The Cdc Model of Urban Redevelopment: A Critique and an Alternative

TLDR

Most CDCs are undercapitalized, lack genuine community control, and their perceived successes allow elites to blame them for redevelopment failures while undermining empowerment efforts. The paper critiques the CDC-based redevelopment model and proposes an alternative. The alternative model emphasizes community organizing, community‑controlled planning, and high‑capacity multi‑local CDCs held accountable through a strong community organizing process. The CDC process can disorganize poor communities by fostering internal competition and disrupting social networks.

Abstract

:This paper questions the viability of an urban redevelopment model that relies on small community development corporations (CDCs) and proposes an alternative. Because most CDCs are severely undercapitalized, they can not keep up with accelerating decay. Their existence, and the emphasis placed on their supposed successes, allow elites to blame poor neighborhood CDCs rather than external conditions for redevelopment failure. The model also emphasizes that CDCs be community–based, but because their resource base is controlled from outside the neighborhood there is really very little community control over CDCs. CDCs may even delegitimize more empowerment–focused community organizing attempts by making them appear radical. Consequently, the CDC development process may actually disorganize poor communities by creating internal competition or disrupting social networks. An alternative model of neighborhood redevelopment is proposed which emphasizes community organizing, community–controlled planning, and high–capacity multi–local CDCs held accountable through a strong community organizing process.