The rural implications of urban vacant space

By Dennis Archambault

Detroit Free Press Editor Stephen Henderson’s recent commentary, “Sprawl, isolation, and the poverty they leave behind,” warns of  Detroit becoming “an economic chasm that’s largely cut off from areas where there’s more opportunity.” This is a problem that has been worsening for some time and has considerable impact on the health of the city’s population. The gentrification under way in urban Detroit threatens to create two cities: one affluent, young, and trendy; the other large expanses of vacant land with sections of concentrated poverty – the worst formula for creating a healthy urban fabric. You might conclude that there will be one community that’s healthy and the other burdened by chronic disease, crime, and chronic stress.

Looking through a population health lens, the future for low income Detroiters is bleak if current trends continue. Not only is the low income population disconnected from health care resources necessary to prevent and manage chronic disease, it is cut off from sources of fresh food and water, good education, safe places to exercise, and employment. The proliferation of urban farms may be good seasonal sources of vegetables and community connection, they also are increasingly symbolic of rural life.

Henderson points out that while there are clear differences in urban and rural poverty, the distinction between the two in Detroit is disappearing rapidly. That could have profound implications for population health.

Dennis Archambault is vice president of Public Affairs for Authority Health.