Table of Contents
Introduction: The Blueprint That Broke My Heart
I began my career as a sociologist and urban planner with the kind of unshakeable confidence that only comes from years of rigorous academic training.
I had studied the models, memorized the theories, and believed, with an almost religious fervor, in the power of rational design to solve the most intractable of human problems.
My first major assignment was a testament to this belief: a large-scale urban renewal project in a historically neglected part of a major city.
It had everything a young planner could dream of—significant federal funding, a master plan drafted by a prestigious architectural firm, and a clear, noble mission to eradicate blight and usher in a new era of prosperity.
We called it “The Renaissance Plan.”
Our blueprints were immaculate.
We designed wide, clean boulevards to replace narrow, congested streets.
We slated dilapidated housing for demolition, to be replaced by mixed-income apartment complexes with modern amenities.
We allocated space for manicured parks, a gleaming community center, and new retail storefronts.
On paper, it was a perfect machine for generating well-being.
We were replacing old, broken parts with new, efficient ones.
We were, I told myself, building a better future.
The reality of that future, when it arrived, was a professional and personal cataclysm.
The physical transformation was undeniable.
The new buildings rose, the parks were green and pristine, and the streets were clean.
But the community—the living, breathing soul of the place—was gone.
The “revitalization” had triggered a surge in property values and rents that the original residents, the very people we were supposed to be helping, could not afford.
One by one, families that had lived there for generations were forced out, their deep-rooted social networks severed.
The small, locally-owned businesses that had been the lifeblood of the neighborhood were replaced by chain stores that had no connection to the area.
What we created was not a community; it was a sterile, transient dormitory.
The new parks were often empty, the community center underutilized.
The vibrant, chaotic, and deeply human street life had been replaced by a quiet, orderly emptiness.
We had succeeded in changing the physical landscape, but in doing so, we had shattered the social one.
We hadn’t revitalized a neighborhood; we had displaced a community and replaced it with a real estate product.
The project, my beautiful blueprint, was a heartbreaking failure.
It forced me to confront a devastating question that would redefine my entire career: If we followed all the rules, if our logic was sound and our intentions were good, why did our perfectly designed machine for fixing poverty fail so catastrophically? This report is the story of my search for an answer—a journey that led me away from the sterile logic of the blueprint and toward the messy, complex, and profound wisdom of a living ecosystem.
Part I: The Autopsy of a Broken Model
The failure of “The Renaissance Plan” was not an anomaly.
It was a symptom of a deeply flawed paradigm that has dominated our approach to poverty for decades.
To understand why it failed, I had to perform an autopsy, not just on my own project, but on the entire intellectual framework that produced it.
This investigation revealed a set of fundamental errors in how we see, understand, and intervene in communities struggling with poverty.
It became clear that our solutions often fail not because they are poorly executed, but because they are built on a catastrophic misunderstanding of the problem itself.
Chapter 1: The Fallacy of the Machine
Our most fundamental error is that we view communities as broken machines.
When a machine malfunctions, we diagnose the faulty part and replace it.
We see a lack of jobs, so we try to attract a large employer.
We see “blight,” so we demolish old buildings and construct new ones.
We see low incomes, so we inject cash through aid programs.
This mechanistic worldview treats communities as simple, linear systems where external inputs produce predictable outputs.1
It is a model born of engineering and economics, one that prizes efficiency, standardization, and top-down control.
It is also profoundly, dangerously wrong.
This “machine logic” finds its ultimate expression in the mega-project.
These are the massive, billion-dollar-plus infrastructure and development initiatives that promise to transform entire regions.2
They are often justified by far-reaching claims about how they will positively reshape society and the economy.3
Yet, the data reveals a grim and consistent reality: mega-projects are notorious for their failures.
An estimated nine out of ten suffer from significant cost overruns, often exceeding 50% of the original budget in real terms.4
These budget blowouts are frequently coupled with massive benefit shortfalls; the projects simply do not deliver what they promised.4
The UK’s High Speed 2 (HS2) rail project is a textbook example.
Envisioned as a transformative modernization of the nation’s railway, it has been plagued by a spiraling budget that led to the cancellation of key segments, fueling public anger and exacerbating regional inequalities rather than healing them.4
The problem is that these projects are often driven by what scholars call “political and economic sublimes”—the desire of politicians to build monuments and the lure of massive contracts for consultants, banks, and construction firms—rather than a sober assessment of community needs.3
The focus is on the spectacle of construction, not the long-term, sustainable benefits for the people who live in the project’s shadow.
The positive effects are touted at the national or regional level, while the severe negative impacts—such as displacement, environmental damage, and social polarization—are felt most acutely at the local level, a reality that is consistently neglected in official appraisals.2
This same top-down, mechanistic thinking infects our social programs.
Much like mega-projects, traditional poverty alleviation programs are often conceived and implemented by experts and bureaucrats who are far removed from the lived experience of poverty.6
They are designed in capital cities by people who have never had to choose between paying for medicine and buying food.
Consequently, these programs often fail to address the issues that residents themselves see as most critical, such as access to clean water, quality education, or a safe environment.
Instead, they focus on narrow, easily measurable economic metrics, like raising income above a $2-per-day threshold, a definition of poverty that bears little resemblance to its complex social reality.6
Worse, these interventions can create perverse incentives and unintended consequences.
In some systems, local governments have been found to compete with one another to be officially designated as “poverty-stricken” to gain access to resources, a phenomenon that leads to political maneuvering and misallocation of aid.8
The aid itself, when it does arrive, can function more like a steroid than a cure—providing a temporary boost but fostering dependency and failing to build the underlying skills and capacity for long-term self-sufficiency.6
Inefficient institutions, corruption, and political instability can further ensure that aid and government support fail to reach those who need it most.9
Looking back at my own failed project, I can now see this pattern with painful clarity.
We treated the neighborhood like a machine.
We saw “blight” and replaced the “parts” with new buildings.
We saw a lack of amenities and added a “component” in the form of a park.
We operated from a blueprint designed by outsiders, imposed from the top down.
We never truly engaged with the intricate, self-organizing social systems that already existed.
In our effort to “fix” the machine, we inadvertently destroyed the life within it.
This reveals a hidden dynamic, an almost physical law of social intervention: the more a solution is designed, funded, and controlled by external systems, the more likely it is to overwhelm and weaken the internal, adaptive capacity of the community itself.
Benevolent intentions are no defense against this law.
By replacing an organic, if struggling, local system with a synthetic, fragile, and externally dependent one, we set the stage for its collapse.
Chapter 2: The Great Extraction: Unmasking Economic Leakage
The second critical flaw in the machine model is its blindness to flows.
It tends to see poverty as a static problem—a simple lack of things, primarily money.
The logical solution, therefore, is to add more money.
But this overlooks a more fundamental and dynamic process.
Impoverished areas are not just lacking resources; they are often structured in a way that systematically drains them of the wealth they do manage to generate.
The problem is not just that the bucket is empty, but that it is riddled with holes.
This phenomenon is known as economic leakage.
The concept is most starkly illustrated in the tourism industry in developing nations.
Studies have shown that a shockingly high percentage of tourist spending—as much as 70% in Thailand or 80% in the Caribbean—”leaks” out of the local economy.10
On average, for every $100 spent by a tourist from a developed country, only about $5 remains in the host community’s economy.10
This
external leakage happens in two primary ways.
First, when large-scale infrastructure like hotels and resorts is built using capital from multinational corporations, the profits are repatriated back to the investors’ home countries rather than being reinvested locally.
Second, when tourists demand goods and services—from specific food and drink brands to transportation—that the local economy cannot provide, these items must be imported, sending money straight back out of the country.10
This same dynamic plays out within low-income neighborhoods in developed countries.
When the only grocery store is a national chain, the only bank is a multinational corporation, and most housing is owned by absentee landlords, a significant portion of every dollar spent by residents is extracted from the community and sent to distant corporate headquarters or investors.
The community functions as a site of revenue generation for outside entities, but it lacks the locally-owned infrastructure to capture and recirculate that wealth for its own benefit.
Beyond this external drain, there is a form of internal leakage driven by public policy itself.
The “benefit cliff” is a powerful example.
Means-tested programs like housing assistance, childcare subsidies (CCDF), and food assistance (SNAP) are designed to support low-income households.
However, they come with strict income eligibility thresholds.13
When a worker receives a small pay raise, it can push their income just over a threshold, triggering a sudden and complete loss of a benefit worth far more than the raise itself.
A $100-a-month increase in wages could lead to the loss of a $500-a-month childcare subsidy.
This creates an absurdly high “effective marginal tax rate,” where the worker is financially punished for earning more money.13
The system itself effectively extracts the gains from their increased labor, creating a powerful disincentive to accept higher-paying jobs and trapping families in a cycle of dependency.
Finally, there is structural leakage, which arises from the very nature of low-opportunity neighborhoods.
These areas are characterized by a lack of local economic opportunities, poor infrastructure, under-resourced schools, and limited access to capital.14
This forces residents to commute outside the neighborhood for work, spending their money on transportation and food elsewhere.
A lack of local banks or credit unions means they may have to rely on predatory check-cashing services and payday lenders, which extract exorbitant fees.
Decades of disinvestment, often rooted in discriminatory practices like redlining, have stripped these communities of the basic economic infrastructure needed to retain and grow wealth.16
When these different forms of leakage are viewed together, a new definition of poverty emerges.
It is not a static condition of “not having enough.” It is a dynamic process of “constant losing.” A poor area is a place experiencing a chronic net outflow of resources—financial, human, and social.
Money flows out to distant corporations and landlords.
Potential wage gains are clawed back by flawed benefit systems.
Talented young people leave in search of opportunities elsewhere.17
This reframes the challenge entirely.
The primary task is not simply to pour more resources into the leaky bucket.
It is to plug the leaks and, more importantly, to build the community’s capacity to capture, circulate, and multiply its own resources.
Chapter 3: Poverty Beyond the Ledger
The machine model’s most insidious legacy is its reductionism.
By focusing almost exclusively on income and employment—variables that are easy to measure and fit neatly into economic models—it ignores the lived reality of poverty as a complex, multi-dimensional social condition.18
Poverty is not just a line on a ledger; it is a tangled web of interconnected disadvantages that ensnares individuals, families, and entire communities.
Sociological and public health research paints a much richer and more disturbing picture.
Poverty is characterized by a cascade of deprivations that reinforce one another.
It involves low levels of nutrition and the resulting poor health outcomes, from stunting in children to higher rates of chronic diseases like diabetes and hypertension in adults.7
It means inadequate or absent education and healthcare, cutting off pathways to social mobility.14
It is linked to poor housing conditions, a lack of safe and affordable places to live, and severe housing cost burdens, with many families paying more than half their income on rent.20
It is alienation from mainstream society and a lack of access to the basic amenities—like green spaces, reliable transportation, and stores selling healthy food—that many take for granted.16
These are not separate problems to be solved one by one; they are interlocking symptoms of a single, deeply dysfunctional system.
Crucially, this web of disadvantage is not spread evenly across the landscape.
It is geographically concentrated.20
People living in poverty tend to be clustered in specific neighborhoods, regions, and counties.
This concentration creates what researchers call “low-opportunity neighborhoods,” and living in one imposes burdens that go far beyond an individual’s or family’s own circumstances.16
These areas are often plagued by higher crime rates, under-resourced schools, environmental pollution, and social isolation.
The very geography of the neighborhood becomes a self-perpetuating trap, limiting opportunities and diminishing the life chances of residents, particularly children.17
This reality is deeply intertwined with race; due to a long history of systemic discrimination and housing segregation, racial and ethnic minorities are far more likely to live in these high-poverty, low-opportunity areas than their white counterparts.22
The true danger of this concentration lies in a compounding effect.
The various deprivations present in a low-opportunity neighborhood do not simply add up; they interact and multiply each other’s negative impact.
This creates a powerful, reinforcing feedback loop that is incredibly difficult for residents to escape.
Consider the cycle: a child grows up in a neighborhood with high levels of air pollution from nearby industry and lives in poorly maintained housing with mold and pests.16
This contributes to the development of asthma, a chronic health condition.7
Frequent asthma attacks cause the child to miss school, leading to lower educational attainment.
At the same time, their parents may have to miss work to care for them, reducing household income and job stability.14
With a lower level of education, the child, upon entering adulthood, has access to fewer and lower-paying job opportunities.24
This low income, in turn, restricts their housing choices, forcing them to raise their own children in the same type of low-opportunity, high-pollution neighborhood where they grew up.20
In this way, a low-opportunity neighborhood functions as a “poverty amplifier.” Each individual disadvantage—poor health, struggling schools, lack of jobs, environmental hazards—magnifies the others, creating a combined negative force that is far greater than the sum of its parts.
This explains why so many single-point interventions, the hallmark of the machine model, are doomed to fail.
A job training program, however well-designed, will struggle to succeed if participants lack stable housing, affordable childcare, and reliable transportation.
A new health clinic will have limited impact if residents return to homes filled with environmental triggers that make them sick.
Pouring resources into just one part of this complex, interconnected system is like trying to fill a bathtub with the drain wide open and multiple faucets running dry.
The effort is simply overwhelmed by the powerful, systemic forces working against it.
Part II: The Gardener’s Epiphany: A New Way of Seeing
The autopsy of the machine model was a painful but necessary process.
It explained why my project, and countless others like it, had failed.
But an explanation is not a solution.
My professional crisis left me adrift, stripped of the certainties I had once held so dear.
The blueprints were useless.
The machine was a lie.
I needed a new way to see.
This search led me away from my own discipline and into the seemingly unrelated fields of theoretical biology, ecology, and complexity science.
It was there, in the study of living systems, that I had my epiphany.
I began to understand that a community is not a machine to be engineered, but a living ecosystem to be cultivated.
Chapter 4: From Blueprints to Biology: Discovering Systems Thinking
My journey began with systems theory, a holistic way of investigating the world that stands in direct opposition to the reductionism of the machine model.25
Instead of breaking things down into their component parts, systems thinking focuses on the interactions and relationships
between the parts, recognizing that it is these connections that give rise to the behavior of the whole.1
It is a framework built on a few core principles that, once understood, completely reframe the problem of poverty.
The first principle is holism.
A system is always more than the sum of its parts.27
A pile of gears, wires, and circuits is not a computer.
It only becomes a computer when those parts are assembled in a specific way, allowing them to interact.
Similarly, a neighborhood is not just a collection of people, buildings, and streets.
It is the web of relationships—social, economic, cultural—that connect them.
The “community” is an emergent property that arises from these interactions.
This insight immediately invalidates the machine model’s approach of simply replacing “broken parts” without considering how that act disrupts the entire system.
The second principle is interconnectedness.
Within a system, everything is connected to everything else, either directly or indirectly.26
A change in one element can send ripples throughout the entire system.
This is the very dynamic I had observed in the “poverty amplifier.” Poor housing affects health, which affects education, which affects employment, which affects housing.
Systems thinking provides a language to describe this web of causality, moving beyond the simple, linear “if-then” logic of the machine model.
This leads to the third principle: feedback loops.
Systems are not static; they are dynamic and constantly changing, governed by feedback loops that either reinforce or counteract change.25
A
reinforcing (or positive) feedback loop is an engine of amplification.
The poverty cycle is a classic example: poverty leads to conditions that create more poverty.
But feedback loops can also be virtuous.
A new local business hires a resident, who then has more money to spend at other local businesses, which can then hire more residents.
A balancing (or negative) feedback loop is a source of stability.
A thermostat is a simple example: when a room gets too hot, the thermostat turns the heat off, bringing the temperature back down.
In a community, strong social norms can act as balancing loops, discouraging behavior that harms the collective.
Understanding these loops is critical for intervention, as the goal becomes to weaken vicious cycles and strengthen virtuous ones.
Finally, systems theory recognizes hierarchy and boundaries.
Systems exist within other systems.25
An individual is a system.
They are part of a family system, which is part of a neighborhood system, which is part of a city system, and so on.
Each system has boundaries that distinguish it from its environment, and a hierarchy that organizes its internal relationships (e.g., the power dynamics within a family).26
This layered perspective is crucial for understanding how macro-level forces (like national economic policy, the “exosystem”) impact micro-level realities (like a family’s well-being, the “microsystem”).28
This way of thinking was not entirely new to the helping professions.
Social work, for instance, has long been guided by the “Person-in-Environment” (PIE) framework, which insists that an individual’s problems cannot be understood or treated in isolation from the various systems they inhabit—family, community, and society.1
But while social work had embraced the framework for diagnosis, the fields of urban planning and economic development were still largely stuck in the mechanistic mindset.
Systems theory offered the intellectual bridge I needed.
It provided a rigorous, scientific language to describe the complex, interconnected, and dynamic reality I had witnessed on the ground, and it laid the foundation for a new, more powerful guiding metaphor.
Chapter 5: The Central Analogy: The Community Ecosystem
If a community is not a machine, what is it? The epiphany that crystallized my new understanding was this: a community is a living ecosystem.
A poor, struggling neighborhood is a damaged, fragile ecosystem.
A healthy, thriving neighborhood is a resilient, diverse one.
This is not just a poetic metaphor; it is a powerful analytical tool that redefines every aspect of development work, from goals and strategies to the very role of the practitioner.
Consider the contrast.
A struggling neighborhood, under the old model, is often treated like an industrial farm—a fragile monoculture.
It may become dependent on a single industry (a factory town) or a single source of external support (government aid).
Like a farm that grows only corn, it is highly efficient at one thing but extremely vulnerable.
When a shock hits—the factory closes, the aid is cut, a recession begins—the entire system collapses.29
A healthy community, by contrast, is like a mature forest—a
resilient polyculture.
It possesses a rich diversity of “species”: a mix of large and small businesses, a variety of housing types, a wide range of resident skills, a multitude of cultural institutions, and a dense network of formal and informal organizations.
This diversity creates stability.
If one “species” is impacted by a shock, the others can adapt and fill the gap, allowing the overall ecosystem to persist and recover.30
This ecological lens also provides a new way to understand economic leakage.
The “leaky bucket” is the direct equivalent of nutrient leaching in depleted, over-farmed soil.
When resources are applied from the outside, they wash right through without being absorbed or utilized, leaving the soil just as barren as before.
A healthy ecosystem, on the other hand, is characterized by tight nutrient cycling.31
When a leaf falls in a forest, it is not lost.
It is decomposed by fungi and bacteria, its nutrients are returned to the soil, and it is taken up again by the roots of other plants.
In a community, this is the circular economy in action.
A local restaurant buying produce from a local farm, which in turn banks at a local credit union that gives a loan to a local contractor to build an expansion for the restaurant—this is nutrient cycling.
It keeps wealth, talent, and energy circulating within the system, nourishing the entire community.
Finally, the ecosystem analogy reframes the nature of intervention.
Top-down mega-projects and one-size-fits-all programs can act like invasive species.
They arrive with immense resources and can quickly out-compete and overwhelm the native flora and fauna, destroying the local ecology in the process.31
My “Renaissance Plan” was a classic invasive species.
The ecosystem approach, instead, prioritizes
endogenous growth.
The goal is to nurture what is already there.
It begins by identifying the community’s existing assets, talents, and knowledge—the “native species”—and providing the conditions for them to flourish.31
The role of the outsider is not to import a whole new ecosystem, but to act as a gardener, carefully tending to the unique life that wants to grow in that specific place.
The public spaces, community centers, schools, and local businesses are the habitats and niches of this ecosystem.
The quality, accessibility, and interconnectedness of these spaces determine the health and vitality of community life.33
A thriving ecosystem has a rich variety of habitats that support a wide range of activities and interactions, fostering the social and economic relationships that are the lifeblood of the community.
This shift in perspective from machine to ecosystem is a fundamental paradigm change.
It moves us from a world of linear causality to one of complex interactions, from a focus on static parts to dynamic flows, and from a goal of top-down control to one of bottom-up cultivation.
| Feature | The Machine Model | The Ecosystem Model |
| Core Metaphor | A community is a broken machine. | A community is a living ecosystem. |
| Goal of Intervention | Repair broken parts; replace with new ones. | Cultivate health; nurture resilience. |
| Approach | Top-down, standardized, blueprint-driven. | Bottom-up, adaptive, place-based. |
| Primary Focus | Inputs, projects, physical structures. | Relationships, flows, processes. |
| View of Residents | Beneficiaries, clients, problems to be solved. | Co-creators, stewards, sources of solutions. |
| Key Metric of Success | Dollars spent, housing units built, jobs created. | Wealth retained, local businesses sustained, community resilience. |
Part III: The Principles of Community Cultivation
Adopting an ecosystem mindset is the first step.
The next is to translate that paradigm into practice.
If a planner is to become a community gardener, what are the tools of the trade? What are the fundamental principles of cultivating a healthy community ecosystem? The work can be organized around four key pillars, each corresponding to a core ecological function: anchoring the soil, sealing the leaks, cultivating biodiversity, and weaving the web of life.
These are not a sequential checklist but a set of interconnected strategies that, when pursued together, can begin to reverse the cycles of disadvantage and foster genuine, lasting well-being.
Pillar 1: Anchoring the Soil with Community Land Trusts (CLTs)
The first and most urgent task in restoring any damaged ecosystem is to prevent further erosion and stabilize the foundation.
In a community context, the “soil” is the land itself.
In neighborhoods facing disinvestment or, conversely, rapid gentrification, the speculative land market is the primary force of erosion.
It either devalues the land, leading to blight, or overvalues it, leading to displacement.
To cultivate a healthy community, you must first anchor the soil by taking land out of the speculative market and placing it under permanent community stewardship.
The single most effective tool for achieving this is the Community Land Trust (CLT).
A CLT is a nonprofit, community-based organization that acquires and holds land in a trust for the benefit of the community.34
The CLT then sells or rents the buildings on that land—homes, retail spaces, urban farms—to lower-income residents and local enterprises at affordable rates.
The key innovation is the separation of the ownership of the land from the ownership of the buildings on it.
A homeowner in a CLT owns their house but leases the land beneath it from the trust via a long-term, inheritable ground lease.35
This ground lease includes a resale formula that limits how much the home’s price can appreciate.
This allows the homeowner to build some equity but ensures that when they sell, the home remains affordable for the next low-income buyer, locking in permanent affordability for generations.34
The CLT is governed by a board typically composed of one-third residents, one-third community stakeholders, and one-third public representatives, ensuring it remains accountable to the people it serves.35
The power and flexibility of the CLT model are demonstrated by its successful implementation in a wide variety of contexts across the country.
In Irvine, California, a high-cost city, the municipality itself was the driving force behind the creation of the Irvine CLT in 2006.
The city was facing a dual challenge: the affordability restrictions on hundreds of units created through its inclusionary zoning program were set to expire, and it needed a plan to manage the development of thousands of new affordable homes around the newly created Great Park.
The CLT was established as the ideal vehicle to ensure all new publicly subsidized units would remain affordable in perpetuity, preventing the future loss of these critical community assets to the speculative market.34
This case shows how CLTs can be a proactive, government-led strategy for preserving and creating a permanent stock of affordable housing.
In King County, Washington, home to Seattle’s booming and increasingly unaffordable tech economy, the Homestead CLT demonstrates the model’s adaptability.
Initially formed in 1992 to provide down payment assistance, Homestead shifted its strategy after the 2008 financial crisis to acquire and rehabilitate foreclosed properties, turning a market failure into an opportunity for affordable housing.
More recently, as the region faces the twin crises of housing affordability and climate change, Homestead has pivoted again, focusing on building new, highly energy-efficient housing, including net-zero townhomes near transit corridors.
This approach not only provides stable housing but also reduces energy and transportation costs for low-income residents, tackling poverty and climate resilience simultaneously.36
In Los Angeles, California, the story of Rolland Curtis Gardens (RCG) showcases the CLT’s power to preserve existing communities.
RCG was a 48-unit apartment complex funded by the Section 8 program, a critical source of affordable housing in a rapidly gentrifying neighborhood near the University of Southern California.
When its affordability covenants were set to expire, threatening the displacement of dozens of families, the T.R.U.S.T.
South LA land trust partnered with an affordable housing developer, Abode Communities.
Together, they acquired the property, relocated the residents temporarily, and redeveloped the site into a new 140-unit complex.
Because the land is now held by the CLT, all 140 units will remain affordable in perpetuity.
The original residents were able to return to a brand new, larger, and more secure home, a stark contrast to the displacement that typically follows such redevelopment.37
The model’s cultural competence is highlighted by efforts in cities like Minneapolis, Grand Rapids, and Boise to serve immigrant and refugee communities.
The City of Lakes CLT (CLCLT) in Minneapolis, for example, recognized that many members of the local East African and Islamic communities could not use traditional mortgages due to religious prohibitions on paying interest.
In response, CLCLT developed innovative, non-interest-based financing models to make homeownership accessible.
In Boise, the LEAP Housing CLT created outreach videos explaining the homebuying process and had them translated into Swahili, Arabic, Spanish, and Kinyarwanda to better serve its refugee population.38
These cases demonstrate that the CLT is not a rigid template but a flexible framework that can be adapted to meet the specific financial, cultural, and linguistic needs of diverse communities.
| Community Land Trust | Context / Challenge | Formation Driver | Scale (Approx.) | Key Innovation | Primary Outcome |
| Irvine CLT (Irvine, CA) | High-cost suburban city; expiring inclusionary units; new large-scale development. | Municipality-led initiative. | 5,000+ units planned. | Preserving affordability of public subsidies; managing new development. | Creation of a permanent, large-scale affordable housing stock. 34 |
| Homestead CLT (King County, WA) | Booming tech economy; rapid gentrification; climate change impacts. | Nonprofit-led, adaptive. | 200+ homes. | Acquiring foreclosures; focus on green, net-zero energy construction. | Housing stability, reduced energy costs, climate resilience for low-income families. 36 |
| Rolland Curtis Gardens (Los Angeles, CA) | Gentrifying urban neighborhood; expiring Section 8 affordability covenants. | Partnership between a CLT and an affordable housing developer. | 140 rental units. | Rescuing and expanding at-risk affordable rental housing. | Prevention of displacement and creation of new, permanently affordable rentals. 37 |
| Immigrant-Serving CLTs (e.g., Minneapolis) | Serving immigrant and refugee populations with unique cultural/financial needs. | Nonprofit-led, community-responsive. | Varies. | Culturally competent outreach (translations); innovative financing (non-interest models). | Increased access to stable homeownership for immigrant communities. 38 |
By anchoring the soil, CLTs provide the stable foundation upon which all other community cultivation efforts can be built.
They stop the bleeding of displacement, buffer residents from the volatility of the market, and create a tangible, community-controlled asset that can serve residents for generations to come.
Pillar 2: Sealing the Leaks with Localized Economies
Once the soil is anchored, the next ecological imperative is to improve its ability to capture and hold nutrients.
For a community, this means plugging the economic leaks and building a circular local economy where wealth is retained and recirculated, nourishing local enterprises and residents.
This involves creating new kinds of financial infrastructure and exchange systems that are designed to serve the community first, rather than extracting value for outside interests.
One of the most direct ways to encourage this internal circulation is through the use of local currencies.
These are complementary forms of money, designed to be spent only within a specific geographic area, often to support independent businesses.
The Brixton Pound in South London and Ithaca HOURS in New York are two well-known examples.39
When residents and businesses agree to accept and use a local currency, it ensures that the value exchanged stays within the community.
A resident might earn Brixton Pounds by volunteering, spend them at a local bakery, which then uses them to pay a local supplier, who in turn pays their employee—all without a single pound leaking out to a multinational corporation.
These currencies are more than just economic tools; they are powerful instruments for building community identity, fostering social connections, and making the local economy visible and tangible to its participants.39
While these community-level initiatives are often small, the principle of using local currency to strengthen regional economies is scalable, as evidenced by the growing number of bilateral agreements between nations to settle trade in their own currencies, bypassing the need for a global reserve currency and reducing exposure to exchange rate volatility.41
To support this circular flow, communities need a financial ecosystem that is tailored to their needs.
This is where community-based finance comes in.
Instead of relying on large, impersonal banks that are often unwilling to lend to small, unproven businesses, communities can create their own financial institutions.
- Community Loan Funds are a prime example. These funds raise capital from a variety of sources, including donations and investments from community members, foundations, and socially-minded organizations. They then lend this money to local entrepreneurs and small businesses, often those who cannot access traditional financing. The Montreal Community Loan Association, for instance, focuses its lending on women, welfare recipients, immigrants, and unemployed youth, requiring that all funded projects have a positive social impact in addition to being financially viable.44
- Peer Lending Circles, pioneered by organizations like Calmeadow and modeled on successful microfinance initiatives in the developing world, offer another alternative. Small groups of self-employed individuals form a circle to approve and cross-guarantee each other’s loans. Because loan approval depends on the trust and assessment of one’s peers, and the collective is responsible for repayment, the need for traditional collateral, credit scores, and complex business plans is eliminated. This radically lowers the barrier to entry for aspiring entrepreneurs.44
- Individual Development Accounts (IDAs) are a tool for building assets at the household level. These are special savings accounts for low-income families where their deposits are matched (often at a rate of 2:1 or 3:1) by public or private funds. The matched funds can then be withdrawn for specific, asset-building purposes, such as a down payment on a home, tuition for postsecondary education, or start-up capital for a small business. IDAs are a powerful way to turn small streams of savings into significant investments in a family’s future.44
These strategies work in concert to plug the myriad leaks in a low-income community’s economy.
Each one provides a local, community-controlled alternative to an extractive mainstream system.
| Economic Leakage Pathway | Ecosystem Solution |
| Rent paid to an absentee landlord, extracting wealth from the neighborhood. | CLT homeownership, where housing payments build equity for the resident and the community. |
| Groceries and goods purchased at a national chain store, with profits sent to a distant HQ. | A local farmers market or food co-op that accepts a local currency, keeping money circulating among local producers. |
| A high-interest loan taken from a payday lender or check-cashing service. | A small, affordable loan from a community loan fund or a peer-lending circle. |
| A home repair or other service performed by a non-local contractor. | A local worker cooperative or skills directory that connects residents with neighborhood-based service providers. |
| Personal savings held in a large national bank that invests little in the local community. | An account at a community development credit union that reinvests deposits into local housing and businesses. |
| Talented youth leaving the neighborhood to find educational and economic opportunities elsewhere. | A youth entrepreneurship program combined with an Individual Development Account (IDA) to fund their local business idea. |
By systematically identifying these points of leakage and creating community-based alternatives, a neighborhood can begin to transform itself from a place of chronic net outflow to one of vibrant internal circulation, building shared wealth and collective self-reliance.
Pillar 3: Cultivating Biodiversity for Economic Resilience
A healthy, mature ecosystem is defined by its diversity.
A rainforest with thousands of species of plants, insects, and animals is far more stable and resilient than a wheat field.
The same principle applies to local economies.
Communities that are economically dependent on a single industry—a “monoculture”—are incredibly vulnerable to shocks.29
The cautionary tales of factory towns in the Rust Belt or tourist-dependent cities during a pandemic demonstrate this fragility.
When the dominant industry falters, the entire local economy can collapse.
The path to long-term stability and resilience lies in intentionally cultivating
economic biodiversity.
There is strong empirical evidence supporting this link.
Research analyzing decades of economic data has found that regions with greater industrial diversity are significantly more resilient to negative shocks.
When a natural disaster or a sharp recession hits, more diverse economies experience smaller downturns and bounce back more quickly.29
One study focusing on the impact of natural disasters on housing markets found that economic diversity dampens both the magnitude and the duration of the negative effects on real estate values.
In the year following a disaster, highly concentrated (non-diverse) regions saw prices fall by as much as 4.7%, an effect that persisted for up to two years.
Diverse economies, however, experienced much milder and shorter-lived impacts.
Furthermore, these resilient areas see less out-migration after a crisis, as residents have more alternative employment options and are better able to weather the storm.30
This is not to say that specialization has no benefits.
In good economic times, specialized economies can sometimes experience faster growth due to economies of scale and knowledge spillovers, as seen in places like Silicon Valley.29
However, this growth often comes with the price of increased volatility and risk.
The ecosystem approach argues for a strategic trade-off, prioritizing long-term, stable well-being over short-term, high-risk growth.
The goal is not to eliminate specialization entirely, but to build a balanced and diversified economic base that can withstand the inevitable disruptions of a changing world.
How can a community cultivate this economic biodiversity? It requires a shift from “economic hunting”—trying to lure one big company with massive tax breaks—to “economic gardening,” which focuses on nurturing a wide variety of local enterprises.
- Supporting a Mix of Businesses: This means creating an environment where a diverse range of local businesses can thrive. This includes everything from home-based micro-enterprises (like catering or childcare) and small retail shops to skilled trades, local manufacturing, and tech startups. Initiatives like the Native Self-Employment Loan Program, which directs capital to small, community-based businesses that serve the local market, are a perfect example of this approach.44
- Investing in an Adaptable Workforce: Rather than training people for one specific industry, the focus should be on developing a versatile workforce with transferable skills. This includes offering accessible education and vocational training programs that equip residents for a variety of potential employment opportunities.24 The Human Resources Development Association (HRDA) of Halifax, for example, combines business creation with life skills training, individual counseling, and specialized skills training to prepare welfare recipients for a range of jobs.44
- Creating an Entrepreneurial Ecosystem: This involves providing the “technical assistance” that new and growing businesses need to succeed. This can include support with business and community planning, marketing, financial management, and information technology. Programs like the Community Economic Development Technical Assistance Program (CEDTAP) in Canada support local organizations in providing this crucial infrastructure for entrepreneurs.44
- Embracing Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI): It is increasingly clear that DEI is not just a social or moral imperative; it is an economic one. Research consistently shows that more inclusive economies are more innovative, resilient, and experience more sustainable growth.46 By ensuring that women, people of color, people with disabilities, and other historically marginalized groups have equitable access to capital, training, and opportunities, a community taps into a wider pool of talent and ideas, strengthening its overall economic ecosystem.46
By pursuing these strategies, a community can deliberately move away from a fragile economic monoculture and cultivate a rich, diverse, and resilient local economy capable of weathering storms and providing sustainable opportunities for all its residents.
Pillar 4: Weaving the Web of Social Capital
An ecosystem is not merely a collection of diverse species occupying the same space.
It is the intricate web of relationships—of competition, cooperation, and symbiosis—that connects them.
The final, and perhaps most important, pillar of community cultivation is to intentionally weave this web of social connection.
A healthy community requires strong social infrastructure, a deep well of trust, and a shared sense of collective stewardship.
Without this social capital, even the most well-designed economic initiatives will fail to take root.
The foundation of this work is inclusive and participatory planning.
The era of experts drawing up master plans in distant offices and imposing them on communities must end.
The ecosystem approach demands that we plan with communities, not for them.32
This means a deep and authentic commitment to community engagement at every stage of the process, from identifying problems to designing and implementing solutions.
Effective engagement goes far beyond the token public meeting.
It involves a suite of techniques designed to build trust and elicit genuine input: statistically representative community surveys to understand needs, focus groups with diverse segments of the population (youth, seniors, different ethnic groups), and interactive workshops where residents can collectively map assets, prioritize projects, and co-create a vision for their future.32
The ultimate goal is not just to gather data, but to build community power and a sense of shared ownership and stewardship over the development process.50
This collaborative spirit must be supported by physical infrastructure that fosters connection.
This means investing in high-quality shared “habitats”—the public and semi-public spaces where community life unfolds.
Well-maintained parks, accessible libraries, welcoming community centers, and vibrant public squares are not luxuries; they are essential infrastructure for building social capital.44
These are the places where neighbors meet, where children play, where informal support networks are formed, and where the “weak ties” that bind a diverse community together are forged.
The design of these spaces should be inclusive and culturally sensitive, ensuring they are welcoming and accessible to people of all ages, abilities, and backgrounds.45
Finally, the process of weaving the web requires active efforts to build trust and connection.
This is often slow, patient, and relationship-based work.
It can involve establishing a core committee of trusted local residents to act as liaisons between planners and the broader community, ensuring communication is a two-way street.49
It might involve creative engagement techniques like “photovoice” activities, where residents use photography to document their perspectives on community challenges and strengths.32
A crucial strategy is to identify and leverage the community’s existing talents and passions.
By supporting a local sports league, a community garden, or an arts and crafts group, organizers can tap into existing sources of energy and pride, building momentum and helping residents identify the shared goals that can galvanize them into collective action.32
The most effective community-based initiatives are those that consciously cultivate an atmosphere of dignity, mutual respect, and active participation, treating residents not as clients to be serviced but as capable partners in a shared enterprise.44
This pillar is the connective tissue that holds the entire ecosystem together.
Without a strong web of social capital, a CLT is just a housing program, a local currency is just a token, and a collection of small businesses is just a strip mall.
It is the trust, collaboration, and shared identity of the community that transforms these individual components into a thriving, resilient, and living neighborhood.
Part IV: A Practitioner’s Field Guide to Regenerative Development
The journey from the wreckage of my first project to the discovery of the ecosystem model was a complete reordering of my professional world.
It required me to unlearn the core tenets of my training and embrace a new way of thinking, seeing, and acting.
This final section aims to synthesize the principles of community cultivation into a practical guide for others who wish to undertake this work.
It offers a new vision for the role of the planner, a new ethos for our profession, and a clear, actionable framework for beginning the slow, patient, and deeply rewarding work of helping communities heal and thrive.
Chapter 6: The Role of the Community Gardener
I began my career as an engineer.
I believed my job was to design elegant, rational systems, impose them on the messy reality of the world, and fix its problems through the force of my intellect and expertise.
I stood above the problem, armed with my blueprints.
The failure of that approach forced me to become something else entirely: a gardener.
The ethos of the community gardener is fundamentally different from that of the social engineer.
The gardener does not create life from scratch; they cultivate the life that is already there.
Their work is not about imposition, but about stewardship.
It is a role defined by humility, patience, and a deep respect for the complex, self-organizing intelligence of the ecosystem itself.
This new professional ethos can be broken down into four key practices:
- Observing: The first act of the gardener is not to plant, but to watch. It is to spend time in the garden, learning its unique character. What is the quality of the soil? Where does the sun fall? What plants already grow here? What pests are a problem? For the community gardener, this means setting aside preconceived notions and engaging in deep listening. It means walking the streets, talking to residents, and humbly learning the unique history, culture, assets, challenges, and aspirations of the local ecosystem. It is a process of discovery, not diagnosis.
- Nurturing: The gardener does not make the plants grow. They create the conditions for growth. They amend the soil, provide water, and ensure there is adequate sunlight. The community gardener’s role is similar. It is not to run the programs, but to provide the “nutrients” that help the community’s own initiatives take root and flourish. This might mean providing seed funding for a pilot project, offering technical assistance to a new entrepreneur, or connecting a local group with the resources they need to achieve their own goals. The agency remains with the community; the gardener is a facilitator of their success.
- Connecting: A key role of the gardener is to understand the relationships between different parts of the garden. They might plant nitrogen-fixing beans next to heavy-feeding corn, creating a symbiotic relationship. The community gardener is a weaver of connections. They work to break down the silos that often exist between different organizations, government agencies, and resident groups. They introduce the person running the food pantry to the person starting a community garden. They connect the youth center with the local business association. They act as a facilitator, helping the different “species” in the ecosystem form the beneficial relationships that create a resilient web of mutual support.
- Weeding: The gardener must also protect the garden from threats. They pull the weeds that would choke out the desired plants and build fences to keep out pests. For the community gardener, this means helping the community identify and remove the obstacles that are holding it back. This is often political and structural work. The “weeds” might be predatory businesses like payday lenders. They might be restrictive zoning laws that prevent the creation of affordable housing or small businesses. They might be bureaucratic barriers that make it difficult for community groups to access public resources. The gardener’s role is to help the community build the power and strategy needed to challenge and change these harmful conditions.
This shift from engineer to gardener is a move from arrogance to humility, from control to collaboration, and from building things to growing capacity.
It is a more challenging, less heroic, and far more effective way to engage with the complex work of community change.
Chapter 7: An Actionable Framework for Cultivating Your Community
The principles of community cultivation are not an abstract philosophy; they can be translated into a practical, step-by-step process that any community can adapt to its own unique context.
This is not a rigid blueprint, but a flexible framework for beginning the journey.
Step 1: Map the Ecosystem
The work must begin with a deep, community-led assessment.
This process should have two components.
First, conduct an asset map.
Instead of focusing on deficits, identify the community’s strengths.
Who are the informal leaders and trusted elders? What skills, talents, and passions exist among residents? What local institutions—churches, clubs, businesses—are sources of social connection? What physical assets—underutilized buildings, vacant lots—could be repurposed?.32 Second, simultaneously,
map the leaks.
Follow the money.
Where do residents work? Where do they shop? Where do they bank? Identify the key pathways through which wealth is being extracted from the community.
This dual-lens approach—mapping both assets and leaks—provides a clear and comprehensive picture of the ecosystem’s current state.
Step 2: Anchor the Soil First
Before all else, address the issue of stability and displacement.
A community cannot heal and grow if its residents live in constant fear of being forced O.T. This means that in almost all cases, the foundational first step should be to explore the creation of a Community Land Trust or a similar shared-equity housing model.
Securing land and housing under permanent community control creates the stable ground upon which all other initiatives can be built.
It is the single most powerful intervention to halt the cycle of disinvestment and gentrification.
Step 3: Start Small, Weave Connections
Do not try to solve every problem at once.
The ecosystem approach favors small, adaptive experiments over large, risky mega-projects.
Identify one or two of the most significant leaks and launch a pilot project to plug them.
Start a small farmers market in a church parking lot.
Organize a tool-lending library out of a community center.
Facilitate the formation of a single peer-lending circle.
The key is to choose projects that are visible, achievable, and build on the assets identified in Step 1.
Success in these small, tangible projects generates momentum, builds trust among residents, and creates the social capital needed for more ambitious efforts down the road.32
Step 4: Cultivate Diversity
As the work progresses, be intentional about fostering economic and social diversity.
Actively support a wide range of local enterprises, from the home-based caterer to the small-scale manufacturer.
Advocate for policies, like zoning reforms and simplified business licensing, that make it easy for residents to start and grow their own businesses.
Ensure that all initiatives are inclusive and equitable, providing opportunities for all members of the community to participate and benefit.
The goal is to weave a rich and complex tapestry of economic and social life, not a uniform blanket.
Step 5: Measure What Matters
Abandon the machine model’s metrics of success.
The number of dollars spent or units built tells you nothing about the health of the ecosystem.
Develop a new dashboard of indicators that reflect genuine well-being and resilience.
Track metrics like:
- Wealth Retention: What percentage of resident income is spent at locally-owned businesses?
- Local Business Health: What is the creation and survival rate of local enterprises?
- Housing Stability: What are the rates of eviction and foreclosure? How many families are housing-cost-burdened?
- Social Cohesion: Do residents report a stronger sense of belonging and trust in their neighbors?
- Resident Well-being: Are health outcomes improving? Are educational attainment levels rising?
Conclusion
The journey I have described, from the shattered blueprint to the living garden, is a call for a profound reorientation of our efforts to address poverty.
It is an invitation to abandon the comforting but false certainties of the machine model and to embrace the complex, messy, and ultimately more hopeful reality of the community as a living ecosystem.
This work is not easy.
It is slow, it is patient, and it requires a humility that is often foreign to the worlds of policy, philanthropy, and planning.
There are no quick fixes or silver bullets.
The gardener knows that a healthy ecosystem cannot be built overnight.
It is the result of persistent, season-after-season effort—of preparing the soil, planting the seeds, nurturing the growth, and patiently waiting for life to flourish.
But this approach offers a path forward that is more respectful, more sustainable, and ultimately more effective.
By seeing our neighborhoods as living systems, full of inherent assets and potential, we can move beyond the cycle of failed interventions.
We can stop trying to impose solutions from the outside and start cultivating the capacity for well-being from within.
We can begin the real, generative work of helping our communities not just to survive, but to truly thrive.
Works cited
- Application of Systems Thinking in social work research and practice, accessed August 14, 2025, https://grandchallengesforsocialwork.org/grand-challenges-for-social-work/application-of-systems-thinking-in-social-work-research-and-practice/
- Full article: Megaprojects – An Anatomy of Perception – Taylor & Francis Online, accessed August 14, 2025, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/02513625.2019.1630189
- Full article: Making Megaprojects: The Practices and Politics of Scale-Making – Taylor & Francis Online, accessed August 14, 2025, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00141844.2023.2241657
- Megaprojects: Challenges, Opportunities, and the Role of the Project Profession – PMI, accessed August 14, 2025, https://www.pmi.org/learning/thought-leadership/megaprojects-challenges-opportunities-and-the-role-of-the-project-profession
- Modernism & Mishaps in Mega Project Management – CalcTree, accessed August 14, 2025, https://www.calctree.com/resources/mishaps-project-management
- Why are there so many rural poverty reduction interventions in …, accessed August 14, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/post/Why-are-there-so-many-rural-poverty-reduction-interventions-in-developing-countries-yet-rural-households-are-still-very-poor
- Poverty | Definition, Causes, Types, & Facts – Britannica, accessed August 14, 2025, https://www.britannica.com/topic/poverty
- How Targeted Poverty Alleviation Has Changed the Structure of Rural Governance in China, accessed August 14, 2025, https://thetricontinental.org/wenhua-zongheng-2023-2-targeted-poverty-alleviation-rural-governance/
- Poverty reduction – Wikipedia, accessed August 14, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poverty_reduction
- Negative impacts; leakage – UN Atlas of the Oceans: Subtopic, accessed August 14, 2025, https://www.oceansatlas.org/subtopic/en/c/72/
- Economic Leakage In Tourism: What Is It, And What Can Travel Brands Do About It?, accessed August 14, 2025, https://www.lemongrassmarketing.com/insights/economic-leakage-in-tourism
- Exploring Policies and Strategies to Minimize Economic Leakages in the Tourism Sector Experiences in Many Countries – ResearchGate, accessed August 14, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/365349445_Exploring_Policies_and_Strategies_to_Minimize_Economic_Leakages_in_the_Tourism_Sector_Experiences_in_Many_Countries
- Understanding Economic Risk for Low-Income Families: Economic Security, Program Benefits, and Decisions about Work – HHS ASPE, accessed August 14, 2025, https://aspe.hhs.gov/reports/economic-risk-report
- The welfare effects of impoverished rural areas: Review and research prospects – PMC, accessed August 14, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10558749/
- Economic Problems of Developing Areas | EBSCO Research Starters, accessed August 14, 2025, https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/business-and-management/economic-problems-developing-areas
- How Neighborhoods Shape Health and Opportunity – Community Health and Economic Prosperity – NCBI Bookshelf, accessed August 14, 2025, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK568862/
- Advancing Economic Development in Persistent-Poverty Communities, accessed August 14, 2025, https://eig.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/EIG-Persistent-Poverty-Report.pdf
- Poverty: Definition in Sociology and Types – ThoughtCo, accessed August 14, 2025, https://www.thoughtco.com/poverty-3026458
- Macroeconomic Policy and Poverty Reduction – International Monetary Fund (IMF), accessed August 14, 2025, https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/exrp/macropol/eng/
- Rural Poverty & Well-Being | Economic Research Service – USDA, accessed August 14, 2025, https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/rural-economy-population/rural-poverty-well-being
- The Problem | National Low Income Housing Coalition, accessed August 14, 2025, https://nlihc.org/explore-issues/why-we-care/problem
- Investing in housing: Unlocking economic mobility for Black families and all Americans – McKinsey, accessed August 14, 2025, https://www.mckinsey.com/institute-for-economic-mobility/our-insights/investing-in-housing-unlocking-economic-mobility-for-black-families-and-all-americans
- Social Theories of Poverty | EBSCO Research Starters, accessed August 14, 2025, https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/social-sciences-and-humanities/social-theories-poverty
- What Issues Do Low- and Moderate-Income Households and Communities Face?, accessed August 14, 2025, https://www.stlouisfed.org/on-the-economy/2016/january/issues-low-moderate-income-households-communities
- What is Systems Thinking? | SNHU, accessed August 14, 2025, https://www.snhu.edu/about-us/newsroom/business/what-is-systems-thinking
- Theoretical Approaches in Social Work: Systems Theory, accessed August 14, 2025, https://socialworklicensemap.com/social-work-resources/theories-and-practice-models/systems-theory/
- What is Systems Theory? – Social Work Theories for 2025 | Research.com, accessed August 14, 2025, https://research.com/education/what-is-systems-theory
- Systems Theory – The Social Work Graduate, accessed August 14, 2025, https://www.thesocialworkgraduate.com/post/systems-theory
- Economic Diversity and Community Resilience – Ohio State Sustainability Institute, accessed August 14, 2025, https://si.osu.edu/economic-diversity-and-community-resilience
- Economic diversification and the resiliency hypothesis: Evidence from the impact of natural disasters on regional housing values – PubMed Central, accessed August 14, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7456524/
- COMMUNITY NOTE Development knowledge ecology: metaphors …, accessed August 14, 2025, https://www.km4djournal.org/index.php/km4dj/article/download/417/560
- Inclusive Strategic Planning for Disadvantaged Communities – The City at Eye Level, accessed August 14, 2025, https://thecityateyelevel.com/stories/inclusive-strategic-planning-for-disadvantaged-communities/
- The ecology of community development: Environments and levels (review of “Community builders: A tale of neighborhood mobilization in two cities”) – ResearchGate, accessed August 14, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/322750530_The_ecology_of_community_development_Environments_and_levels_review_of_Community_builders_A_tale_of_neighborhood_mobilization_in_two_cities
- Community Land Trusts: Irvine | Terner Center, accessed August 14, 2025, https://ternercenter.berkeley.edu/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Community_Land_Trusts_Irvine.pdf
- is a community land trust the best model for – Deep Blue Repositories, accessed August 14, 2025, https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/110968/community_land_trusts_professional_project.pdf;sequence=1
- Case Study: Homestead Community Land Trust – King County, Washington, accessed August 14, 2025, https://www.adaptationclearinghouse.org/resources/case-study-homestead-community-land-trust-king-county-washington.html
- Community Land Trusts for Sustainably Affordable Rental Housing Redevelopment: A Case Study of Rolland Curtis Gardens in Los Angeles, accessed August 14, 2025, https://www.cacltnetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Rolland-Curtis-Gardens-case-study_HUD_2022.pdf
- Using CLTs to Support Immigrants – Local Housing Solutions, accessed August 14, 2025, https://www.localhousingsolutions.org/housing-solutions-lab/our-research-and-partnerships/lab-grant-awardees/using-clts-to-support-immigrants/
- Money with a purpose | New Economics Foundation, accessed August 14, 2025, https://neweconomics.org/2015/05/money-with-a-purpose
- Printing Money, Making Change: The Future of Local Currencies – Schumacher Center for a New Economics, accessed August 14, 2025, https://centerforneweconomics.org/publications/printing-money-making-change-the-future-of-local-currencies/
- Local Currency Financing in Africa: Anticipating Risks, Unlocking Investments, accessed August 14, 2025, https://www.ifc.org/en/stories/2024/local-currency-financing-in-africa
- Promoting Cross-border Local Currency Settlement (LCS) – Bank Negara Malaysia, accessed August 14, 2025, https://bnm.gov.my/ar23b2
- Keeping it Local: A Secure and Stable Way to Access Financing, accessed August 14, 2025, https://www.imf.org/en/Blogs/Articles/2021/03/12/blog-keeping-it-local-a-secure-and-stable-way-to-access-financing
- Community-Based Poverty Reduction – Maytree, accessed August 14, 2025, https://maytree.com/wp-content/uploads/260ENG.pdf
- Addressing Equity and Inclusivity in Urban Planning and Development, accessed August 14, 2025, https://www.carrollengineering.com/equity-and-inclusivity-in-urban-planning-creating-inclusive-cities/
- Diversity, equity and inclusion: Building resilient economies – The World Economic Forum, accessed August 14, 2025, https://www.weforum.org/stories/2025/01/resilient-inclusive-economies-diversity-equity-inclusion/
- Center for Community Resilience: Home, accessed August 14, 2025, https://ccr.publichealth.gwu.edu/
- Inclusive Urban Planning Strategies – Number Analytics, accessed August 14, 2025, https://www.numberanalytics.com/blog/inclusive-urban-planning-strategies
- A Guidebook to Community Engagement: Involving Urban and Low-Income Populations in an Environmental Planning Process – MSU College of Agriculture and Natural Resources – Michigan State University, accessed August 14, 2025, https://www.canr.msu.edu/uploads/375/65790/GuidebooktoCommunityEngagement_FINAL_Sept2014.pdf
- Promoting Equitable Development in Communities: An Overview of Five Promising Strategies – Urban Institute, accessed August 14, 2025, https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/2024-06/Promoting_Equitable_Development_in_Communities.pdf
