Search

Copyright of Japanese Journal of Experimental Social Psychology is the property of Japanese Group Dynamics Association and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Opinion polls show that public support for nuclear power has declined since the Fukushima crisis began, not only in Japan but also in other nations around the world. People oppose nuclear power for a variety of reasons, but the predominant concern is the perception that it is a risky technology. Some communities that are closely associated with it even suffer from stigmatization. The nuclear industry has tried a variety of strategies to break down public resistance to nuclear power—including information campaigns, risk comparisons, and efforts to promote nuclear power as a solution to climate change. None of these strategies has worked well, mostly because the public lacks trust in the nuclear industry. Public resistance to nuclear power is likely to continue, making it difficult to site and build new reactors. This resistance may be a major obstacle to the rapid expansion of nuclear power. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

“Not in my back yard” (NIMBY) is a wicked problem in China’s rapid urbanization. The types and interests of the stakeholders are complex and the risks are constantly changing over the facilities’ life course. NIMBY indicates the necessity of public participation in urban development. The questions faced by Chinese policy-makers are whom and how to involve the public in NIMBY risk mitigation plan. This paper develops a discourse zoning approach for promoting public participation in NIMBY risk mitigation over public facilities’ whole life course. It applies the approach into Diantou historic district renewal in China to estimate the discourse power of different public groups in the process of site selection, construction, operation, and eventual abandonment of the NIMBY facility. And then assigned the discourse power in public hearings. Results show that local stakeholders considered this approach could maximize the participation of public groups and balance their weights in decision-making process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Local residents often oppose some types of facilities because of their negative side effects, even though they are claimed to be necessary for the public good. These facilities are known as locally unwanted-land-uses, and local opposition to them is often referred to as not-in-my-backyard, usually with a pejorative connotation. However, some studies have challenged this conventional view of local opposition. Given these conflicting views, the present article explores how local mobilisation should be evaluated, focusing particularly on distributive justice. First, the study illuminates how different interpretations of distributive justice lead to difference in views on local opposition. Then, by comparing three waste disposal facility cases in Japan, a distinction between cost sharing and cost overlapping cases is illuminated. The study further develops discussions by pointing out the limits of using this distinction to evaluate local opposition movements and provides insights that can contribute to a fuller understanding of siting conflicts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Over the past 15 years there has been an increase in the use of local direct democracy in the Czech Republic. The analysis shows that the primary cause has been the regulation of development projects. Using transaction costs economics (TCE) approach it is shown how the regulation related to the siting of development projects leads to a not-in-my-backyard (NIMBY) response resulting in political activism that uses institutions of local direct democracy. Drawing from the TCE perspective, in this article it is argued that the key sources of this political mobilisation have been the existence of contractual hazards related to development projects and an inability to form credible commitments between developers and communities. The article highlights a previously neglected explanation for the increased use of direct democracy because sources outside the political system often go unnoticed and contributes to the research on NIMBY disputes and on the expansion of direct democracy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Research Summary We examine citizen decision-making in the context of providing access to safe housing to different noncriminal and criminal populations. More than 4,000 national online survey respondents considered different 'emergency housing policy' scenarios that would affect the housing conditions of one of five randomly assigned populations of varying stigma (three noncriminal, two criminal). We find that the criminal populations had the least support for helpful housing policies and the most support for harmful housing policies. Furthermore, compared with a 'no cost' policy, average support levels decreased when it increased taxes for the respondent. Policy Implications Citizens seem more willing to subject criminal populations to poor and unsafe housing conditions compared with noncriminal populations. Thus, citizen support may be higher when policies are pitched in ways that do not imply specifically helping ex-offenders, when they do not involve a personal sacrifice through increased taxes, and when they do not involve 'in-my-backyard' proposals. For example, a housing policy pitched as aiding the area's homeless (ex-offenders included) would likely see more support than one that identifies ex-offenders (and particularly sex offenders) as the population being targeted for help, or that identifies a specific neighborhood as a potential housing facility location. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Not In My Back Yard (NIMBY) supporters are presented as citizens in opposition to local developments due to their spatial proximity. However, these conflicts have proven much more complex than the NIMBY concept can explain. The objective of this paper is to provide a framework to facilitate the understanding of opposition movements and how they can affect society at large, triggering social change. The conceptual framework is applied to a case of local opposition to a landfill project in Essonne, France. Through the analysis of the structure of the opposition movement and its changes over time, the author shows how it can evolve into a social movement that enriches democracy through the constitution of four types of capital: social, scientific, patrimonial and political. The author argues that scientific and patrimonial capitals allow social capital to evolve into political capital. The shift from being a self-interest to a civic interest movement is called enlightened resistance, which reveals local public interest, called territorial interests. When studying environmental controversies, the author emphasises the importance of recognizing the evolution through time of (1) social landscape, (2) different types of legitimate knowledge, (3) the role of place attachment, and (4) the political dimension of identities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper investigates how the problem of NIMBY (Not-In-My-Back-Yard) related to the location of unwanted facilities is dealt in a hierarchically organized city. The conventional view of NIMBY is based on two premises: first, that locally unwanted facilities are essential to achieve an important societal benefit and realize the public good; second, that selfish opposition of local community prevents the realization of that societal good. The NIMBY effect is studied as a conflict between the City of Prague and its city districts. The official documents of the Prague City Council and of the Prague City Assembly were searched to find examples of decisions on the location of unwanted facilities. The documents search was concentrated on five selected facilities: municipal waste dumps, services for the homeless, services for drug users, regulation of gambling facilities, and the system of parking zones. In the documents, the authors identified five types of approaches to NIMBY that are called financial compensation, fair distribution, local autonomy, gradual problem shifting, and consultation/cooperation. It was observed that city districts, lower level of public administration, behave as guardians of local interests if they communicate with a higher level of public administration, a guardian of global interests. As local politicians depend on their local voters, it is not surprising that they prefer local interests to global ones. This naturally creates an internal policy conflict in the city that is divided into smaller units. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A substantial extension of the electricity grid seems to be necessary in Germany in the coming decades for technical, economic, and ecological reasons. The increased usage of electricity from environmentally conscious sources is not undisputed and the question of where and how to extend the grid is at the centre of a controversial public discussion. One crucial point in this discussion concerns the fair sharing of the costs and benefits of such an extension. It is necessary to create a fair compensation mechanism. Therefore, an innovative mechanism is proposed in this paper that consists of cooperative game theory as well as auction elements. We interpret the German grid extension as a cooperative cost reduction game that allows the identification of fair cost shares and compensation payments. To solve the problem of non-cooperative behaviour, we propose the involvement of a sealed-bid auction. We show that this novel procedure is incentive compatible. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study explores the politics of distributive fairness in Locally-Unwanted-Land-Uses (LULUs) siting by looking into how a movement in LULU disputes changes its attitude towards a frame of distributive fairness over a long period of time. Some kinds of facilities are often opposed by local residents because of negative side-effects, even as they are claimed to be necessary for the well-being of the wider public. Framing refers to actors’ signifying work, and how to frame distributive fairness plays a significant role in conflicts over such controversial land uses. In the 23 wards of Tokyo, distributive fairness in waste disposal among the wards has been a crucial issue. In the early 1970s, Koto Ward, which suffered a disproportionate burden of waste disposal, launched a campaign to rectify the unfairness. In-Ward Waste Disposal (IWWD), a frame of distributive fairness, played a central role in this movement. However, Koto Ward’s attitude towards this frame of distributive fairness changed over time. By examining why Koto Ward’s advocacy for IWWD varied over time, this study shows how Koto Ward’s stance on IWWD changed in conjunction with economic, policy, and political circumstances, thereby illuminating the importance of integrating socio-politico-economic contexts in framing analysis. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

What drives local decisions to prohibit industrial land uses? This study examines the passage of municipal ordinances prohibiting gas development using hydraulic fracturing (“fracking”) in New York State. I argue that local action against fracking depended on multiple conceptions of the shale gas industry. Matching these alternative conceptions with prevailing spatial models of public response to industrial land uses—“not in my backyard,” “not in anyone’s backyard,” and “please in my backyard”—improves our understanding of where local contention might emerge and how it contributes to policy change. Results from event history and logistic regression analyses show, first, that communities lying above favorable areas of the shale did not pass anti-fracking laws because opposition to fracking was counteracted by significant local support for development. Fracking bans passed primarily in a geographic sweet spot on the periphery of targeted regions, where little or no compelling economic interest in development existed. Second, as fracking became the subject of a highly politicized national debate, local opposition increasingly reflected mobilization by political liberals. This trend is reflected in the increasing rate of ordinance adoption among Democratic-leaning communities outside the geographic sweet spot. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Not-in-my-backyard (NIMBY) protests have been on the rise in urban China over the past few years. Previous studies have focused on campaign strategies and outcomes, yet less attention has been paid to how the Chinese government at different levels has responded to NIMBY protests. This paper focuses on the controversies over three paraxylene (PX) chemical plant projects, which were considered as growth engines by local governments but as health and environmental threats by local residents. It adopts the analytical framework of divided state power to explain why local governments chose to make concessions to the public's demands to relocate or cancel these PX projects. The study finds that the mandate to maintain social stability incentivized local governments to address NIMBY concerns in an ad hoc manner, which tended to create more problems than solutions. The central government has introduced several institutional measures to formalize public participation in land use planning and to hold local governments more responsible for environmental decisions. The analysis of multi-level government responses to NIMBY protests provides a new insight into the power structure that enables or constrains public participation in facility siting in China. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It is deeply ironic that the social movement perspective has so far scarcely been utilised to analyse local protests against establishments of human service enterprises, as the perspective was originally formulated in just such a context. The social movement approach could inject new vitality into a field of research that has become increasingly marginalised and enable human geographers and other social scientists to reconnect to the key issues of socio-spatial exclusion that were raised 30–40 years ago, but now with theoretically informed perspectives. At the same time, social movement research has much to gain from returning to the study of protest movements opposing the establishment of human service enterprises: they are local and thus typical of most social movements, and their success or failure, which lacks the ambiguity so often noted in social movement research, can be studied from a lifecycle perspective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Effective democracy requires participation. However, the history of urban politics, housing policy, and neighborhood revitalization has demonstrated that wealth and power often overshadow participation and community activism. Proponents of equity planning and advocacy planning in the USA have fought to include vulnerable, marginalized populations within planning decisions, yet there have been few examples of this in action. We apply Fainstein's principles ofThe Just City(Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2010) to investigate the extent to which local opposition affects affordable housing development. In doing so, we question the extent to which housing policy and planning in the USA successfully achieve the goals of equity and fairness, or whether not-in-my-backyard forces operating within (and beyond) “democratic” planning processes override those principles in siting decisions. Our results suggest that community opposition is a considerable barrier to the efficient siting of affordable housing, and propose changes to local planning and implementation strategies in order to minimize opposition and produce more equitable outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

In 2012, a planning application for a McDonald's ‘convenience restaurant’ in Tecoma, Melbourne's Dandenong Ranges region, was approved at Victoria's planning tribunal. Although generating a high-profile backlash, the Tecoma McDonald's was far from being Australia's, Victoria's, or even the immediate region's first to encounter a campaign of place-protective opposition. The Tolstoy truism holds that ‘every happy family is alike; every unhappy family is unhappy in its own way’. Franchised ‘family restaurants’ are premised on and perhaps defined by being recognisable alike. Yet as Massey argues, seemingly aspatial phenomena are always mediated by local context. This paper argues that local statutory planning has been central to the expansion of fast food chains, with globalisation tending to be accompanied by increasingly defensive legal boundaries. To demonstrate this, the paper explores a group of fast food outlets that experienced some form of local ‘unhappiness’ – 37 planning appeals involving opposition to fast food outlets in Victoria over 1969–2012. The paper explores how planning provisions applicable to fast food developments have shifted and how these shifts, in turn, have determined the permissible boundaries of planning decisions around them. Hall once reported finding himself describing the containment of urban England in ‘terminology appropriate to boxing or all-in wrestling’ (90). Here I borrow Hall's boxing analogy by suggesting six boxing-inspired rules, codified over time, applicable to the Tecoma McDonald's. These statutory details resemble the legal and physical boundaries within which, in boxing, blows are landed – but always by the book. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The development of offshore wind energy is often connected to expectations that the public will be positive about or at least indifferent to the technology. Because turbines are placed at sea--out of sight, out of mind--they are expected to avoid the public resistance experienced with respect to onshore installations. This paper examines offshore wind scientists' constructions of the public(s) by identifying narratives in the research communities. It is based on twenty-six semistructured interviews with scientists at two national research centres on offshore wind energy and technology in Norway. It finds that, although the dominant narrative of these scientists conveys a positive public, expectations of public resistance and constructions of public sentiment as NIMBY ('not in my backyard') are present in the research environments. This continued presence of narratives of irrational public resistance in the scientists' imaginings could be understood as an act of othering the public, with the possible implication of a disembedded technology development. The paper concludes by asking whether the persistence of constructions of resistant publics mirrors a pessimistic engineering mindset. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Implementation efforts of novelties such as new land use facilities frequently involve controversy; even when adoption is expected to result in a more sustainable practice. This article analyses the overlaps of the discursive spheres of the project participants and the stakeholder groups of a proposed novel farm. This will shed light on the work involved when governing for the adoption of novelties. The analysis reveals that reframing and redesigning of the novelty are needed for social embedding. Through functional and conceptual alignment activities, the proposed novelty is aligned more to the perceptions and needs of diverse stakeholder groups. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Problem, research strategy, and findings:Twenty-three states and Washington, DC, have legalized medical marijuana, raising difficult land use questions for planners regarding allowable locations, buffering from sensitive uses, and distribution of facilities. We know little about how local jurisdictions regulate medical marijuana dispensary (MMD) location and operation and how equitably different regulatory models distribute these facilities. We begin with an overview of MMD impacts related to crime, property values, and quality of life. We then review emerging local regulation of MMDs with a particular emphasis on land use controls, and find that most authorities regulate MMD location like they do other locally unwanted land uses (LULUs) such as sex-oriented businesses and liquor stores. Given a history of siting LULUs in less-affluent neighborhoods and communities of color, we conduct a case study of Denver and show that four common regulatory models concentrate land that permits MMDs in socioeconomically disadvantaged tracts and areas with high proportions of persons of color. Takeaway for practice:Local planners are often caught unprepared for the land use implications of medical marijuana legalization. This outline of common land use regulatory models and a replicable analytical model help practitioners develop ordinances that square with their own communities’ goals, values, and attributes. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

This research investigates the nuances of local not-in-my-backyard (NIMBY) attitudes and actions, asking why some communities support publicly assisted affordable rental housing development, while others do not. Six case studies within New York State explore local acceptance and avoidance of affordable rental housing development through the low-income housing tax credit program. Findings inform future marketing, planning, and programming toencourage local participation in affordable rental housing development. More research is needed on the contextualized nature of NIMBY, how NIMBYattitudes and actions can be effectively reduced, and whether this increases the supply of affordable rental housing. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Public opposition toward new energy infrastructure is often labeled “NIMBYism” (Not In My Backyard), despite strong criticisms of the concept’s validity. Research on technology acceptance has followed two pathways: first, investigating the role of place attachments and sociodemographic characteristics; second, investigating project-related constructs such as perceived impacts, trust, and procedural justice. This study aimed to integrate these research pathways and deepen understanding of the specific role of place attachments by measuring intensity of attachment and specific varieties. A total of 503 residents of a town in South West England completed a questionnaire survey on proposals to construct a high voltage power line in the vicinity. A hierarchical linear regression analysis indicated significant effects of education, length of residence, the discovered variety of place attachment, and four project variables: positive and negative impacts, trust in the developer, and procedural justice. Conceptual, methodological, and applied implications of the findings are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Our widely cited 2005 explanatory framework for considering public responses to wind farm developments distinguished two gaps: a ‘social gap’ between the high support for wind energy reported in surveys and the low success rate for wind farm applications; and an ‘individual gap’ whereby an individual supports wind energy in general but opposes a local wind farm (NIMBYism). The popular assumption that NIMBYism was the only explanation for the ‘social gap’ was contested. Instead, three explanations of the social gap were provided – democratic deficit, qualified support, and NIMBYism – and a range of different policy responses was suggested. This analysis is re-visited in order to take account of the theoretical and empirical developments since its publication. The original explanatory framework is expanded and revised and new conclusions are drawn about the likely causes of the ‘social gap’. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Marble quarries like any other mining project are faced with NIMBY (‘not-in-my-backyard’) reactions, since some negative externalities are inevitable. The paper presents a contingent valuation survey aimed at investigating a local community's willingness to accept (WTA) compensation for allowing the establishment and operation of a marble quarry in its surroundings and exploring the determinants influencing NIMBY reactions against marble quarrying activity. The valuation scenario used involves an annual monetary payment to a community fund in order to be more realistic and to lessen the so-called ‘bribe effect’, which is common in compensation schemes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We asked a national sample of 651 US residents about the feelings, emotions, images and colours they associated with nearby waste management, energy, industrial facilities and other big developments commonly regarded as locally unwanted land uses (LULUs). The respondents showed the expected dislike of them, picking ‘bad’, ‘fear’, ‘polluted’, red and black to describe them more than ‘safe’, ‘secure’, ‘jobs’ and other positive descriptors and images. Waste management facilities, especially nuclear ones, had the most negative labels, and coal and gas energy facilities had fewer than anticipated. This survey occurred prior to the events in the Fukushima plant in Japan. However, even before those events LULU concerns endured and nuclear facilities and chemical and metal plants were the most distressing to the public as a whole. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

With an ever-expanding stream of solid waste, and limited possibilities for disposal, communities increasingly have to make difficult decisions about where to store these by-products of daily living. The authors use survey data from seven counties in Florida that have recently dealt with solid waste location decisions to assess the extent to which citizen attitudes reflect a NIMBY perspective to these facilities. Contrary to what the NIMBY phenomena predicts, respondents who lived closer to existing or proposed facilities were not more likely to perceive them as dangerous as those living further away. In addition, the respondents were able to list problems and benefits to support their perceptions of danger posed by these facilities. These findings suggest that citizens do not always respond to environmental risks by gut reaction or without information as is sometimes suggested in the NIMBY literature. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Copyright of Management international / International Management / Gestiòn Internacional is the property of Management International and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This paper uses a discourse analysis of print media articles to assess the prevalence of NIMBY (not in my backyard) sentiment, and community acceptance of a therapeutic community for homeless persons with co-morbid disorders. While evidence of NIMBY is present, the contested nature of the proposed facility in terms of competing explanations for land use renders NIMBY insufficient in explaining the conflict. In addition to the dominant discourse highlighting the central arguments for facility siting, intersecting discourses involving the local municipal government and First Nations reveal a complex debate. Thus, the development of more sophisticated analytical approaches and societal responses to siting facilities for homelessness persons with co-morbid disorders are required. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Urban intensification is a key planning strategy in the UK, but one that is frequently resisted by local residents objecting to transformations of urban character. This paper is concerned with the factors that underlie such resistance, and with the opportunities for addressing them through the planning process. The paper relates a case-study of the East London district of Dalston where a mixed-use redevelopment project, strongly supported by local authorities, was fiercely resisted by residents who claimed that the existing character of the locality was being violated. Reflecting on the case through theories of place, gentrification, and planning process, we argue that resident resistance was not simply a case of self-interested NIMBYism, but a product of important differences in the ways that character was variously constructed and valued by local authorities and community members. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In 1972, an anti-freeway movement in St. Paul, Minnesota, successfully leveraged new federal Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) requirements to bring a halt to construction on the final leg of I-35E, leading into downtown. What began as a typical NIMBY (not in my backyard) battle soon produced a thoughtful environmental critique of urban freeways, sparking a debate over replacing the freeway with a low-speed parkway. Protesters ultimately failed to generate the political support necessary to cancel the Interstate, but when the last leg of I-35E opened in 1990, it was not as a classic urban freeway, but as a “parkway” replete with various “green” features. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Uses of the term NIMBY (‘not in my back yard’) were analysed in the three main Italian newspapers between 1992 and 2008. In the first study, a content analysis of 231 articles containing the term NIMBY showed two main views of the issues raised: one, aligned with the conventional view, according to which protesters are mainly driven by parochialism, emotionalism and ignorance, and the other consistent with the most innovative literature on this issue, which presents NIMBY conflicts as struggles for justice and democracy. The second study, which adopted the discursive psychology perspective on the articles characterised by the co-occurrence of the words ‘NIMBY’ term and ‘protest’, confirmed those results. Overall, there are multiple and diverse portrayals of NIMBY conflicts in the Italian press; the idea that the press supports traditional views of such conflicts, is, in part, unfounded. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Only sometimes do environmental protests that begin as not-in-my-backyard (NIMBY) objections to proposed facilities become translated into more universal not-in-anyone's-backyard (NIABY) mobilizations. An examination of opposition to liquefied natural gas (LNG) receiving terminals in the United States shows evidence of regional mobilization in the Gulf and West Coasts, but not in the Northeast. Opposition to LNG facilities in the United States thus provides an opportunity to study often overlooked regional mobilization. A narrative of events in each region is provided, with special attention to the key mechanisms of frame bridging, relational diffusion, brokerage and certification. In the case of the Northeast, two contextual factors also appear to have impeded the development of more coordinated opposition to LNG. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article examines the use of litigation by political actors to contest unwanted environmental policy options on the basis of NIMBY claims. It analyzes the discursive frames employed by policy actors to explain how one community in Northern Ontario could reject a facility to receive Toronto's waste while another in Michigan could not. The article employs a case study approach to trace the process of judicial and tribunal decisions about these two potential landfill sites. The research found that the judicial policy frames can serve as a determinative of outcomes of siting decisions in subsequent institutional settings and that such precedents could be overcome only when opponents reframed the issues to align with the interests of all parties. The article concludes that the specific characteristics of each institutional setting in which policy disputes take place are an important factor to explaining policy change or stability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

"Not in my back yard" (NIMBY) is characterized as behavioral opposition to proposed change and reflects vested interest and perceived negative personal consequences. The present research examined the role of arousal in moderating the relationship between vested interest and oppositional behavior. Two studies replicated previous research with high vested interest associated with greater oppositional behavior and greater attitude-behavior consistency than that observed with low vested interest. Moreover, a misattribution of arousal manipulation (Study 1) resulted in reduced oppositional behavior, whereas an induced arousal manipulation (Study 2) resulted in greater oppositional behavior. These results provide experimental support for the role of arousal underlying vested interest and behavioral opposition. Implications of the results for applications and further research are considered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Deepening understanding of public responses to large-scale renewable energy projects is of academic and practical importance, given policies to lessen fossil fuel use in many countries. Although the NIMBY (Not In My Back Yard) concept is commonly used to explain public opposition, the concept has been extensively critiqued. This study applies an alternative approach based upon the notion of disruption to place attachment, and the theory of social representations, with a focus upon the symbolic meanings associated with a proposed project and the places affected by it. Empirical data is provided from a case study of a proposed 750 MW offshore wind farm in North Wales, using group discussions and questionnaires distributed to local residents in two coastal towns (n = 488). Results indicate significant differences between each town''s residents in their responses to the project, and how opposition arises from nature/industry symbolic contradictions: between a place represented in terms of scenic beauty that provides a restorative environment for residents and visitors, and a wind farm that will industrialise the area and ‘fence’ in the bay. In one of the towns, the data suggests that contradiction between project and place was experienced as a threat to identity for those with strong place attachment, leading to negative attitudes and oppositional behaviour. Levels of trust in key actors moderated the relation between place attachment and negative attitudes to the wind farm. The results provide further evidence of the role of place attachment in shaping so-called ‘NIMBY’ responses to development proposals, and challenge the assumption that offshore wind farms will prove less controversial than those onshore. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

The government of Greece has gained notoriety for its failure to implement EU environmental directives in general, and is criticised specifically for its lack of an effective plan for the safe disposal of waste. Local mobilisations against a series of planned 'Sanitary Waste Disposal Sites' (HETAs) in three municipalities of Attica are examined. Should such protests be classified as NIMBY (not in my backyard)? Or do they present broader claims of justice and equity? Qualitative analysis of the protesters' on-line campaign material reveals that while these mobilisations do demonstrate some NIMBY characteristics, such campaigns should rather be perceived as ad hoc mobilisations reflective of tensions of late modernity. The public's mistrust of science and concerns about democratic deficit and accountability, as well as different perceptions of risk, are prominent. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper aims to investigate factors affecting public attitude towards the siting of locally unwanted land uses (LULUs) and to explore the possible strategies to resolve such conflicts. Three questionnaire surveys were undertaken in communities with different siting experiences and socio-economic profiles. Over 750 individuals were successfully interviewed in each study district. The three communities were found to share similar risk beliefs but show variations in the level of awareness of and response to LULUs. In communities with a disproportionate share of LULUs, many residents did not trust the government in handling LULU issues and thought that the siting process was unfair. The results of the binary logistic regression analysis show that people are likely to oppose the siting of a LULU in their community if they have a negative siting experience, do not perceive the need, accord a high risk to the facility and have a low level of trust in government. The resolution strategies preferred by the public are greater public participation and effective mitigation of risks and impacts, rather than provision of compensation and incentives. All these call for policy-makers to be sensitive to local concerns, engage the public in the process, communicate risks effectively and foster trust building. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A substantial amount of research relative to the not in my backyard (NIMBY) and locally unwanted land use (LULU) phenomena has been conducted during the past two decades. The article begins by illustrating the complex nature of these phenomena, noting variation in the types of facilities considered LULUs, the range of participants who exhibit NIMBY responses, and the varied manner in which these phenomena have been described. The focus of the article then moves to the influence of perceptions relative to NIMBY and methods available to respond to NIMBY concerns. The article summarizes research in these areas with the purpose of reminding us of what we know about NIMBY and LULU phenomena and what continues to challenge planning practitioners. The literature review points to research opportunities and the need to integrate the findings of previously distinct areas of inquiry to inform planning practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

NIMBY (Not In My Backyard) refers to an oppositional attitude from local residents against some risk generating facility that they have been chosen to host either by government or industry. The attitude is claimed to be characteristic of someone who is positive to a facility but who wants someone else to be its host. Since siting cannot be provided if everyone has this attitude, society ends up in a worse situation. The attitude is claimed to be egoistic and irrational. Here it is argued that the NIMBY critique rests on questionable assumptions about the rightness of weighing total benefit against total cost. This weighing-principle will sometimes have to yield so that the rights of individuals can be acknowledged. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The key thesis in Hubbard's paper ‘Accommodating Otherness: anti-asylum centre protest and the maintenance of white privilege’ is that racial dimensions of opposition to asylum seekers centres are part of cultural NIMBYism. This connection of complex issues with an invalid concept obscures our understanding of the role of ‘otherness’ in facility siting discussions. The deconstruction of the contested NIMBY concept is illustrated by a brief review of wind power, which was mentioned as a field in which ‘otherness’ had not been incorporated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In a continuing climate of "Not In My Backyard" (NIMBY), a mobile medication approach to expanding treatment services for individuals suffering from opioid addiction has proven to be effective and efficient. Due to NIMBY, this approach is not just a way to expand treatment services, but in many situations it represents the only way. Research has borne out the efficacy of partnerships between mobile medication programs and existing community agencies in an urban setting. Demonstration projects have yielded anecdotal data regarding the value of this approach in suburban and rural areas as well. This paper will highlight some issues for consideration in determining if this approach will meet the needs of your substance abuse treatment system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The author revisits his paper ' 'Not at our seaside': community opposition to a nineteenth-century branch asylum', published in Area in 1987, beginning with a mini-biography of the paper that explains something of how it sought to work between past and present (between historical and social geography). Attention is given to the paper's highlighting of parallels between older and more recent expressions of NIMBYism in the landscape of mental health provisions, and also to the undercurrents of the paper that sought to position such disputes within a bigger picture historical geography of 'the Same and the Other'. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]