Dynamics and Causation of Environmental Equity, Locally Unwanted Land Uses, and Neighborhood Changes

/ Why are some environmental risks distributed disproportionately in the neighborhoods of the minorities and the poor? A hypothesis was proposed in a recent study that market dynamics contributed to the current environmental inequity. That is, locally unwanted land uses (LULUs) make the host communities home to more poor people and people of color. This hypothesis was allegedly supported by a Houston case study, whereby its author analyzed the postsiting changes of the socioeconomic characteristics of the neighborhoods surrounding solid waste facilities. I argue that such an analysis of postsiting changes alone is insufficient to test the causation hypothesis. Instead, I propose a conceptual framework for analysis of environmental equity dynamics and causation. I suggest that the presiting neighborhood dynamics and the characteristics of control neighborhoods be analyzed as the first test for the causation hypothesis. Furthermore, I present theories of neighborhood change and then examine alternative hypotheses that these theories offer for explaining neighborhood changes and for the roles of LULUs in neighborhood changes. These alternative hypotheses should be examined when analyzing the relationship between LULUs and neighborhood changes in a metropolitan area. Using this framework of analysis, I revisited the Houston case. First, I found no evidence that provided support for the hypothesis that the presence of LULUs made the neighborhoods home to more blacks and poor people, contrary to the conclusion made by the previous study. Second, I examined alternative hypotheses for explaining neighborhood changes-invasion-succession, other push forces, and neighborhood life-cycle; the former two might offer better explanation.KEY WORDS: Environmental equity and justice; Locally unwanted lane uses; Siting; Market dynamics; Invasion-succession; Neighborhood changes     

Compensation for risks: host community benefits in siting locally unwanted facilities

This article analyzes the recent negotiations connected with siting 24 solid-waste landfills in Wisconsin. We examine the association between the type and amount of compensation paid to host communities by facility developers and the size of facilities, certain facility characteristics, the timing of negotiated agreements, the size of the host community, and the socioeconomic status of the host area. Our findings suggest that the level of compensation after adjusting for landfill capacity is positively associated with the percentage of total facility capacity dedicated to host community use, positively associated with the percentage of people of the host area who are in poverty, and larger for public facilities that accept municipal wastes. Other explanatory variables we examined, whose association with levels of compensation proved statistically insignificant, were facility size, facility status (new vs expansion), facility use (countyonly vs multicounty), timing of negotiation, host community size, and the host area education level, population density, and per capita income. We discuss the policy implications of our principal findings and future research questions in light of the persistent opposition surrounding the siting of solid-waste and other waste-management facilities.     

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.     

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.     

Siting restrictions and proximity of Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations to surface water

Proximity and connections to surface waters may play significant roles in determining impacts of manure spills. As occurred in many U.S. states, Minnesota adopted in 2000 more stringent regulations on Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs) including restrictions on siting new facilities near surface waters. The objectives of this study were to determine whether CAFO proximity to surface waters decreased following the siting restrictions and to evaluate implications of siting restrictions. Permit dates, locations, and distances to nearest surface water bodies for 111 west central Minnesota CAFOs were determined based on satellite imagery, historical records, and correspondence with regulatory officials. Average distance between surface waters and facilities permitted after 2000 was greater than for facilities permitted before 2000. The increase in average distance between CAFOs and public surface waters was significant for open water (1790 m, p = 0.03), but not for streams (280 m, p = 0.47). Decreased CAFO proximity to surface waters should benefit water quality, but after 2000 facilities continued to be permitted close to hydraulic connections not covered by the siting restriction. Comprehensive manure spill tracking and long term targeted water quality monitoring are needed to evaluate effectiveness of siting restrictions and other strategies for protecting surface waters from manure spills.     

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.     

Using MCDA and GIS for hazardous waste landfill siting considering land scarcity for waste disposal

The main aim of this study was to develop a procedure that minimizes the wasting of space for the siting of hazardous waste landfills as part of a solid waste management system. We wanted to tackle the shortage of land for waste disposal that is a serious and growing problem in most large urban regions. The procedure combines a multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) approach with a geographical information system (GIS). The GIS was utilised to obtain an initial screening in order to eliminate unsuitable areas, whereas the MCDA was developed to select the most suitable sites. The novelty of the proposed siting procedure is the introduction of a new screening phase before the macro-siting step aimed at producing a “land use map of potentially suitable areas” for the siting of solid waste facilities which simultaneously takes into consideration all plant types. The issue of obtaining sites evaluations of a specific facility was coupled with the issue of not wasting land appropriate to facilitate other types of waste management options. In the developed case study, the use of an innovative criteria weighting tool (the “Priority Scale”) in combination with the Analytic Hierarchy Process was useful to easier define the priorities of the evaluation criteria in comparison with other classic methods such as the Paired Comparison Technique in combination with the Simple Additive Weighting method.     

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     

Siting analyses for water quality sampling in a catchment

Pollution loads discharged from upstream development or human activities significantly degrade the water quality of a reservoir. The design of an appropriate water quality sampling network is therefore important for detecting potential pollution events and monitoring pollution trends. However, under a limited budgetary constraint, how to site an appropriate number of sampling stations is a challenging task. A previous study proposed a method applying the simulated annealing algorithm to design the sampling network based on three cost factors including the number of reaches, bank length, and subcatchment area. However, these factors are not directly related to the distribution of possible pollution. Thus, this study modified the method by considering three additional factors, i.e. total phosphorus, nitrogen, and sediment loads. The larger the possible load, the higher the probability of a pollution event may occur. The study area was the Derchi reservoir catchment in Taiwan. Pollution loads were derived from the AGNPS model with rainfall intensity estimated using the Thiessen method. Analyses for a network with various numbers of sampling sites were implemented. The results obtained based on varied cost factors were compared and discussed. With the three additional factors, the chosen sampling network is expected to properly detect pollution events and monitor pollution distribution and temporal trends.     

Siting landfills and incinerators in areas of historic unpopularity: Surveying the views of the next generation

The Campania Region in Southern Italy has suffered many problems with municipal solid waste management since the mid-1990s, leading to significant public disturbances and subsequent media coverage. This paper reports on the current views and knowledge of young people (university students) in this region about waste management operations and facilities, specifically the siting of landfills and incinerators. By means of a structured questionnaire, opinion and knowledge were systematically examined by degree type and course year. The study took place in 2011 at the University of Salerno campus. A sample of 900 students, comprising 100 students for each of the nine considered faculties, and 20 students for every academic course year, was randomly selected. Only about a quarter of respondents were not opposed to the siting of a landfill or an incinerator in their city. This clearly highlights that historic opposition to the construction of waste facilities is difficult to overcome and that distrust for previous poor management or indiscretions is long-lived and transcends generations. Students from technical faculties expressed the most reasonable opinion; opinion and knowledge were statistically related (Chi-square test, p < 0.05) to the attended faculty, and the knowledge grew linearly with progression through the university. This suggests that awareness of waste management practices develops with experience and understanding of environmental issues. There is general acceptance that many stakeholders – technicians, politicians and citizens – all have to be part of the decision process when siting a new waste management facility. The opinions of the young respondents were significantly influenced by their level of environmental knowledge.