Over the summer when the cencus poplation loss figures came out I compared the top 21 cities for population loss with the top 21 cities for racially segregated metro areas based on a university of wisconsin(?) study, (I'll post the link if I find it) .  Only 17 of the 21 were on both lists in their entirety because the racial segregation was for the top 100 metros and population loss was for the 256 municipal corporations with a population over 100k. (ex. Gary indiana is a top 100 metro, but the largest single city has 95k).  here is the list, those bolded are on both top 21 lists.  Those italicised are only one of the lists in their entirety.  The number in parenthises is the rank on the racial segregation list.

 

Pop Loss

21. Syracuse (20)

20. Jackson (not in 100 metros)

19. Philadelphia (16)

18. Savannah (not in 100 metros)

17. DC (54)

16. Mobile AL (57)

15. Rochester NY (67)

14. Toledo (78)

13. St. Paul (39)

12. Dayton Ohio (19)

11. Buffalo (the number eight)

10. Birmingham AL (13)

9. Evansville ID (not 100 metros)

8. San Francisco (47)

7. Boston (64)

6. Flint (not top 100 metros)

5. Cleveland (7)

4. Pittsburg (72)

3. New Orleans (21)

2. Detriot (1)

1. Cincinnati (9)

 

9 of the 17 comparables are on both lists.  Including 4 of the top 5.  Why 21 instead of twenty or twenty five? I copied the wrong number of cells on accident.  If the top 25 are compared there are 11 on both top 25 lists of 21 on both lists to begin with.

http://www.uwm.edu/Dept/ETI/integration/integration.htm

 

By the way this is only black / white segregation not total segregation.

^ummm...Cleveland and Toledo are black/white segregated too.

 

No one is an exception in Ohio.

^ no way!  from Strongsville to Glenville its a rainbow of diversity!

There doesn't appear to be any relation between the two lists.  Did you come to any conclusions based on this?  I would offer that it looks like black/white segregation has no effect how much population the various cities have lost since the last census.

I didn't mean to imply a causal relationship, but having three of the top five cities for population loss also in the top ten for racial segregation seems like it might be more than a coincidence.  The reason that I made the lists was that while the city of cincinnati lost population the metro area of cincinnati grew during the same period.  Since the majority of growth happened in the outer suburban areas which are almost all white, I wondered if racial segregation further impelled population loss from the racially mixed or predominately black mother cities to the supermajoritarian white suburbs.  I don't have the time or statistical skills to make a much more detailed comparison, but it was just an interesting exercise.