Spatial mismatch is related to job sprawl and economic Environmental Justice.

Workforce development today often takes a more holistic approach, addressing issues such as spatial mismatch or poor transportation to jobs.

The Spatial Mismatch phenomenon has many implications for inner city residents that are dependent on low level entry jobs.

Latinos (45.8%) experience spatial mismatch as well, though to a lesser extent than African Americans.

Spatial Mismatch: With the expansion of the suburbs, economic growth shifted from the inner cities to the suburbs.

Kasarda and Ting (1996) argue that poor people become trapped in dependency on welfare due to a lack of skills along with spatial mismatch.

Under the spatial mismatch hypothesis, reductions in urban welfare dependence, particularly among Blacks, would rely on giving potential workers access to suitable jobs in affluent suburbs.

The Mechanisms of Spatial Mismatch (Free download as PDF)

The River Line will diminish what William Julius Wilson Jr. characterizes as the spatial mismatch, an intractable dilemma in the contemporary metropolis.

Spatial mismatch is the sociological, economic and political phenomenon associated with economic restructuring in which employment opportunities for low-income people are located far away from the areas where they live.

In 1968, J. F Kain formulated the "Spatial Mismatch Hypothesis", although he did not refer to it by this term.

Stoll's research shows that a substantially higher percentage of African Americans (53.5%) experience spatial mismatch than European Americans (35.6%).

In terms of measurement, spatial mismatch can be thought of as the percentage of people who would have to move in order to be distributed in the same way as jobs.

In his latest book, When Work Disappears , William Julius Wilson argues that there is a "spatial mismatch" between workers in the cities and jobs in the suburbs.

Spatial Mismatch: Certain neighborhoods may have little accessibility (in either spatial proximity or as mediated by transportation networks) to job opportunities appropriate to the skills of their residents, thereby restricting their employment opportunities.

The spatial mismatch hypothesis argues that the movement of jobs away from central city areas, combined with constraints on geographic mobility imposed by continued residential segregation, limits the employment prospects of inner city minorities.

Spatial Mismatch is defined as the situation where poor urban, predominantly minority citizens are left without easy access to entry-level jobs, as a result of increasing job sprawl and limited transportation options to facilitate a reverse commute to the suburbs.

Arguments against effectiveness of LRT based on spatial mismatch fail to taken into account that automobiles supplement the reach of a mass transit system, particularly to suburbs, reducing the population density required for a viable system.

In The Truly Disadvantaged: The Inner City, the Underclass, and Public Policy (1987), Wilson was one of the first to enunciate at length the "spatial mismatch" theory for the development of a ghetto underclass.

In The Mechanisms of Spatial Mismatch (2007), Laurent Gobillon, Harris Selod and Yves Zenou suggested that there are seven different factors that support the Spatial Mismatch phenomenon.

Moreover, with the movement of blue-collared employment from central cities, geographically entrenched housing discrimination, and suburban land use policy, African American youths in inner cities become victims of spatial mismatch, where their residences provide only weak and negative employment growth and they usually lack access to intrametropolitan mobility.

While the spatial mismatch argument is largely correct for the Midwest (except Chicago), the South, and Southwest, it never was relevant to San Francisco, the nation's second-densest city after New York, and is increasingly not the case in places such as Los Angeles and San Diego.

He has long been interested in the question of how employer characteristics and hiring practices, as well as the quality of jobs they generate, have affected job opportunities for less-skilled workers - especially when they create "mismatches" between worker skills and those sought by employers, as well as between their geographic locations (or "spatial mismatch").