IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jpamgt/v19y2000i1p3-22.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Talking trash about landfills: Using quantitative scoring schemes in landfill siting processes

Author

Listed:
  • Marie Lynn Miranda

    (Director of Undergraduate Programs, Nicholas School of the Environment, Duke University.)

  • James N Miller

    (Sanford Institute of Public Policy, Duke University.)

  • Timothy L Jacobs

    (Sanford Institute of Public Policy, Duke University.)

Abstract

Policymakers and the public often turn to scientific experts for help in making decisions about complex policy problems. Such decisions, however, may involve trade-offs among desired goals and so require considerable technical and political judgment. Typically there is no objectively "best" answer, although some answers may be better than others. We use a case study of a landfill siting process in Orange County, North Carolina, to analyze how quantitative scoring schemes may best be used to facilitate site selection processes. Quantitative scoring schemes, used and interpreted properly, can help policymakers and the public focus their attention on central rather than peripheral issues, and thereby conduct a more informed political debate. For the quantitative scoring scheme to fulfill this role, however, the community must be explicit about how the scoring scheme will be used within the larger decisionmaking framework. Clarifying the power and limitations of quantitative scoring schemes shows promise for facilitating decisionmaking regarding other locally unpopular land use siting processes, as well as any public policy decision involving multiple objectives. © 2000 by the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management.

Suggested Citation

  • Marie Lynn Miranda & James N Miller & Timothy L Jacobs, 2000. "Talking trash about landfills: Using quantitative scoring schemes in landfill siting processes," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 19(1), pages 3-22.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:jpamgt:v:19:y:2000:i:1:p:3-22
    DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1520-6688(200024)19:1<3::AID-PAM2>3.0.CO;2-1
    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. Kunreuther, Howard & Easterling, Douglas, 1990. "Are Risk-Benefit Tradeoffs Possible in Siting Hazardous Facilities?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(2), pages 252-256, May.
    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. Mazzanti, Massimiliano & Montini, Anna & Nicolli, Francesco, 2010. "Waste Generation and Landfill Diversion Dynamics: Decentralised Management and Spatial Effects," Sustainable Development Papers 60660, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    2. Massimiliano Mazzanti & Anna Montini & Francesco Nicolli, 2011. "Embedding landfill diversion in economic, geographical and policy settings," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(24), pages 3299-3311.
    3. Mazzanti, Massimiliano & Zoboli, Roberto, 2008. "Waste generation, waste disposal and policy effectiveness," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 52(10), pages 1221-1234.
    4. Shackley, Simon & Mander, Sarah & Reiche, Alexander, 2006. "Public perceptions of underground coal gasification in the United Kingdom," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(18), pages 3423-3433, December.
    5. Chen, M.C. & Ruijs, A. & Wesseler, J., 2005. "Solid waste management on small islands: the case of Green Island, Taiwan," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 31-47.
    6. Badriyah Zakaria & Ramdzani Abdullah & Mohammad Firuz Ramli & Puziah Abdul Latif, 2013. "Selection criteria using the Delphi method for siting an integrated hazardous waste disposal facility in Malaysia," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 56(4), pages 512-530, May.
    7. Mazzanti, Massimiliano & Montini, Anna & Nicolli, Francesco, 2009. "The dynamics of landfill diversion: Economic drivers, policy factors and spatial issues," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 54(1), pages 53-61.
    8. William D. Leach & Neil W. Pelkey & Paul A. Sabatier, 2002. "Stakeholder partnerships as collaborative policymaking: Evaluation criteria applied to watershed management in California and Washington," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 21(4), pages 645-670.

    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. Robin Gregory & Howard Kunreuther & Doug Easterling & Ken Richards, 1991. "Incentives Policies to Site Hazardous Waste Facilities," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 11(4), pages 667-675, December.
    2. 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.
    3. Mary Riddel & W. Douglass Shaw, 2003. "Option Wealth and Bequest Values: The Value of Protecting Future Generations from the Health Risks of Nuclear Waste Storage," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 79(4), pages 537-548.
    4. Frey, Bruno S & Oberholzer-Gee, Felix & Eichenberger, Reiner, 1996. "The Old Lady Visits Your Backyard: A Tale of Morals and Markets," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 104(6), pages 1297-1313, December.
    5. Howard Kunreuther & Douglas Easterling & William Desvousges & Paul Slovic, 1990. "Public Attitudes Toward Siting a High‐Level Nuclear Waste Repository in Nevada," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 10(4), pages 469-484, December.
    6. Richard O. Zerbe, 2013. "Ethical benefit–cost analysis as art and science: ten rules for benefit–cost analysis," Chapters, in: Scott O. Farrow & Richard Zerbe, Jr. (ed.), Principles and Standards for Benefit–Cost Analysis, chapter 8, pages 264-293, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    7. Peter A. Groothuis & George Van Houtven & John C. Whitehead, 1998. "Using Contingent Valuation to Measure the Compensation Required to Gain Community Acceptance of a Lulu: the Case of a Hazardous Waste Disposal Facility," Public Finance Review, , vol. 26(3), pages 231-249, May.
    8. Danzer, Alexander M. & Danzer, Natalia, 2016. "The long-run consequences of Chernobyl: Evidence on subjective well-being, mental health and welfare," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 47-60.
    9. Mouez Fodha, 2015. "Nuclear waste storage and environmental intergenerational externalities," International Journal of Sustainable Development, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 18(1/2), pages 94-114.
    10. 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.
    11. L. Robin Keller & Rakesh K. Sarin, 1995. "Fair Processes for Societal Decisions Involving Distributional Inequalities," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(1), pages 49-59, February.
    12. Cardenas, Juan Camilo & Stranlund, John & Willis, Cleve, 2000. "Local Environmental Control and Institutional Crowding-Out," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 28(10), pages 1719-1733, October.
    13. Donald W. Hine & Craig Summers & Mark Prystupa & Antoinette McKenzie‐Richer, 1997. "Public Opposition to a Proposed Nuclear Waste Repository in Canada: An Investigation of Cultural and Economic Effects," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 17(3), pages 293-302, June.
    14. Liu, Peng & Ma, Yanjiao & Zuo, Yaqing, 2019. "Self-driving vehicles: Are people willing to trade risks for environmental benefits?," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 139-149.
    15. Howard Kunreuther & Doug Easterling, 1996. "The role of compensation in siting hazardous facilities," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(4), pages 601-622.
    16. Ghidoni, Riccardo, 2017. "Mistrust and Opposition to Large-Scale Projects : An Experiment on the Role of Uncertainty," Discussion Paper 2017-053, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    17. Wenche Tobiasson & Tooraj Jamasb, 2014. "Sustainable Electricity Grid Development and the Public: An Economic Approach," Working Papers EPRG 1411, Energy Policy Research Group, Cambridge Judge Business School, University of Cambridge.
    18. Crabbé, Philippe, 1990. "Les économistes doivent-ils se mettre au vert?," L'Actualité Economique, Société Canadienne de Science Economique, vol. 66(3), pages 285-304, septembre.
    19. Chakaphon Singto & Martijn Vries & Gert Jan Hofstede & Luuk Fleskens, 2021. "Ex Ante Impact Assessment of Reservoir Construction Projects for Different Stakeholders Using Agent-Based Modeling," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 35(3), pages 1047-1064, February.
    20. 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.

    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:19:y:2000:i:1:p:3-22. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/34787/home .

    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.