NIMBYism - A re-examination of the phenomenon

Social Science Research

Volumn 48, Issue , 2014, Pages 185-195

  Esaiasson, Peter ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GOTHENBURG   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Experiment; NIMBYism; Self interest; Symbolic politics theory

Indexed keywords

ADULT; COOPERATION; DEMOGRAPHY; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MOTIVATION; PUBLIC OPINION; SOCIAL BEHAVIOR;

ADULT; COOPERATIVE BEHAVIOR; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MOTIVATION; PUBLIC OPINION; RESIDENCE CHARACTERISTICS; SOCIAL BEHAVIOR;

EID: 84904290239     PISSN: 0049089X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ssresearch.2014.06.005     Document Type: Article

References (54)

1. Alterman R. National-level planning in democratic countries: a comparative perspective. National-level Planning in Democratic Countries: An International Comparison of City and Regional Policy Making 2001, Liverpool University Press, Liverpool. R. Alterman (Ed.).
2. Benford R.D., Snow D.A. Framing processes and social movements: an overview and assessment. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 2000, 26:611-649.
3. Bergmark Å., Thorslund M., Lindberg E. Beyond benevolence - solidarity and welfare state transition in Sweden. Int. J. Soc. Welfare 2000, 9:238-249.
4. Boholm Å. What are the new perspectives on siting controversy?. J. Risk Res. 2004, 7:99-100.
5. Burgess A. Cellular Phones, Public Fears and a Culture of Precaution 2004, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
6. Burningham K. Using the language of NIMBY: a topic for research, not an activity for researchers. Local Environ. 2000, 5:55-67.
7. Cameron T., Crewe K. Locating children's group homes: the politics of neighbourhood participation. Plann., Pract. Res. 2006, 21:323-335.
8. Chong D., Citrin J., Conley P. When self-interest matters. Polit. Psychol. 2003, 22:541-570.
9. Colon I., Marston B. Resistance to a residential AIDS home: an empirical test of NIMBY. J. Homosex. 1999, 37:135-145.
10. Crano W.D. Attitude strength and vested interests. Attitude Strength: Antecedents and Consequences 1995, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ. R.E. Petty, J.A. Krosnick (Eds.).
11. Deng F.F. The rebound of private zoning: property rights and local governance in urban land use. Environ. Plann. 2003, 35:133-149.
12. Devine-Wright P. Beyond NIMBYism: towards an integrated framework for understanding public perceptions of wind energy. Wind Energy 2005, 8:125-139.
13. Devine-Wright P. Rethinking NIMBYism: the role of place attachment and place identity in explaining place protective action. J. Commun. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 2009, 19:426-441.
14. Elster J. The market and the forum: three varieties of political theory. Foundations of Social Choice Theory 1986, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. J. Elster, A. Hyland (Eds.).
15. Farber S. Undesirable facilities and property values: a summary of empirical studies. Ecol. Econ. 1998, 24:1-14.
16. Fischel W.A. Why are there NIMBYs?. Land Econ. 2001, 77:144-152.
17. Freudenberg W., Pastor S. NIMBYs and LULUs: stalking the syndromes. J. Soc. Issues 1992, 48:39-61.
18. Futrell R. Framing processes, cognitive liberation, and NIMBY protest in the U.S. chemical-weapons disposal conflict. Sociol. Inquiry 2003, 73:359-386.
19. Green, D.P., 1988. Self-interest, Public Opinion and Mass Political Behavior. Doctoral Dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.
20. Grimes M. Organizing consent: the role of procedural fairness in political trust and compliance. Eur. J. Polit. Res. 2006, 45:285-315.
21. Groothuis P.A., Miller G. The role of social distrust in risk-benefit analysis: a study of the siting of a hazardous waste disposal facility. J. Risk Uncertainty 2005, 15:241-257.
22. Hadenius A. Att belägga motiv. Tre studier i politiskt beslutsfattande 1984, Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis, Uppsala. A. Hadenius, R. Henning, B. Holmström (Eds.).
23. Hall P. The eighth planning decade: challenges for American city planning. J. Am. Plann. Assoc. 1989, 56:275-282.
24. Hunter S., Leyden K.M. Beyond NIMBY: explaining opposition to hazardous waste facilities. Policy Stud. J. 1995, 23:601-619.
25. Kraft M.E. Democratic dialogue and acceptable risks: the politics of high-level nuclear waste disposal in the United States. Hazardous Waste Siting and Democratic Choice 1996, Georgetown University Press, Washington, DC. D. Munton (Ed.).
26. Kraft M.E., Clary B.B. Citizen participation and the NIMBY syndrome: public response to radioactive waste disposal. Western Polit. Q. 1991, 44:299-328.
27. Kunda Z. The case for motivated reasoning. Psychol. Bull. 1990, 108:480-498.
28. Lake R.W. Rethinking NIMBY. J. Am. Plann. Assoc. 1993, 59:87-93.
29. Lau R.L., Heldman C. Self-interest, symbolic attitudes, and support for public policy. Polit. Psychol. 2009, 30:513-537.
30. Beyond Self-Interest 1990, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago. J. Mansbridge (Ed.).
31. Mansbridge J. Taking coercion seriously. Constellation 1997, 3:407-416.
32. Mansfield C., van Houtven G., Huber J. The efficiency of political mechanisms for siting nuisance facilities: are opponents more likely to participate than supporters?. J. Real Estate Finance Econ. 2001, 22(2/3):141-161.
33. McAvoy G.E. Partisan probing and democratic decision making: rethinking the NIMBY syndrome. Policy Stud. J. 1998, 26:274-292.
34. Minehart D., Neeman Z. Effective siting of waste treatment facilities. J. Environ. Manage. 2002, 43:303-324.
35. Oakley D. Housing homeless people: local mobilization of federal resources to fight NIMBYism. J. Urban Affairs 2002, 24:97-116.
36. Schively C. Understanding the NIMBY and LULU phenomena: reassessing our knowledge base and informing future research. J. Plann. Lit. 2007, 21:255-266.
37. Sears D.O., Citrin J. Tax Revolt. Something for Nothing in California 1982, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
38. Sears D.O., Funk C.L. Self-interest in Americans' political opinions. Beyond Self-Interest 1990, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago. J. Mansbridge (Ed.).
39. Sears D.O., Funk C.L. The role of self-interest in social and political attitudes. Adv. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 1991, 24:1-91.
40. Sears D.O., Lau R.L., Tyler T.R., Allen H.A. Self-interest vs. symbolic politics in policy attitudes and presidential voting. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 1980, 74:670-684.
41. Söderholm P., Pettersson M., Ek K., Michanek G. Policy effectiveness and the diffusion of carbon-free energy technology: the case of wind power. From Kyoto to the Town Hall 2007, Earthscan, London. L.J. Lundqvist, A. Biel (Eds.).
42. Soneryd L. Deliberations on the unknown, the unsensed, and the unsayable? Public protests and the development of third-generation mobile phones in Sweden. Sci. Technol. Hum. 2007, 32:287-314.
43. Strömgren, A., 2007. Samordning, hyfs och reda: Stabilitet i svensk planpolitik 1945-2005 [Co-ordination, Manners and Order. Stability and Change in Swedish Planning]. Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis, Uppsala.
44. Suau-Sanchez P., Pallares-Barbera M., Paül V. Incorporating annoyance in airport environmental policy: noise, societal response and community participation. J. Transp. Geogr. 2011, 19:275-284.
45. Takahashi L.M. The socio-spatial stigmatization of homelessness and HIV/Aids: toward an explanation of the NIMBY syndrome. Soc. Sci. Med. 1997, 45:903-914.
46. Takahashi L.M., Dear M.J. The changing dynamics of community opposition to human service facilities. J. Am. Plann. Assoc. 1997, 63(1):79-94.
47. Thornton B., Knowx D. 'Not in my back yard': the situational and personality determinants of oppositional behavior. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 2002, 32:2554-2574.
48. van Alphen L., Dijker A., Bos A., van den Borne B., Curfs L. The influence of group size and stigma severity on social acceptance. The case of people with intellectual disability moving into neighbourhoods. J. Commun. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 2012, 22:38-49.
49. van der Horst D. NIMBY or not? Exploring the relevance of location and the politics of voiced opinions in renewable energy siting controversies. Energy Polit. 2007, 35:2705-2714.
50. Wester-Herber M. Underlying concerns in land-use conflicts - the role of place-identity in risk perception. Environ. Sci. Policy 2004, 7:109-116.
51. Wolsink M. Entanglement of interest and motives: assumptions behind the NIMBY-theory on facility siting. Urban Stud. 1994, 31:851-866.
52. Wolsink M. Wind power and the NIMBY-myth: institutional capacity and the limited significance of public support. Renew. Energy 2000, 49-64.
53. Wolsink M. Wind power implementation: the nature of public attitudes: equity and fairness instead of 'backyard motives'. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2005, 11:1188-2007.
54. Wolsink M. Planning of renewable schemes: deliberative and fair decision-making on landscape issues instead of reproachful accusations of non-cooperation. Energy Policy 2007, 35:2692-2704.