Making or breaking waste facility siting successes with a siting framework

Waste facility siting successes depend on many linked factors of facility design and impacts, site characteristics, and community beliefs and values. A facility siting framework is constructed to combine important elements and cause–effect linkages that affect the siting outcome. The framework consists of three main components: (1) core elements of facility design, effects, and community beliefs, attitude and response; (2) contributing factors of site and community characteristics, community beliefs and values that affect the interpretation of the facility and its effects; and (3) siting management interventions to manage the process and facility impacts. The framework is applied in an unsuccessful and a successful siting case to determine the key elements that contribute to siting outcome: (1) thorough need justification for the facility from the proponent's and the community's perspective; (2) careful facility design and prediction of the impacts and to select impact management compensation measures; (3) screening and selection of communities where the beliefs and values are compatible with the type of facility and its effects, (4) cooperatively selected impact reduction (i.e., prevention, control, and mitigation) measures followed by compensation and incentives; and (5) intensive process management to balance the community characteristics and values with the proponent's efforts to plan, design, assess and manage impacts, and ultimately, gain approval of the facility. The siting framework provides a comprehensive and robust structure of key factors that contribute to siting outcome and, therefore, provides the tool to identify, evaluate, and design siting interventions to enhance the chances of successful siting outcome.     

Public concerns and the public role in siting nuclear and chemical waste facilities

Nuclear and chemical waste facilities can be successfully sited, despitenimby responses, if siting programs account for the sources of public concern. Irrational fear is not the main source; instead, waste managers must deal with perceived inequities in the distribution of benefits and costs, and concern about facility safety. Benefit-cost inequities may be dealt with in part by keeping wastes where they are generated, through political restrictions, or by providing economic compensation and political incentives (for example, a local veto). Assuring people of facility safety includes allowing local control (monitoring, health assessment, regulation), and enhancing trust of facility managers through such means as rectifying past mistakes, individual-oriented education campaigns, and negotiation of compensation packages with local residents. These means should reduce —without eliminating—public opposition to local siting of nuclear and chemical waste facilities.     

Host community attitudes towards solid waste landfill infrastructure: comprehension before compensation

One of the most controversial planning issues internationally is the siting of waste disposal infrastructure in local communities. Compensation is viewed as a possible solution to siting difficulties in many countries. However, existing empirical evidence is conflicting as to whether or not compensation-based siting has reduced opposition to such developments. Thus, before compensation policy can be considered as the solution for recognising social costs and introducing equity into the waste planning system, it is important to understand why people reject waste disposal infrastructure developments and if this rejection continues over the lifetime of facility operations. This paper utilises information gathered through surveys to examine the effects of distance, local authority consultation efforts, experience and other factors, on attitudes towards non-hazardous solid waste landfill developments in two examples of a potential and actual host communities. Our findings suggest distance proxies expectations of environmental risk in communities with no experience of living with landfill infrastructure. Community consultations by authorities are consistently important, even after a landfill has been in operation for a number of years. This suggests to policy makers to consult thoroughly and adequately before pursuing compensation policies.     

Public perception of locally unwanted facilities in Hong Kong: implications for conflict resolution

This paper aims to investigate factors affecting public attitude towards the siting of locally unwanted land uses (LULUs) and to explore the possible strategies to resolve such conflicts. Three questionnaire surveys were undertaken in communities with different siting experiences and socio-economic profiles. Over 750 individuals were successfully interviewed in each study district. The three communities were found to share similar risk beliefs but show variations in the level of awareness of and response to LULUs. In communities with a disproportionate share of LULUs, many residents did not trust the government in handling LULU issues and thought that the siting process was unfair. The results of the binary logistic regression analysis show that people are likely to oppose the siting of a LULU in their community if they have a negative siting experience, do not perceive the need, accord a high risk to the facility and have a low level of trust in government. The resolution strategies preferred by the public are greater public participation and effective mitigation of risks and impacts, rather than provision of compensation and incentives. All these call for policy-makers to be sensitive to local concerns, engage the public in the process, communicate risks effectively and foster trust building.     

Environmental justice: A louisiana case study

The paper begins with a brief analysis of the concepts of environmental justice and environmental racism and classism. The authors argue that pollution- and environment-related decision-making is prima facie wrong whenever it results in inequitable treatment of individuals on the basis of race or socio-economic status. The essay next surveys the history of the doctrine of free informed consent and argues that the consent of those affected is necessary for ensuring the fairness of decision-making for siting hazardous facilities. The paper also points out that equal opportunity to environmental protection and free informed consent are important rights. Finally, it presents a case study on the proposed uranium enrichment facility near Homer, Louisiana and argues that siting the plant would violate norms of distributive equity and free informed consent. It concludes that siting the facility is a case of environmental injustice and likely an example of environmental racism or classism.     

A comparative analysis of the psychosocial impacts of waste disposal facilities

This paper reports the results of a comparative analysis of the psychosocial impacts of municipal solid waste disposal facilities (both landfills and incinerators) in six communities in the provinces of Ontario and British Columbia, Canada. Telephone surveys were administered to random samples of residents living around each facility between 1990 and 1995 (total n=1203). The results of logistic regression analyses show that type of facility was the strongest predictor of residents' awareness, concern, and actions taken in response to site concerns. Essentially, residents living in close proximity to a landfill had a higher probability of reporting awareness, concern or actions than residents living around an incinerator site. There was little evidence of differences in reactions between Ontario and British Columbia (BC) residents, despite variations in provincial policies on waste disposal. The effects of other predictors, with the exception of involvement in the local community, were not consistent, supporting previous findings that the determinants of facility impacts are outcome‐specific. It is essential that environmental managers take this constellation of factors into account in the operation of existing, or siting of new, facilities.     

From Siting Principles to Siting Practices: A Case Study of Discord among Trust,Equity and Community Participation

This paper contributes to the noxious facilities siting literature by exploring some implications of adhering to some recommended principles and practices for competent siting. Through a qualitative case study of a landfill siting process in Peel (Ontario, Canada) three principles are critically assessed: trust; equity; and community participation. While laudable notions in principle, in practice they can impact each other in important ways which can (potentially) undermine the siting process. These impacts result mainly from the failure to achieve meaningful goals associated with one principle (e.g. community participation) which can exacerbate problems achieving goals associated with other principles (e.g. trust). The resulting discord can be further aggravated by the snowballing of adverse effects over time. In particular, practices for achieving trust and equity were adversely linked, as were the relationships between spatial equity and procedural equity and interregional and intraregional equity. These adverse synergisms were linked together with ineffective community participation which brought the process to a halt. Siting inertia (a process momentum difficult to redirect) and an inflexible siting context contributed to these conflicts. Implications for siting and further research are discussed.     

Public opinion and siting solid waste landfills in Kuwait

Siting municipal solid waste landfills in Kuwait had not considered public concerns about the location of such facilities. Kuwait Municipality has disposed urban waste in abandoned sand quarries for the past 20 years in an unplanned fashion. Due to this improper siting criteria, environmental and health problems have risen from old landfills that are located in residential areas. In an effort to help responsible decision-makers in assessing public support for siting landfills a structured, yet simple, questionnaire was designed and distributed to a random sample of heads of households. Statistical techniques were employed to examine trends and relationships between the sample public responses concerning landfill siting criteria. The findings of the research indicated that a significant percentage of the responding sample did not know about the various landfill impacts and less than 50% were aware of the negative impacts of landfills on the public health and the environment. The visual appearance of the landfill scored the lowest impact in the opinion of the sample public while the most important aspect in siting a landfill appeared to be its economic consideration. The research findings also directed attention to the important role that the media could play in increasing public awareness. Results from the cross-classification analysis demonstrated the existence of differences in awareness levels according to age, nationality, martial status, education, and occupation of the responding sample. Statistically, these differences were significant at the 95% significance level, as supported by the test of the χ-square.     

Social Approval of the Community Assessment Model for Odor Dispersal: Results from a Citizen Survey

Odors emitted from US Midwest hog production facilities present farmers, residents, and state regulatory agencies with a set of complex challenges. To predict odor exposure from multiple swine production sources simultaneously, and to determine siting recommendations for proposed new or enlarged hog facilities, researchers at Iowa State University designed the community assessment model for odor dispersion (CAM). A three-county citizen survey conducted in Iowa examined the level of hypothetical social acceptance of the modeling process, and level of trust in CAM results. While 69 % of respondents approved of modeling as a way to determine the most socially appropriate location for production sites, only 35 % would trust the results if potential odor exposure from a new facility were proposed to be built near their home. We analyzed approval of the CAM model, and level of trust, across a number of demographic, attitudinal, and belief factors regarding environmental quality and the hog industry. Overall, trust in CAM was uneven and varied across respondents. Those residents who would not trust CAM tended to be more concerned with environmental quality and less inclined to believe that the hog industry is critically important economically. Those who would not trust CAM results also had significantly more direct experience with odors. Findings point to predominantly positive, yet equivocal acceptance of CAM results among the citizenry, which is not unexpected given conflict typical of siting decisions in industry and waste disposal arenas. Recommendations are offered regarding the interaction of trust, beliefs and attitudes and the utility of CAM.     

Residential Care in Los Angeles: evaluating the spatial distribution of facilities and neighbourhood access to care among older adults

ABSTRACT

Residential care has increased in number of facilities and has grown in density in urban areas, yet it is disproportionately dispersed in cities and only beginning to meet the current long-term care need of older adults as an alternative to institutional and in-home care. California State Department of Social Services residential care facility data were linked with Los Angeles County census tract data to examine the spatial distribution of facilities through hot spot analysis of clusters of small and large facilities and zero-inflated negative binomial regression of census tract facility counts on older age and race groups, older disabled adults, and older adults in poverty in the area. The results show clusters of large facilities west of downtown Los Angeles and clusters of small facilities in the northern suburbs of the city in the San Fernando Valley. Increases in pre- and early-retired adults and older Hispanics in census tracts are associated with the greatest decreases in facility tract capacity in the area, whereas increases in the oldest old and older disabled adults are associated with the greatest increases. Understanding spatial disparities in residential care can help local agencies and developers plan and partner in more intentional and equitable development of facilities. The greatest opportunity for such development may lie in institutional tools for eldercare facility development such as the eldercare facility ordinance of Los Angeles and development of board and care facilities in residential zones of Los Angeles and other cities.     

Waste Management Strategy Development: A Case Study of Community Involvement and Consensus-Building in Hampshire

Public opposition to the siting of waste facilities has been partly explained by a failure to directly involve communities in fundamental policy decisions about waste management. Public participation at the local level is primarily reactive, based upon the premise of consultation on preferred strategies rather than direct involvement in their derivation. This paper presents the findings of a study into the effectiveness of a more proactive community involvement programme adopted by one English county council. The paper suggests some opportunities and barriers to public involvement in waste management strategy development and the potential effectiveness of consensus-building approaches.     

Canadian Innovations in Siting Hazardous Waste Management Facilities

/ Siting hazardous waste facilities is an extremely complex and difficult endeavor. Public aversion to the construction of these facilities in or near their community often results in concerted opposition, referred to as the NIMBY syndrome. For the most part, siting processes do not fail because of inadequate environmental or technical considerations, but because of the adversarial decision-making strategies employed by the proponents. Innovative siting processes used in the provinces of Alberta and Manitoba offer tangible evidence of the successful application of an innovative siting approach based on the principles of decentralization of decision-making authority and full and meaningful public involvement. The purpose of this paper is to evaluate four Canadian siting processes from the perspective of public participation and access to decision-making authority. Examples of siting processes related to hazardous waste management facilities are provided from the provinces of Alberta, Manitoba, British Columbia, and Ontario. Siting has evolved from approaches dominated by top-down decision making to increasing decentralized and pluralistic approaches. Focusing on social and political concerns of potentially affected communities and on the process of decision making itself are fundamental to achieving siting success. In Alberta initially, and later in Manitoba, this new "open approach" to siting has resulted in the construction of the first two comprehensive hazardous waste treatment facilities in Canada.KEY WORDS: Hazardous waste facilities; Siting methodologies; Public participation     

Failing to Site Hazardous Waste Facilities Voluntarily: Implications for the Production of Sustainable Goods

A current approach to the process of siting hazardous waste facilities is to seek 'willing host' communities that will not oppose but rather voluntarily accept risky facilities. Voluntary siting strategies have been put forward as the solution to hazardous waste location problems, and there have indeed been a small number of siting successes achieved voluntarily. This paper argues that, despite claims about voluntary processes, there are indications that few 'willing host' sites will be found in response to the many that are proposed. Instead, it suggests that the limited success of siting attempts, voluntary or otherwise, signals a new phase in hazardous waste management, a shift in focus from where to site a facility to whether a good is worth producing at all if its wastes are not siteable. A characteristic of this phase is the growing influence that the disposal potential of the generated waste can have on future management decisions to produce a good. In practice, siting failure may be one of the critical turning points on the road to sustainable production. It can accomplish what technology and environmental assessments have generally been unable to do: foresee the sustainability of a good. In this way, siteability can be seen as one indicator of sustainable production. A good can be considered sustainable if the wastes associated with its production are siteable.     

Sweet for the sour: Incentives in environmental mediation

The siting of facilities with undesirable environmental characteristics often leads to public conflict. Efforts to resolve the conflict and make siting decisions frequently exacerbate the problem. Environmental mediation, the process of negotiating an agreeable settlement, is an accepted approach to resolving conflict. This paper explores the use of incentive systems as a means of achieving equity in environmental mediation. Obnoxious and noxious characteristics of facilities are discussed as the basis of conflicts. Four types of incentives—mitigation, compensation, reward, and participation—are discussed. The paper concludes with a discussion of the utility and application of incentives for solving environmental conflicts.     

Beyond self‐interest: a model of public attitudes towards waste facility siting

This study examines the attitudinal and demographic determinants of public preferences towards siting solid waste disposal facilities in the United States. Survey data is collected from a random sample of 400 individuals selected from the population of the State of Connecticut. A logit statistical model of public preferences towards siting is created. The results are consistent with previous research indicating the importance of variables reflective of self‐interest motivations, such as perceptions of costs and benefits, in influencing attitudes. However, it is also revealed that more longstanding values, in addition to narrowly defined personal costs and benefits, influence siting preferences. These include widely‐shared norms concerning need for the facility and the appropriate sphere of government influence. Effective, efficient and equitable siting policy must consider and respond to these additional public motivations.     

Using citizen science in environmental justice: participation and decision-making in a Southern California waste facility siting conflict

Uses of science by environmental justice (EJ) activists reflect struggles to challenge professional scientific expertise, achieve fair outcomes, and effectively participate in decision-making processes. This qualitative research analyses the relationship between citizen science and EJ in a new waste facility siting conflict in urban Los Angeles, namely connections between citizen science and four dimensions of EJ: fair distribution, respect and recognition, participation in decision-making, and community capabilities. Citizen science is one tactic in EJ, yet little research investigates its role in a new facility siting conflict, particularly in relation to multi-faceted EJ goals. The research reveals opportunities for individual empowerment and community capacity building using citizen science, and a small measure of improved respect and recognition for participants who brought their own knowledge, research, and voices to the table. At the same time, the work identifies limitations on citizen science to improve local participatory procedures and decision-making, which also constricted the achievement of outcomes most desired by the EJ group: to prevent approval and construction of the new waste facility. This paper argues that uses of citizen science contributed to partial achievement of EJ goals, while hindered by governance processes that call for public participation yet shield decision-makers from substantive engagement with the volume or content of that participation.     

A case study of intra-community conflict as facility impact

Through a qualitative case study, this paper describes the everyday experience of conflict as a serious impact of noxious facilities. It describes intra-community conflict over two existing waste facilities (a regional landfill and a low-level hazardous waste facility) in Ryley, Alberta, Canada. Twenty-seven in-depth face-to-face interviews and one focus group reveal deep conflict presented as frustration, anger, social isolation and strained social relations between locals who ‘support’ the facilities as a means of bolstering the local economy and those who do not (mainly long-time resident farmers). Although the type of hazard exposure (i.e. existing facilities) is important for explaining why conflict developed and became entrenched, it is argued that the nature of community, and in particular differences in ways of life, are also critical determinants. The findings are compared to theory and other case studies concerning why social conflict develops over technological hazards. Implications for environmental impact assessment and environmental appeals are discussed, as well as compensation as one avenue for equitably reducing conflict.     

Approaches and Methods of Siting Locally Unwanted Waste Facilities

The siting of waste facilities is a popular subject but one constrained by a tendency to advocate a single solution regardless of context. This effort to address the siting of waste facilities from a broader perspective describes three major siting approaches and a range of site selection methods. The application of siting approaches and methods in 10 waste siting examples are described, general conclusions are advanced and suggestions for further initiatives are offered.     

Risk Communication and the Waste-to-energy Incinerator Environmental Impact Assessment Process: A UK Case Study of Public Involvement

With a view to suggesting ways in which we might arrive at a more socially acceptable waste management facility siting process, this paper considers the effectiveness of a more innovative approach to risk communication for a planned municipal waste-to-energy incinerator in Portsmouth, Hampshire, UK. The risk communication programme involved a contact group process designed to enable key members of the local community to participate in structured and informed discussions about the proposal before it was submitted as a planning application to the competent authority. The paper concludes that the communication model was dominated by the findings of technical assessments and that it provided only limited opportunities for interested stakeholders to participate fairly and competently in the development process.     

EFFECTS OF MUNICIPAL WASTEWATER DISCHARGES ON AQUATIC COMMUNITIES,BOISE RWER,IDAHO1

ABSTRACT: Aquatic communities in the Boise River were examined from October 1987 to March 1988 to determine whether they were adversely affected by trace elements in effluents from two Boise wastewater treatment facilities. Trace-element concentrations in the Boise River were less than or near analytical-detection levels and were less than chronic toxicity criteria when detectable. Insect communities colonizing artificial substrates upstream and downstream from the wastewater treatment facilities were strongly associated, and coefficients of community loss indicated that effluents had benign enriching effects. The distributions of trace-element-intolerant mayflies indicated that trace-element concentrations in effluents did not adversely affect intolerant organisms in the Boise River. Condition factor of whitefish was significantly increased downstream from the Lander Street wastewater treatment facility and was significantly decreased downstream from the West Boise wastewater treatment facility.