NIMBY

(Redirected from Nimbyism)

__NOTOC__

'NIMBY' (an acronym of '''N'ot 'I'n 'M'y 'B'ack 'Y'ard'') describes the phenomenon in which residents designate a development as inappropriate or unwanted for their local area, even if the development is clearly a benefit for many.
NIMBY and its derivative terms 'NIMBYism', 'NIMBYs', and 'NIMBYists', refer implicitly to debates of development generally or a specific case, and as such their use is inherently contentious. Also, it is a relatively recent term, the first printed usage of which the ''Oxford English Dictionary'' identifies as being in 1980 in the ''Christian Science Monitor'', and the nuances of which are still disputed. The term is usually applied to opponents by advocates of a development, implying that those opposing the debated development, or at least their viewpoint in such regards, is narrow, selfish, myopic, hypocritical or otherwise limited. As such, its use is pejorative.^[1]
The term has been applied in debates over developments in various situations:

★ when a government or private party advocates development of residential or commercial property

★ when parties advocate infrastructure development such as highways, power plants, electrical transmission lines, wastewater treatment plants, landfills, sewerage outfalls or prisons

★ when ventures such as wireless telephone companies petition local governments for permission to build new cellular transmission facilities near residential areas or schools, to improve coverage

★ when parties build, operate, or advocate culturally unfamiliar functions, such as subsidized housing, cult-like or alternative lifestyle communes, or religious facilities

Contents

NIABY

Points of debate

First order debate points

In advocacy of a development:

In opposition to a development:

Second order debate points

Of opponents of a development:

Of advocates of a development:

Examples

See also

References

External links

NIABY

Opposition to certain developments as inappropriate anywhere in the world is characterised by the acronym 'NIABY' ('''N'ot 'I'n 'A'nyone's 'B'ack 'Y'ard''). The building of nuclear power plants, for example, is often subject to NIABY concerns. Another term for the same opinion is BANANA.
Also used: 'NOTE' ('''N'ot 'O'ver 'T'here 'E'ither'').

Points of debate

First order debate points

While use of a given argument is necessarily dependent on the specific development concerned, points which arise in a debate over proposed development may include:

In advocacy of a development:

★ employment

★ tax revenue

★ marginal cost of remote development

★ population growth is inevitable and new housing necessary

★ safety

★ environmental benefits of dense, mixed-use developments in/adjacent to already-developed areas

In opposition to a development:

★ increases in local traffic

★ harm to small business

★ loss of property value

★ degradation of the environment

★ spoiling of a community's small-town feel

★ strain of public resources

★ overwhelming public schools

★ disproportionate benefit to non-locals or new residents

★ degradation of local quality of life

★ increases in crime

★ failure to "fit in"/"blend in" to the surrounding environment

★ safety
These are only a sampling of the points raised. They do not apply to every development project and are based on underlying assumptions whose validity is dependent on the specific situation.

Second order debate points

Recriminating accusations may be made of the adversary's position generally. These may include:

Of opponents of a development:

★ elitism

★ parochialism

★ drawbridge mentality

★ that public services are demanded without regard to how government will pay for them

★ that private sector companies provide or improve upon services without regard to what infrastructure is required to deliver them

★ opposition to diversity

★ inevitability of criticism

★ claims of preventing urban sprawl are misguided and unrealistic

Of advocates of a development:

★ the value of "Progress" is not a given

★ the love of money is the root of all evil

Examples

In Alexandria, Virginia, people who opposed the original proposals for high-density development in Potomac Yard were faulted for demanding a Washington Metro station while simultaneously opposing the scale of development that would provide either sufficient funds for the station or sufficient ridership to justify its construction.
Paul Callow, a former felon charged with serial raping women, has been released into the public. Although he has completed the sentence assigned to him by the Canadian Crown, he is still assessed as a high-risk reoffender and as such there is no neighbourhood which will accept his residence willingly. He has moved from Ontario to Surrey, BC, to New Westminster, BC. In each location he is met with public protests and city hall statements asking for him to move elsewhere, i. e. nobody wants him in their backyard, yet logically he has to live somewhere, and has the legal rights to as he's completed his jail sentence.
In the small English village of Ashtead, Surrey. Local residents are objecting to the conversion of a large, £1.7 million residential property into a family support centre for relatives of wounded British service personnel. The house will be purchased by a charity—the Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Families Association (SSAFA)—so that relatives can visit and support their wounded loved ones in a homely environment. The injured personnel are being treated in the close–by Headley Court rehabilitation centre run by the Ministry of Defence.^{[2] [3] [4]}
Some local residents have objected to the proposed use of the property on grounds of increased traffic and noise, as well as their belief in an increased terrorist threat of having servicemen's relatives living in their street. They also consider that the SSAFA charity is actually a business, thereby setting an unwelcome precedent (although several other businesses are registered in the same street).^[5]
Ex-servicemen and several members of the British general public are so outraged by this example of NIMBYism that they have organised a Downing Street petition in support of SSAFA. Another amusing development is the auctioning of the Self Respect of Ashtead on the popular auction site eBay.
Since the start of this campaign, it appears that the bulk of Ashtead support the SSAFA application, and it seems to be only some residents who object.

See also

★ BANANA

★ CAVE People

★ Drawbridge mentality

★ Luddite

★ PIMBY

★ YIMBY

★ Smart Growth

References

1. You can’t park here: it’s my retreat, says ‘Nimby’ Clooney (The Times)
2. ''Headley Court Families Accommodation'' (SSAFA Forces Help)
3. ''Nimby neighbours' war with wounded soldiers' families'' (Daily Mail, 15 July 2007)
4. ''NO HEROES IN MY BACKYARD: Residents fight guest house for servicemen’s relatives'' (Your Local Guardian, 19 July 2007)
5. ''Letters of Representation'' (Mole Valley Council)

External links

★ Multifamily Housing Group Targets NIMBY

★ Saint Index strives to measure Nimbyism

★ How to Overcome NIMBY Opposition to Your Project