NIMBYism as a Sustainability Problem
In the modern world, appropriating land and finding locations for sustainability projects can be
fraught with complications. Be it the construction of a high speed rail line, the siting of a nuclear power
plant, or even the installation of a wind turbine, opposition is mustered from all sides. Often, a vocal set
of opponents are so called “NIMBYs,” local citizens who may support such projects in theory, but “not in
my back yard.” These people can stall the approval process, generate political resistance, and
sometimes even get projects scrapped or relocated. This NIMBY attitude can also be a benefit for
sustainability, as unsustainable projects like the Keystone XL pipeline or a new coal plant will also be
opposed. This paper looks in particular at wind farms. In some areas, like Iowa and Texas, the farms are
seen as a positive addition to the local economy. However, in other areas, like Nantucket Sound, a
proposed wind farm is being vocally resisted. Obviously, a way to counteract these NIMBY activists must
be found if such projects are to proceed.
To overcome the NIMBY problem, the psychology behind the local opposition must be
understood. Three papers were consulted, two that directly interviewed local citizens in areas with
ongoing wind farm construction (Slattery et al, 2012, and Waldo, 2012), and one that examined the
success rates of eminent domain referenda in relation to local economic data (Adanu et al, 2012).
The Slattery paper involved the support behind wind farms in Iowa and Texas. These are
generally conservative states that have seen the construction several large wind projects in recent years,
with more planned. Their flat topography makes them ideal for turbine placement. Many locals support
the construction of the farms, citing their benefits to the local economy. All the while, many local
residents do not believe in climate change, the nominal impetus behind the push for renewable energy
in this country to begin with.
The Waldo paper looked at the psychology behind opponents of wind power in Sweden. Waldo
concludes that opponents who had an emotional objection to wind farms also had logical objections.
This correspondence of ‘it’s ugly as well as unprofitable’ suggests that opposition to the farms may not
be on entirely rational grounds. Overcoming these objections, then, must involve more than simply
presenting charts and figures proving the overall profitability of a project.
Finally, the Adanu paper took a data analysis approach, comparing the success of police power
and eminent domain voting actions in the United States to local economic indicators like income and
unemployment. It is found that higher income, lower unemployment areas support eminent domain less
than poorer areas, yet the authors also found a link between educational attainment and support for
eminent domain. Above the high school level, the higher educated an area is, the less likely it is to vote
to restrict eminent domain use.
All of these factors combine to create a difficult problem to solve. It is possible, though, to
overcome NIMBY opposition, by showing locals that the project has real, local benefits. People will not
support a project that inconveniences them while saving the planet, but they will tolerate some
inconvenience in the name of local economic development.
Bibliography
Kwami Adanu, John P. Hoehn, Patricia Norris, Emma Iglesias, Voter decisions on eminent domain and
police power reforms, Journal of Housing Economics, Volume 21, Issue 2, June 2012, Pages 187-194,
ISSN 1051-1377, 10.1016/j.jhe.2012.04.005.
Michael C. Slattery, Becky L. Johnson, Jeffrey A. Swofford, Martin J. Pasqualetti, The predominance of
economic development in the support for large-scale wind farms in the U.S. Great Plains, Renewable
and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Volume 16, Issue 6, August 2012, Pages 3690-3701, ISSN 1364-0321,
10.1016/j.rser.2012.03.016.
Åsa Waldo, Offshore wind power in Sweden—A qualitative analysis of attitudes with particular focus on
opponents, Energy Policy, Volume 41, February 2012, Pages 692-702, ISSN 0301-4215,
10.1016/j.enpol.2011.11.033.
The Economist, “Not On My Beach, Please” Aug 19th, 2010
(http://www.economist.com/node/16846774)
Annotations
1. Kwami Adanu, John P. Hoehn, Patricia Norris, Emma Iglesias, Voter decisions on eminent
domain and police power reforms, Journal of Housing Economics, Volume 21, Issue 2, June
2012, Pages 187-194, ISSN 1051-1377, 10.1016/j.jhe.2012.04.005.
2. Kwami Adanu is a lecturer at the GIMPA business school in Accra, Ghana. Dr. Adanu has written
other papers on economics using data mining techniques.
3. The main argument of the text is that the success of eminent domain and police power reforms
is directly related to educational attainment and income levels, as revealed by statistical analysis
of data on local population metrics and the passage of reform referenda.
4. The argument is supported by the analysis of 13 ballot initiatives, of which 10 passed and 3
failed.
5. “Results from this study indicate that eminent domain referendum outcomes hinged on voters’
fundamental values and ideology, and voters’ immediate self-interest.”
“high educational attainment in a county has a statistically significant and negative effect on
support for reform [that reduces eminent domain use]”
“Higher unemployment rates have a negative effect on the odds of voting yes at the polls [to
reduce eminent domain use]”
6. The argument of the paper supports the NIMBYism as a sustainability problem theory by
providing data on economic reasons for opposition to eminent domain use. In this case, eminent
domain is serving as a proxy for sustainability projects, as eminent domain is often used to push
sustainability projects through, but also because of their similar impacts. Eminent domain is the
taking of land from an individual for the use of the community. Similarly, projects like wind
farms may negatively impact a few people in their immediate vicinity, but will have a positive
impact on the community at large.
7. The paper was used to help formulate a solution to the NIMBY problem, as it suggests that
educational attainment will increase the support for eminent domain use. It also suggests that
higher income communities will not support eminent domain use more. This is helpful in the
planning of future sustainability projects, as it indicates that lower income areas where eminent
domain is more common are less hostile. Perhaps economic benefit trumps other objections.
1. Michael C. Slattery, Becky L. Johnson, Jeffrey A. Swofford, Martin J. Pasqualetti, The
predominance of economic development in the support for large-scale wind farms in the U.S.
Great Plains, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Volume 16, Issue 6, August 2012,
Pages 3690-3701, ISSN 1364-0321, 10.1016/j.rser.2012.03.016.
2. Michael Slattery is the Director of the Institute for Environmental Studies at Texas Christian
University, and is a professor of Geology at TCU. He writes about the confluence of
environmental and social issues.
3. The main argument of the text is that support for wind farming can be marshaled by proving to
local residents that the farm will have a real, tangible benefit to them. A majority of the
residents did not believe in global warming, yet still supported the farms because of their
demonstrable local impacts. Arguments about clean, secure, and renewable power carried
further than those about carbon emissions.
4. The argument is supported by interviews with local residents. 85% of respondents believed that
wind power should be used more, yet only 38% believed that using fossil fuels to generate
electricity was detrimental to the environment. This indicates that offsetting fossil fuels is not
the primary impetus for support of wind power. The respondents also indicated that many of
them would not support renewable generation if it meant having to pay more for their
electricity.
5. “we found a high level of public support for wind energy, with more than two-thirds of
respondents being in favor of building more wind farms either in their community or within the
U.S. as a whole. Such support for wind farms was independent of age, proximity, or
environmental attitude”
“we found that support for wind power hinged largely on perceived increased employment and
economic activity”
“support for wind power in these communities is associated far more with socioeconomic factors
than foundational aesthetic or moral values. The irony is that, although relatively few residents
benefit directly from the wind farms, at least in terms of royalty payments and direct income from
the farms themselves, we still found strong support for the wind farms, largely because of the
perceived local economic impacts and the fact that wind farms are seen as the vehicle that will
reverse economic decline”
6. The argument supports the solutions side of my report, as it helps to show how NIMBY
resistance can be overcome. Wind farms in Iowa and Texas enjoy a large level of local support,
in contrast with other projects like cape wind, where some local residents have been vocally
opposing the project.
7. The ability to use local economic benefit as an incentive to remove NIMBY opposition is a
central argument of my post.
1. Åsa Waldo, Offshore wind power in Sweden—A qualitative analysis of attitudes with particular
focus on opponents, Energy Policy, Volume 41, February 2012, Pages 692-702, ISSN 0301-4215,
10.1016/j.enpol.2011.11.033.
2. Dr. Åsa Waldo is a member of the Department of Sociology at Lund University. She is involved
with research in siting wind power farms, funded by the Swedish Energy Agency.
3. The main argument of the text is that opposition to wind power is not solely based on logical
points. The authors did not find that opposition was based on local issues, but that those against
wind farm construction questioned the veracity of wind power in general. The opponents
generally felt that wind power was unprofitable and ugly, yet many were passive about actually
resisting the construction of the farms. The author speculates that these passive opponents may
become more active at a later date.
4. Many residents compare the construction of wind farms to the construction of nuclear power,
and view wind energy as inefficient in comparison. This is a part of the cognitive objection
section. The feeling component of the objectors was primarily a visual one. Many of those who
disfavor wind farms find them jarring in the countryside, making it feel as though “you’re at an
industrial site.” These objections apply to offshore farms as well, as these farms are visible from
the coast. Yet, most residents are passive about wind farm construction, only objecting
privately. The author quotes one resident who cites the political incorrectness of active
opposition to a form of energy seen as environmentally friendly.
5. “the visual impact of wind power is one of the main causes of negative attitudes”
“people's attitudes towards wind power have a complex composition; the components of an
attitude interact and influence each other to varying degrees, thus determining why a specific
attitude prevails”
“ Recognition of the existence of this element of uncertainty among the local people should
motivate developers and authorities to deepen their knowledge and understanding of the attitudes
of the local population”
6. The paper shows how NIMBY- like resistance can be formed, by illustrating the connection
between the different reasons for opposing wind farms; and by showing how these resistances
can be turned into active opponents. It concludes that the best way to circumvent local
opposition is to increase dialogue with residents. This all ties into my argument that NIMBY
attitudes are a sustainability issue, as the resistance involves wind power, a sustainable and
renewable energy generation technique.
7. The connection between cognition and feeling is crucial to understanding NIMBY attitudes, as it
shows that a logical presentation about the benefits of wind power will not overcome all
objections. Perhaps an illustration that local benefits do exist will not be enough to change the
minds of Swedish opponents to wind power, but it may be enough to prevent them from
becoming anything more than passive opponents.