Exploring critical influencing factors for the site selection failure of waste-to-energy projects in China caused by the “not in my back yard” effect

Abstract

PurposeThis study aims to explore the critical influencing factors that lead to the site selection failure of waste-to-energy (WtE) projects in China under the influence of the “Not In My Back Yard” (NIMBY) effect, which can provide references to improve the decision-making process of similar projects in the future.Design/methodology/approachThe fuzzy decision-making trial and evaluation laboratory (DEMATEL) method was used to propose an analytical framework for exploring the critical influencing factors affecting the site selection failure of WtE projects. The causal relationship between different influencing factors is finally determined on the basis of the opinions of 12 experts from universities, government departments, consulting units, planning and design units, construction units and WtE enterprises.FindingsResults showed that six crucial factors resulted in the site selection failure of WtE projects from the NIMBY effect perspective: “Insufficient public participation,” “Near the place of residence,” “Nonstandard government decision-making processes,” “Low information disclosure,” “Destroys the surrounding environment,” and “Imperfect compensation scheme.”Originality/valueResults can determine the priorities and causal relationships among the various influencing factors. The decision-making optimization suggestions can provide reference for decision- makers, thereby possibly promoting the scientific and standardization of site selection decision process.

How perceived corporate social responsibility and public knowledge affect public participation intention: evidence from Chinese waste incineration power projects

“…Tremendous literature studies focusing on NIMBY have reached the consensus that public participation provides an effective strategy for addressing the NIMBY issue (Cong et al, 2021;Langer et al, 2017;Liu et al, 2018). By involving in the policy development process, such as agenda-setting, decision-making and policy-formulating, the public can express their concerns and restrain authorities and industries (Tu et al, 2019).…”

“…By involving in the policy development process, such as agenda-setting, decision-making and policy-formulating, the public can express their concerns and restrain authorities and industries (Tu et al, 2019). As public resistance to the project frequently occurs in siting and planning stage (Cong et al, 2021), scholars have paid particular attention to the improvement of public participation in the early stage of project construction, which is of significance to gain support on contentious measures and avoid conflicts (Johnson, 2020). The research interests of these literature centered on the evaluation of the effectiveness of the current public participation practice (Brombal et al, 2017;Hasan, 2018) and the design of operational rules or procedures for participation (Bobbio, 2019;Thanappan, 2019).…”

Information Dissemination and Control of NIMBY Projects under Stigmatization

“…Dai et al believed that NIMBY effect exists in nuclear power due to its threat of releasing harmful radioactive substances and calculated the health risks using a health impact assessment methodology [56]. Cong et al established an early warning system to determine the NIMBY of heavy pollution projects, which included public security influence, impact of production safety accidents, and different kinds of environmental pollutions [57]. He et al concluded that chemistry has the characteristics of high environmental and safety impacts and risks and it is easily protested by residents [40].…”

“…In the absence of stigmatization, NIMBY projects with high environmental risk are easily resisted by residents. NIMBY projects with low environmental risk are easy to stigmatize, which is also one of the answers to the question "why do the Based on Daily's research [57], the degree of ecological damage can be divided into four levels. Grades 1-4 represent 3-10 years, 10-20 years, 20-50 years, and more than 50 years of ecological restoration time projects with low risks assessed by experts attract public attention and seriously affect social and economic development?"…”

Range dependent expected utility theory based model for NIMBY conflicts in China: An evolutionary game analysis

“…However, current research on the NIMBY conflicts between the government and the public under the influence of emotion is relatively few, and the theory is not mature enough. Scholars mostly use the stakeholder theory to study the evolution of NIMBY conflicts, such as game theory [ 11 , 12 ], linear and nonlinear integer programming [ 13 ], case analysis method [ 14 ], and other methods. The above-mentioned literature on NIMBY conflicts effectively relaxed the rational assumptions of participants, explained participants’ behavioral decisions from the perspective of bounded rationality, and lacked the construction of participants’ subjective cognitive level.…”