Ethnic diversity is generally associated with less social capital and lower levels of trust. However, most empirical evidence for this relationship is focused on generalized trust, rather than more theoretically appropriate measures of group-based trust. This paper evaluates the relationship between ethnic diversity – at national, regional, and local levels – and the degree to which coethnics are trusted more than non-coethnics, a value I call the “coethnic trust premium.” Using public opinion data from sixteen African countries, I find that citizens of ethnically diverse states express, on average, more ethnocentric trust. However, within countries, regional ethnic diversity is actually associated with less ethnocentric trust. This same negative pattern between diversity and ethnocentric trust appears across districts and enumeration areas within Malawi. I then show, consistent with these patterns, that diversity is only detrimental to intergroup trust at the national level in the presence of ethnic group segregation. These results highlight the importance of the spatial distribution of ethnic groups on intergroup relations, and question the utility of micro-level studies of interethnic interactions for understanding macro-level group dynamics.

This graph shows the population of the U.S. by race and ethnic group from 2000 to 2023. In 2023, there were around 21.39 million people of Asian origin living in the United States. A ranking of the most spoken languages across the world can be accessed here. U.S. populationCurrently, the white population makes up the vast majority of the United States’ population, accounting for some 252.07 million people in 2023. This ethnicity group contributes to the highest share of the population in every region, but is especially noticeable in the Midwestern region. The Black or African American resident population totaled 45.76 million people in the same year. The overall population in the United States is expected to increase annually from 2022, with the 320.92 million people in 2015 expected to rise to 341.69 million people by 2027. Thus, population densities have also increased, totaling 36.3 inhabitants per square kilometer as of 2021. Despite being one of the most populous countries in the world, following China and India, the United States is not even among the top 150 most densely populated countries due to its large land mass. Monaco is the most densely populated country in the world and has a population density of 24,621.5 inhabitants per square kilometer as of 2021. As population numbers in the U.S. continues to grow, the Hispanic population has also seen a similar trend from 35.7 million inhabitants in the country in 2000 to some 62.65 million inhabitants in 2021. This growing population group is a significant source of population growth in the country due to both high immigration and birth rates. The United States is one of the most racially diverse countries in the world.

Racial diversity is measured by a diversity index that is calculated using United States Census racial and ethnic population characteristics from the PL-94 data file. The diversity index is a quantitative measure of the distribution of the proportion of five major ethnic populations (non-Hispanic White, non-Hispanic Black, Asian and Pacific Islander, Hispanic, and Two or more races). The index ranges from 0 (low diversity meaning only one group is present) to 1 (meaning an equal proportion of all five groups is present). The diversity score for the United States in 2010 is 0.60. The diversity score for the San Francisco Bay Region is 0.84. Within the region, Solano (0.89) and Alameda (0.90) Counties are the most diverse and the remaining North Bay (0.55 - 0.64) Counties are the least diverse.

California is home to 12 percent of the nation's population yet accounts for more than 20 percent of the people living in the nation’s hardest-to-count areas, according to the United States Census Bureau (U.S. Census Bureau). California's unique diversity, large population distributed across both urban and rural areas, and sheer geographic size present significant barriers to achieving a complete and accurate count. The state’s population is more racially and ethnically diverse than ever before, with about 18 percent of Californians speaking English “less than very well,” according to U.S. Census Bureau estimates. Because the 2020 Census online form was offered in only twelve non-English languages, which did not correspond with the top spoken language in California, and a paper questionnaire only in English and Spanish, many Californians may not have been able to access a census questionnaire or written guidance in a language they could understand. In order to earn the confidence of California’s most vulnerable populations, it was critical during the 2020 Census that media and trusted messengers communicate with them in their primary language and in accessible formats. An accurate count of the California population in each decennial census is essential to receive its equitable share of federal funds and political representation, through reapportionment and redistricting. It plays a vital role in many areas of public life, including important investments in health, education, housing, social services, highways, and schools. Without a complete count in the 2020 Census, the State faced a potential loss of congressional seats and billions of dollars in muchneeded federal funding. An undercount of California in 1990 cost an estimated $2 billion in federal funding. The potential loss of representation and critically needed funding could have long-term impacts; only with a complete count does California receive the share of funding the State deserves with appropriate representation at the federal, state, and local government levels. The high stakes and formidable challenges made this California Complete Count Census 2020 Campaign (Campaign) the most important to date. The 2020 Census brought an unprecedented level of new challenges to all states, beyond the California-specific hurdles discussed above. For the first time, the U.S. Census Bureau sought to collect data from households through an online form. While the implementation of digital forms sought to reduce costs and increase participation, its immediate impact is still unknown as of this writing, and it may have substantially changed how many households responded to the census. In addition, conditions such as the novel Coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, a contentious political climate, ongoing mistrust and distrust of government, and rising concerns about privacy may have discouraged people to open their doors, or use computers, to participate. Federal immigration policy, as well as the months-long controversy over adding a citizenship question to the census, may have deterred households with mixed documentation status, recent immigrants, and undocumented immigrants from participating. In 2017, to prepare for the unique challenges of the 2020 Census, California leaders and advocates reflected on lessons learned from previous statewide census efforts and launched the development of a high-impact strategy to efficiently raise public awareness about the 2020 Census. Subsequently, the State established the California Complete Count – Census 2020 Office (Census Office) and invested a significant sum for the Campaign. The Campaign was designed to educate, motivate, and activate Californians to respond to the 2020 Census. It relied heavily on grassroots messaging and outreach to those least likely to fill out the census form. One element of the Campaign was the Language and Communication Access Plan (LACAP), which the Census Office developed to ensure that language and communication access was linguistically and culturally relevant and sensitive and provided equal and meaningful access for California’s vulnerable populations. The Census Office contracted with outreach partners, including community leaders and organizations, local government, and ethnic media, who all served as trusted messengers in their communities to deliver impactful words and offer safe places to share information and trusted messages. The State integrated consideration of hardest-to-count communities’ needs throughout the Campaign’s strategy at both the statewide and regional levels. The Campaign first educated, then motivated, and during the census response period, activated Californians to fill out their census form. The Census Office’s mission was to ensure that Californians get their fair share of resources and representation by encouraging the full participation of all Californians in the 2020 Census. This report focuses on the experience of the Census Office and partner organizations who worked to achieve the most complete count possible, presenting an evaluation of four outreach and communications strategies.

The statistic shows public opinion on TV shows being more or less racially diverse compared to five years ago in the United States as of August 2017, sorted by ethnicity. During the survey, 40 percent of white respondents believed that TV shows are somewhat more racially diverse compared to five years ago.

This national, tract-level experienced racial segregation dataset uses data for over 66 million anonymized and opted-in devices in Cuebiq’s Spectus Clean Room data to estimate 15 minute time overlaps of device stays in 38.2m x 19.1m grids across the United States in 2022. We infer a probability distribution of racial backgrounds for each device given their home Census block groups at the time of data collection, and calculate the probability of a diverse social contact during that space and time. These measures are then aggregated to the Census tract and across the whole time period in order to preserve privacy and develop a generalizable measure of the diversity of a place. We propose that this dataset is a better measurement of the segregation and diversity as it is experienced, which we show diverges from standard measurements of segregation. The data can be used by researchers to better understand the determinants of experienced segregation; beyond research, we suggest this data can be used by policy makers to understand the impacts of policies designed to encourage social mixing and access to opportunities such as affordable housing and mixed-income housing, and more.

For the purposes of enhanced privacy, home census block groups were pre-calculated by the data provider, and all calculations are done at the Census tract, with tracts that have more than 20 unique devices over the period of analysis.

Why does ethnic violence occur in some places but not others? This paper argues that the local ethnic configuration below the national level is an important determinant of how likely conflict is in any particular place. Existing studies of ethnicity and conflict focus on national-level fractionalization or dominance, but much of the politics surrounding ethnic groups’ grievances and disputes takes place at a more local level. We argue that the existence of multiple ethnic groups competing for resources and power at the level of sub-national administrative regions creates a significant constraint on the ability of states to mitigate ethnic groups’ grievances. This in turn increases the likelihood of conflict between ethnic groups and the state. In particular, we argue that diverse administrative regions dominated by one group should be most prone for conflict. Using new data on conflict and ethnic group composition at the region level, we test the theory and find that units with one demographically dominant ethnic group among multiple groups are most prone to conflict.

Diversity in Tech Statistics: In today's tech-driven world, discussions about diversity in the technology sector have gained significant traction. Recent statistics shed light on the disparities and opportunities within this industry. According to data from various sources, including reports from leading tech companies and diversity advocacy groups, the lack of diversity remains a prominent issue. For example, studies reveal that only 25% of computing jobs in the United States are held by women, while Black and Hispanic individuals make up just 9% of the tech workforce combined. Additionally, research indicates that LGBTQ+ individuals are underrepresented in tech, with only 2.3% of tech workers identifying as LGBTQ+. Despite these challenges, there are promising signs of progress. Companies are increasingly recognizing the importance of diversity and inclusion initiatives, with some allocating significant resources to address these issues. For instance, tech giants like Google and Microsoft have committed millions of USD to diversity programs aimed at recruiting and retaining underrepresented talent. As discussions surrounding diversity in tech continue to evolve, understanding the statistical landscape is crucial in fostering meaningful change and creating a more inclusive industry for all. Editor’s Choice In 2021, 7.9% of the US labor force was employed in technology. Women hold only 26.7% of tech employment, while men hold 73.3% of these positions. White Americans hold 62.5% of the positions in the US tech sector. Asian Americans account for 20% of jobs, Latinx Americans 8%, and Black Americans 7%. 83.3% of tech executives in the US are white. Black Americans comprised 14% of the population in 2019 but held only 7% of tech employment. For the same position, at the same business, and with the same experience, women in tech are typically paid 3% less than men. The high-tech sector employs more men (64% against 52%), Asian Americans (14% compared to 5.8%), and white people (68.5% versus 63.5%) compared to other industries. The tech industry is urged to prioritize inclusion when hiring, mentoring, and retaining employees to bridge the digital skills gap. Black professionals only account for 4% of all tech workers despite being 13% of the US workforce. Hispanic professionals hold just 8% of all STEM jobs despite being 17% of the national workforce. Only 22% of workers in tech are ethnic minorities. Gender diversity in tech is low, with just 26% of jobs in computer-related sectors occupied by women. Companies with diverse teams have higher profitability, with those in the top quartile for gender diversity being 25% more likely to have above-average profitability. Every month, the tech industry adds about 9,600 jobs to the U.S. economy. Between May 2009 and May 2015, over 800,000 net STEM jobs were added to the U.S. economy. STEM jobs are expected to grow by another 8.9% between 2015 and 2024. The percentage of black and Hispanic employees at major tech companies is very low, making up just one to three percent of the tech workforce. Tech hiring relies heavily on poaching and incentives, creating an unsustainable ecosystem ripe for disruption. Recruiters have a significant role in disrupting the hiring process to support diversity and inclusion. You May Also Like To Read Outsourcing Statistics Digital Transformation Statistics Internet of Things Statistics Computer Vision Statistics

Despite comprising of a smaller share of the U.S. population than African Americans or Hispanics, the most represented non-white U.S. CEOs were of an Asian background. They made up 55 percent of CEO positions at Fortune 500 and S&P 500 companies in 2024. By comparison, 11 percent of CEOs at the time were African American. The rise of environmental, social, and corporate governance (ESG) Investments in ESG have risen dramatically over last few years. In November 2023 there were approximately 480 billion U.S. dollars in ESG ETF assets worldwide, compared to 16 billion U.S. dollars in 2015. ESG measures were put in place to encourage companies to act responsibly, with the leading reason for ESG investing stated to be brand and reputation according to managers and asset owners. Gender diversity With the general acceptance of ESG in larger companies, there has still been a significant employment gap of women working in senior positions. For example, the share of women working as a partner or principal at EY, one of the largest accounting firms in the world, was just only 28 percent in 2023.

How racially diverse are residents in Massachusetts? This topic shows the demographic breakdown of residents by race/ethnicity and the increases in the Non-white population since 2010.

This map layer shows the prevalent generations that make up the population of the United States using multiple scales. As of 2018, the most predominant generations in the U.S. are Baby Boomers (born 1946-1964), Millennials (born 1981-1998), and Generation Z (born 1999-2016). Currently, Millennials are the most predominant population in the U.S.A generation represents a group of people who are born around the same time and experience world events and trends during the same stage of life through similar mediums (for example, online, television, print, or radio). Because of this, people born in the same generation are expected to have been exposed to similar values and developmental experiences, which may cause them to exhibit similar traits or behaviors over their lifetimes. Generations provide scientists and government officials the opportunity to measure public attitudes on important issues by people’s current position in life and document those differences across demographic groups and geographic regions. Generational cohorts also give researchers the ability to understand how different developmental experiences, such as technological, political, economic, and social changes, influence people’s opinions and personalities. Studying people in generational groups is significant because an individual’s age is a conventional predictor for understanding cultural and political gaps within the U.S. population.Though there is no exact equation to determine generational cutoff points, it is understood that we designate generational spans based on a 15- to 20-year gap. The only generational period officially designated by the U.S. Census Bureau is based on the surge of births after World War II in 1946 and a significant decline in birth rates after 1964 (Baby Boomers). From that point, generational gaps have been determined by significant political, economic, and social changes that define one’s formative years (for example, Generation Z is considered to be marked by children who were directly affected by the al Qaeda attacks of September 11, 2001).In this map layer, we visualize six active generations in the U.S., each marked by significant changes in American history:The Greatest Generation (born 1901-1924): Tom Brokaw’s 1998 book, The Greatest Generation, coined the term ‘the Greatest Generation” to describe Americans who lived through the Great Depression and later fought in WWII. This generation had significant job and education opportunities as the war ended and the postwar economic booms impacted America.The Silent Generation (born 1925-1945): The title “Silent Generation” originated from a 1951 essay published in Time magazine that proposed the idea that people born during this period were more cautious than their parents. Conflict from the Cold War and the potential for nuclear war led to widespread levels of discomfort and uncertainty throughout the generation.Baby Boomers (born 1946-1964): Baby Boomers were named after a significant increase in births after World War II. During this 20-year span, life was dramatically different for those born at the beginning of the generation than those born at the tail end of the generation. The first 10 years of Baby Boomers (Baby Boomers I) grew up in an era defined by the civil rights movement and the Vietnam War, in which a lot of this generation either fought in or protested against the war. Baby Boomers I tended to have great economic opportunities and were optimistic about the future of America. In contrast, the last 10 years of Baby Boomers (Baby Boomers II) had fewer job opportunities and available housing than their Boomer I counterparts. The effects of the Vietnam War and the Watergate scandal led a lot of second-wave boomers to lose trust in the American government. Generation X (born 1965-1980): The label “Generation X” comes from Douglas Coupland’s 1991 book, Generation X: Tales for An Accelerated Culture. This generation was notoriously exposed to more hands-off parenting, out-of-home childcare, and higher rates of divorce than other generations. As a result, many Gen X parents today are concerned about avoiding broken homes with their own kids.Millennials (born 1981-1998): During the adolescence of Millennials, America underwent a technological revolution with the emergence of the internet. Because of this, Millennials are generally characterized by older generations to be technologically savvy.Generation Z (born 1999-2016): Generation Z or “Zoomers” represent a generation raised on the internet and social media. Gen Z makes up the most ethnically diverse and largest generation in American history. Like Millennials, Gen Z is recognized by older generations to be very familiar with and/or addicted to technology.Questions to ask when you look at this mapDo you notice any trends with the predominant generations located in big cities? Suburbs? Rural areas?Where do you see big clusters of the same generation living in the same area?Which areas do you see the most diversity in generations?Look on the map for where you, your parents, aunts, uncles, and grandparents live. Do they live in areas where their generation is the most predominant?

This study investigates whether ethnic and other forms of social diversity affect militarization of society. Recent scholarship in economics finds that high diversity leads to lower provision of public goods. At the same time, many conflict studies find that highly diverse societies face a lower risk of civil war, as opposed to relatively more homogenous populations. The authors explore whether diversity prompts governments to militarize heavily in order to prevent armed conflict, which would then crowd out spending on other public goods in a ‘guns versus butter’ trade-off. Thus, ‘preventive militarization’ would explain both outcomes. Yet the authors find the opposite: higher levels of ethnic diversity predict lower levels of militarization. If high diversity lowers the hazard of civil war, as many find, then it does not happen via preventive militarization. If diverse societies spend less on public goods, then this is not because they are crowded out by security spending. The results support those who suggest that diversity may, in fact, pose a lower security threat to states, since it is highly likely that states facing potential social strife would prioritize state militarization.

How does a state’s ethnic composition affect its propensity to engage in diversionary conflicts? Recent empirical work examines the political conditions under which domestic unrest compels an embattled leader to initiate conflict abroad. We remain uncertain, however, of what social or demographic characteristics make states particularly prone to diversionary behavior. This article tries to address this gap, examining whether a state’s ethnic structure conditions its leader’s response to domestic discontent. Combining the expansive literatures on ethnic politics and diversionary war yields conflicting expectations here. I find that ethnically fragmented states are significantly more prone to initiating diversionary conflicts, and I show that the greater availability of “conflict opportunities” resulting from transborder ethnic-kin groups, in part, drives this effect. A brief case study illustrates these dynamics.

The statistic shows the share of U.S. population, by race and Hispanic origin, in 2016 and a projection for 2060. As of 2016, about 17.79 percent of the U.S. population was of Hispanic origin. Race and ethnicity in the U.S. For decades, America was a melting pot of the racial and ethnical diversity of its population. The number of people of different ethnic groups in the United States has been growing steadily over the last decade, as has the population in total. For example, 35.81 million Black or African Americans were counted in the U.S. in 2000, while 43.5 million Black or African Americans were counted in 2017.

The median annual family income in the United States in 2017 earned by Black families was about 50,870 U.S. dollars, while the average family income earned by the Asian population was about 92,784 U.S. dollars. This is more than 15,000 U.S. dollars higher than the U.S. average family income, which was 75,938 U.S. dollars.

The unemployment rate varies by ethnicity as well. In 2018, about 6.5 percent of the Black or African American population in the United States were unemployed. In contrast to that, only three percent of the population with Asian origin was unemployed.

Previous research indicates that cultural variations exist in conceptualizations of compassion, potentially attributable to the extent to which individuals in diverse cultural settings want to avoid (versus accept) feeling negative emotions and the significance they place on emotional sharing as a component of compassion. The present study investigates the conceptualization of compassion among individuals in Mexico and the United States, aiming to understand why these cultural differences occur. We hypothesized that Mexicans (1) would want to avoid feeling negative less, (2) would consequently regard emotion sharing as a more critical element of a compassionate response, and (3) would therefore conceptualize a compassionate face as one that mirrors sadness more and expresses happiness less compared to U.S. Americans. Participants from Mexico and the United States engaged in a reverse correlation task, selecting stimuli that most closely resembled a compassionate face. The selected images were aggregated and coded for the extent of sadness and happiness depicted. Additionally, participants indicated how much they wanted to avoid feeling negative and, by using an open-ended format, described what a compassionate response would entail in their view. These responses were coded for whether or not they focused on emotion sharing. Consistent with our hypotheses, Mexicans, who want to avoid feeling negative less compared to U.S. Americans, place greater importance on emotion sharing in a compassionate response. This variation is associated with Mexicans conceptualizing a compassionate face as one that portrays more sadness and less happiness compared to U.S. Americans. People in different cultural contexts have different views about what compassion might entail. Understanding and embracing these cultural differences in compassion can help us navigate our increasingly multicultural world, fostering more meaningful connections and guiding our actions with more humility and sensitivity.

How does cultural diversity affect social organization? Do institutional differences between diverse and homogeneous communities have implications for economic development? I argue that heterogeneity not only weakens informal enforcement mechanisms that rely on shared norms and networks, but also creates demand for formal (public-order) institutions provided by the state. I further argue that the predominance of formal over informal institutional mechanisms in more heterogeneous communities can lead to divergent economic outcomes when formal institutions adequately protect private property and enforce contracts. In particular, greater reliance on formal law and public authority facilitates economic development by enabling arm’s length transactions and encouraging entrepreneurship. I provide empirical evidence for this argument by drawing on micro-level historical data on population transfers following the shift in Poland’s borders in 1945, one of the largest episodes of forced migration in Europe’s recent history. The border changes triggered resettlement of nearly six million people, or one-fifth of Poland’s pre-war population, from the USSR, Central Poland, and Western and Southern Europe into the communities abandoned by ethnic Germans. Arbitrary resettlement procedures produced varying degrees of cultural heterogeneity at the local level. I find that homogeneous migrant groups were more successful in reestablishing private-order institutions that relied on informal enforcement mechanisms, such as volunteer fire brigades, while diverse migrant communities depended on the state for the provision of public goods and enforcement of cooperative behavior. Economically similar during state socialism, communities settled by diverse migrants in the 1940s registered higher incomes and greater entrepreneurship following the transition to a market economy. Their residents also express greater confidence in formal institutions, such as courts and the police.

Ethnic Foods Market Outlook

The global ethnic foods market size was valued at approximately USD 49 billion in 2023 and is projected to reach USD 78 billion by 2032, growing at a CAGR of around 5.3% during the forecast period. The increasing globalization and multicultural interaction, coupled with a rising inclination towards diverse culinary experiences, have been pivotal in driving the growth of this market. Furthermore, as consumers become more adventurous with their food choices, the demand for authentic ethnic cuisines continues to rise, contributing significantly to the robust expansion of this market.

The primary growth factor of the ethnic foods market is the increasing globalization and cultural exchange facilitated through travel and digital media, which have introduced consumers to a variety of international cuisines. This exposure has broadened consumer palates and increased the demand for diverse and authentic ethnic foods. The popularity of food-focused television shows, social media influencers, and culinary tourism has played a significant role in making ethnic foods more mainstream, prompting retailers and foodservice outlets to expand their offerings to include a wider range of global cuisines. Additionally, the growing immigrant population in various countries has supported the rise in demand for ethnic foods, as people seek comfort in familiar traditional flavors.

Another significant growth factor is the increasing health consciousness among consumers, leading to a surge in demand for ethnic foods perceived as healthier options. Many ethnic cuisines, such as Mediterranean and Asian, emphasize the use of natural ingredients, fresh produce, and lean proteins, aligning well with current health trends. The inclination towards plant-based diets has also contributed to the popularity of ethnic foods, as many traditional cuisines are inherently plant-based. For instance, dishes like Indian dals or Middle Eastern hummus are rich in plant proteins and are now widely appreciated for their nutritional benefits. This shift in consumer preference towards healthier eating has encouraged manufacturers to innovate and offer ethnic food products with enhanced nutritional profiles.

Technological advancements in food processing and preservation have further bolstered the ethnic foods market. The development of advanced packaging techniques and the advent of ready-to-eat ethnic meals have made it easier for consumers to enjoy these cuisines conveniently. These innovations have not only improved the shelf life and accessibility of ethnic foods but also maintained their authenticity and flavor, crucial factors for consumer satisfaction. This convenience factor has been especially appealing to the younger demographic, which values time-saving meal solutions without compromising on taste and quality. Such technological progress has allowed ethnic foods to penetrate mainstream markets and expand their consumer base significantly.

Regionally, North America and Europe have traditionally been the largest markets for ethnic foods, driven by their diverse populations and openness to culinary experimentation. In North America, the United States leads the way, with its large immigrant population and dynamic food culture contributing to the market's growth. In Europe, countries like the United Kingdom and Germany have seen a growing demand for ethnic foods, supported by multicultural societies and a high level of acceptance for international cuisine. However, the Asia Pacific region is expected to witness the fastest growth during the forecast period, propelled by rising disposable incomes, urbanization, and evolving food preferences among consumers. The increasing number of international food chains and the expansion of retail distribution channels in this region also contribute to the market's expansion.

Product Type Analysis

The ethnic foods market is segmented into several product types, including Asian, African, Latin American, Middle Eastern, European, and others. Asian foods have traditionally dominated the market, with Chinese, Japanese, and Indian cuisines being particularly popular. The rising interest in Asian cuisine can be attributed to its rich flavors, diversity, and perceived health benefits. Many Asian dishes incorporate vegetables, lean meats, and spices known for their health-enhancing properties. The increasing global footprint of Asian food brands and restaurants has further fueled the demand for these cuisines, making them accessible to a broader audience.

African and Middle Eastern cuisines are also gaining traction in the ethnic foods market.

In the United States, cultural and ethnic diversity is reflected in a wide variety of surnames that have fascinating stories and origins. These surnames, more than simple identifiers, are a reflection of the roots, traditions and origins of their bearers. In this article, we will explore the most common surnames among the inhabitants of this country, offering a vision of how American influences have shaped and enriched the onomastic landscape. As we delve into this list, we'll see how each last name can tell a unique story about American culture and heritage, highlighting the plurality that characterizes this nation.

The United States ethnic foods market size reached USD 29.2 Billion in 2024. Looking forward, IMARC Group expects the market to reach USD 56.1 Billion by 2033, exhibiting a growth rate (CAGR) of 7.3% during 2025-2033. The growing health and wellness trends, increasing cultural diversity and immigration, rapid globalization and food accessibility, and the rising influence of celebrity chefs and food-related media, represent some of the key factors driving the market.

IMARC Group provides an analysis of the key trends in each segment of the United States ethnic foods market report, along with forecasts at the country level for 2025-2033. Our report has categorized the market based on cuisine type, food type, and distribution channel.