Urban Blight Remediation as a Cost-Beneficial Solution to Firearm Violence

Abstract

Objectives. To determine if blight remediation of abandoned buildings and vacant lots can be a cost-beneficial solution to firearm violence in US cities.Methods. We performed quasi-experimental analyses of the impacts and economic returns on investment of urban blight remediation programs involving 5112 abandoned buildings and vacant lots on the occurrence of firearm and nonfirearm violence in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, from 1999 to 2013. We adjusted before-after percent changes and returns on investment in treated versus control groups for sociodemographic factors.Results. Abandoned building remediation significantly reduced firearm violence -39% (95% confidence interval [CI] = -28%, -50%; P < .05) as did vacant lot remediation (-4.6%; 95% CI = -4.2%, -5.0%; P < .001). Neither program significantly affected nonfirearm violence. Respectively, taxpayer and societal returns on investment for the prevention of firearm violence were $5 and $79 for every dollar spent on abandoned building remediation and $26 and $333 for every dollar spent on vacant lot remediation.Conclusions. Only a modicum of attention has been paid to intervening upon the context within which firearm violence occurs and the urban environments in which it thrives. It is now commonly accepted that changing the context within which health problems occur is a leading opportunity for high-impact change, often better than focusing on individuals and lifestyles. [13][14][15][16][17] This may also apply to firearm violence-individuals who are simply instructed to adhere to safety practices are unlikely to be successful if the unsafe context within which they find themselves day after day does not permit it. Directly changing the contexts and environments that promote firearm violence is a potentially potent solution to explore in reducing the persistent problem of firearm violence in the United States. Such contextual changes may take the form of actual, in-situ changes to the environments themselves, an approach that may be more politically feasible, economically viable, and have a greater probability of widespread implementation. 13,18 Cities in the United States experience a heavily disproportionate burden of the nation's interpersonal firearm violence. 19Urban shootings are concentrated in neighborhoods stricken by poverty and neglect, and a growing body of scientific evidence suggests that blighted neighborhood environments are strongly tied to firearm violence in US cities. 9,[20][21][22][23][24][25] It is very possible that directly treating aspects of these blighted environments in inexpensive ways could produce lasting reductions in urban firearm violence. However, to our knowledge, no research has yet investigated the cost benefits, Medicine, Philadelphia, PA 19104-6021 (e-mail: cbranas@upenn.edu). Reprints can be ordered at http://www.ajph.org by clicking the "Reprints" link.

The Impact of Green Space on Violent Crime in Urban Environments: An Evidence Synthesis

“…Studies that focused specifically on gun violence support the hypothesis that green space reduces this violence [11,34,36,40,[42][43][44][45][46]. Of the nine studies (two reported in a single publication by Branas et al [11]), six had the expected outcomes. Three of the 45 studies were from the same team of researchers (Branas, Kondo, South) who investigated the potential link between green space and crime through the cleaning and greening of vacant lots, primarily in Philadelphia, PA.…”

“…As might be expected, the majority of all studies were correlational, and the quasi-experimental studies involving greening interventions were typically limited to community gardens and site greening interventions, likely due to the scale of these projects. Several notable exceptions include the street/walkway improvements research described by Locke et al [39] and the lot improvements performed by Branas et al in Philadelphia [11,34,40].…”

“…The positive impact of nature and green space on human health and well-being has been documented by over 100 studies [1][2][3], including several literature reviews and meta-analyses which have examined the benefits of the nature connection [2,[4][5][6][7][8][9][10]. Several researchers have begun to explore the relationship between nature and urban crime, focusing on outcomes such as reduced aggression and improved community cohesion [11][12][13][14]. Multiple new papers and dissertations have been published in the last three years [15,16], and an expansive update is essential to setting future research agenda.…”

Testing Broken Windows Theory in Mexico City

“…Other land‐use characteristics such as public housing (Griffiths and Tita, ; Pridemore and Grubesic, ; Suresh and Vito, ), rented houses (Pereira, Mota, and Andresen, ), vacant housing (Broidy et al., ; Fuentes, ; Norza et al., ; Suresh and Vito, ; Vilalta and Muggah, ), and abandoned properties (Schnell, Grossman, and Braga, ; Wilson and Kelling, ) have all been associated with homicide. In this respect, it is argued that vacant housing and abandoned properties signal a lack of guardianship (Branas et al., ; Kondo et al., ). Likewise, it is argued that public housing inhibits social control and limits social interaction, even more than in low‐income communities (Griffiths and Tita, ).…”

Transforming Life: A Broad View of the Developmental Origins of Health and Disease Concept from an Ecological Justice Perspective

“…On the other hand, green remediation of vacated urban blight may be set up in such a way as to be aesthetically pleasing, yet also host biodiversity [361]. Relatively simple transformation of vacant urban lots with trees and vegetation has been associated with improved perceptions of the neighborhood, more physical activity, less stress and decreasing violence [362,363,364]. …”