IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/jfasei/v2y2020i1p97-114.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Why CBA and NIMBY Syndrome Are Important Challenges to China’s BRI?

Author

Listed:
  • Quah Euston
  • Iuldashov Nursultan

Abstract

The purpose of this article is to make a preliminary assessment of the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) in the context of environmental impacts and arising not-in-my-backyard (NIMBY) opposition in host countries. We discuss the use of cost-benefit analysis (CBA) in developing countries (most members of BRI) and application of the available conflict-resolution mechanisms to deal with siting issues. We review these instruments and suggest a way forward for BRI NIMBY projects. JEL Codes: O53, R58

Suggested Citation

  • Quah Euston & Iuldashov Nursultan, 2020. "Why CBA and NIMBY Syndrome Are Important Challenges to China’s BRI?," Journal of Asian Economic Integration, , vol. 2(1), pages 97-114, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:jfasei:v:2:y:2020:i:1:p:97-114
    DOI: 10.1177/2631684620916043
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2631684620916043
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/2631684620916043?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kunreuther, Howard & Kleindorfer, Paul R, 1986. "A Sealed-Bid Auction Mechanism for Siting Noxious Facilities," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(2), pages 295-299, May.
    2. Euston Quah & K.C. Tan, 2002. "Siting Environmentally Unwanted Facilities," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 1389.
    3. Frank J. Popper, 1983. "LP/HC and LULUs: The Political Uses of Risk Analysis in Land‐Use Planning," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 3(4), pages 255-263, December.
    4. Euston Quah & Jongsay Yong, 2008. "An assessment of four popular auction mechanisms in the siting of NIMBY facilities: some experimental evidence," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(7), pages 841-852.
    5. E Quah & K C Tan, 1998. "The Siting Problem of Nimby Facilities: Cost – Benefit Analysis and Auction Mechanisms," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 16(3), pages 255-264, June.
    6. Beal, Diana J., 1995. "A Travel Cost Analysis of the Value of Carnarvon Gorge National Park for Recreational Use," Review of Marketing and Agricultural Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 63(02), pages 1-12, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Alberti, Federica & Mantilla, César, 2020. "Provision of noxious facilities using a market-like mechanism: A simple implementation in the lab," Working papers 35, Red Investigadores de Economía.
    2. Fumihiro Yamane & Hideaki Ohgaki & Kota Asano, 2011. "Nuclear Power‐Related Facilities and Neighboring Land Price: A Case Study on the Mutsu‐Ogawara Region, Japan," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(12), pages 1969-1994, December.
    3. Euston Quah, 2015. "Pursuing Economic Growth in Asia: The Environmental Challenge," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(10), pages 1487-1504, October.
    4. Euston Quah & Jongsay Yong, 2008. "An assessment of four popular auction mechanisms in the siting of NIMBY facilities: some experimental evidence," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(7), pages 841-852.
    5. Toshiaki Sasao, 2004. "Analysis of the socioeconomic impact of landfill siting considering regional factors," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 6(2), pages 147-175, June.
    6. Bruno S. Frey & Alois Stutzer, 2006. "Environmental Morale and Motivation," CREMA Working Paper Series 2006-17, Center for Research in Economics, Management and the Arts (CREMA).
    7. Bellettini, Giorgio & Kempf, Hubert, 2013. "Why not in your backyard? On the location and size of a public facility," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 22-30.
    8. Heagney, E.C. & Rose, J.M. & Ardeshiri, A. & Kovac, M., 2019. "The economic value of tourism and recreation across a large protected area network," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    9. Prabha Prayaga & John Rolfe & Jack Sinden, 2006. "A Travel Cost Analysis of the Value of Special Events: Gemfest in Central Queensland," Tourism Economics, , vol. 12(3), pages 403-420, September.
    10. Steffen, Bjarne, 2012. "Prospects for pumped-hydro storage in Germany," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 420-429.
    11. David Pérez-Castrillo & David Wettstein, 2000. "In whose backyard? A generalized bidding approach," UFAE and IAE Working Papers 463.00, Unitat de Fonaments de l'Anàlisi Econòmica (UAB) and Institut d'Anàlisi Econòmica (CSIC).
    12. Bruno Frey & Matthias Benz & Alois Stutzer, 2004. "Introducing Procedural Utility: Not Only What, but Also How Matters," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 160(3), pages 377-401, September.
    13. Cramton, Peter C, 1995. "Money Out of Thin Air: The Nationwide Narrowband PCS Auction," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 4(2), pages 267-343, Summer.
    14. Laurent-Lucchetti, Jérémy & Leroux, Justin, 2011. "Choosing and sharing," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 73(1), pages 296-300, September.
    15. Bennett, Jeffrey W., 2005. "Australasian environmental economics: contributions, conflicts and ‘cop-outs’," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 49(3), pages 1-19.
    16. Martin Besfamille & Jean-Marie Lozachmeur, 2010. "NIMBY and mechanism design under different constitutional constraints," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 17(2), pages 114-132, April.
    17. Simões, Paula & Barata, Eduardo & Cruz, Luís, 2013. "Joint estimation using revealed and stated preference data: An application using a national forest," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 249-266.
    18. Paula Simões & Luís Cruz & Eduardo Barata, 2012. "Non-market Recreational Value of a National Forest: Survey Design and Results," GEMF Working Papers 2012-09, GEMF, Faculty of Economics, University of Coimbra.
    19. Bossert, Walter & Peters, Hans, 2014. "Single-basined choice," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 162-168.
    20. Murat Öztürk & Hans Peters & Ton Storcken, 2014. "On the location of public bads: strategy-proofness under two-dimensional single-dipped preferences," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 56(1), pages 83-108, May.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Belt and Road Initiative; cost-benefit analysis; not-in-my-backyard syndrome; auction mechanism;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O53 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economywide Country Studies - - - Asia including Middle East
    • R58 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Regional Government Analysis - - - Regional Development Planning and Policy

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:sae:jfasei:v:2:y:2020:i:1:p:97-114. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.