Placemaking vs Economic Development

Placemaking and economic development are often talked about as if they are the same thing.

They share language. They share imagery. They even share many of the same tools. Because of that overlap, the line between them can blur quickly, especially when momentum is high and pressure is rising.

But while they are related, they are not interchangeable. Understanding the difference, and more importantly the order, matters more than most communities realize.

Why the Two Get Confused

Placemaking is outwardly visible.

Painted crosswalks. Pop-up seating. Pocket parks. Murals. Temporary installations. Events that transform a street for a day or a weekend.

Economic development is quietly behind-the-scenes.

Leases renew. Businesses stabilize. Property owners invest slowly. Systems become less fragile over time.

When downtowns feel stuck, visible activity feels like progress. It reassures stakeholders that something is happening. That reassurance can be powerful.

But visibility is not the same as economic function or an indicator of effective production.

What Placemaking Does Well

Placemaking has real value when it is used intentionally.

It can:

  • test ideas quickly

  • improve perception

  • signal care and attention

  • invite people to experience downtown differently

  • build confidence in places that feel overlooked

Used well, placemaking lowers the barrier for people to re-engage with downtown. It helps communities imagine what could be possible.

Placemaking is especially effective early, when the goal is to shift perception or open the door to change.

What Placemaking Cannot Do on Its Own

Placemaking cannot replace underlying economic conditions.

It does not:

  • lower operating costs for businesses

  • resolve building code issues

  • stabilize staffing

  • correct market mismatches

  • create consistent daily demand

When placemaking is asked to do this work, it often becomes repetitive. Each new installation or event must be bigger or more novel to maintain attention.

Over time, the effort required increases while the return diminishes. That is not a failure of placemaking. It is a mismatch of expectations.

What Economic Development Actually Requires

Economic development is about creating conditions where businesses and property owners can make long-term decisions with some confidence.

That work includes:

  • business retention and support

  • realistic recruitment

  • predictable operating environments

  • coordinated systems

  • patient capital

Much of this work is invisible to the public. When it works, it often looks like nothing dramatic happened.

In reality, something important did happen. Friction was reduced. Risk became more manageable. The environment became easier to operate within.

The Tradeoff: Activity vs Function

The tension between placemaking and economic development usually comes down to a tradeoff between activity and function. 

Activity reassures people now. Function sustains progress later.

When downtowns prioritize activity before function, they often feel busy without becoming durable. When they prioritize function without any visible signal, progress can feel slow or disconnected from public perception.

The challenge is not choosing one over the other. It is sequencing them correctly.

When Placemaking Helps Economic Development

Placemaking supports economic development when it:

  • is tied to a specific goal

  • tests something that could become permanent

  • aligns with business needs

  • buys time while larger issues are addressed

  • is framed honestly as temporary or experimental

In these cases, placemaking acts as a bridge. It connects short-term visibility to long-term intention.

When Placemaking Starts to Get in the Way

Placemaking becomes counterproductive when it:

  • substitutes for difficult conversations

  • absorbs capacity needed elsewhere

  • creates pressure to maintain constant novelty

  • distracts from retention and stabilization work

  • becomes the primary strategy instead of a supporting one

At that point, placemaking can unintentionally mask underlying issues instead of helping resolve them.

Why This Tension Shows Up So Often

This dynamic appears frequently because placemaking:

  • is easier to fund in short bursts

  • photographs well

  • fits political timelines

  • produces quick wins

Economic development:

  • takes longer

  • feels riskier

  • produces fewer immediate signals

  • requires restraint and patience

Without a clear frame, communities default to what feels safest in the moment.

How Downtowns Hold Both Without Burning Out

Downtowns that manage this balance well tend to:

  • limit how much placemaking happens at once

  • connect activity to clear economic goals

  • protect staff and volunteer capacity

  • resist escalating spectacle

  • regularly reassess whether activities still serve a purpose

This restraint is not a lack of ambition. It is discipline.

Connecting Back to the Bigger Picture

If downtown revitalization is about improving daily function, economic development does the heavy lifting.

Placemaking can help people see and feel that progress, but it cannot replace it.

Understanding the difference allows leaders to use each tool more effectively, without asking either to carry weight it was never designed to bear.

The Takeaway

Placemaking and economic development are partners, not substitutes for one another. 

When activity supports function, downtowns build momentum that lasts. When activity replaces function, progress becomes harder to sustain.

The most successful downtowns do not choose between placemaking and economic development. They choose the right order.

Continue the series:
Next: How to Support Microbusinesses and First-Time Entrepreneurs

Or, if you want to see how RAD helps communities apply these ideas in real situations, you can explore how we help and our services here.