Applying New York's Jewish Community Report Elsewhere

New York/JTA

he 2011 Jewish Community
Study of New York was
recently released with some
fanfare. Some of the UJA-Federation
of New York's survey results came
as somewhat of a surprise. After a
decrease from about 2 million Jews
in 1970 to 1.4 million in both 1991 and
2002, the region's Jewish popula-
tion increased to 1.54 million in 2011,
reflecting higher numbers of both
children and elderly.
Even more surprising was that near-
ly 500,000 Jews now live in Orthodox
households, making the eight-county
area (New York City's five boroughs
plus Nassau, Suffolk and Westchester
counties) almost one-third Orthodox.
At the same time, the number of
people who are "Just Jewish" and
have much weaker ties to the Jewish
community also is increasing. Thus,
the two extremes are growing at the
expense of the middle (Conservative
and Reform Jews).
The study also found significant
diversity (Russians, Israelis, Syrians and
others), a significantly increased per-
centage of Jews living in poverty (about
20 percent) and modest decreases
in philanthropic giving as needs are

increasing. But the reader should not
concentrate just on the findings initially
highlighted by the news media. The
report contains more than 250 pages
of interesting and instructive informa-
tion on this most important American
Jewish community.

The Backdrop

With the New York area's 1.54 mil-
lion Jews representing as much as
25 percent of America's
Jews, changes in its
demography and Jewish
engagement affect the
overall profile of America's
Jewish population. So can a
Houston, a Tucson, Ariz., or
a Springfield, Mass., learn
anything from a reading of
the New York results that
will assist them in their own
community planning?
Yes — and no.
New York is New York. It is differ-
ent Jewishly (and otherwise) from
the rest of the country. Bethamie
Horowitz, the researcher for the 1991
New York Jewish Population Survey,
in a 1994 article in Contemporary
Jewry posited a "New York effect"
(that New York is different from other
American Jewish communities) even
though, demograph-
ically, N.Y. Jews did
not differ signifi-
cantly in 1990 from
the rest of America.
Is this still the case
ASSAD'S SYRIAN
today?
ALAWITES, IRAN,
To answer the
CHINA, H!ZBULLAH,
question, I used
AND RUSSIA
the "Comparison
of Jewish
Communities: A
Compendium of
Tables and Bar
Charts" recently
posted by this
author at the
Mandell Berman
North American
Jewish Data Bank,
which provides
AND MAY
comparisons of
GOD
55 American
Auf
Jewish communi-
ties on hundreds
of measures.
Philanthropist
Mandell "Bill"
Berman of Detroit
endowed the bank.

Dry Bones

IT'S THE WORLD
WIDE WRESTLING
SMACK-DOWN
BATTLE OF THE
21ST CENTURY

AGAINST. THE
SYRIAN MIS,
SAM ARANA, AL
QUM, TURKEY,
NC NATO.

us

HP

New York: New York

New York is like other Jewish
communities in some ways. For
example, among the comparison
Jewish communities, the percentage
of persons in Jewish households
in New York age 17 and younger
(23 percent), age 65 and older
(20 percent) and age 75 and older
(12 percent) as well as average
household size (2.55 persons per
household) are all about
average. Synagogue
membership (44 percent)
and Jewish community
center participation
(32 percent) are both
about average, too. The
percentage of households
who donated to any
Jewish charity in the past
year (59 percent) is a bit
below average.
On the other hand, New
York really differs from the rest of
the country on many measures. For
example, among the comparison
communities, the percentage of
those in the local community who
are Jewish (13 percent) is the third
highest after Florida's South Palm
Beach and Broward County. The
percentage locally born (56 percent)
is the highest and the percentage
foreign born (29 percent) is topped
only by Miami.
Among the 55 comparison Jewish
communities, the percentage of
Orthodox households (20 percent)
is the second highest (just below
Baltimore), Conservative (19
percent) is the fourth lowest and
Reform (23 percent) is the second
lowest. The percentage Just Jewish
(37 percent) is the fifth highest.
The percentage of households who
keep a kosher home (32 percent)
is the highest. The 22 percent
of married couples in the Jewish
community who are intermarried is
well below average. The percentage
of households who donated to the
local Jewish federation in the past
year (24 percent) is the sixth lowest.
Thus, New York also differs
greatly. No other Jewish community
is as large, as diverse or as poor.
Its Orthodox Jewish community
alone is larger than any other
American Jewish community, except
perhaps for Los Angeles. In no other
community do we see the growth in
Orthodox identification that we see

in New York (although we do see
increases elsewhere in participation
in Orthodox, mostly Chabad
institutions).

Trend Lines

Still, some trends and relationships
found in the New York report
almost certainly apply in many
other Jewish communities. For
example, the trend toward greater
bifurcation, with some becoming
more Jewishly engaged (although
not Orthodox) while others become
less Jewishly engaged, is seen in
most Jewish communities today.
And the relationships shown in New
York between Jewish engagement
and such experiences as Israel trips
and Jewish overnight camps almost
certainly suggest that further
emphasis on such informal Jewish
educational efforts throughout the
nation is warranted.
While it is unfortunate that a
2010 national Jewish population
survey was not undertaken, one
of the valid arguments against a
new National Jewish Population
Survey is that most planning in the
Jewish community is done at the
community level. That is because, as
shown by our Compendium, Jewish
communities differ significantly
from one another. New York differs
even more than most.
Perhaps the most important
lesson to be garnered from our
initial exposure to the findings of
the New York study is that it will
lead to some major changes in the
manner in which the UJA-Jewish
Federation of New York and the New
York Jewish community in general
views itself and operates. I have
completed more than 40 similar
studies throughout the country and
believe that the real lesson is that
conducting similar studies in the
Houstons, Tucsons and Springfields
will result in similar benefits
for those communities. Jewish
communities do differ. ❑

Ira M. Sheskin is a professor in the

department of geography and regional

studies and director of the Jewish

Demography Project of the Sue and Leonard

Miller Center for Contemporary Judaic

Studies at the University of Miami.

July 26 • 2012

69