No abstract

Since enacting a unique facility siting law in 1981, Wisconsin has had unusual success in siting solid-waste management facilities. The law mandates a state-level technical review and licensing process and a local-level negotiatiodarbitration process that deals with host community impacts and concerns. Data from the negotiated compensation agreements, a survey of facility proposers, and secondary data for the host communities are analyzed in relation to compensation levels. Concerns with community image and health risks and with facility management and equity issues are found to significantly and substantially increase negotiated compensation levels. In contrast, a focus on logistics and transportation concerns is associated with lower levels of compensation. Compensation increases with facility capacity but at a less than proportional rate. Higher levels of compensation are obtained by communities that accept compensation "in kind" in the form of free or reduced fees for host community waste disposal.

Since the mid-1980s the concept of corporate environmentalism has taken hold among global stakeholders, promising improved environmental health and safety (EH&S) performance at multinational (MNC) facilities in less developed countries. In this article we examine corporate environmentalism through two lenses: (1) our own empirical case studies of three Third World subsidiaries of USA-based multinationals; (2) evolving theories on EH&S performance at MNC subsidiaries in less developed countries. We suggest that over the past decade there has been a convergence of three theoretical perspectives -neoclassical, radical and ecological -toward consistent predictions of improved EH&S performances and relations with host country governments. However, important differences among the three perspectives remain in how each interprets improved EH&S performance in the context of long-term benefits to corporations, host countries, workers, local publics and the global community. While we find that the neoclassical economic perspective is most consistent with the empirical findings of our three case studies, we also note some debatable neoclassical assumptions concerning whether all stakeholders benefit mutually from superior CCC 09644733 / 951

No abstract