Recent Latinx Immigrants to Miami-Dade County, Florida: A Characterization of Pre- and Post-Immigration Travel

Abstract

With greater understanding of preferred and frequently used modes of transportation, urban planners can design and promote efficient, equitable, and sustainable living environments. Few studies have examined the transportation needs immigrants who have recently arrived in the United States. Most of our limited understanding of this subset of the population is based on research obtained from immigrants who have resided in the United States for extended periods of time. Moreover, little is known about how post-immigration travel behaviors are affected by pre-immigration travel behaviors. This study examines how pre-immigration travel behaviors of Latinx immigrants affect their post-immigration travel behaviors within one year of their arrival to Miami-Dade County, Florida.

The findings of this study align with previous research suggesting that, among this immigrant group, multiple modes of transportation are used—with variations by sex, income, and country of origin. Unlike previous studies, however, our results reveal a relatively high prevalence of driving, particularly among men, indicating the uniqueness of Latinx travel behavior in Miami-Dade County. An important and novel study finding is that transportation behaviors of immigrants soon after arrival are highly influenced by transportation behaviors in their country of origin. This knowledge can potentially be highly relevant to transportation planners in the United States, as it facilitates the adoption of early behavioral interventions to address immigrants’ transportation needs.

1. Introduction

Mobility is crucial for the economic and social development of individuals and societies. Understanding transportation behavior within a population is crucial for urban planners to design and promote efficient, equitable, and sustainable living environments. In pursuit of this knowledge, researchers and policy makers have directed attention to the transportation needs and demands of immigrants. There is consensus that immigrants differ from their U.S.-born populations regarding preference and modes of transportation (Asgari, Zaman, & Jin, 2017; Barajas, Agrawal, & Chatman, 2018; Blumenberg, 2009; Blumenberg & Evans, 2010). Compared to their U.S.-born populations, immigrants are more likely to use transit, walk, ride a bicycle, and carpool (Bagley & Mokhtarian, 2002; Blumenberg, 2008; Burbidge, 2012; Crane & Crepeau, 1998; Handy et al., 2008; Tal & Handy, 2010).

Several factors contribute to these differences, including social networks, residential neighborhood characteristics, car ownership, and legal and financial barriers to driving (Asgari et al., 2017). For instance, immigrants tend to prefer living in neighborhoods with high residential and employment rates and/or extensive public transit systems (Bagley & Mokhtarian, 2002; Blumenberg, 2008; Liu & Painter, 2012; M. Smart, 2010). Immigrants’ travel decisions are strongly influenced by their income. For instance, lower-income immigrants tend to use public transit and carpool more often than higher-income immigrants (Barajas et al., 2018; Blumenberg & Smart, 2010; Liu & Painter, 2012). Lower-income immigrants also tend to use bicycles more often than their higher-income counterparts (Barajas et al., 2018; M. Smart, 2010).Additionally, previous research has indicated that immigrants’ transportation behaviors are influenced by cultural attributes (Chatman, 2014). As with other determinants of transportation, the effect of cultural factors on travel preferences slowly diminishes over time (Federal Highway Administration, 2011; Tal & Handy, 2010). Time since immigration is an important factor influencing immigrants’ travel patterns—particularly their patterns relating to driving. Compared to their U.S.-born counterparts, immigrants tend to drive less often upon arrival, but increase the frequency of their driving over time (Chatman, 2014; Chatman & Klein, 2009; Heisz & Schellenberg, 2004). This increasing reliance on private vehicles over time—a process also called “transportation assimilation” (Portes & Zhou, 1993)—has been found to be associated with immigrants’ acculturation level, as well as improvements in socioeconomic status and the acquisition of new family obligations (Alba, Logan, & Stults, 2000; Lovejoy & Handy, 2011; M. Smart, 2010). Transportation assimilation rates decrease over time—a finding that has been linked with changes in the age, destination area, and composition of immigrants over time (Dafeng, 2018).

The bulk of our understanding of immigrants’ transportation needs and usage has been based on research obtained from immigrants who have been in the United States for an extended period of time (Asgari et al., 2017; Barajas, 2019; Barajas et al., 2018). A limited number of studies have examined immigrants’ transportation behavior in the first five years (Kim, 2009; Lovejoy & Handy, 2011; M. J. Smart, 2015) and 10 years (Heisz & Schellenberg, 2004; Kim, 2009) after arrival to the host country. Fewer studies have examined immigrants’ transportation patterns within their first year of arriving to the United States (Chatman & Klein, 2009; Kim, 2009). A better understanding of immigrants’ transportation needs and usage early in the immigration process is needed; there is a dearth of knowledge on how initial transportation behaviors after immigration relate to pre-immigration transportation behaviors.

The present study focuses on Latinx immigrants—the largest immigrant group in the United States. Specifically, we examine a uniquely understudied subset of this population: Latinx immigrants who have recently (i.e., within one year) arrived to Miami-Dade County, Florida.

Miami-Dade County has several unique characteristics. According to the most recent U.S. Census, the county’s composition is 53.7% Cuban, 17.8% South American, 13.6 % Central American, and 3.5% Other Caribbean (Statistical Atlas, 2018). In our sample, distributions by country/region of origin are: 62.7% South American, 23.9% Central American, and 13.4% Other Latin American country. Although country/region of origin data for recent Latinx immigrants in Miami-Dade County is not available, U.S. Census data have indicated substantial national shifts in immigration patterns with steep increases in immigrants from Central and South America arriving in the United States (Noe-Bustamante, 2019). For instance, rates of immigrants from South American countries such as Venezuela have increased up to 76% to 421,000, while immigrants from Central American countries such as Guatemala have increased by 37% to 1.4 million (Noe-Bustamante, 2019). In terms of public transportation, Miami-Dade County has the 15th largest public transit system in the country. While Miami-Dade County has multiple modes of transportation options available such as Metrobus, Metrorail, Metromover, and city trolley systems, it remains a car-dependent city. Indeed, the county has experienced a significant trend in decreased use of public transit over the past few years (Miami-Dade Transportation Planning Administration, 2018). Currently, Miami-Dade ranks fifth nationally and tenth globally for congestion, as residents spend 64 hours in traffic per year on average (Cookson, 2018). Just 18.6% of Miami-Dade households do not own a car according to the 2016 American Community Survey estimates. In comparison, 37% of Washington, D.C., residents and 54% of New York City’s residents did not own a car in 2016 (US Census Bureau, 2016).

The present study examines the transportation behaviors of Latinx immigrants after arrival (within one year of arrival) to Miami-Dade County. The study’s innovative aspects include: (a) capturing the recent immigration patterns described above, (b) exploring the prevalent modes of transportation in the area, and (c) linking post-immigration transportation patterns with retrospective information on transportation patterns in the immigrants’ country of origin. The study aims to: (1) provide a characterization of the travel behavior of Latinx immigrants within the first year of arrival to Miami-Dade County, Florida, and (2) examine to what extent post-immigration travel modes are correlated with pre-immigration travel modes.

2. Methods

2.1. Data

This study uses baseline data from an ongoing National Institutes of Health (NIH)-funded longitudinal study examining pre- to post-immigration travel and drinking and driving trajectories among young adult recent Latinx immigrants. The survey included measures that assess pre- and post-immigration transportation, alcohol use, and impaired driving, as well as the environmental, demographic, and sociocultural factors that may influence changes in these behaviors before and after immigration. This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of a large public university in South Florida.

During the baseline assessment, retrospective pre-immigration data and current post-immigration data were obtained. Inclusion criteria were: being a Latinx immigrant, 18-34 years old, who recently immigrated (within one year prior to baseline assessment) to the United States from a Latin American country with the intention of staying in the United States at least three years beyond baseline. Respondent-driven sampling was the primary recruitment strategy. This technique is an effective strategy in recruiting participants from difficult-to-reach populations (Salganik & Heckathorn, 2004). Because the study consisted of recently arrived immigrants, many of whom had either temporary or undocumented immigration status, respondent-driven sampling was deemed to be the most appropriate sampling approach. Previous studies have also found this sampling strategy to be effective in this population (Sanchez, Dillon, Concha, & De La Rosa, 2015). We asked each participant (the seed) to refer three individuals in his or her social network who met eligibility criteria. Seeds were recruited via flyers and in-person throughout Miami-Dade County neighborhoods and businesses with substantial Latinx recent immigrant populations, in community-based agencies serving Latinx recent immigrants, and during Latinx health fairs in Miami-Dade County. More than 50 locations for recruitment were identified through long-standing partnerships between our research team and community-based agencies serving the Latinx immigrant community. This procedure was followed for a maximum of three legs per seed. As described in the introduction, the resulting sample shows an over-representation of South and Central Americans and makes the study sample representative of the current Latinx immigrant population to Miami-Dade County.

Four bilingual interviewers, with extensive experience conducting research interviews in the target population, were recruited from the community, hired, and extensively trained to conduct the surveys in the present study. All surveys were conducted orally in Spanish via computer-assisted personal interviews; surveys were completed at a confidential, safe location agreed upon by both the interviewer and participant. Each interview required approximately 1.5 hours to complete. For their participation, participants received $50. A total of 540 immigrants were recruited for this study, half self-reported being male, half female. Approximately 16% of the immigrants have permanent residency status (“green card,” citizenship), 41% have legal but not permanent residency status (e.g., student visa, working permit, asylum seeking status), and 42% have no legal residency status. Approximately 36% of our sample has an average household income $2,000 or higher.

2.2. Transportation Measures

Participants were asked to report on the many modes of transportation they used. To assess transportation in the country of origin, we asked participants whether “in the past year before coming to the U.S., did you use [MODE] to get from place to place?” In separate questions, we replaced the term [MODE] with 9 travel options as follows: “drive yourself in a car or other motor vehicle,” “have someone else drive you in a car or other motor vehicle,” “carpool” (unlike riding in a passenger vehicle driven by somebody else, carpooling in this study implies a pre-existent transportation arrangement), “use public transportation (bus, railway),” “use a bicycle,” “walk,” “use ride-share services (Uber or Lyft),” “use para-transit services (taxi),” and “other.”

Post-immigration transportation modes were assessed by asking participants: “Since you came to the U.S. did you use [MODE] to get from place to place?” with each of the 9 abovementioned options subsequently presented. For each mode of pre- and post-immigration transportation mode that was endorsed, a follow-up item probed for frequency of use (“every day,” “several days a week,” “once a week or less,” “only certain times a year”), and the reason(s) for their use (“work,” “school,” “fun or recreation,” “grocery shopping,” “driving family around,” “other”).

2.3. Statistical Analyses

We first applied descriptive analyses to estimate the distribution of the five modes of transportation under examination (Bicycle, Transit, Carpool, Driving, Riding in a Passenger Vehicle) by immigrants’ sex, country, or region of origin (i.e., Colombia, Cuba, Venezuela, Central American, Other Latin American countries), months since arrival, employment, legal residence status, monthly household income, and whether the immigrant has family in the United States. To examine use of multiple modes of transportation upon arrival to the United States, we estimated the non-parametric correlation between the five modes of transportation (Spearman’s Rho). We applied logistic regression to assess the relative contribution of immigrants’ age, sex, subjective social status (the MacArthur Scale of Subjective Social Status, Goodman et al., 2001), household income, months in the host country, legal residence status, and pre-immigration use of transportation mode under study on the post-immigration use (yes/no) of that mode of transportation. Notably, the MacArthur Scale of Subjective Social Status aims to assess the respondent’s perceived standing in society, and hence reflects appraisal of social standing relative to others. Subjective social status has been found to be a greater predictor of health and well-being above and beyond traditional objective measures of socioeconomic status such as education, occupation, or income (Cundiff & Matthews, 2017). The MacArthur Scale of Subjective Social Status has been widely used with multiple racial and ethnic populations national and internationally (Cundiff & Matthews, 2017), including among recent immigrants (Garza, Glenn, Mistry, Ponce, & Zimmerman, 2017; Leu et al., 2008). Finally, we applied cumulative logistic regression to assess whether the frequency of driving, carpooling, riding a bike, and use of public transit after immigration varies with the frequency of use of the other modes of transportation after arrival, as well as in the country of origin. Due to sample size limitations, demographic and socio-economic variables were not included in these models (i.e., the frequency of use for each mode was modeled only as a function of the frequency of use of the other modes of transportation).

3. Results

While travelling within Miami-Dade County, recent Latinx immigrants used multiple modes of transportation. Common transportation modes included walking (78%), riding as passengers in private vehicles (78%), and using a ride-sharing service such as Uber or Lyft (84%) (Table 1). Driving was relatively common for these recent Latinx immigrants (64%), a rate that is substantially higher than the 25%-33% of immigrants who reported driving alone within the first year of arrival by Chatman and colleagues (Chatman, 2014; Chatman & Klein, 2009). Compared with women, men were more likely to drive, be passengers in private cars, or ride a bicycle, but they were less likely to carpool or use a ride-sharing service. No sex-based differences in using public transit, a taxi, or walking were found. No statistical difference in driving, carpooling, walking, or use of a ride-sharing service among study participants by country of origin was found. However, compared with other Latinx immigrants, those from Cuba were less likely to use a bicycle (6%), use public transit (35%), or be a passenger in a private vehicle (55%). Time since arrival did not impact the use of most of the modes of transportation—an anticipated result given that all participants had been in the United States for less than one year. The exception was driving: a significantly larger proportion of Latinx immigrants drove one year after arrival (75%) compared to within 3 months of arrival (55%). Immigrants with permanent (76%) or temporary (74%) resident status were more likely to drive than immigrants without legal resident status (42%). Driving also increased based on immigrants’ income. On the other hand, recent immigrants with higher household monthly income were less likely to use a bicycle, use public transit, or walk compared to their less affluent counterparts. Immigrants with permanent resident status were also more likely to use a ride-sharing service but less likely to walk or use public transit than immigrants without such status. The use of ride-sharing services was higher among immigrants with a temporary legal residency status (86%) than among legal permanent residents (73%) or those with undocumented immigration status (80%).

Table 1.

Transportation Modes by Immigrants’ Characteristics.

		N	Col %	Bicycle	Transit	Car-pool	Drive	Pass.	Walk	Taxi	Ride Sharing	Other
Sex	Female	268	50%	17%	63%	50%	55%	81%	72%	27%	86%	3%
	Male	271	50%	33%	60%	38%	66%	71%	79%	26%	77%	4%
Country	Colombia	86	16%	29%	57%	45%	69%	78%	69%	15%	83%	5%
	Cuba	51	9%	6%	35%	53%	67%	55%	67%	18%	69%	0%
	Central American	135	25%	30%	76%	39%	54%	76%	82%	30%	80%	3%
	Venezuela	158	29%	22%	58%	43%	61%	82%	78%	30%	85%	3%
	Other	108	20%	32%	66%	45%	60%	76%	75%	29%	82%	5%
Months Since Arrival	3 or less	149	28%	20%	57%	48%	55%	83%	76%	23%	77%	2%
	4–6 months	150	28%	25%	64%	35%	57%	77%	73%	25%	88%	5%
	7–9 months	132	24%	30%	66%	47%	60%	70%	79%	30%	78%	3%
	10–12 months	108	20%	27%	58%	47%	75%	72%	76%	27%	82%	3%
Legal Residence Status	Permanent	86	16%	22%	42%	48%	76%	67%	59%	30%	73%	1%
	Without papers	225	42%	26%	70%	44%	42%	80%	80%	23%	80%	2%
	Temporary	223	41%	26%	61%	42%	74%	75%	78%	27%	86%	6%
Household Monthly Income	Less than $500	38	7%	47%	84%	42%	40%	82%	87%	24%	66%	0%
	S500 - $900	98	18%	27%	63%	46%	52%	82%	79%	29%	84%	2%
	S1000 - $1999	199	37%	23%	66%	44%	58%	75%	81%	21%	77%	2%
	$2000 - $2999	126	23%	25%	53%	46%	75%	77%	71%	28%	85%	7%
	$3000 or more	71	13%	21%	48%	34%	70%	63%	62%	34%	90%	4%
All		539	100%	25%	62%	40%	64%	78%	78%	27%	84%	3%

“Col %” indicates column percentages. “Pass” denotes “passenger in a vehicle.” Unlike “passenger in a vehicle,” “carpooling” implies a pre-existent transportation agreement. Percentages in the five rightmost columns indicate the percent of immigrants within a group that uses the mode of transportation. Percentages in bold indicate statistical difference at p < .05. Percentages in bold and underlined indicate statistical difference at p < .01. For instance, 36.2% of the males rode a bicycle, a percentage statistically higher than the 13.1% of females who rode a bicycle. Statistical significance in Table 1 was assessed by applying a Chi square test… “Household Monthly Income” indicates response to “last month, which was the total amount of money you and your family lived on?”

Table 2 presents transportation modes used after arrival and informs about how they correlate. Latinx immigrants who rode a bicycle also often used public transit and taxis and walked. Those who often rode as passengers also carpooled and used a ride-sharing service. On the other hand, immigrants who drove a car were less likely to use public transit, be a passenger in a passenger car, use a taxi, or ride a bicycle.

Table 2.

Recent Latinx Immigrants to Miami-Dade County: Correlation Between Usage of Modes of Transportation.

	Bike	Public Transit	Carpool	Drive	Ride as Passenger in a Car	Walk	Taxi	Ride Sharing	Other
Bike	1.00	0.24	−0.03	−0.04	0.00	0.21	0.16	0.06	0.06
Public Transit		1.00	0.02	−0.20	0.04	0.43	0.20	0.08	0.15
Carpool			1.00	0.04	0.27	0.05	0.02	0.14	0.09
Drive				1.00	−0.22	−0.18	−0.21	0.03	0.15
Ride as Passenger in a Car					1.00	0.09	0.06	0.09	0.03
Walk						1.00	0.10	−0.02	0.01
Taxi							1.00	0.23	−0.02
Ride Sharing								1.00	0.04
Other									1.00

Spearman Rank-Order Correlation. Correlations in bold and underlined are statistically different from no correlation (rho = 0.00) (p < .01). Bold alone indicates p < .05 significance.

Tables 1 and 2 present the overall use of the distinct modes of transportations. Their frequency of use, as well as the reasons for such use, are presented in Table 3. In our sample, 73% of immigrants had a driver’s license in their country of origin—a significantly larger percentage than the 50% who had a driver’s license within the first year after arrival. Correspondingly, 75% of immigrants reported driving in their country of origin, but only 64% reported driving after immigration. It is noteworthy that the reported percentage of driving was larger than the percentage of driving licenses—both before as well as after immigration—indicating that some driving is occurring without proper licenses. Most respondents who reported driving did so every day, both before (70%) as well as after immigration (66%). However, there was a significant decrease in the frequency of driving after immigration. The most cited reason for driving was to get to work, both before (60%) and after immigration (65%).

Table 3.

Recent Immigrants’ Use of and Motivation for Transportation Modes in Their Country of Origin and in the United States.

			Country of Origin		After Immigration			Country of Origin		After Immigration
			N	%	N	%		N	%	N	%
Use	No	Bicycle	387	72%	402	75%	Transit	225	42%	128	38%
	Yes		152	28%	137	25%		313	58%	206	62%
Frequency (Yes)	Every day		25	16%	14	10%		85	27%	42	21%
	Several days a week		46	30%	34	25%		86	28%	77	38%
	Once a week or less		31	20%	46	34%		76	25%	43	21%
	Only certain times a year		50	33%	43	31%		63	20%	41	20%
Main Reason (Yes)	Work		40	27%	17	21%		138	44%	107	54%
	School		8	5%	10	12%		85	27%	24	12%
	Fun or Recreation		82	54%	44	54%		47	15%	31	16%
	Grocery Shopping		10	7%	2	3%		5	2%	18	9%
	Driving Family Around		1	1%	1	1%		5	2%	6	3%
	Other		10	7%	7	9%		31	10%	14	7%
Use	No	Carpool	336	62%	199	60%	Drive	136	25%	120	36%
	Yes		203	38%	135	40%		400	75%	213	64%
Frequency (Yes)	Every day		47	23%	29	22%		282	71%	139	66%
	Several days a week		82	40%	61	45%		61	15%	33	16%
	Once a week or less		38	19%	34	25%		20	5%	25	12%
	Only certain times a year		36	18%	11	8%		37	9%	14	7%
Main Reason (Yes)	Work		84	42%	80	59%		241	60%	136	65%
	School		27	13%	9	7%		55	14%	22	10%
	Fun or Recreation		44	22%	15	11%		48	12%	14	7%
	Grocery Shopping		4	2%	9	7%		5	1%	17	8%
	Driving Family Around		33	16%	9	7%		28	7%	15	7%
	Other		10	5%	13	10%		22	6%	7	3%
Use	No	Ride as passenger	202	38%	72	22%	Ride Share	410	76%	54	16%
	Yes		336	63%	262	78%		129	24%	280	84%
Frequency (Yes)	Every day		128	38%	122	47%		2	2%	17	6%
	Several days a week		119	35%	93	36%		31	24%	65	23%
	Once a week or less		61	18%	29	11%		46	36%	103	37%
	Only certain times a year		28	8%	18	7%		50	39%	95	34%
Main Reason (Yes)	Work		129	39%	129	50%		31	24%	119	43%
	School		71	21%	27	11%		6	5%	9	3%
	Fun or Recreation		68	21%	49	19%		74	57%	95	34%
	Grocery Shopping		10	3%	23	9%		3	2%	9	3%
	Driving Family Around		35	11%	7	3%		3	2%	13	5%
	Other		19	6%	21	8%		12	9%	35	13%
Use	No	Taxi	221	41%	244	73%	Walk	139	26%	74	22%
	Yes		315	59%	90	27%		400	74%	260	78%
Frequency (Yes)	Every day		22	7%	3	2%		92	23%	97	24%
	Several days a week		52	17%	38	27%		80	20%	118	29%
	Once a week or less		107	34%	53	38%		89	22%	110	27%
	Only certain times a year		132	42%	46	33%		137	34%	79	20%
Main Reason (Yes)	Work		94	30%	58	42%		71	18%	109	27%
	School		51	16%	6	4%		52	13%	47	12%
	Fun or Recreation		92	29%	41	30%		122	31%	101	25%
	Grocery Shopping		12	4%	6	4%		95	24%	78	19%
	Driving Family Around		8	3%	3	2%		5	1%	5	1%
	Other		56	18%	25	18%		49	12%	65	16%

Bold and underlined indicate statistically difference (p < ..01). Bold alone indicates p < .05 significance.

There was no significant change in the percentage of recent Latinx immigrants who used a bicycle before (28%) and after immigration (25%). However, significant differences in the frequency of that use was found, with a smaller percentage of Latinx immigrants reporting bicycling every day after immigration (10%) than before immigration (16%). Bicycling for fun or recreation was the most cited reason for using a bicycle both before immigration (54%) and after immigration (54%).

Results indicated significant differences in the frequency of using various transportation modes for work purposes. While no significant changes in pre- to post-immigration public transit use was found, public transit users did report using this mode of transportation more often to get to work after immigration (54%) than prior to immigration (44%). Similarly, while frequency in the use of carpooling did not change significantly after immigration, there was an increase in its use for work after immigration (59%) compared to before immigration (42%). Immigrants not only carpooled to work more often after immigration, but also rode as passengers to work (increased from 39% to 50%), and used ride-sharing services (Uber, Lyft) to work after immigration (from 24% to 43%).

To obtain a more comprehensive understanding of the pre/post immigration changes in transportation, we next estimated the percentage of immigrants who (a) used each mode of transportation and (b) used each mode on a daily basis. Following conditional probability theory, we estimated the probability an individual uses Mode X every day conditional to the individual using Mode X at all: Prob (uses Mode X and uses it every day) = Prob (uses Mode X) * Prob (uses Mode X every day / Uses Mode X at all). In other words, we obtained these estimates by multiplying the percent of immigrants who used each mode of transportation by the percent who used it every day (both measures available in Table 3). The resulting estimates are presented in Figure 1.

Figure 1.

Percentage of Recent Latinx Immigrants to Miami-Dade County Who Used Transportation Modes Every Day, Before and After Immigration.

Findings indicated changes in daily use across various modes of transportation before and after immigration. While driving a car was the most commonly reported mode of transportation both before and after immigration, approximately 53% of participants drove every day prior to immigration, while only 42% drove every day after immigration. Approximately 24% rode every day as a passenger in their country of origin. That percentage increased to 37% after immigration. The percent of immigrants who walked every day also increased from 17% pre-immigration to 19% post-immigration. The percentage who used ride-shares on a daily basis climbed from nearly 0% before immigration to about 5% after immigration. The everyday use of public transit or biking also declined after immigration, from 27% to 21%.

Using a mode of transportation in the country of origin significantly predicted using the same mode after immigration (Table 4). The influence of the pre-immigration mode of transportation on the post-immigration mode was largest for driving and smallest for use of public transit. Results suggested significant differences in modes of transportation across various demographic factors including employment status, age, gender, subjective social status, and time in the United States, and country/region of origin. Recent Latinx immigrants with permanent or temporary immigration status were about 4 times more likely to drive compared to immigrants with undocumented status. Those who were employed were about twice as likely to drive than those who were unemployed. Recent Latinx immigrants that were employed were almost 2 times more likely to ride in a private vehicle or carpool, and 3 times most likely to using ride-sharing services after immigration. Compared to older immigrants (ages 30-34), younger immigrants (ages 18-20) were more than 8 times more likely to use ride-sharing services, 2.5 times more likely to use public transit, and almost 2 times more likely to carpool after immigrating to the United States. Females were less likely to drive and use bicycles compared to males. Nevertheless, they were approximately 1.5 more likely to ride as passengers in a private vehicle and carpool and more than 2 times more likely to use a ride-sharing service compared to males. Immigrant with higher subjective social status reported decreased use of public transit and taxi as modes of transportation after immigration. Higher household income was associated with less likelihood of using public transit, riding as passengers in a private vehicle, or biking after immigration. Immigrants who had been in the United States for a longer period of time were more likely to drive or use a taxi, and the less likely to ride as passengers in a car. Compared with immigrants from Venezuela, immigrants from Central America were more than 2.5 times more likely to use a bus whereas immigrants from Colombia were about half as likely to walk or use a taxi compared to immigrants from Venezuela. Conversely, immigrants from Cuba were 3 times more likely to drive compared to immigrants from Venezuela, but less likely to use public transit, ride as passengers in a car, bike, walk, or use a taxi.

Table 4.

Odds Ratios of Factors Influencing the Likelihood of Post-Immigration Use of 8 Modes of Transportation.

	Post-Public Transit	Post-Drive	Post-Ride	Post-Carpool	Post-Bicycle	Post-Walk	Post-Ride Sharing	Post-Taxi
Public Transit pre-immigration	2.11
Drive pre-Immigration		7.69
Ride pre-immigration			2.98
Carpool pre-immigration				3.07
Bicycle pre-immigration					3.26
Walk pre-immigration						4.08
Ride-Sharing pre-immigration							4.11
Taxi pre-immigration								2.28
Employed	0.69	2.04	1.87	1.70	1.30	0.68	3.09	0.67
Age 18–20 vs. 30–34	2.53	0.79	1.25	2.01	2.80	1.37	8.04	1.66
Age 21–24 vs. 30–34	1.30	0.56	0.85	1.41	1.55	0.70	4.39	1.42
Age 25–29 vs. 30–34	1.90	0.82	0.61	1.18	1.38	0.65	5.64	2.10
Female vs. Male	1.32	0.56	1.71	1.55	0.49	0.75	2.34	0.96
Subjective Social Status	0.82	1.06	0.92	0.95	0.98	0.93	0.90	0.88
Household Monthly Income	0.76	1.14	0.81	0.92	0.66	0.81	1.11	0.97
Permanent Resident vs. No papers	0.67	4.99	0.79	0.78	1.42	0.50	0.33	3.12
Temporary vs. No papers	0.86	4.11	0.76	0.93	1.16	0.84	1.72	1.41
# of months since arrival	1.02	1.11	0.90	1.01	1.11	1.04	1.05	1.05
Central America vs Venezuela	2.67	0.93	0.63	1.12	0.98	1.07	1.01	1.09
Colombia vs Venezuela	0.77	1.83	0.72	1.35	1.29	0.47	0.67	0.38
Cuba vs Venezuela	0.40	3.00	0.29	1.74	0.07	0.40	0.62	0.37
Other vs Venezuela	1.29	1.14	0.64	1.43	1.39	0.52	1.35	0.89

Post-Public Transit; Post-Drive, Post-Ride as a passenger, Post-Carpool, and Post-Bicycle denote post-immigration use of transit; driving a car, being a passenger in a private car, carpooling, and riding a bicycle. Bold and underlined indicate statistically difference (Odds Ratios different from 1.00) at alpha = 0.01. Bold only indicates statistical significance at alpha = 0.05. “Household Monthly Income” indicates response to “last month, which was the total amount of money you and your family lived on?” After removing missing responses, N = 500 responses were included in these regressions.

Table 4 models the bivariate (yes/no) use of the 8 modes of transportation under study. To assess how frequently post-immigration modes of transportation were used, we applied ordinal (cumulative) regressions. Table 5 shows the outcome of these regressions. Only the odds ratios (ORs) of factors that were statistically significant are presented in Table 5. Unlike ORs in binary logistic, ORs in cumulative logistic regressions can be interpreted as indicative of the association between an independent variable (e.g., frequency of driving a car in the US) and the higher level of a dependent variable (e.g., most frequent use of public transit in the US). As shown in Table 5, once the model accounts for the use of alternative modes of transportation, the use of public transit in the country of origin no longer is a significant factor on the frequency in use of public transit upon arrival. The frequency in use of public transit upon arrival is largely influenced by the frequency in driving (inverse association), and with the frequency in using a bike (direct association). The frequency of using a bike after immigration is directly associated with using a bike in the country of origin and with the frequent use of public transit after arrival. The frequency of carpooling in the United States is directly associated with the frequency of carpooling in the country of origin, and inversely associated with the frequency of driving after arrival. The frequency of driving after arrival is directly associated with the frequency of driving in the country of origin, and inversely associated with the use of public transit after arrival.

Table 5.

Odds Ratios for Larger Frequency of use of four Post-Immigration Transportation Modes.

			OR	99% Confidence Limits
Dependent Variable: Frequently Using Transit in the US
Independent Variable: Driving a Car in the US	Every Day	vs. Not since arriving	0.36	0.22	0.60
	Every Day	vs. Once a week or less	0.42	0.19	0.93
	Every Day	vs. Only certain times a year	0.24	0.08	0.72
Independent Variable: Riding a Bike in the US	Several days a week	vs. Not since arrival	3.59	1.47	8.76
	Once a week or less	vs. Not since arrival	2.34	1.11	4.92
	Only certain times a year	vs. Not since arrival	2.24	1.01	4.96
Dependent Variable: Frequently Riding a Bicycle in the US
Independent Variable: Riding a Bike in Country of Origin	Several days a week	vs. Not since arrival	3.48	1.46	8.27
	Once a week or less	vs. Not since arrival	4.97	1.76	14.03
	Only certain times a year	vs. Not since arrival	4.00	1.71	9.35
Independent Variable: Transit in the US	Every Day	vs. Not since arrival	3.73	1.56	8.90
	Several days a week	vs. Not since arrival	6.77	2.95	15.51
	Once a week or less	vs. Not since arrival	2.78	1.07	7.24
Dependent Variable: Frequently Carpooling in the US
Independent Variable: Carpooling in Country of Origin	Every Day	vs. Not since arrival	3.76	1.74	8.12
	Several days a week	vs. Not since arrival	2.92	1.54	5.54
	Once a week or less	vs. Not since arrival	2.64	1.12	6.19
	Only certain times a year	vs. Not since arrival	3.41	1.45	8.00
Independent Variable: Driving a Car in the US	Several days a week	vs. Not since arrival	3.43	1.49	7.89
	Only certain times a year	vs. Several Days a week	0.16	0.04	0.65
Dependent Variable: Frequently Driving a Car in the US
Independent Variable: Driving in Country of Origin	Every Day	vs. Not since arrival	4.57	2.55	8.18
	Several days a week	vs. Not since arrival	3.71	1.65	8.38
	Only certain times a year	vs. Not since arrival	3.11	1.21	7.98
Independent Variable: Transit in the US	Every Day	vs. Not since arrival	0.36	0.18	0.71
	Every Day	vs. Once a week or less	0.32	0.14	0.75
	Several days a week	vs. Not sin arrival	0.30	0.16	0.56
	Every Day	vs. Only certain times a year	0.31	0.13	0.73
	Once a week or less	vs. Several Days a week	3.70	1.69	8.10
	Only certain times a year	vs. Several Days a week	3.84	1.72	8.56

The frequency of use of 4 post-immigration modes are described (use of transit, riding a bicycle, carpooling, and driving a car) OR stands for Odds Ratio. Only significant contributors (independent variables) to each of these outcomes are included (i.e., significant OR at p<.01). For instance, Compared to those who have not driven a car in the US, those who drove every day tend to use transit less frequently (OR = 0.36).

4. Discussion

The present study contributes to the research literature by providing a characterization of the transportation behaviors Latinx immigrants within the first year of their arrival to Miami-Dade County, Florida, and by relating such characterization retrospectively with the transportation behaviors of this population in their country of origin.

4.1. Associations between Sociodemographic Characteristics and Travel Decisions of Recent Latinx Immigrants Made within One Year of Arrival

Our sample of recent immigrants presents many similar transportation-related characteristics previously reported on the general population of immigrants. Like most immigrants, our sample of recent Latinx immigrants also tended to use multiple modes of transportation, with use varying by immigrants’ sex, income, and country of origin. Nevertheless, our findings suggest that unique characteristics among recent Latinx immigrants in Miami-Dade County may be associated with distinct differences in transportation patterns compared to previous studies.

Unique to our sample of recent immigrants was their relatively high driving rates, particularly among men. Approximately 64% of the immigrants in the sample have driven a vehicle within one year of arrival to the United States, with about 66% reporting daily driving. Indeed these figures are substantially higher than the 25%-33% of immigrants reported to be driving alone within the first year of arrival reported by Chatman and colleagues (Chatman, 2014; Chatman & Klein, 2009). These relatively high driving rates suggest that recent Latinx immigrants in Miami-Dade County present characteristics that distinguish them from other U.S. Latinx communities, and these differences include income, country/regions of origin, context of the immigrant receiving community, and limited transportation infrastructure.

Compared to other Latinx immigrants, our sample of recent Latinx immigrants to Miami-Dade County is a relatively affluent population. Such relative affluence may explain, at least in part, the noted relatively high rates of driving in our sample. For instance, Chatman (2014) reported the average monthly household income for Latinx immigrants in New Jersey 5 years after arrival was $2,800 (Chatman, 2014). Participants in our sample reported reaching a similar average household income, but within the first 12 months of arrival in the United States: about 36% of our sample lives in households with an average monthly household income of $2,000 or higher.

With regard to country/region of origin, our study sample consisted of a large number of Venezuelan recent immigrants. While there has been an overall slowing of migration to the United States from Latin American countries, substantial growths in immigration have been documented among some subgroups. Namely, the Venezuelan population is the fastest growing Latinx immigrant population in the United States with an increase of 76% from 2010 to 2017 (Noe-Bustamante, 2019). Nationally, recent immigrants of South American origin have been found to have a higher socioeconomic status compared to other Latinx immigrant groups. Notably, Venezuelans have the highest levels of education of any U.S. Latinx immigrant group (Noe-Bustamante, 2019).

The context of Miami-Dade County’s immigrant receiving community, which includes the availability of strong social networks that may facilitate access to and use of cars soon after arrival, is another possible contributor to the high driving rates found in our sample. Indeed, our findings reveal that not only do recent Latinx immigrants in Miami-Dade County drive more, but they also carpooled or rode as passengers compared to Latinx immigrants to other areas in the United States (Kim, 2009). With Latinx immigrants from a large variety of Caribbean and South and Central American countries, Miami-Dade County is home to one the most diverse Latinx populations of any U.S. city (Noe-Bustamante, 2019). Miami-Dade County is a well-established Latinx immigrant-receiving community. Latinxs in this area tend to enjoy more political and economic advantages compared to other cities. It is possible that well-established Latinx immigrant-receiving communities with dense ethnic enclaves, such as those in Miami-Dade County may provide support networks that increase recent immigrants’ availability to private transportation (McGlynn, 2005; M. Sanchez et al., 2016; Schwartz, Unger, Zamboanga, & Szapocznik, 2010).

Another explanation for the higher rates of carpooling may be related to evidence that private shared transportation modes in the form of jitneys (cars or minivans carrying 5-12 passengers), pickups, and shuttles have been increasingly servicing immigrants in some large cities. (Chatman & Klein, 2009; Kemper, Adkins, Flores, & Santos, 2007). Our study suggests that recent immigrants to Miami-Dade County may be taking advantage of these services.

Additionally, the transportation infrastructure of Miami-Dade County undoubtedly influenced the results of the present study. For instance, the relatively high driving and car-related transportation rates of the recent Latinx immigrants in our sample may have also been stimulated by limited public transit opportunities. Unlike other large urban cities, Miami-Dade County lacks a widespread and effective mass transit system. Numerous areas are not accessible by public transportation, thus making driving a vehicle often a necessity to travel from place to place (Gross, 2019). While the evidence indicates a larger reliance on private vehicles after immigration, it is not that clear that such reliance was motivated by limited transit opportunities. Although we found that when used, public transit is more often used to go to work after immigration than it was in the country of origin, we found no significant change in the frequency of use of public transit before and after immigration. This lack of change in public transit usage after immigration may only indicate that the public transit system in Miami-Dade County satisfies the immigrants’ travel needs as well (or as badly) as the public transit systems in their countries of origin.

4.2. Pre-Immigration Influences on Post-Immigration Travel

Research has shown that immigrants’ transportation mode choices are strongly influenced by neighborhood typologies (i.e., based on socioeconomic as well as geographic characteristics) (Asgari et al., 2017). Upon arrival, immigrants’ residence tends to gravitate around certain neighborhoods (Borjas, 2002), and residential location strongly influences immigrants’ transportation modes (Srinivasan & Ferreira, 2002). In line with previous research, findings from the present study indicate that transportation choices made by the recent Latinx immigrants in our sample were highly influenced by their transportation behaviors in their country of origin. The sole exception to this finding involves the frequency in use of public transit upon arrival. Once other modes are accounted for, the frequency of use in public transit is related to immigrants’ driving and use of a bike, but no longer by whether they were using public transit in their country of origin. Although reasons for this behavior are unclear, we speculate it relates to the limited availability of transit options in Miami-Dade County (as summarized in the introduction), and the recent influx of relatively affluent Latino immigrants to Miami-Dade County, who compared to Latino immigrants to other areas have access to a vehicle and driving. This knowledge can potentially be highly relevant to transportation planners, as it facilitates the adoption of early behavioral interventions to address immigrants’ transportation needs.

4.3. Implications

Our findings that the modes of transportation adopted by the Latinx immigrants soon after arrival are also strongly influenced by the modes of transportation used in their country of origin suggests the need for a greater focus on taking recent immigrants’ culture and embedded travel behaviors into account when addressing this population’s travel needs. For instance, it would be beneficial to Miami-Dade County if the culture of biking that immigrants possessed in their countries of origin could be maintained after arrival. While Miami-Dade County offers some bike-friendly paths, these paths are restricted to only certain neighborhoods (e.g., Miami Beach, Miami Shores, Doral, South Miami, Key Biscayne) (https://www.discoverhomesmiami.com/miami/where-to-find-miamis-bicycle-friendly-neighborhoods). Increasing the number of bike-friendly neighborhoods would benefit immigrants as well as Miami as a whole. Moreover, the present study suggests that improving the offering of transit alternatives to the public should be highly beneficial to Latinx recent immigrants.

While the relatively large proportion of Latinx immigrants who drive as soon as they arrive may indicate affluency and a relatively rapid acculturation and adaptation to U.S. norms and behaviors, it also brings a source of concern. Some of those recent immigrants to Miami-Dade County are not familiar to U.S. traffic laws and are at a high risk of driving while impaired (Romano, de la Rosa, Sanchez, Babino, & Taylor, 2016). Developing behavioral interventions for these at-risk Latinx immigrants would be highly relevant to transportation planners.

4.4. Study Limitations

Our findings should be interpreted in light of certain limitations. Eliciting retrospective information about participants’ pre-immigration behavior could have made responses susceptible to recollection bias. However, our ability to access and interview immigrants relatively soon after their arrival reduces the occurrence of such bias and increases the reliability of the information collected by this study. Perhaps the main study limitation was that the information collected and the interpretation of the findings pertain specifically to Latinx immigrants to Miami-Dade County, Florida. Miami-Dade County presents unique characteristics and challenges for Latinx immigrants, culturally, legally, as well as environmentally. It is therefore likely that similar research efforts conducted on Latinx groups in other immigrant-receiving communities would yield different results. Although respondent-driven sampling is a preferred method to recruit “hard-to-reach” populations such as recent and undocumented immigrants, it does not ensure a representative sample. Nevertheless, the findings of this study are relevant to an important U.S. community and metropolis. Moreover, despite their limited generalizability, findings from the present study could be highly relevant to transportation planners in other immigrant-receiving communities, as it facilitates the adoption of early measures to address U.S. immigrants’ travel needs.

4.5. Future Directions

This study focuses on the modes of transportation used by Latinx recent immigrants to Miami-Dade County. Although the uniqueness of the host area precludes a direct generalization to other sites, it would be important to assess whether some of the findings of this study are applicable to other large multicultural enclaves around the country. Also, although the information we provide about the transportation characteristics of Latinx immigrants upon arrival to Miami-Dade County is of novel importance, future research should examine how the initial behaviors documented by this effort progress over time. Furthermore, there is an urgent need for transportation planners to assess the impact of the COVID-19 outbreak on such progression, as Latinx immigrants and the entire population of Miami-Dade County adapt to the new post-COVID-19 reality. In this regard, the present study can be the foundation for future studies of this nature.

Highlights.

• A unique examination of the travel characteristics of Latinx immigrants within one year of arrival to Miami-Dade County, Florida, as they relate to pre-immigration travel behaviors.

• Many findings are in line with previous evidence suggesting the use of multiple modes of transportation, with variations by immigrants’ sex, income, and country of origin.

• Unlike previous studies, however, results reveal relatively high prevalence of driving, particularly among men, indicating the uniqueness of the Miami-Dade County, Latinx travel characteristics.

• An important and novel finding is that transportation choices made by immigrants soon after arrival are highly influenced by their transportation behaviors in the country of origin.