72,000 −42
OCEANIA TOTAL 70,000 115,600 −100
Source: Sheskin and DellaPergola (2013: 225)
aIncluding former Republics now members of the European Union
bIncluding areas in Asia
[AU5]
S. DellaPergola and I.M. Sheskin
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
t1.1
t1.2
t1.3
t1.4
t1.5
t1.6
t1.7
t1.8
t1.9
t1.10
t1.11
t1.12
t1.13
t1.14
t1.15
t1.16
t1.17
t1.18
t1.19
t1.20
t1.21
t1.22
t1.23
t1.24
t1.25
t1.26
the 15 largest communities of the Diaspora, including 69.1 % who lived in the U.S.
(see Table 70.2). Besides the two major Jewish populations (Israel and the US) each
comprising well over five million persons, another seven countries each had more
than 100,000 Jews, and another seven had about 30,000 Jews or more. Of the larger
seven, three were in the European Union (EU) (France, the UK, and Germany), one
in Eastern Europe (the Russian Federation), one in North America (Canada), one in
South America (Argentina), and one in Oceania (Australia). Of the smaller seven,
three were in the EU (Hungary, Belgium and the Netherlands), one in Eastern
Europe (Ukraine), two in Central and Southern America (Brazil and Mexico), and
one in Africa (South Africa). The dominance of Western countries in global Jewish
population distribution is a relatively recent phenomenon and reflects the West’s
relatively more hospitable socioeconomic and political circumstances vis-à-vis the
Jewish presence.
The growth, or at least the slower decrease, of Jewish population in the more
developed Western countries is accompanied by a higher share of Jews in a country’s
total population. Indeed, the share of Jews in a country’s total population tends to be
strongly related to the country’s level of development (see Table 70.2). For 2011, the
share of Jews out of the total population was 744.7 per 1,000 in Israel (including
Jews in East Jerusalem, the West Bank, and the Golan Heights, but excluding
Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza) which obviously is a special case, yet also
a developed country; 17.4 per 1,000 in the U.S.; 3.9 per 1,000 on average in the
other seven countries with more than 100,000 Jews; 0.8 per 1,000 on average in the
other seven countries with more than 30,000 Jews; and virtually nil in the complex
of the many other countries.
Sephardic
Immigration
Million
7
4
2
0
6
5
3
1
8
German
Immigration
Eastern
European
Immigration
Holocaust Survivors
FSUImmigrants
300
2,500
25
3,000
4,500
5,000
6,000
15,000
100,000
200,000
200,000
280,000
875,000
1,058,000
2,350,000
3,605,000
4,228,000
4,359,000
4,700,000
5,532,000
6,060,000
5,921,000
5,981,000
6,137,000
6,722,00
0
1700
1776
1
654
1790
1800
1820
1830
1840
1850
1860
1870
1880
1890
1900
1910
1920
1927
1945
1950
1960
1970
1980
1990
2000
2012
Higher estimate
Only or lower estimate
Fig. 70.2 Number of American Jews over time (Source: Sheskin and Dashefsky 2013: 144, used
with permission)
this figure will be printed in b/w
70 Global Dispersion of Jews: Determinants and Consequences
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
To better illustrate the increasing convergence and dependency between the
Jewish presence and the level of socioeconomic development of a country, Table 70.2
also reports the Human Development Index (HDI) for each country. The HDI – a
composite measure of a society’s education, health, and income – provides a general
sense of the context in which Jewish communities operate, although it does not
necessarily reflect the actual characteristics of the members of those Jewish com-
munities. Of the top 16 Jewish communities, four (Australia, the US, Canada, and
the Netherlands) live in countries with the ten best HDIs among nearly 200 coun-
tries, another four (Germany, France, Israel, and Belgium) are ranked better than
25th, three (UK, Hungary, and Argentina) are better than 50th, two (Russian
Republic and Ukraine) are better than 100th, and only one (South Africa, 110th)
exhibits a lower HDI. Of course, one should be aware that Jewish communities in
these countries may display social and economic data significantly better than the
average population of their respective countries.
The increasing overlap of a Jewish presence with higher levels of socioeconomic
development in a country, and at the same time the diminution or gradual disappear-
ance of a Jewish presence in less developed areas, is a conspicuous development of
the twentieth and early twenty-first centuries. The emerging geographical configu-
ration carries advantages concerning the material and legal conditions of the life of
Jews, but it may be associated with growing difficulties at maintaining a sufficient
sense of separate Jewish identity in an open and dynamic society; and it also may
generate a lack of recognition of, or estrangement toward, Jews on the part of societ-
ies in less developed countries that constitute the overwhelming majority of the
world’s total population.
70.3.5 Migration of Jews to the U.S.
Most likely, the first settlement of Jews in the New World resulted from the Spanish
Inquisition (1492) and the Portuguese Inquisition (1497) during which time, faced
with the decision to leave, convert to Christianity, or be burned at the stake, many
Jews fled to other lands, including the Mexican territory that now is part of the west-
ern U.S. But the first American Jewish community was created when 23 Jews left
Pernambuco (Recife), Brazil (as a result of the Portuguese reconquest of the area
from the Dutch) and arrived at New Amsterdam in 1654.
Although Peter Stuyvesant, governor of New Amsterdam, was loathe to permit
the Jews to remain, they were eventually permitted to stay. When permission was
granted for Jews to conduct religious services in private, the agreement stipulated
that they must “exercise in all quietness their religion within their houses, for which
end they must without doubt endeavor to build their houses close together in a con-
venient place on one side or the other of New Amsterdam” (Hertzberg 1989: 24).
Thus was established the first Jewish neighborhood in America, although Jews in
New York were not permitted to build a synagogue until 1728.
S. DellaPergola and I.M. Sheskin
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
Table 70.2 Countries with largest core Jewish populations, 2011
Rank Country
Jewish
population
% of Total Jewish Population
Total population
Jews per 1,000
population
HDI
ranka
In the World In the Diaspora
% Cumulative % Cumulative
1 Israelb5,802,900 42.5 42.5 = = 7,694,900 744.7 15
2 United States 5,425,000 39.7 82.2 69.1 69.1 311,592,000 17.4 4
3 France 482,000 3.5 85.7 6.1 75.2 63,340,000 7.6 14
4 Canada 375,000 2.7 88.5 4.8 80.0 34,500,000 10.9 8
5 United Kingdom 291,500 2.1 90.6 3.7 83.7 62,920,000 4.6 26
6 Russia 199,000 1.5 92.1 2.5 86.2 142,800,000 1.4 65
7 Argentina 182,000 1.3 93.4 2.3 88.5 40,500,000 4.5 46
8 Germany 119,000 0.9 94.3 1.5 90.1 81,800,000 1.5 10
9 Australia 108,000 0.8 95.1 1.4 91.4 22,700,000 4.8 2
Total 3–9 1,756,500 12.8 95.1 22.3 91.4 448,560,000 3.9 24.4
10 Brazil 95,400 0.7 95.8 1.2 92.6 196,700,000 0.5 73
11 South Africa 70,500 0.5 96.8 0.9 94.4 50,500,000 1.4 110
12 Ukraine 69,000 0.5 96.3 0.9 93.5 45,700,000 1.5 69
13 Hungary 48,300 0.4 97.1 0.6 95.0 10,000,000 4.8 36
14 Mexico 39,300 0.3 97.4 0.5 95.5 114,800,000 0.3 56
15 Belgium 30,100 0.2 97.7 0.4 95.9 11,000,000 2.7 18
16 Netherlands 29,900 0.2 97.9 0.4 96.3 16,700,000 1.8 7
Total 10–16 382,500 2.8 97.9 4.9 96.3 445,400,000 0.9 38.6
Rest of world 297,000 2.1 100.0 3.7 100.0 5,773,047,100 0.0 ca. 100
Source: DellaPergola (2013: 225)
aThe Human Development Index, a synthetic measure of health, education, and income (in terms of US Dollar purchase power parity) among the country’s total
population. See: United Nations (2011)
bIsrael’s Jewish population includes residents in East Jerusalem, the West Bank, and the Golan Heights. The respective total population includes non-Jews in
Israel, including East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights, but does not include Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza
70 Global Dispersion of Jews: Determinants and Consequences
t2.1
t2.2
t2.3
t2.4
t2.5
t2.6
t2.7
t2.8
t2.9
t2.10
t2.11
t2.12
t2.13
t2.14
t2.15
t2.16
t2.17
t2.18
t2.19
t2.20
t2.21
t2.22
t2.23
t2.24
t2.25
t2.26
t2.27
Historic estimates of the U.S. Jewish population have been collated by Marcus
(1990) and by the American Jewish Historical Society (www.ajhs.org) and form the
basis for estimates in this chapter prior to 1990 (see Fig. 70.1).
Four periods of Jewish immigration to the U.S. (see Fig. 70.2) may be identified
(Dimont 1978):
1. The Sephardic Migration (1654–1820);
2. The German Migration (1820–1880);
3. The Eastern European Migration (1880–1920s); and
4. The Modern Period of Migration (from the 1930s to the present day).
70.3.6 The Sephardic Immigration Period
Sephardic Jews are those whose ancestors derive from Spain and were expelled in
1492 as a result of the Spanish Inquisition. Many Sephardic Jews migrated to parts
of the Ottoman Empire, as the Ottoman Sultan welcomed Jews who were expelled
from Spain. During this period, the U.S. Jewish population only increased to about
5,000. These Jews were mostly shopkeepers and merchants. Not having been
allowed to own land in most European countries, Jews did not develop farming
skills. They were involved in retail activity in Europe and brought those skills to the
U.S. During colonial times, while 80 % of Americans in general were farmers, the
vast majority of Jews were urbanites. The earliest synagogues were to be found in
New Amsterdam (New York), Newport (Rhode Island), Savannah, Philadelphia,
and Charleston.
70.3.7 The German Immigration Period
The second period of Jewish migration, from 1820 to 1880, marks the era of German
Jewish migration, with most Jews coming from Bavaria (Hertzberg 1989). While
Napoleon’s message of liberty, equality, and fraternity had improved conditions for
Jews in Europe and had freed them from the confines of the ghetto in many areas
(resulting in the Haskala, or Enlightenment movement in Jewish history), the end of
this era, with the end of the Napoleonic era, made life difficult for Jews in many
areas, particularly in Germany. During the first wave of immigration from Germany,
from 1820 to 1860, as many as 100,000 German Jews migrated to the US (Hertzberg
1989: 106). Many of these German immigrants were involved in retail trade, par-
ticularly in the garment industry. Some began peddling goods from push carts and
gradually developed retail outlets. These retail outlets evolved into major depart-
ment stores, including Abraham & Strauss, Gimbels, Bloomingdale’s, Lazarus,
Macy’s, Lord & Taylor, and others. In New York, by 1880, 80 % of all retail clothing
establishments and 90 % of wholesale clothing establishments were owned by Jews
S. DellaPergola and I.M. Sheskin
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
(Sachar 1992: 86). In other cities, such as Columbus, Ohio, all retail clothing stores
were owned by Jews. In the 1870s, nine out of ten Jews in smaller towns were self-
employed businessmen (Hertzberg 1989: 137). When the Gold Rush of 1849 began,
Jewish merchants left the East and became storekeepers in the West, but they did not
become gold miners. Levi Strauss, however, was responsible for the design and
manufacture of pants for gold miners that have now diffused throughout the world
as “jeans.”
By 1880, about 280,000 Jews lived in the U.S. Two hundred new synagogues
were established, although they were more important in providing immigrant Jews
a familiar milieu than they were in providing a location for piety. B’nai B’rith (www.
bnaibrith.org), now the largest Jewish organization in the world, began as well as a
(nonreligious) group designed to maintain some aspects of Jewishness and to
provide self-help. These German Jews also brought with them a new innovation in
Jewish worship, Reform Judaism, which, while starting in Amsterdam in 1979, had
flourished in Germany. Economically, many German Jews prospered and as they
moved into the better neighborhoods, non-Jews moved out, leading to “gilded”
ghettos. Other German Jews remained poor. The nature of this migration is fully
explored in Stephen Birmingham’s 1967 classic Our Crowd, The Great Jewish
Families of New York. This German migration changed the American Jewish com-
munity from one in which most Jews were American born, to one in which most
Jews were foreign born.
70.3.8 The Eastern European Immigration Period
The third period of Jewish migration began with the fall of Czar Alexander II in
Russia in 1881. Following this change in leadership, pogroms (anti-Jewish riots)
occurred in Russia in 1881 and in Kishinev (in Bessarabia, now Moldova) in 1903
and 1905 (Pasachoff and Littman 1995: 218–221 and 236–239). This led to a sig-
nificant migration of Jews from Eastern Europe to the US, Palestine, and other
locations. Often this was a stage migration process, with Jews first moving out of
small villages and towns into Eastern European cities, and then moving from
these cities to the US. Jews began to arrive in significant numbers to New York,
Baltimore, Philadelphia, Boston, and Chicago, all prominent ports of entry
(Sanders 1988: 167).
This migration was to change the face of American Jewry from one that was
dominated by German Jews, who by 1880 were, because of very high levels of
assimilation, well on their way to becoming another Protestant denomination, to
one dominated by the Eastern European Jewish migrants who came between 1880
and 1940. This large scale migration increased the US Jewish population to almost
five million by 1937. More than 90 % of Jewish migrants during this period were
from Russia. In total, 3,715,000 Jews entered the US between 1880 and 1929.
During this period, 8 % of migrants to the U.S. were Jewish (Barnavi 1992: 194–195)
and 15 % of all European Jewry moved to the U.S. The Jewish immigrants came to
70 Global Dispersion of Jews: Determinants and Consequences
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
the US to stay. The rate of reverse migration was only 5 % for the Jewish population,
compared to 35 % for the general immigrant population (Sherman 1965: 61). This
difference is probably related to the fact that while “economic opportunity” was a
“pull” factor to the U.S. for all immigrant groups, the “push” factors (persecution)
for Jews to leave Europe were clearly more significant than for most, if not all, other
ethnic groups.
At first, the German Jews distanced themselves somewhat from the Eastern
European group. The German Jews had “made it” and had become quite
“Americanized” in the process and had largely adopted Reform Jewish practices.
The Eastern European arrivals came with an Eastern European shtetl (small town)
mentality, were poor, spoke Yiddish, and those that were religious followed more
traditional practices. Because the rabbis of Eastern Europe had opposed emigration
to the U.S., those with higher incomes and those who were more religious remained
in Europe (Hertzberg 1989: 156–157). In both “look and feel,” despite the common
heritage, Eastern European Jews differed significantly from the German Jews that
preceded them. The eventual success of these Eastern European immigrants is fully
described in Stephen Birmingham’s (1984) The Rest of Us: The Rise of America’s
Eastern European Jews and in Howe’s (1976) World of Our Fathers, the Journey of
East European Jews to America and the Life They Found and Made.
At first, the German Jews wanted to spread the new Jewish immigrants through-
out the country. The concept was that if the Jewish population became too geo-
graphically clustered, a reaction would occur among non-Jews, resulting in
anti-Semitism. This led to the Galveston Plan in 1907, which was to divert some of
the immigrants headed for northeastern cities, particularly New York, to Galveston,
Texas (Sanders 1988: 235–240). This plan failed, as any plan would that is at odds
with an understanding of the chain migration process: very few Jews could be con-
vinced to move to Galveston. Jews wanted to move to the large northeastern cities
that already had large Jewish populations, where they could find a landsmannschaftan
or landsleite, a cultural society with membership from their former country, or even
their former city (Shamir and Shavit 1986).
With the eventual suburbanization of the Jewish population following World War
II, the passing of a generation and significant intermarriage between German and
Eastern European Jews, the distinction between the two groups has left the American
Jewish psyche.
An important distinction between the German Jews and the Eastern European
Jews should be noted. German Jews did not dislike the land they had left. They
remained proud of their German heritage and maintained varying degrees of loyalty
to Germany until the US entered World War I against the Germans. In today’s lan-
guage, the German Jews were “Jews by religion” or in the language of Germany in
the 1800s “Germans of the Mosaic persuasion.” The Eastern European Jews, on the
other hand, thought of themselves as a people, as an ethnic group, and did not have
fond memories of the old country and its government (although they might have had
fond memories of their little shtetl or Jewish village). The coming of the Eastern
European Jews in large numbers did lead to an increase in anti-Semitism. It also led
to an initial friction between the groups, although eventually the German Jews did
S. DellaPergola and I.M. Sheskin
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
come to the aid of their poor brethren. With this aid, the Eastern European Jews
quickly rose to be one of the most successful American ethnic groups. As early as
1910, about one-fourth of those enrolled in American medical schools were Jewish.
By the 1960s, about 20 % of the faculty at non-Church related American universi-
ties were Jewish. By the beginning of World War I, the Jews from Eastern Europe
had replaced the German Jews as the leaders of the American Jewish community.
And the door to further immigration was significantly closed.
70.3.9 The Modern Immigration Period
The fourth period of Jewish migration to the US began in the 1930s. By this time,
the First (1921) and Second (1924) Johnson Acts (Sanders 1988: 386–387) had
been passed by Congress, practically halting Jewish (and other Eastern and Southern
European) immigration (Friesel 1990: 132). Immigration would never return to the
high levels that persisted between 1880 and the early 1920s. Unfortunately, this
closing of the door to immigration occurred at the worst time for European Jews, as
the next two decades saw the rise of Hitler and the extermination of six million Jews
in the Shoah. Those Jews who came to the US during World War II clearly came as
refugees, not merely as immigrants. Between 1933 and 1937 fewer than 40,000
Jews were permitted to enter the US. Even under the Immigration Law of 1924 (the
Johnson Acts), this was less than 20 % of the quota. Jewish immigration from
Europe saw a temporary surge from Germany following kristallnacht in 1939, the
event most historians now agree was the initial act of the Shoah. In total, about
110,000 Jews were permitted entry to the US from 1938 to 1941. Wyman’s (1984)
The Abandonment of the Jews provides significant detail on this period.
At the end of World War II, as the full extent of the Shoah became evident,
American Jews came to the realization that they were now the largest Diaspora
Jewish community, but it soon became evident that the size of the community would
no longer be increasing due to large scale immigration. First, as described above,
US immigration law no longer permitted unfettered immigration. Second, and per-
haps more important, the establishment of Israel in 1948 opened a new haven for
Jews throughout the world who were in economic or political distress or had been
displaced by World War II. By 1953, Israel had welcomed more than 700,000 refu-
gees. In total, from 1948 to 2011, Israel has settled 3,150,000 new immigrants
(www.cbs.gov.il), mostly Jews, but also their non-Jewish family members in the
framework of the Law of Return.
Yet, Jewish migrants have continued to enter the US. A surge of migrants was
seen just after World War II, comprised mostly of 160,000 Holocaust survivors
from the displaced persons camps established just after the Holocaust (Shapiro
1992: 26). Since the mid-1960s, more than 400,000 Jews have immigrated to the
U.S. from the FSU (Kotler-Berkowitz et al. 2003), with most settling in New York
City (particularly Brighton Beach, Bensonhurst, Borough Park, and Bay Ridge).
Other important destinations included Boston, Chicago, Los Angeles, and San
70 Global Dispersion of Jews: Determinants and Consequences
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
Francisco. About 140,000 Israeli Jews now live in the US, based on an analysis of the
Public Use Microdata Sample (PUMS) from the American Community Survey
(Sheskin 2010a), with most residing in New York, California, Florida, and New Jersey.
Smaller numbers of Jews have come to the US from a variety of other locations.
More than 10,000 Hungarian Jews moved to the US just after the Hungarian revolu-
tion of 1956. A few thousand Cuban Jewish migrants came to Miami in the late
1950s and early 1960s (Liebman 1977). Starting in the 1970s and continuing to the
present day, Jews from a number of Middle American and South American coun-
tries, particularly from Argentina, Colombia, and Venezuela, have moved to Miami
(Sheskin 2005: Table 4–13). After the fall of the Shah of Iran in 1979, Jews moved
to the U.S. from Iran (particularly to Los Angeles and New York), resulting in a
community of perhaps 60,000–80,000 by 2006 according to an Associated Press
report (“Iranian Jews Living in U.S. Have Complex Feelings About Mideast Crisis”
Fox News, August 7, 2006). Jewish migrants also came from the Arab world, par-
ticularly after the establishment of Israel in 1948.
70.4 Migration of Jews to Israel
70.4.1 General Patterns
The Jewish population of Israel is composed almost entirely of immigrants and
descendants of immigrants. In 1951, after the mass immigration following Israel’s
independence in 1948, three-quarters of the Jewish population were foreign-born,
and about half of all Israelis had lived in the country for 5 years or less. Over the
years, the share of Israeli-born in the Jewish population rose from 47 % in 1972 to
63 % in 1988 and 71 % in 2010 – after absorbing more than 1.3 million new immi-
grants (mostly from the FSU) since 1990.
Following an early numerical predominance of the European-born Jews, the
share of the Asian/African-born rose markedly as a percentage of all foreign-born
Israelis, though the European/American-born remained the larger group. The chil-
dren’s generation shows a different trend: since the early 1970s, Israeli-born Jews of
Middle Eastern (Asian)/North African extraction outnumbered those of European/
American extraction. Overall, the division between the two main origin groups
(comprising foreign- and Israeli-born nationals, including members of the third
generation) was quite close. In 1988, the percentage of Israeli Jews of Asian/African
extraction stood at 52 % of all Israeli Jews. This percentage would have been slightly
higher if it included FSU immigrants from the Caucasus and Central Asian repub-
lics, who, like all FSU immigrants, were customarily classified as European-born by
the CBS. With the large FSU immigration in recent years, the number of Israelis of
European origin rose again. By 2010, 34 % of all Jews were of European/American
origin, 28 % were of Asian/African origin, and 38 % were Israelis of third and
higher generation.
S. DellaPergola and I.M. Sheskin
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
A sequence of periods of large- and moderate-scale immigration most strongly
influenced demographic and socioeconomic change in Israeli society. Immigration
directly affected the growth rates and composition of the population in several
respects, such as the absolute and relative share of population groups according to
religion and ethnic affiliation, country of origin, and duration of stay in Israel.
However, immigration also affected other significant variables such as the geo-
graphic distribution of the population, its composition by age groups and marital
status, and social stratification.
Immigration reached Israel at a very unsteady pace, in the shape of subsequent
waves (DellaPergola 1998). Early immigration played an important role in estab-
lishing the primary cultural, political and institutional infrastructure of Palestine
and, later, in Israel. Roughly 60,000–70,000 Jews immigrated to Palestine toward
the end of Ottoman rule (1880–1918), and about 483,000 arrived during the British
Mandate (1919–1948). Until 1948, official immigration policies restricted the size
of Jewish immigration and directly or indirectly stimulated selectivity of immigra-
tion by countries of origin and the social and demographic profile of migrants
(Bachi 1977; Friedlander and Goldscheider 1979). Migration opportunities radi-
cally changed with Israel’s independence in 1948 and its adoption of nearly unre-
stricted admission policies for Jewish immigrants epitomized by the 1950 Law of
Return.
70.4.2 Geographical Correlates of Immigration to Israel
Since 1948, the rhythm of immigration was quite different in the various Diaspora
countries. Four principal models provide a basic typology that can be extended to all
possible countries of origin of immigrants (DellaPergola 2009):
1. total transfer to Israel between 1949 and 1951 of a country’s existing Jewish
population – as in Iraq, Yemen, Bulgaria, and to a lesser extent in several other
countries in the Middle East and the Balkans;
2. large-scale and unselective migration spread over longer time spans of the abso-
lute majority of pre-existing Jewish population, the pace of migration being
mostly determined by the shifting opportunities to leave the country of origin.
These, in turn, largely reflected changing migration policies of the respective
governments, typically in the FSU, but also in Romania and most other countries
in Eastern Europe, Morocco, and Ethiopia;
3. more selective Jewish emigration, uninterrupted over time but of variable inten-
sity reflecting periodic economic and political crises and their consequences for
the Jewish community in the respective countries of origin, as in Argentina and
most other Latin American countries and South Africa;
4. comparatively scant and highly selective Jewish emigration, with the exception
of a more intense period following the 1967 Six-Day war – as in the U.S. and
most Western developed countries.
70 Global Dispersion of Jews: Determinants and Consequences
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
547
548
549
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
567
These different models clearly indicate that the principal determinants of the timing
and volume of migration to Israel reflected the push of changing and often negative
situations in the countries of origin more than Israel’s pull. At the same time, the
role of cultural-ideological determinants in migration decisions among Diaspora
Jews cannot be dismissed. The influence of Zionism and of a broader Jewish iden-
tity significantly determined choosing Israel over alternative targets such as the
U.S., Canada, Australia, or France, once migration driving factors emerged in the
countries of origin.
Following mass immigration, Israel became a contemporary society with the
seventh highest percentage of foreign-born population in the world. Yet by 2010,
78 % of Israel’s total population, and 71 % of its Jewish population were born in
the country. As immigration to Israel reflected greatly different demographic,
socioeconomic, and cultural modernization attained across Diaspora communities,
many of the typical global East-west or North-south cleavages were introduced
through immigration in the Israeli context. In a sweeping generalization, immi-
grants from Muslim countries comprised a comparatively more traditional popula-
tion in terms of cultural orientation and socioeconomic development, relative to
immigrants from European countries and the relatively small component of
American origin.
Concomitant Jewish migration streams from the same countries of origin to
Western countries – particularly from North Africa to France and from Eastern
Europe to the U.S. – comprised smaller proportions of children and elders relative
to migrants to Israel, and featured better levels of socioeconomic training and spe-
cialization. In other words, Israel had to absorb and integrate a Jewish population
with unusually onerous initial demographic and socioeconomic profiles, which
became more frustrating because of the integration elsewhere of a large share of the
respective social and intellectual elites.
70.4.3 Emigration from Israel
Out-migration (also called yerida, descent) from Israel was a quantitatively far
lesser factor. Emigration has been comparatively stable over time. Excluding
occasional fluctuations, the number of Israeli residents who left Israel and spent
more than 4 years abroad usually ranged between 10,000 and 20,000 per year.
As against an overall population in rapid growth, the annual emigration rate
tended to decline and ranged around 3–4 per thousand inhabitants. A recent
survey by the Pew Research Center (Global Religion and Migration Data Base)
suggests that only 230,000 Jews born in Israel are living in other parts of the
world. The 4 % of Israelis who live abroad is half the 8 % average figure for the
rest of the world.
S. DellaPergola and I.M. Sheskin
568
569
570
571
572
573
574
575
576
577
578
579
580
581
582
583
584
585
586
587
588
589
590
591
592
593
594
595
596
597
598
599
600
601
602
603
604
605
70.5 The Changing Spatial Distribution of American Jews
Next, we examine the changing spatial distribution of American Jews over the past
four decades (Figs. 70.3, 70.4 and 70.5). What the aforementioned Galveston Plan
was unsuccessful at in 1907 (distributing the Jewish population throughout the
nation), American Jews have accomplished on their own in the past half century.
American Jews are not geographically distributed as are all Americans: In 1970,
46 % of American Jews would have had to move to another state so that the geo-
graphic distribution of American Jews would match that of the American population
in general. In 2012, the 46 % decreased to 40 %, indicating that the significant dif-
ference in geographic distribution between Jews and all Americans, although less-
ening a bit, has maintained from 1970 to 2012.
In 1970, five states (New York-42 %, California-12 %, Pennsylvania-8 %, New
Jersey-7 %, and Illinois-5 %) contained 73 % of American Jews. By 2012, Jews were
somewhat less geographically concentrated with seven states (New York- 26 %,
California-18 %, Florida-10 %, New Jersey-8 %, Illinois-4 %, Pennsylvania-4 %,
and Massachusetts-4 %) containing 74 % of American Jews. Note that New York’s
share of American Jews decreased from 42 % in 1970 to 26 % in 2012, while Florida’s
share increased from 4 % in 1970 to 10 % in 2012 (Sheskin and Dashefsky 2012).
Fig. 70.3 US Jewish Population, 1970 (Map from Sheskin and Dashefsky 2013: 160, used with
permission)
70 Global Dispersion of Jews: Determinants and Consequences
606
607
608
609
610
611
612
613
614
615
616
617
618
619
620
621
622
623
While remaining geographically concentrated in 5–7 states, the geographic dis-
tribution among the four census regions has changed significantly away from the
Northeast and Midwest and toward the South and West (Table 70.3). From 1970 to
2012, the percentage of Jews in the Northeast decreased from 67 to 45 %, with this
decrease being concentrated in the Middle Atlantic. The percentage of Jews in the
Midwest decreased slightly from 12 to 11 %, with this decrease being predomi-
nantly in the East North Central. The percentage of Jews in the South increased
from 12 to 21 %, with this increase being predominantly in the South Atlantic.
Finally, the percentage of Jews in the West increased from 13 to 24 %, predomi-
nantly in the Pacific. Note that the latest table of Jews by state is available at www.
jewishdatabank.org.
Four issues related to the changing spatial distribution of American Jews may be
identified. First, as Jews have moved from the immigrant cities of the Northeast and
Midwest to the South and West, the difficulty of creating a sense of community
in locations where few have roots in the area, leads to a lack of support for local
institutions (Tobin 1984). An extreme example is the Jewish community in Palm
Beach County, Florida. According to a 2005 survey, 0 % of Jewish adults in the
County were born in the County. This is manifested in very low rates of synagogue
and Jewish Community Center membership (Sheskin 2006).
Second, the movement to the South and West has meant that enormous monetary
resources and volunteer time have been expended recreating Jewish institutions
(synagogues, Jewish Community Centers, Jewish day schools, Jewish federations,
etc.) in these new communities, rather than using resources for the development of
programs that would enhance the lives of American Jews and the general communi-
ties in which they reside.
Table 70.3 Jewish population in the United States, by census region and census division, 2012
Census region/division
Jewish population Total population
Number Distribution (%) Number aDistribution
Northeast 3,002,470 44.7 55,521,598 17.8
Middle Atlantic 2,560,395 38.1 41,029,238 13.2
New England 442,075 6.6 14,492,360 4.7
Midwest 710,280 10.6 67,158,835 21.6
East North Central 574,610 8.5 46,519,084 14.9
West North Central 135,670 2.0 20,639,751 6.6
South 1,388,380 20.7 116,046,736 37.2
East South Central 41,250 0.6 18,553,961 6.0
South Atlantic 1,190,575 17.7 60,513,771 19.4
West South Central 156,555 2.3 36,979,004 11.9
West 1,620,550 24.1 72,864,748 23.4
Mountain 296,920 4.4 22,373,411 7.2
Pacific 1,323,630 19.7 50,491,337 16.2
Total 6,721,680 100.0 311,591,917 100.0
Source: Sheskin and Dashefsky (2013: 162)
[AU6]
70 Global Dispersion of Jews: Determinants and Consequences
624
625
626
627
628
629
630
631
632
633
634
635
636
637
638
639
640
641
642
643
644
645
646
647
648
t3.1
t3.2
t3.3
t3.4
t3.5
t3.6
t3.7
t3.8
t3.9
t3.10
t3.11
t3.12
t3.13
t3.14
t3.15
t3.16
t3.17
Third, a significant geographic separation of families has occurred. In some
cases, grandparents have moved away from their children and grandchildren to
retire in Florida and other Sunbelt states. In other cases, children have migrated out
of the traditional areas of Jewish settlement in the Northeast and Midwest to seek
job opportunities elsewhere. While improvements in communication, such as
unlimited long distance telephones, Skype, etc. have somewhat ameliorated the
impact of the separation of families, the impact is still significant, particularly as the
elderly age and become frail and vulnerable.
Fourth, the changing geographic distribution of American Jews has resulted in
increased political power for the Jewish community in presidential elections. The
top ten states for Jewish population have 244 electoral votes, with 270 needed to
secure the presidency. Although Jews are only about 2 % of all Americans, they are
a somewhat larger percentage of all American adults. About 90 % of Jews are reg-
istered to vote, compared to about two-thirds of all Americans. For the 2008 presi-
dential election, polls showed that 96 % of registered Jews actually voted, compared
to 77 % of all Americans (www.electionstudies.org). Thus, Jews are always a much
larger percentage of voters than of the total population. Some of the states with the
largest increases in Jewish population over the past half century also have signifi-
cant increases in electoral votes, California’s electoral votes increased from 40 in
1970 to 55 in 2012; Florida from 14 to 29; Georgia from 12 to 16, Arizona, from 5
to 11; and Texas, from 25 to 38. While Jews are but 1.3–3.4 % of the population of
most of these states (Sheskin and Dashefsky 2012), they are a larger percentage of
voters in these states. With most elections won by 2–6 percentage points, presiden-
tial candidates do pay attention to the concerns of the Jewish community.
70.6 Population Distribution in Israel
The population in Israel is chiefly urban – at least under current definitions that do
not necessarily reflect changes in lifestyle or in the social makeup of localities. In
Israel all localities with more than 2,000 residents are defined as urban. Among Jews,
the share of town dwellers exceeded 90 % since the early 1970s, and was 91 % in
2010. The Arab population, too, has been characterized by a significant transition to
a large urban majority: from 63 % in 1961 to 95 % in 2010. The process most respon-
sible for the urbanization of Israeli Arabs was the growth of small rural or semi-urban
localities into larger, urban-type localities, as a result of local population growth. The
Bedouins have recently shown greater inclination to move to permanent settlements
in the south, as opposed to the temporary settlements they occupied in the past.
Another important element for the appraisal of the process of immigrants absorp-
tion relates to the preoccupation of Israeli governments with strategic population
dispersal over the national territory. Despite its small size, Israel features significant
regional climatic and socioeconomic differences. The incoming population natu-
rally tended to concentrate in the more developed and geographically more acces-
sible areas. The veteran population, mostly of European origin, thus tended to
S. DellaPergola and I.M. Sheskin
649
650
651
652
653
654
655
656
657
658
659
660
661
662
663
664
665
666
667
668
669
670
671
672
673
674
675
676
677
678
679
680
681
682
683
684
685
686
687
688
689
occupy geographical locations closer to the central areas in the country, in and
around the Tel Aviv-Yafo Metropolitan Area, along the Mediterranean coast, and in
the Haifa urban area. Subsequent immigrants from Asia and Africa in the 1950s and
1960s, but also more recently from the FSU were largely settled in northern and
southern areas which besides being more peripheral were also less economically
developed and more often affected by security problems. Looking at the country-
wide distribution of Jewish population by countries of origin, by residential dis-
tricts, one obtains a synthetic picture of similarity and dissimilarity across different
origin groups. Figure 70.6 obtains from a Smallest Space Analysis (SSA) which
graphically elaborates percentage distributions of each group, by district, as of the
*
* *
* *
* *
*
*
*
*
*
*
* * *
*
*
*
*
*
* *
*
*
*
North
America
France
SouthAfrica
Rest of
Europe
South
America
Algeria-
TunisiaMorocco
India-
Pakistan
Ethiopia
Russia
Ukraine
USSR
Rest of Europe USSR
Rest of
Asia
Georgia
Uzbekistan
Libya
Egypt
Turkey
Bulgaria-Greece
Rest of Asia
Iran
Yemen
Iraq
Romania
Poland
Germany-
Austria
EUROPEAN-
AMERICAN
SEPHARDIC-ASIAN-
AFRICAN
Fig. 70.6 Smallest space analysis of Jewish population distribution in Israel, by country of birth
and sub-district, 1995 (Source: Sergio DellaPergola and Ira M. Sheskin)
this figure will be printed in b/w
70 Global Dispersion of Jews: Determinants and Consequences
690
691
692
693
694
695
696
697
698
699
1995 Israel population census (DellaPergola 2007). While each country is represented
in each district, there are definite patterns of concentration and convergence that
outline the complexity, dynamics and resilience of Israel as an immigrants’ absorp-
tion country.
70.7 The Metropolitan Scale
70.7.1 The Interurban Scale
Changes in the geographic distribution of Jews have affected their distribution not
only among countries, but also within countries. Historically, reflecting legal and
economic constraints imposed upon them, Jews tended to be concentrated in cities
more than other population groups. However, especially in Eastern Europe, in
Middle Eastern countries like Yemen, or in North African countries like Morocco,
a large share to an absolute majority of Jews were found in small towns and villages.
Jews often constituted a high percentage or even the majority of the total population
in those locales. Especially since the mid-nineteenth century, vast masses of Jews
relocated from those smaller and relatively peripheral towns and villages to major
urban centers. The 15 cities that hosted the largest Jewish communities in 1925 had
a combined Jewish population of 4.3 million that constituted nearly 30 % of the
total world Jewish population, whereas in 1850 the same 15 cities had a combined
Jewish population of less than 150,000, equal to 3 % of world Jewry (DellaPergola
1983). The geographic, socioeconomic, and cultural change involved was huge.
The continuing tendency of Jews to migrate to large metropolitan areas is shown
by the overwhelmingly urban concentration of Jewish populations in 2010
(Table 70.4). More than half (53.0 %) of world Jewry lived in only five metropolitan
areas. These areas – including the main cities and vast urbanized territories around
them – were Tel Aviv, New York, Jerusalem, Los Angeles, and Haifa. Over two-
thirds (67.5 %) of world Jewry lived in the five previous areas plus the South Florida
(Miami, Fort Lauderdale, West Palm Beach), San Francisco, Be’er Sheva,
Washington/Baltimore, and Boston metropolitan areas. The 24 largest metropolitan
concentrations of Jewish population encompassed 74.4 % of all Jews worldwide.
Of the 15 largest metropolitan areas of Jewish residence, eight were located in
the U.S., four in Israel, and one each in France, the UK, and Canada. Nearly all of
the major areas of settlement of contemporary Jewish populations share distinct
features, such as being national or regional capital cities, with a high standard of
living, a highly-developed infrastructure for higher education, and strong transna-
tional connections.
American Jews have tended to reside in major urban areas. Because Jews were
traditionally barred from owning land in many parts of Europe, few became farmers
when they came to the U.S. In fact, of the 6.7 million American Jews enumerated in
Sheskin & Dashefsky, Table 70.5 shows the 5.3 million (79 %) live in the top 20
S. DellaPergola and I.M. Sheskin
700
701
702
703
704
705
706
707
708
709
710
711
712
713
714
715
716
717
718
719
720
721
722
723
724
725
726
727
728
729
730
731
732
733
734
735
736
737
738
Table 70.4 Metropolitan areas with largest core Jewish populations, 2012
Rank Metropolitan areaaCountry
Jewish
population
Share of world’s Jews
% Cumulative %
1Tel AvivbIsrael 3,070,800 22.2 22.2
2New YorkcU.S. 2,099,000 15.3 37.6
3 JerusalemdIsrael 850,900 6.2 43.8
4Los AngeleseU.S. 688,600 5.0 48.8
5 HaifafIsrael 686,300 5.0 53.8
6 South FloridagU.S. 485,850 3.5 57.3
7 Be’er ShevahIsrael 377,700 2.7 60.1
8 San FranciscoiU.S. 345,700 2.5 62.6
9 Washington/BaltimorejU.S. 332,900 2.4 65.0
10 BostonkU.S. 295,700 2.2 67.2
11 ChicagolU.S. 294,700 2.1 69.3
12 ParismFrance 284,000 2.1 71.4
13 PhiladelphianU.S. 280,000 2.0 73.4
14 LondonoUnited
Kingdom
195,000 1.4 74.8
15 TorontopCanada 180,000 1.3 76.1
Source: www.census.gov, 2011 estimates
aMost metropolitan areas include extended inhabited territory and several municipal authorities
around the central city. Definitions vary by country. Some of the U.S. estimates may include non-
core Jews
bIncludes Tel Aviv District, Central District, and Ashdod Subdistrict. Principal cities: Tel Aviv,
Ramat Gan, Bene Beraq, Petach Tikwa, Bat Yam, Holon, Rishon LeZiyon, Rehovot, Netanya, and
Ashdod, all with Jewish populations over 100,000
cNew York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-CT-PA Metropolitan Statistical Area.
Principal Cities: New York, NY; White Plains, NY; Newark, NJ; Edison, NJ; Union, NJ; Wayne,
NJ; and New Brunswick, NJ
dIncludes Jerusalem District and parts of Judea and Samaria District
eIncludes Los Angeles, Orange, Ventura, Riverside, and San Bernardino Counties. Not including
5,000 part-time residents
fIncludes Haifa District and parts of Northern District
gIncludes Miami-Dade, Broward, and Palm Beach Counties. Not including 69,275 part-time residents
hIncludes Be’er Sheva Subdistrict and other parts of Southern District
iOur adjustment of original data. Includes the San Francisco area (San Francisco County, San
Mateo County, Marin County, and Sonoma County), as well as Alameda County, Contra Costa
County, and Silicon Valley. Assumes the San Francisco area currently comprises 60 % of the total
Bay area Jewish population, the same as in the 1986 demographic study of that area
jIncludes DC, Montgomery and Prince Georges Counties in Maryland, and Fairfax, Loudoun, and
Prince William Counties in Virginia
kIncludes North Shore
lIncludes Clark County, DuPage County, and parts of Lake County
mDepartments 75, 77, 78, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95
nIncludes the Cherry Hill, NJ area
oGreater London and contiguous postcode areas
pCensus Metropolitan Area
70 Global Dispersion of Jews: Determinants and Consequences
t4.1
t4.2
t4.3
t4.4
t4.5
t4.6
t4.7
t4.8
t4.9
t4.10
t4.11
t4.12
t4.13
t4.14
t4.15
t4.16
t4.17
t4.18
t4.19
t4.20
t4.21
t4.22
t4.23
t4.24
t4.25
t4.26
t4.27
t4.28
t4.29
t4.30
t4.31
t4.32
t4.33
t4.34
t4.35
t4.36
t4.37
t4.38
t4.39
t4.40
t4.41
t4.42
t4.43
t4.44
t4.45
t4.46
t4.47
Table 70.5 Jewish population for the top 20 U.S. Metropolitan Statistical Areas, 2012
MSA
Rank MSA Name Population TotalaJewish
Percent
Jewish (%)
1New York-Northern New
Jersey-Long Island,
NY-NJ-PA
19,015,900 2,064,300 10.9
2Los Angeles-Long Beach-
Santa Ana, CA
12,944,801 617,480 4.8
3 Chicago-Joliet-Naperville,
IL-IN-WI
9,504,753 294,280 3.1
4Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington,
TX
6,526,548 55,005 0.8
5 Houston-Sugar Land-
Baytown, TX
6,086,538 45,640 0.8
6 Philadelphia-Camden-
Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE-MD
5,992,414 275,850 4.6
7 Washington-Arlington-
Alexandria,
DC-VA-MD-WV
5,703,948 217,390 3.8
8 Miami-Fort Lauderdale-
Pompano Beach, FL
5,670,125 555,125 9.8
9 Atlanta-Sandy Springs-
Marietta, GA
5,359,205 119,800 2.2
10 Boston-Cambridge-Quincy,
MA-NH
4,591,112 251,360 5.5
11 San Francisco-Oakland-
Fremont, CA
4,391,037 304,700 6.9
12 Riverside-San Bernardino-
Ontario, CA
4,304,997 22,625 0.5
13 Detroit-Warren-Livonia, MI 4,285,832 67,000 1.6
14 Phoenix-Mesa-Glendale, AZ 4,262,236 82,900 1.9
15 Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA 3,500,026 39,700 1.1
16 Minneapolis-St. Paul-
Bloomington, MN-WI
3,318,486 44,500 1.3
17 San Diego-Carlsbad-San
Marcos, CA
3,140,069 89,000 2.8
18 Tampa-St. Petersburg-
Clearwater, FL
2,824,724 58,350 2.1
19 St. Louis, MO-IL 2,817,355 54,200 1.9
20 Baltimore-Towson, MD 2,729,110 115,400 4.2
Total population in top 20 MSAs 116,969,216 5,298,730 4.5
Total U.S. population 311,591,917 6,721,680 2.2
Percentage of population in top 20
MSAs
37.5 % 78.8 %
Source: Sheskin and Dashefsky (2013: 156)
aTotal Jewish population of 5,298,730 excludes 75,875 part-year residents who are included in
MSAs 8, 12, and 18
bTotal population is for 2011, Jewish population is for 2012
cSee www.census.gov/population/metro/files/lists/2009/List1.txt for a list of counties included in
each MSA
[AU7]
S. DellaPergola and I.M. Sheskin
t5.1
t5.2
t5.3
t5.4
t5.5
t5.6
t5.7
t5.8
t5.9
t5.10
t5.11
t5.12
t5.13
t5.14
t5.15
t5.16
t5.17
t5.18
t5.19
t5.20
t5.21
t5.22
t5.23
t5.24
t5.25
t5.26
t5.27
t5.28
t5.29
t5.30
t5.31
t5.32
t5.33
t5.34
t5.35
t5.36
t5.37
t5.38
t5.39
t5.40
t5.41
t5.42
t5.43
t5.44
t5.45
t5.46
t5.47
t5.48
t5.49
t5.50
U.S. Metropolitan Statistical Areas. (Note that Table 70.5 shows data for Metropolitan
Statistical Areas while Table 70.4, to be more consistent with data from other coun-
tries, uses data for the Combined Metropolitan Statistical Areas.)
70.7.2 The Intraurban Scale
Some of the basic classical models of neighborhood change (Jordan et al. 1996;
Boal 1978; for example) do not apply as well to Jews as they might to other groups.
Arthur Hertzberg (1989) shows that between 1945 and 1965, one third of Jews left
the city for the suburbs and spent at least one billion dollars on new synagogue
buildings in the 1950s and 1960s. Thus, the need for capital expenditures noted at
the national scale above, also applies at the intraurban scale. Moore (1997) suggests
that the suburbanization of Jews, as it true for all Americans, was mostly due to a
scarcity of adequate housing in the city as Jewish incomes increased post World War
II, the modestly priced single family homes available in the suburbs with easy mort-
gage rates, and highway construction that allowed the working spouse to work in
the city while living in the suburbs.
Nathan Glazer (1957) posited that Jewish suburbanization occurred in three
phases since the end of World War I. At first Jews, mostly the Eastern European
Jews who arrived via Ellis Island, lived in the areas of first settlement (in New York,
the Lower East Side neighborhood) and many would define themselves as Orthodox.
As the area of first settlement rapidly emptied, second generation Jews, mostly
Conservative and Reform, with higher socioeconomic status than the first genera-
tion, moved to areas of second settlement, also called gilded ghettos. Finally, by the
1950s and 1960, Jews were moving to areas of third settlement in suburbs located
further from the city. Thus, as one moved further from the city, generation in the
U.S. increased, as did socioeconomic status, and assimilation into American
society.
Sheskin (1993) notes that this suburbanization differed from some other ethnic
groups in that Jews tended to move in large numbers to some suburbs, but not to
others. (Recently, Li (2009) has noted a similar phenomenon for Asians suburbs in
Los Angeles, which she called “ethnoburbs.”) In the case of Jews, while restrictive
covenants were mostly passé after World War II, real estate practices that restricted
Jews from some neighborhoods were in effect. Sometimes non-Jews moved out of
neighborhoods as large numbers of Jews moved in (gentile flight). Also, Jewish
incomes were generally higher than non-Jews, limiting the neighborhoods into
which Jews wanted to move. Finally, Jews wanted to live near other Jews and Jewish
institutions, such as synagogues and Jewish schools.
Thus, even with suburbanization, Jews remain a spatially clustered population at
the intraurban scale. American Jews are also a highly mobile population. In 2000,
35 % of adult Jews lived in a different house than in 1995 (Kotler-Berkowitz et al
2003). Thus, the changing intraurban distribution is due not just due to intraurban
migration but to interurban migration, and international migration. For example,
Sheskin (2010b) shows that most of the change in the geographic distribution of
70 Global Dispersion of Jews: Determinants and Consequences
739
740
741
742
743
744
745
746
747
748
749
750
751
752
753
754
755
756
757
758
759
760
761
762
763
764
765
766
767
768
769
770
771
772
773
774
775
776
777
778
779
780
Jews in Milwaukee and Detroit is due to interurban migration. Both intraurban and
international migration has contributed to the changing spatial distribution of Jews
in New York and the Twin Cities. Interurban migration explains the significant
changes in Broward County (FL) and Las Vegas. All three migration types have
combined to change the geography of Jews in Miami.
Finally, at the other end of the geographic scale, many small Jewish communities,
particularly in the south, have disappeared due to changes in employment, the effect
of anti-Semitism, and assimilation (Sheskin 1995).
70.8 The Changing Urban Profile in Israel
and in Other Countries
Rapid Jewish population growth in Israel has resulted in the formation and develop-
ment of a number of large metropolitan areas. The largest, and eventually the largest
single concentration of Jews in an urban setting worldwide, is the Tel Aviv-Yafo
Metropolitan Area stretching from Netanya north in Israel’s Central District to
Ashdod south in the Southern District. The total population passed the three million
mark in the first decade of the 2000s. The second largest metropolitan area is
Jerusalem, which also includes portions of Palestinian Authority territory in the
West Bank. Haifa and the Northern District is the third largest, and Beersheba and
surrounding areas in the Southern District is fourth.
As noted above, immigration came in waves, each dominated by different coun-
tries of origin. Therefore, the early environments of newcomers tended to be quite
homogeneous. Many new immigrants were directed to small rural localities (espe-
cially moshav-type cooperative villages), to newly built development towns, or to
developing residential quarters in older cities where new housing blocks (shikuním)
were built. While these policies produced reasonably quick and extensive solutions
to impelling problems of housing in a situation of unusually rapid population
growth, the resulting geographic and social distribution of Jewish population in
Israel could well be described during the late 1960s as a mosaic of segregated
groups (Klaff 1980).
Compared with the prevailing residential homogeneity of primary settlement
boosted by immigration waves, powerful streams of internal geographical mobil-
ity operated to dilute residential gaps both between the different administrative
divisions at the country level, and within individual localities. Social intermin-
gling and integration occurred particularly in newly developed urban areas that
attracted secondary movers who previously experienced geographical mobility
and whose socioeconomic characteristics were compatible with the new neigh-
borhoods. A more heterogeneous geographic origin profile developed within each
residential area, while the differences between the various areas tended to dimin-
ish. At the same time, pockets of ethnic homogeneity persisted among the less
mobile, many of whom also shared a lower socioeconomic status. At the same
[AU8]
S. DellaPergola and I.M. Sheskin
781
782
783
784
785
786
787
788
789
790
791
792
793
794
795
796
797
798
799
800
801
802
803
804
805
806
807
808
809
810
811
812
813
814
815
816
817
818
819
820
time, high residential segregation continued to prevail between Israeli Jews and
Arabs (Schmelz et al. 1991).
Also in other countries, outside of the US and Israel, the residential configuration
of Jews in metropolitan areas has certain definite peculiarities worthy of noting. One
trait frequently shared by Jewish communities in European countries is that the
original location of the ghetto – whether legally or socially determined – was in the
Eastern parts of the central city. Such was the case in London’s East End, in Paris’
Le Marais, or in Rome’s Rione St. Angelo, as well as in several other major cities.
Later generations tended to move out of the ghetto, resolutely choosing locations
mostly to the southwest, west, northwest, or north of the city center. Such move-
ments were of course also a function of a city’s physical shape, as delimited by
seashores, rivers, and hills. Some of these patterns will become better understood
when considering that the value of real estate is related to environmental conditions.
In the northern hemisphere, the jet stream tends to flow predominantly from the
northwest to the southeast, thus creating a better and cleaner environment in the
windward northwestern urban sections. The logic would be, therefore, that other
things being equal, one would prefer a Northern-Western to a Southern-Eastern
location, which in turn would generate higher land and housing costs in the north-
west. In turn, access to real estate’s cost is related to the socioeconomic characteris-
tics of households. An additional factor related to physical geography could be the
presence of rivers. Clean water would come into the city neighborhoods located
upstream. The city would add industrial pollution and sewerage to the river, making
home sites downstream far less desirable. That is why Jewish suburbs (and in gen-
eral higher income suburbs) may often be found upstream, also enjoying the benefit
of higher altitude (Fig. 70.7).
Upward mobility processes like those that quite massively characterized most
Jewish communities in Western countries during the twentieth century could thus
result in residential relocation of significant percentages of a given Jewish commu-
nity. Indeed, Jewish communities in large cities like London, Paris, Berlin, Vienna,
Fig. 70.7 Schematic representation of the possible relationship between physical environment
and socioeconomic opportunities as a background to residential choices of Jews in major metro-
politan areas in the Northern hemisphere (Source: Sergio DellaPergola and Ira M. Sheskin)
this figure will be printed in b/w
70 Global Dispersion of Jews: Determinants and Consequences
821
822
823
824
825
826
827
828
829
830
831
832
833
834
835
836
837
838
839
840
841
842
843
844
845
846
847
848
849
Rome, Milan, Manchester, but also Mexico City and Buenos Aires, all tended over
time to move to a more western and/or northern configuration. Jewish urban settle-
ment in several large North American cities followed similar patterns, for example,
in Atlanta, Baltimore, Boston, Chicago, Detroit, Indianapolis, Los Angeles, Miami,
Minneapolis, Milwaukee, St. Louis, Washington DC, Montreal, and Toronto.
Similar patterns were visible in major cities in North Africa and the Middle East
inasmuch as upward social mobility of Jews was at work. In some Jewish communi-
ties in the southern hemisphere, like Sydney, São Paolo, or Caracas, the different
wind patterns and land value differences prevailing there led to Jewish relocation
patterns somewhat symmetric to those observed in the northern hemisphere.
In any case, the significant transformation of Jewish residential patterns implied
that the location of institutional buildings and centers of collective activities some-
times remained behind the actual location of the Jewish community. Moreover, in
spite of significant acculturation that occurred in the process of socioeconomic pro-
motion, the residential density and concentration of Jews remained substantially
high. Urban geography played in the past, and continues to play in the present, an
important role in defining the profile of personal and community life among the
Jewish population.
Conclusions
In the course of history, Jewish populations have undergone dramatic geo-
graphic transformations that have significantly changed not only the terms of
reference and meaning of their relationship with non-Jewish societies, but
have fundamentally affected the outlook of the Jews themselves, their existen-
tial opportunities, demography, socioeconomic development, security, and
quite certainly beliefs. This can be said to be true both in long term historical
perspective, in the course of the twentieth century, after the Shoah and the
establishment of Israel, and more recently since the demise of the Soviet
Union at the beginning of the 1990s. Such dramatic changes concerned move-
ments at interchanges at all possible dimensions of the geographical ladder:
across continents, across countries within the same continent, across regions
within the same country, across all possible levels of urban hierarchy from
peripheral village to capital city and world metropolitan area.
The trends described in this chapter are in no way random, but they reflect
consolidated patterns and causal mechanisms that we have outlined: the inner
needs of the religio-ethnic group investigated here, its interaction with a social
environment on occasion hostile, and broader socioeconomic and cultural
transformations shared among Jews and all others. The powerful population
dynamics affecting world, regional and national Jewish communities are not
set to stop suddenly. It can be postulated that further changes are ahead, fol-
lowing the broader transformative drivers that we have outlined. However, it
would be presumptuous to suggest a clear prognosis for the future. Jewish
(continued)
S. DellaPergola and I.M. Sheskin
850
851
852
853
854
855
856
857
858
859
860
861
862
863
864
865
866
867
References
Bachi, R. (1977). The population of Israel. Paris/Jerusalem: CICRED/The Hebrew University.
Barnavi, E. (Ed.). (1992). A historical atlas of the Jewish people. New York: Knopf.
Birmingham, S. (1967). Our crowd, the greater Jewish families of New York. New York: Harper &
Row.
Birmingham, S. (1984). “The rest of us:” the rise of America’s Eastern European Jews. Boston:
Little, Brown.
Boal, F. W. (1978). Ethnic residential segregation. In D. T. Herbert & R. J. Johnston (Eds.), Social
areas in cities (pp. 57–95). London: Wiley.
DellaPergola, S. (1983). La trasformazione demografica della Diaspora ebraica. Torino: Loescher.
DellaPergola, S. (1998). The global context of migration to Israel. In E. Leshem & J. Shuval (Eds.),
Immigration to Israel: Sociological perspectives (pp. 51–92). New Brunswick/London:
Transaction Books.
DellaPergola, S. (2005). Was it the demography: A reassessment of US Jewish population estimates,
1945–2001. Contemporary Jewry, 25, 85–131.
DellaPergola, S. (2007). “Sephardi and Oriental” migrations to Israel: Migration, social change
and identification. In P. Medding (Ed.), Studies in contemporary Jewry (pp. 3–43). New York:
Oxford University Press.
DellaPergola, S. (2009). International migration of Jews. In E. Ben-Rafel & Y. Sternberg (Eds.),
Transnationalism: Diasporas and the advent of a new (dis)order (pp. 213–236). Leiden/
Boston: Brill.
DellaPergola, S. (2010). World Jewish population. In Current Jewish Population Reports, Number
2–2010. Storrs: Mandell Berman Institute, North American Jewish Data Bank.
DellaPergola, S. (2012). How many Jews in the US? Contemporary Jewry, 2012 (forthcoming)
DellaPergola, S. (2013). World Jewish Population, 2012. In A. Dashefsky & I. M. Sheskin (Eds.),
The American Jewish year book. Dordrecht: Springer.
Dimont, M. I. (1978). The Jews in America, the roots, history, and destiny of American Jews.
New York: Simon and Schuster.
Friedlander, D., & Goldscheider, C. (1979). The population of Israel. New York: Columbia
University Press.
Friesel, E. (1990). Atlas of modern Jewish history. New York: Oxford University Press.
[AU9]
[AU10]
history has taught the analyst to be cautious. Indeed, the geographer and the
demographer that, say 100 years ago in 1912, would have ventured a projec-
tion of the future of the Jewish people, would not have been able to predict
two world wars, the Holocaust of the European Jews, the rebirth of world
Jewry thanks to the foundation of Israel, and its younger population. Nor
would it have been possible to accurately predict changes in international
migration policies and their dramatic consequences, the rise and fall of
empires and nations, the exodus from the Islamic countries, the FSU, and
Ethiopia, or the demographic consequences of acculturation and integration
in the more hospitable societies. The main result of the trends of the past
decades was the rise of the Jewish community of Israel to global prominence
and primacy, and judging from the existing evidence this quantitative strength-
ening is expected to continue, while the prospects for Jewish communities in
the rest of the world rather point to stability or decline.
70 Global Dispersion of Jews: Determinants and Consequences
868
869
870
871
872
873
874
875
876
877
878
879
880
881
882
883
884
885
886
887
888
889
890
891
892
893
894
895
896
897
898
Glazer, N. (1957). American Judaism. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Hertzberg, A. (1989). The Jews in America, four centuries of an uneasy encounter. New York:
Simon and Schuster.
Howe, I. (1976). World of our fathers, the journey of East European Jews to America and the life
they found and made. New York: Galahad Books.
Israel, Central Bureau of Statistics. (2011). Statistical Abstract of Israel, table 2–16. Jerusalem.
Jordan, T. G., Domosh, M., & Rowntree, L. (1996). The human mosaic. A thematic introduction to
cultural geography. New York: Addison Wesley Publishing Company.
Klaff, V. Z. (1980). Residence and integration in Israel: A mosaic of integrated groups. In E. Krausz
(Ed.), Studies of Israeli society: Migration, ethnicity and community (pp. 53–71). New
Brunswick: Transaction.
Kosmin, B. A., & Keysar, A. (2009). American religious identification survey (ARIS 2008).
Hartford: Trinity College.
Kosmin, B. A., Goldstein, S., Waksberg, J., Lerer, N., Keysar, A., & Scheckner, J. (1991). Highlights
of the CJF 1990 National Jewish Population Survey. New York: Council of Jewish Federations.
Kotler-Berkowitz, L., et al. (2003). Strength, challenge and diversity in the American Jewish popu-
lation. New York: United Jewish Communities.
Li, W. (2009). Ethnoburb: The new ethnic community in urban America. Honolulu: University of
Hawaii Press.
Liebman, S. (1977). Cuban Jewish community in south Florida. In A. D. Lavender (Ed.), A coat of
many colors, Jewish subcommunities in the United States (pp. 296–304). Westport: Greenwood
Press.
Marcus, J. R. (1990). To count a people: American Jewish population data 1585–1984. Lanham:
University Press of America.
Mayer, E., Kosmin, B. A., & Keysar, A. (2001). American religious identification survey. New York:
The Center for Jewish Studies: The Graduate School and University Center, City University of
New York (CUNY).
Moore, D. D. (1997). Jewish migration in postwar America: The case of Miami and Los Angeles.
In J. D. Sarna (Ed.), The American Jewish experience (pp. 314–327). New York: Holmes and
Meier.
Norland, J., & Freedman, H. (1977). Jewish demographic studies in the context of the census of
Canada. In U. O. Schmelz, P. Glikson, & S. DellaPergola (Eds.), Jewish Population Studies
1973 (Papers in Jewish Demography) (pp. 59–78). Jerusalem: The Hebrew University, The
Avraham Harman Institute of Contemporary Jewry.
Pasachoff, N., & Littman, R. J. (1995). Jewish history in 100 nutshells. Northvale: Jason Aronson.
Rosenwaike, I. (1980). A synthetic estimate of American Jewish population movement over the
last three decades. In U. O. Schmelz & S. DellaPergola (Eds.), Papers in Jewish Demography
1977 (pp. 83–102). Jerusalem: The Hebrew University, The Institute of Contemporary Jewry.
Sachar, H. M. (1992). A history of the Jews in America. New York: Knopf.
Sanders, R. (1988). Shores of refuge. A hundred years of Jewish immigration. New York: Henry
Holt.
Schmelz, U. O., DellaPergola, S., & Avner, U. (1991). Ethnic differences among Israeli Jews: A new
look. Jerusalem/New York: The Hebrew University/The American Jewish Committee.
Shamir, I., & Shavit, S. (1986). Encyclopedia of Jewish history. New York: Facts on File
Publications.
Shapiro, E. S. (1992). A time for healing. American Jewry since World War II. Baltimore: John
Hopkins University Press.
Sherman, C. B. (1965). The Jew within American society. Detroit: Wayne State University Press.
Sheskin, I. M. (1993). Jewish ethnic homelands in the United States. Journal of Cultural
Geography, 13(2), 119–132.
Sheskin, I. M. (2000). The dixie diaspora: The ‘loss’ of the small southern Jewish community. The
Southeastern Geographer, 40(1), 52–74.
Sheskin, I. M. (2001). How Jewish communities differ: Variations in the findings of local Jewish
demographic studies. New York: City University of New York, North American Jewish Data
Bank.
[AU11]
S. DellaPergola and I.M. Sheskin
899
900
901
902
903
904
905
906
907
908
909
910
911
912
913
914
915
916
917
918
919
920
921
922
923
924
925
926
927
928
929
930
931
932
933
934
935
936
937
938
939
940
941
942
943
944
945
946
947
948
949
950
951
952
953
Sheskin, I. M. (2005). The greater Miami Jewish community study. Miami: The Greater Miami
Jewish Federation.
Sheskin, I. M. (2006). The Jewish community study of Palm Beach County. West Palm Beach: The
Jewish Federation of Palm Beach County.
Sheskin, I. M. (2010a). Jewish Israelis in the United States. Paper presented at the International
Geographic Union Regional Conference, Tel Aviv.
Sheskin, I. M. (2010b) The suburbanization of American Jewry. Paper presented at the Race,
Ethnicity and Place V Conference, Binghamton, NY.
Sheskin, I. M., & Dashefsky, A. (2006). Jewish population in the United States, 2006. In D. Singer
& L. Grossman (Eds.), American Jewish year book (Vol. 106, pp. 134–139). New York:
American Jewish Committee.
Sheskin, I. M., & Dashefsky, A. (2012). Jewish population in the United States, 2012. In
A. Dashefsky & I. Sheskin (Eds.), American Jewish year book (Vol. 106, pp. 134–139).
New York: American Jewish Committee.
Sheskin, I., & Dashefsky, A. (2013). A. Jewish population in the United States, 2012. In
A. Dashefsky & I. M. Sheskin (Eds.), The American Jewish year book. Dordrecht: Springer.
Sheskin, I., & DellaPergola, S. (2013). World Jewish Population, 2012. In A. Dashefsky & I. M.
Sheskin (Eds.), The American Jewish year book. Dordrecht: Springer.
Tighe, E., Saxe, L., & Kadushin, C. (2011). Estimating the Jewish population of the United States:
2000–2010. Waltham: Brandeis University.
Tobin, H. (1984). The myth of community in the Sunbelt. Journal of Jewish Communal Service,
61(1), 44–49.
United Nations Development Programme. (2011). Human development report 2011. New York:
United Nations Publications.
United States, Executive Office of the President, Office of Management and Budget. (2008).
Update of statistical area definitions and guidance on their uses (OMB Bulletin 09-91).
Washington, DC: Office of Management and Budget.
Waksberg, J. (1978). Sampling methods for random digit dialing. Journal of the American
Statistical Association, 73(361), 40–46.
Wyman, D. (1984). The abandonment of the Jews: America and the Holocaust, 1941–1945.
New York: Pantheon Books.
[AU12]
70 Global Dispersion of Jews: Determinants and Consequences
954
955
956
957
958
959
960
961
962
963
964
965
966
967
968
969
970
971
972
973
974
975
976
977
978
979
980
981
982
983
984
Author Queries
Chapter No.: 70 0002197399
Queries Details Required Author’s Response
AU1 Please check if identified head-levels are appropriate.
AU2 Reference citation Kosmin and Keysar (2008) has been
changed to Kosmin and Keysar (2009) as per the reference list.
Please check if appropriate.
AU3 Reference citation Rosewaike (1980) has been changed to
Rosenwaike (1980) as per the reference list. Please check if
appropriate.
AU4 Please check if inserted citation for Table 70.1 is okay.
AU5 Value “1,896.700” has been changed as “1,896,700”. Please
check if this is okay.
AU6 Please provide explanation for note “a” in Table 70.3.
AU7 Please cite note “b” and “c” in Table 70.5.
AU8 Reference Sheskin (1995) is cited in-text but not given in the
reference list. Please check and provide complete details in
reference list.
AU9 Please provide in-text citation for references Israel, Central
Bureau of Statistics (2011), Sheskin (2000), United States,
Executive Office of the President, Office of Management and
Budget (2008).
AU10 Please update reference DellaPergola (2012).
AU11 Please check if inserted publisher Location for reference
Mayer (2001) is okay.
AU12 Please check the inserted publisher name for references United
Nations Development Programme (2011), United States,
Executive office of the president (2008) is okay
