Post-landfill siting perceptions of nearby residents: A case study of Halton landfill

Applied Geography

Volumn 20, Issue 2, 2000, Pages 137-154

  Okeke, Christian Uzo ^a   Armour, Audrey ^b  

^a Regional Municipality of Halton   (Canada)

^b YORK UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

Community perception; Facility siting; Landfill; Waste management

Indexed keywords

ATTITUDINAL SURVEY; LANDFILL; PERCEPTION; RESIDENTIAL SATISFACTION;

CANADA;

EID: 0034052388     PISSN: 01436228     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0143-6228(00)00003-5     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Armour, A. (1990). Socially responsive facility siting. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Waterloo, Ontario.
2. Boren J. Landfill capacity shortage continues. American City and County. 100(1):1985;50-51.
3. Burns M.E. Striking a reasonable balance in hazardous waste management: in whose backyard? Harthill M. AAAS Selected Symposium 88. Washington, DC. 1984.
4. Cartee, C.P. (1989). A review of sanitary landfill impacts on property values. The Real Estate Appraiser and Analyst, Spring, 43-47.
5. Coughlin, R.E., Newburger, H., & Seigner, C. (1973). Perceptions of landfill operations held by nearby residents. Philadelphia, PA: Regional Science Research Institute (Paper No. 65).
6. Dear, M. (1976) Spatial externalities and location conflict. In Massey, D.B., & Batey, P.W.J. London Papers in Regional Science 7: Alternative Frameworks For Analysis. London: Pion Press.
7. Edelstein M.R. Contaminated communities: the social and psychological impacts of residential toxic exposure. 1988;Westview, Boulder, CO.
8. Eyles J., Taylor S.M., Johnson N., Baxter J. Worrying about waste: living close to solid waste disposal facilities in Southern Ontario. Social Science and Medicine. 37(6):1993;791-804.
9. Furuseth O.J., Johnson M.S. Neighbourhood attitude towards a sanitary landfill: a North Carolina study. Applied Geography. 8(2):1988;135-145.
10. Hwang E.G., Rutzitus G. The external costs of sanitary landfills. Journal of Environmental Systems. 7(4):1978;301-308.
11. Kunreunther H. Hazard compensation and incentive systems: an economic perspective. 1995;University of Pennsylvania, Center for Risk and Decision Processes, Philadelphia, PA.
12. Norusis, M.J. (1996). SPSS for Windows, Advanced Statistics 7.0. Chicago, IL: SPSS Inc.
13. O'Hare M., Bacow L., Sanderson D. Facility siting and public opposition. 1983;Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York.
14. Ontario Ministry of the Environment (1987). Land use on or near landfills and dumps (Policy Manual 16-10).
15. Portney K.E. Siting hazardous waste treatment facilities: the Nimby syndrome. 1991;Auburn House, New York.
16. Smolen, G.E., Moore, G., & Conway, L.V. (1992). Hazardous waste landfill impacts on local property values. Real Estate Appraiser, April, 4-11.
17. Sundstrom E., Lounsbury J.W., Schuler C.R., Fowler J.R., Mattingly T.J. Jr. Community attitudes toward a proposed nuclear power generating facility as a function of expected outcomes. Journal of Community Psychology. 5:1977;199-208.
18. Swartzman D., Croke K., Swibel S. Reducing aversion to living near hazardous waste facilities through compensation and risk reduction. Journal of Environmental Management. 20(1):1985;43-50.
19. Zeiss, C.A. (1988). Siting waste disposal facilities in host communities: impacts and acceptance. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of British Columbia.