Advertisement

Hazardous Waste Anyone?

A Comparison of Participatory and Non-participatory Approaches to Hazardous Waste Siting

This chapter is about locally-unwanted land uses, specifically hazardous waste treatment facilities. Finding a location for such a facility can pose various difficulties, not the least of which is the problem of gaining acceptance from surrounding communities. These often resent the idea of having a waste treatment facility in their area, a resentment that is labelled by the increasingly familiar term NIMBYism (Not In My Back Yard). It is exceedingly difficult to overcome negative community feelings, which are channeled through legal procedures and sometimes through extra-legal means (‘siting gridlock’). These problems have received much attention in North America, but are certainly not unique to that continent (see for example Davy, 1997).

Over recent decades, a large amount of literature has been produced which discusses the causes of siting gridlock and offers advice on how to improve practice (see for example Portney, 1991; Rabe, 1994; Williams & Matheny, 1995; Bradshaw, 2003; Petts 2000, 2001; Watson and Bulkeley, 2005; Kuhn and Ballard, 1998; Lidskog, 2005). The causes of siting gridlock that have been identified revolve around multiple types of inter related factors. They include the decline of deference to government (see for example Pushchak, 1998), a lack of trust in the institutions that make hazardous waste decisions (see for example Wynne, 1987), and changes in the perception of risks (see for example Slovic, 2001). Given the diversity in causes of siting problems, it is remarkable that the solutions generally centre on giving local communities a greater role in hazardous waste decision-making. This can be in the form of increased citizen participation in discussions on hazardous waste regulations or proposals for individual facilities (Williams & Matheny), or in the form of communities becoming a party that negotiates compensation for damages (Inhaber, 1998). The terms used in describing such approaches include ‘voluntary siting’, ‘community-based siting’, ‘the compensatory approach’, and ‘hazardous waste auctions’.

Keywords

Hazardous Waste Citizen Participation Local Council Site Process Decision Quality 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Allen, R. (1992). Waste not, want not. London: Earthscan.Google Scholar
  2. Armour, A. (1990). Socially responsive facility siting. Waterloo (Ontario), Canada: University of Waterloo.Google Scholar
  3. Bradshaw, B. (2003). Questioning the credibility and capacity of community based resource management. The Canadian Geographer/Le Géographe Canadien, 47(2), 137–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Burnheim, J. (1995). Power-trading and the environment. Environmental Politics, 4(4), 49–65.Google Scholar
  5. Coenen, F., Huitema, D., & Hofman, P. S. (1998). Green participation?Paper prepared for the IIAS-conference ‘The Citizen and the State’, Paris.Google Scholar
  6. Collections Editor (1987). Interview with Dr. Walter Harris. Collections 3.Google Scholar
  7. Dahl, R. A. (1989). Democracy and its critics. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Davy, B. (1997). Essential injustice. Vienna, Austria: Springer.Google Scholar
  9. Diesing, P. (1962). Reason in society. Urbana, University of Illionois Press, Illionois.Google Scholar
  10. ECA (Environment Council of Alberta) (1980). Hazardous waste management in Alberta. Edmonton, Canada.Google Scholar
  11. Fisher, F. (1993). Citizen participation and the democratization of policy expertise. Policy Sciences, 165–187.Google Scholar
  12. Hisschemöller, M. (1993). De democratie van problemen. Amsterdam: VU Uitgeverij.Google Scholar
  13. Hunold, C. (2002). Canada's low-level radioactive waste disposal program: Volunteerism reconsidered. Environmental Politics, 11(2), 49–72.Google Scholar
  14. Inhaber, H. (1998). Slaying the NIMBY dragon. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.Google Scholar
  15. Krawetz, N. (1979). Hazardous waste management. Edmonton, Canada: Alberta Environment Research Secretariat.Google Scholar
  16. Krawetz, N., MacDonald Research Management Consultants, & M. Payne and Associates (1983). Hazardous waste management in Alberta. A chronology. Edmonton, Canada: ECA.Google Scholar
  17. Kuhn, R. G. & Ballard, K. R. (1998). Canadian innovations in siting hazardous waste management facilities. Environmental Management, 22(4), 533–545.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lidskog, R. (2005). Siting conflicts—democratic perspectives and political implications. Journal of Risk Research, 8(3).Google Scholar
  19. Nikiforuk, A. (1996). Ralph Klein's toxic folly. Canadian Business, 66–73.Google Scholar
  20. Petts, J. (2000). Municipal waste management: Inequalities and the role of deliberation. Risk Analysis, 20(6), 821–832.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Petts, J. (2001). Evaluating the effectiveness of deliberative processes: Waste management case studies. Journal of Environmental Planning & Management, 44(2), 207–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Portney, K. E. (1991). Siting hazardous waste treatment facilities. The NIMBY syndrome. New York: Auburn House.Google Scholar
  23. Pushchak, R. (1998). Failing to site hazardous waste facilities voluntarily. Journal of Environmental planning & Management, 1, 25–44.Google Scholar
  24. Rabe, B. G. (1994). Beyond NIMBY. Washington, DC: Brookings.Google Scholar
  25. Sherbaniuk, R. (1992). History project. Alberta Special Waste Management Corporation. Edmonton, Canada: ECA.Google Scholar
  26. Sherbaniuk, R. (1998). The price of protection. Alberta Views, 3, 26–33.Google Scholar
  27. Slovic, P. (2001). The risk game. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 1–3, 17–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Watson, M. & Bulkeley, H. (2005). Just waste? Municipal waste management and the politics of environmental justice. Local Environment, 10(4), 411–426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Williams, B. A. & Matheny, A. R. (1995). Democracy, dialogue, and environmental disputes. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Wynne, B. (1987). Risk management and hazardous waste. Berlin: Springer Verlag.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media B.V 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute for Environmental Studies (IVM)Vrije UniversiteitAmsterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations