Engaging diverse stakeholders in dialogue around sustainable development has proven to be a successful strategy to advance sustainable development goals. Without local engagement, sustainable development efforts can fail to accomplish their objectives. Yet, determining the best strategy for engaging diverse stakeholders can be challenging. Similarly challenging can be the transfer of information regarding successful development strategies from one community to another. Local specificity is key to finding sustainable development solutions. Yet, knowledge creation one-community-at-a-time is time consuming and limits the transferability of knowledge. Meso-level approaches are therefore essential to finding transferable solutions. The Five-Pillars approach to development is such a meso-level mixed methods approach. It identifies a manageable set of indicators in five common categories: education, health, environmental quality, social and cultural amenities, and information and transportation access. These indicator categories form the basis for selecting specific locations within a community where local stakeholders engage in writing a collective story about their sustainable development future. This article describes the implementation of the Five Pillars approach in two neighborhoods in Washington D.C. It concludes that the approach offers an effective engagement strategy that gives voice to the sustainable development vision of local stakeholders while providing a framework that can benefit diverse communities.

Cities are increasingly employing green infrastructure, defined as a network of multi-functional open spaces within cities and between cities – including green corridors, green streets, formal parks and street trees – to promote resilience and provide clean air, flood protection and erosion control. Yet there is a growing link between these efforts and rising property values and – in some cities, including Washington, DC – displacement. This history of greening and subsequent displacement can hinder successful green-infrastructure implementation. The geographical areas with the greatest need for these amenities and other resilience strategies are often those with high concentrations of low-income, racial minorities who have traditionally been disenfranchised from local planning and development processes due to a lack of knowledge and limited access, as well as institutional racism. In these areas, the perception of green infrastructure is that of something planned by others, for others, with little direct benefit to the community. This exploratory research, which examines lived experiences, builds upon the quantitative documentation of gentrification and demographic shifts in Washington, DC. Through a series of listening sessions, the study explores residents’ experiences of green infrastructure, gentrification and civic engagement in their community. The study uncovers ways in which policymakers and planners can increase support for and the success of green-infrastructure implementation by amplifying the voices of stakeholders, including communities with vulnerable populations, in the planning process.

This study critically examines existing frameworks aimed at establishing restorative practices in community development by conducting a comparative analysis of a meso-level development framework called the Five Pillars of Development and a micro-level framework implemented by a grassroots initiative. Both frameworks were implemented in Washington, DC, and both seek to address the enduring negative externalities disinvested communities face and suggest the need for restorative practices in community development. Restorative development practices trace their roots to the field of restorative economics, which is a subfield of sustainable development. It argues that sustainability must also address the sins of the past and restore systems and systems components that have been negatively impacted by past development practices. This study aims to discern the adaptability of the more broadly applicable meso-level Five Pillars framework in capturing nuanced micro-level frameworks like the one devised by the grassroots organization in Ward 8. By identifying potential gaps, this study proposes strategies to enhance the utility of the more transferable meso-level framework, particularly for communities lacking resources to formulate their own micro-level framework. This study, therefore, contributes valuable insights and recommendations for bridging potential disparities between the meso-level and micro-level frameworks, as demonstrated in the Ward 8 case. The overarching objective is to enrich the community development field by presenting a restorative framework that refines existing meso-level approaches and facilitates opportunities for micro-level applications.