Local governments can proactively manage future growth by applying the principles of shared delivery to large areas for development. If the country is state-owned or developed as part of an agreement with the local government, officials may include the Community`s benefits in requests for proposals. The Staples Center agreement, considered the first “full-fledged” CBA, followed three years after the CBA archetype of Hollywood and Highland Center. The Hollywood and Highland Center CBA differed from the “full-fledged” CBAs that ensued by the fact that a local politician initiated and preceded the negotiation process in place of the community coalition involved. Nevertheless, this archetype CBA has provided a model of communal coalitions that should be emulated in future initiatives (Meyerson 2006; Salkin and Lavine 2008). To prepare for the 2010 Olympic Winter Games, the City of Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, has awarded a contract to the Millennium Development Corporation to build its 56,000-square-metre athlete village on southeast False Creek. This development included a CBA to create 100 jobs for local and downtown residents and raise $15 million targeted for downtown goods and services. It also included a $750,000 legatee fund to train downtown residents. [20] The CBA included investment and support from the Canadian federal government, the BC Provincial Government, the City of Vancouver and the Building Opportunities with Business Inner-City Society (a non-profit community economic development, also known as BOB), and these parties are collectively recognized under the Vancouver Agreement. [21] The CBA has also received support from Bell, VanCity, Canadian Housing and Mortgage Corporation and the Vancouver Regional Construction Association. Building Opportunities with Business oversaw the use of used funds, provided labour and assisted downtown residents with training and assistance, while THE VRCA monitored the training of residents.

Although the Olympic Village has been widely criticized for exceeding the budget, a report written by the BOB to the city in 2008 cites the creation of 120 jobs, with a raising of nearly $50 million. The report also acknowledges that monitoring real economic activity from development has been difficult and that purchases are not accurate. Despite the difficulty of monitoring public procurement and the fact that the project exceeded budget, the CBA is widely regarded as a success. By first organizing power for low-income urban dwellers to guide them, CBA coalitions are also disrupting the existing urban power dynamics. By organizing people in low-income communities and giving them access to development planning processes, CBA coalitions are turning these people from urban planning policy objects into themes that actively help shape development decisions (Baxamusa 2008, 343). As development planning themes, these people, gathered in community coalitions, are demanding a price for private capital that they would not otherwise generate. CFCs can sometimes conflict with existing local political and political priorities for the revival of the Community. While this can create challenges between grassroots community leaders and local elected officials, conflict can also open up opportunities that would otherwise be overlooked. In addition, CBS may be ineffective if it has been created by secret negotiations without real or no community involvement, if they contain vague obligations without a timetable, or if they allow little community control or public responsibility. While local governments were working on their responsibility to design models of land development and use, the community benefits movement emerged to challenge conventional thinking and offer a broader vision.

In the context of smart growth and environmental justice, the community benefits movement aims to ensure that the main objective of economic development is to make measurable and sustainable improvements in the