IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v124y2023ics026483772200480x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Social acceptance of NIMBY facilities: A comparative study between public acceptance and the social license to operate analytical frameworks

Author

Listed:
  • Xu, Min
  • Liu, Yong
  • Cui, Caiyun
  • Xia, Bo
  • Ke, Yongjian
  • Skitmore, Martin

Abstract

Not-In-My-Backyard (NIMBY) facilities play a significant role globally in the sustainable and healthy development of countries, and their successful introduction and operation has become increasingly critically influenced by local communities. Two mainstream research approaches have been proposed to enhance this, in the form of a “public acceptance” (PA) framework and a “social license to operate” (SLO) framework. However, the outcomes of social acceptance within the two approaches in typical NIMBY facilities in China have not been examined empirically. In response, this study introduces the emerging SLO framework, and discusses its applicability to the NIMBY facilities by a comparative analysis with PA, based on a questionnaire survey of residents (with a final sample size of 94) adjacent to a typical waste-to-energy (WTE) incineration plant located in Zhejiang province, China. The results show that, firstly, social acceptance assessed under the two frameworks is similar. Second, the community acceptance of Jiufeng case measured by SLO is non-linear and multi-dimensional, and there is a lack of institutional trust. Third, the viability of SLO is constrained by its social vulnerability and may occur through collective protests. These findings theoretically enrich the existing literature concerning social acceptance assessment and management of the dynamic industry-community relationships involved in the provision of NIMBY facilities. The findings will also be of practical value for government agencies and industrial sectors in gaining the social license needed from local communities.

Suggested Citation

  • Xu, Min & Liu, Yong & Cui, Caiyun & Xia, Bo & Ke, Yongjian & Skitmore, Martin, 2023. "Social acceptance of NIMBY facilities: A comparative study between public acceptance and the social license to operate analytical frameworks," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 124(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:124:y:2023:i:c:s026483772200480x
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2022.106453
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S026483772200480X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2022.106453?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Cesar, Saenz, 2019. "Earning a social license to operate in mining: A case study from Peru," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    2. Luke, Hanabeth, 2017. "Social resistance to coal seam gas development in the Northern Rivers region of Eastern Australia: Proposing a diamond model of social license to operate," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 266-280.
    3. Yong Liu & Caiyun Cui & Chunqin Zhang & Bo Xia & Qing Chen & Martin Skitmore, 2021. "Effects of economic compensation on public acceptance of waste-to-energy incineration projects: an attribution theory perspective," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 64(9), pages 1515-1535, July.
    4. Achillas, Ch. & Vlachokostas, Ch. & Moussiopoulos, N. & Banias, G. & Kafetzopoulos, G. & Karagiannidis, A., 2011. "Social acceptance for the development of a waste-to-energy plant in an urban area," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 55(9), pages 857-863.
    5. Franks, Daniel M. & Cohen, Tamar, 2012. "Social Licence in Design: Constructive technology assessment within a mineral research and development institution," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 79(7), pages 1229-1240.
    6. Prno, Jason, 2013. "An analysis of factors leading to the establishment of a social licence to operate in the mining industry," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 577-590.
    7. Deanna Kemp & John Owen & Nora Gotzmann & Carol Bond, 2011. "Just Relations and Company–Community Conflict in Mining," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 101(1), pages 93-109, June.
    8. Dumbrell, Nikki P. & Adamson, David & Wheeler, Sarah Ann, 2020. "Is social licence a response to government and market failures? Evidence from the literature," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    9. Moffat, Kieren & Zhang, Airong, 2014. "The paths to social licence to operate: An integrative model explaining community acceptance of mining," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 61-70.
    10. Acquier, Aurélien & Daudigeos, Thibault & Pinkse, Jonatan, 2017. "Promises and paradoxes of the sharing economy: An organizing framework," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 1-10.
    11. Carola Braun, 2017. "Not in My Backyard: CCS Sites and Public Perception of CCS," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(12), pages 2264-2275, December.
    12. Swofford, Jeffrey & Slattery, Michael, 2010. "Public attitudes of wind energy in Texas: Local communities in close proximity to wind farms and their effect on decision-making," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 2508-2519, May.
    13. Vivianne H. M. Visschers & Michael Siegrist, 2013. "How a Nuclear Power Plant Accident Influences Acceptance of Nuclear Power: Results of a Longitudinal Study Before and After the Fukushima Disaster," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(2), pages 333-347, February.
    14. Parsons, Richard & Lacey, Justine & Moffat, Kieren, 2014. "Maintaining legitimacy of a contested practice: How the minerals industry understands its ‘social licence to operate’," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 83-90.
    15. Wang, Shanyong & Wang, Jing & Lin, Shoufu & Li, Jun, 2019. "Public perceptions and acceptance of nuclear energy in China: The role of public knowledge, perceived benefit, perceived risk and public engagement," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 352-360.
    16. Guanghui Hou & Tong Chen & Ke Ma & Zhiming Liao & Hongmei Xia & Tianzeng Yao, 2019. "Improving Social Acceptance of Waste-to-Energy Incinerators in China: Role of Place Attachment, Trust, and Fairness," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-22, March.
    17. Owen, John R. & Kemp, Deanna, 2013. "Social licence and mining: A critical perspective," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 29-35.
    18. Chuanwang Sun & Xiaoling Ouyang & Xiaochun Meng, 2019. "Public acceptance towards waste-to-energy power plants: a new quantified assessment based on “willingness to pay”," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 62(14), pages 2459-2477, December.
    19. Wang, Sen, 2019. "Managing forests for the greater good: The role of the social license to operate," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 1-1.
    20. Zhang, Airong & Moffat, Kieren, 2015. "A balancing act: The role of benefits, impacts and confidence in governance in predicting acceptance of mining in Australia," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 25-34.
    21. Evans Asante Boadi & Zheng He & Josephine Bosompem & Joy Say & Eric Kofi Boadi, 2019. "Let the Talk Count: Attributes of Stakeholder Engagement, Trust, Perceive Environmental Protection and CSR," SAGE Open, , vol. 9(1), pages 21582440198, January.
    22. Mah, Daphne Ngar-yin & Hills, Peter & Tao, Julia, 2014. "Risk perception, trust and public engagement in nuclear decision-making in Hong Kong," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 368-390.
    23. Michael Siegrist & George Cvetkovich, 2000. "Perception of Hazards: The Role of Social Trust and Knowledge," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(5), pages 713-720, October.
    24. Measham, Thomas G. & Zhang, Airong, 2019. "Social licence, gender and mining: Moral conviction and perceived economic importance," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 363-368.
    25. Michael H. Finewood & A. Marissa Matsler & Joshua Zivkovich, 2019. "Green Infrastructure and the Hidden Politics of Urban Stormwater Governance in a Postindustrial City," Annals of the American Association of Geographers, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 109(3), pages 909-925, May.
    26. Prno, Jason & Scott Slocombe, D., 2012. "Exploring the origins of ‘social license to operate’ in the mining sector: Perspectives from governance and sustainability theories," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 346-357.
    27. Baumber, Alex & Scerri, Moira & Schweinsberg, Stephen, 2019. "A social licence for the sharing economy," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 12-23.
    28. Wright, Susan & Bice, Sara, 2017. "Beyond social capital: A strategic action fields approach to social licence to operate," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 284-295.
    29. Corscadden, Kenny & Wile, Adam & Yiridoe, Emmanuel, 2012. "Social license and consultation criteria for community wind projects," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 392-397.
    30. Mercer-Mapstone, Lucy & Rifkin, Will & Louis, Winnifred & Moffat, Kieren, 2017. "Meaningful dialogue outcomes contribute to laying a foundation for social licence to operate," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 347-355.
    31. Demajorovic, Jacques & Lopes, Juliana Campos & Santiago, Ana Lucia Frezzatti, 2019. "The Samarco dam disaster: A grave challenge to social license to operate discourse," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 273-282.
    32. Richert, Claire & Rogers, Abbie & Burton, Michael, 2015. "Measuring the extent of a Social License to Operate: The influence of marine biodiversity offsets in the oil and gas sector in Western Australia," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 121-129.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Herkes, Feie J. & Zouridis, Stavros, 2023. "The legitimacy of land use decisions by public authorities in the Netherlands: Results from a survey experiment," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Yıldız, Taşkın Deniz & Kural, Orhan, 2020. "The effects of the mining operation activities permit process on the mining sector in Turkey," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    2. Stuart, Alice & Bond, Alan & Franco, Aldina M.A. & Baker, Julia & Gerrard, Chris & Danino, Vittoria & Jones, Kylie, 2023. "Conceptualising social licence to operate," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(PA).
    3. Alberto Diantini & Salvatore Eugenio Pappalardo & Tim Edwards Powers & Daniele Codato & Giuseppe Della Fera & Marco Heredia-R & Francesco Facchinelli & Edoardo Crescini & Massimo De Marchi, 2020. "Is this a Real Choice? Critical Exploration of the Social License to Operate in the Oil Extraction Context of the Ecuadorian Amazon," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-24, October.
    4. Santiago, Ana Lúcia & Demajorovic, Jacques & Rossetto, Dennys Eduardo & Luke, Hanabeth, 2021. "Understanding the fundamentals of the Social Licence to Operate: Its evolution, current state of development and future avenues for research," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    5. Demajorovic, Jacques & Lopes, Juliana Campos & Santiago, Ana Lucia Frezzatti, 2019. "The Samarco dam disaster: A grave challenge to social license to operate discourse," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 273-282.
    6. Mercer-Mapstone, Lucy & Rifkin, Will & Moffat, Kieren & Louis, Winnifred, 2017. "Conceptualising the role of dialogue in social licence to operate," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 137-146.
    7. Luke, Hanabeth, 2017. "Social resistance to coal seam gas development in the Northern Rivers region of Eastern Australia: Proposing a diamond model of social license to operate," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 266-280.
    8. Leeuwerik, R.N.C. & Rozemeijer, M.J.C. & van Leeuwen, J., 2021. "Conceptualizing the interaction of context, process and status in the Social License to operate: The case of marine diamond mining in Namibia," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    9. Bice, Sara & Brueckner, Martin & Pforr, Christof, 2017. "Putting social license to operate on the map: A social, actuarial and political risk and licensing model (SAP Model)," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 46-55.
    10. Heffron, Raphael J. & Downes, Lauren & Ramirez Rodriguez, Oscar M. & McCauley, Darren, 2021. "The emergence of the ‘social licence to operate’ in the extractive industries?," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    11. Dumbrell, Nikki P. & Adamson, David & Wheeler, Sarah Ann, 2020. "Is social licence a response to government and market failures? Evidence from the literature," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    12. Mercer-Mapstone, Lucy & Rifkin, Will & Louis, Winnifred & Moffat, Kieren, 2019. "Power, participation, and exclusion through dialogue in the extractive industries: Who gets a seat at the table?," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 190-199.
    13. Amoako, Kwame Oduro & Lord, Beverley R. & Dixon, Keith, 2021. "Narrative accounting for mining in Ghana: An old defence against a new threat?," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    14. Omotehinse, Adeyinka O. & De Tomi, Giorgio, 2020. "Managing the challenges of obtaining a social license to operate in the pre-mining phase: A focus on the oil sands communities in Ondo State, Nigeria," World Development Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 18(C).
    15. Costanza, Jennifer Noel, 2016. "Mining Conflict and the Politics of Obtaining a Social License: Insight from Guatemala," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 97-113.
    16. Walton, Andrea & McCrea, Rod, 2020. "Understanding social licence to operate for onshore gas development: How the underlying drivers fit together," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 279(C).
    17. Anna Katharina Provasnek & Anton Sentic & Erwin Schmid, 2017. "Integrating Eco‐Innovations and Stakeholder Engagement for Sustainable Development and a Social License to Operate," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(3), pages 173-185, May.
    18. Smits, Coco C.A. & van Leeuwen, Judith & van Tatenhove, Jan P.M., 2017. "Oil and gas development in Greenland: A social license to operate, trust and legitimacy in environmental governance," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 109-116.
    19. van der Plank, Sien & Walsh, Bríd & Behrens, Paul, 2016. "The expected impacts of mining: Stakeholder perceptions of a proposed mineral sands mine in rural Australia," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 129-136.
    20. Richert, Claire & Rogers, Abbie & Burton, Michael, 2015. "Measuring the extent of a Social License to Operate: The influence of marine biodiversity offsets in the oil and gas sector in Western Australia," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 121-129.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:124:y:2023:i:c:s026483772200480x. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Joice Jiang (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/land-use-policy .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.