Geographically Targeted Place-Based Community Development Interventions: A Systematic Review and Examination of Studies’ Methodological Rigor

ABSTRACT

Targeted interventions to improve specific geographic areas have been a significant policy and intervention tool for the past 50 years. However, few reviews provide a comprehensive examination of studies’ methodological rigor that assesses the effects of geographically targeted place-based community development interventions across intervention types. Accordingly, this review synthesizes research on geographically targeted place-based community development interventions to identify strategies utilized, outcomes measured, methodological strengths and limitations, and intervention effectiveness. A systematic search yielded 31 articles representing 29 unique studies for review. The methodological quality of each study was assessed, and intervention effects were examined. Workforce and economic development programs are the most commonly evaluated intervention in this review, whereas property value is the most common outcome measured. Geographically targeted interventions are effective at increasing property values but achieve mixed results across other indicators. Recommendations include measurement of consistent outcomes and conducting program-wide and site-specific analyses to assess intervention effectiveness.

KEYWORDS:

• community development
• development/revitalization
• neighborhood

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Wendy Auslander, Donny Gerke, and Jason Q. Purnell for their generous feedback on initial versions of this manuscript.

Disclosure Statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Supplementary Material

Supplementary data for this article can be accessed here.

Notes

1. Additional data visualizations using the OAI are available from the authors upon request.

2. Several studies reported effects for multiple intervention sites (e.g., cities, neighborhoods) whereas others provided only program-wide analyses (i.e., pooled estimates). Therefore, we present results distinguishing between studies and sites throughout the results section.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

A. Foell

A. Foell is a doctoral student at the Brown School of Social Work at Washington University in St. Louis. His academic research agenda focuses on the design, implementation, and evaluation of housing and community development interventions. His recent projects include research on housing voucher utilization among low-income families, mental health among youth exposed to community violence, and community-engaged research to address health concerns associated with vacant and abandoned housing.

K. A. Pitzer

K. A. Pitzer is a doctoral candidate at the Brown School of Social Work at Washington University in St. Louis. His academic agenda emphasizes bridging the gap between the science of neighborhood effects and interventions within community contexts. This agenda has led to an interest in examining and solving a wide range of challenging issues in urban communities. He has conducted research on a variety of domains such as policing, mental health, voting access, and services for older adults in order to provide his expertise on neighborhood effects and community development as well as quantitative methods.