“Can You Imagine What’s Happened in Durham?”

Abstract

Problem, research strategy, and findings As Durham’s (NC) economy collapsed in the mid-1990s, Duke established a plan to intervene. Its actions aligned with anchor institution models at many universities; its approach, however, was unique. In a city where Duke was a fixture, university leadership understood a top-down approach was not viable. Instead, administrators launched a community-led model intended to change the “story [from] ‘Look at what Duke did’, to ‘Can you imagine what’s happened in Durham?’” according to one administrator in a 2015 interview. I use a longitudinal case study to examine Duke’s anchor institution model in 12 Durham neighborhoods. I consider Duke’s approach from the mid-1990s to present, drawing from interviews with Duke administrators, community organizations, and neighborhood representatives; newspaper articles and reports; and a descriptive analysis of neighborhood change. I explore an anchor model that engages nonprofit partners and community development strategies. My findings show the potential for a multipartner anchor model that cultivates neighborhood improvement and minimizes (to an extent) gentrification pressures that can arise from anchor investment. Duke’s anchor model offers a unique perspective on university–community engagement, partnerships, and neighborhood investment.Takeaway for practice Duke’s case offers insights for how major institutions—from university anchors to local government—can recast their roles in communities; it also offers a roadmap for how institutions can engage (and benefit) neighborhoods in meaningful ways. Informed by a collaborative anchor model, Duke empowered residents to identify their own neighborhood priorities and partnered with local community organizations to meet those aims. This anchor model reveals a powerful role for intermediaries, including planners and community organizers, to connect institutional resources with neighborhood priorities. Supported by a participatory planning process, there are opportunities to realign anchor institution strategies and tools with neighborhood priorities to move toward mutually beneficial outcomes.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 13 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.