Partisan Probing and Democratic Decisionmaking Rethinking the Nimby Syndrome

Abstract

In this paper, I focus on Minnesota's unsuccessful attempt to site a hazardous waste stabilization and containment facility, but argue that this should not be seen as another siting failure due to irrational and self-interested citizens who subverted a well-conceived and essential disposal facility, Through a detailed comparison of citizen and elite claim7 about the facility, I show that many of the sources of disagreement between citizens and siting officials involve value tradeofiv rather than technical issues, and contend that state officials' views on these matters should not take precedence. Through "partisan probing," citizens actually contribute to eflective policymaking rather than detractfiom it.Nimbys are noisy. Nimbys are powerful. Nimbys are everywhere. Nimbys are people who live near enough to corporate or government projects and are upset enough about them to work to stop, stall or shrink them. Nimbys organize, march, sue and petition to block the developers they think are threatening them. They twist the arms of politicians and they learn how to influence regulators. They fight fiercely and then, win or lose, they vanish (Glaberson, 1988, Sec. 3, p.

Uses of the term NIMBY in the Italian press, 1992–2008

“…At first glance, this account seemed to be consistent with the more innovative literature on NIMBY conflicts (McAvoy, 1998), in that it substantially presented-even if often somewhat implicitly-the local mobilisations as struggles for environmental justice (Tyler, 2000). By spreading this view, the mass media plausibly had the practical effect of increasing readers' awareness about alternative approaches for the management of such local conflicts, which are based on negotiation, dialogue and involvement (Kemp, 1992).…”

“…Sometimes, these protesters are even charged with anti-democratically paralysing public policies and of being based on a "culture of veto" that brings BANANA (Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anyone) positions. Although research has disconfirmed such postulates (e.g., della Porta & Piazza, 2007;McAvoy, 1998;Wolsink, 2000), the technocratic approach is still widely taken in the scientific debate and in the mass media. …”

“…By contrast, individuals adhering to the participatory approach support decisional strategies based on ECFD (Establish criteria, Consult, Filter, Decide) models. These models include the local population in every stage of the decision-making process about how and where to site the unwanted facility; the process is often lengthy, but potentially effective, and it is characterised by genuine negotiation, dialogue and involvement (McAvoy, 1998).The way in which the public views NIMBY protests and chooses between one of these two models of managing the conflict largely depends on their own involvement in the conflict and on the information presented by the media. While residents systematically rely on direct knowledge, individuals living outside the community tend to rely on mass media accounts.…”

“…By contrast, individuals adhering to the participatory approach support decisional strategies based on ECFD (Establish criteria, Consult, Filter, Decide) models. These models include the local population in every stage of the decision-making process about how and where to site the unwanted facility; the process is often lengthy, but potentially effective, and it is characterised by genuine negotiation, dialogue and involvement (McAvoy, 1998).…”

La ecología política de conflictos sobre energía eólica. Un estudio de caso en Cataluña

“…Sin embargo, una cuidadosa investigación sobre actitudes de oposición identifica que pocas personas evalúan costes y beneficios en términos de utilidad individualista y que, en cambio, los opositores resaltan la importancia del interés público y de los derechos de otros (Wolsink, 1994). La bibliografía indica que el NIMBY confunde en vez de ayudar a entender la oposición a parques eólicos (Kempton et al, 2005) y que sirve para descalificar y silenciar oponentes y sus argumentos (McAvoy, 1998). Como explica Pendall (1999), las protestas públicas se suelen basar en una multitud de motivos y no solo en la racionalidad calculadora que subyace en el NIMBY.…”