Is the Definition of "Community Development" Expanding?

Writing recently for the Urban Institute’s MetroTrends Blog, Margery Turner, UI’s Vice President for Research, described an expanding understanding of “community development” to include citywide or even regional objectives. Initially, Turner’s perspective gave me pause. I have always believed strongly that community development is rooted in place, a discrete physical environment. To the extent that broad structural and systemic features may impede development in a specific, geographically-defined place, I agree that community development does sometimes overflow the boundaries of an individual neighborhood. In this sense, community development can involve work on such larger scale issues as fair housing, employment discrimination, predatory lending, public safety, school quality, and access to healthcare.

But is the definition of community development morphing to include work on overarching social policy issues apart from a tie to a particular place? To truly constitute community development, I think these larger issues of social welfare must be grounded in their impact on actual communities. In her post, Turner references a quote from Elizabeth Duke of the Federal Reserve’s Board of Governors regarding place-centric versus people-centric approaches to community development. The quote, repeated here with slightly fuller context, comes from Duke’s forward to the book previously discussed on this blog, Investing in What Works for America’s Communities.

At one time, policy discussions revolved around whether community development was about people or places. I would argue that the debate is over and both sides won. Successful community development is based on attention to both the physical infrastructure, whether housing or commercial spaces, and the health and welfare of the residents therein.

Separate the social policy from the places it impacts, and you’re left with something short of community development. It’s a both/and proposition. Good community development strategies are about both the housing stock and lending practices, both playgrounds and public education, both community gardens and access to healthcare. Community development is simultaneously about physical places and the people who inhabit them.