Social acceptance of NIMBY facilities: A comparative study between public acceptance and the social license to operate analytical frameworks

• Xu, Min ^[1] ; Liu, Yong ^[1] ; Cui, Caiyun ^[2] ; Xia, Bo ^[3] ; Ke, Yongjian ^[4] ; Skitmore, Martin ^[5]
  1. [1] School of Civil Engineering and Architecture, Zhejiang Sci-Tech University, Hangzhou 310018, China
  2. [2] Architectural Engineering College, North China Institute of Science and Technology, Langfang 065201, China
  3. [3] School of Architecture and Built Environment, Queensland University of Technology (QUT), Brisbane, QLD 4001, Australia
  4. [4] School of Built Environment, University of Technology Sydney, Ultimo, NSW 2007, Australia
  5. [5] Faculty of Society & Design, Bond University, Gold Coast 4226, Australia

  Mostrar afiliaciones +
• Localización: Land use policy: The International Journal Covering All Aspects of Land Use, ISSN 0264-8377, ISSN-e 1873-5754, Nº. 124, 2023
• Idioma: inglés
• Texto completo no disponible (Saber más ...)
• Resumen

  • Not-In-My-Backyard (NIMBY) facilities play a significant role globally in the sustainable and healthy development of countries, and their successful introduction and operation has become increasingly critically influenced by local communities. Two mainstream research approaches have been proposed to enhance this, in the form of a “public acceptance” (PA) framework and a “social license to operate” (SLO) framework. However, the outcomes of social acceptance within the two approaches in typical NIMBY facilities in China have not been examined empirically. In response, this study introduces the emerging SLO framework, and discusses its applicability to the NIMBY facilities by a comparative analysis with PA, based on a questionnaire survey of residents (with a final sample size of 94) adjacent to a typical waste-to-energy (WTE) incineration plant located in Zhejiang province, China. The results show that, firstly, social acceptance assessed under the two frameworks is similar. Second, the community acceptance of Jiufeng case measured by SLO is non-linear and multi-dimensional, and there is a lack of institutional trust. Third, the viability of SLO is constrained by its social vulnerability and may occur through collective protests. These findings theoretically enrich the existing literature concerning social acceptance assessment and management of the dynamic industry-community relationships involved in the provision of NIMBY facilities. The findings will also be of practical value for government agencies and industrial sectors in gaining the social license needed from local communities.