IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jpamgt/v15y1996i3p353-376.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Fair siting procedures: An empirical analysis of their importance and characteristics

Author

Listed:
  • Bruno S. Frey

    (Institute for Empirical Economic Research, University of Zurich)

  • Felix Oberholzer-Gee

    (Institute for Empirical Economic Research, University of Zurich)

Abstract

This article analyzes the reasons why individuals oppose the siting of nuclear waste repositories close to their hometowns. In a simple model based on survey data, we show that the willingness to accept such facilities largely depends on economic criteria, namely expected economic impacts and risk estimates. However, the predictive power of such a model is improved by focusing not only on the consequences-as economic models typically do-but also on the procedural aspects. We show that acceptable siting rules contribute positively to the willingness of local residents to host a noxious facility. Acceptable rules, it is found, are essentially fair rules.

Suggested Citation

  • Bruno S. Frey & Felix Oberholzer-Gee, 1996. "Fair siting procedures: An empirical analysis of their importance and characteristics," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(3), pages 353-376.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:jpamgt:v:15:y:1996:i:3:p:353-376 DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1520-6688(199622)15:3<353::AID-PAM2>3.0.CO;2-H
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Douglas Easterling, 1992. "Fair rules for siting a high-level nuclear waste repository," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 11(3), pages 442-475.
    2. Deacon, Robert T & Shapiro, Perry, 1975. "Private Preference for Collective Goods Revealed Through Voting on Referenda," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 65(5), pages 943-955, December.
    3. Tollison, Robert D, 1982. "Rent Seeking: A Survey," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(4), pages 575-602.
    4. Frey, Bruno S, 1994. "Direct Democracy: Politico-economic Lessons from Swiss Experience," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 84(2), pages 338-342, May.
    5. Fischel, William A., 1979. "Determinants of voting on environmental quality: A study of a New Hampshire pulp mill referendum," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 6(2), pages 107-118, June.
    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. Keith Waehrer, 2003. "Hazardous Facility Siting When Cost Information Is Private: An Application of Multidimensional Mechanism Design," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 5(4), pages 605-622, October.
    2. Stéphanie Souche & Charles Raux, 2006. "Perception of the fairness of pricing," Post-Print halshs-00109055, HAL.
    3. Minehart, Deborah & Neeman, Zvika, 2002. "Effective Siting of Waste Treatment Facilities," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 303-324, March.
    4. Stiftung Familienunternehmen (ed.), 2012. "Der Weg zu einer "Agenda 2030": Reformen zwischen objektiver Notwendigkeit und individueller Verweigerung," ZEW Expertises, ZEW - Zentrum für Europäische Wirtschaftsforschung / Center for European Economic Research, number 110562.
    5. Dekel, Sagi & Fischer, Sven & Zultan, Ro’i, 2017. "Potential Pareto Public Goods," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, pages 87-96.
    6. 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.
    7. Laura I. Langbein, 2002. "Responsive bureaus, equity, and regulatory negotiation: an empirical view," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 21(3), pages 449-465.
    8. Yuichi Ishimura & Kenji Takeuchi, 2017. "Does conflict matter? Spatial distribution of disposal sites in Japan," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 19(1), pages 99-120, January.
    9. Amihai Glazer & Stef Proost, 2007. "Earmarking: Bundling to Signal Quality," Working Papers 060713, University of California-Irvine, Department of Economics.
    10. Dolan, Paul & Edlin, Richard & Tsuchiya, Aki & Wailoo, Allan, 2007. "It ain't what you do, it's the way that you do it: Characteristics of procedural justice and their importance in social decision-making," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 64(1), pages 157-170, September.
    11. Tom R. Tyler, 1997. "Procedural Fairness and Compliance with the Law," Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics (SJES), Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics (SSES), vol. 133(II), pages 219-240, June.
    12. Charles Raux & Stéphanie Souche & Yves Croissant, 2009. "How fair is pricing perceived to be? An empirical study," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 139(1), pages 227-240, April.
    13. Bidwell, David, 2013. "The role of values in public beliefs and attitudes towards commercial wind energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 189-199.
    14. O'Garra, Tanya & Mourato, Susana & Pearson, Peter, 2008. "Investigating attitudes to hydrogen refuelling facilities and the social cost to local residents," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(6), pages 2074-2085, June.
    15. Richard Benjamin & Jeffrey Wagner, 2006. "Reconsidering the law and economics of low-level radioactive waste management," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 8(1), pages 33-53, December.
    16. Souche, Stéphanie & Raux, Charles & Croissant, Yves, 2012. "On the perceived justice of urban road pricing: An empirical study in Lyon," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 46(7), pages 1124-1136.
    17. Simon Dietz & Alec Morton, 2009. "Strategic appraisal of environmental risks: a contrast between the UK�s Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change and its Committee on Radioactive Waste Management," GRI Working Papers 5, Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment.
    18. Yuichi Ishimura & Kenji Takeuchi, 2015. "Spatial Distribution of Disposal Sites¦ Empirical Evidence from Japan," Discussion Papers 1523, Graduate School of Economics, Kobe University.
    19. Ian Wills, 2001. "Community Participation in Pollution Control," Agenda - A Journal of Policy Analysis and Reform, Australian National University, College of Business and Economics, School of Economics, vol. 8(3), pages 209-222.

    More about this item

    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:wly:jpamgt:v:15:y:1996:i:3:p:353-376. 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: (Wiley-Blackwell Digital Licensing) or (Christopher F. Baum). General contact details of provider: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/34787/home .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.