Host community attitudes towards solid waste landfill infrastructure: comprehension before compensation
One of the most controversial planning issues internationally is the siting of waste disposal infrastructure in local communities. Compensation is viewed as a possible solution to siting difficulties in many countries. However, existing empirical evidence is conflicting as to whether or not compensation-based siting has reduced opposition to such developments. Thus, before compensation policy can be considered as the solution for recognising social costs and introducing equity into the waste planning system, it is important to understand why people reject waste disposal infrastructure developments and if this rejection continues over the lifetime of facility operations. This paper utilises information gathered through surveys to examine the effects of distance, local authority consultation efforts, experience and other factors, on attitudes towards non-hazardous solid waste landfill developments in two examples of a potential and actual host communities. Our findings suggest distance proxies expectations of environmental risk in communities with no experience of living with landfill infrastructure. Community consultations by authorities are consistently important, even after a landfill has been in operation for a number of years. This suggests to policy makers to consult thoroughly and adequately before pursuing compensation policies.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 51 (2008)
Issue (Month): 2 ()
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.tandfonline.com/CJEP20|
|Order Information:||Web: http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/CJEP20|
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:jenpmg:v:51:y:2008:i:2:p:233-257. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Michael McNulty)
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.