Siting noxious facilities: A test of the Facility Siting Credo

Over the past decade it has become increasingly difficult to site noxious facilities, despite the fact that there is a growing need to do so. To address this problem, a set of guidelines for a fairer, wiser, and more workable siting process -- the Facility Siting Credo -- was developed during a National Facility Siting Workshop in 1990. This paper presents an empirical test of these guidelines. A questionnaire based on the Credo was completed by stakeholders in 29 waste facility siting cases, both successful and unsuccessful, across the United States and Canada. Using an independent determination of outcome (success), a preliminary ranking of the importance of various Credo principles was obtained. The data reveal that establishing trust between the developer and host community is an important factor in facilitating the siting process. The siting process is most likely to be successful when the community perceives the facility design to be appropriate and to satisfy its needs. Public participation also is seen to be an important process variable, particularly if it encourages a view that the facility best meets community needs. Moreover, a siting process where communities volunteer to host facilities in an approach to holds promise for meeting manymore » of these key success criteria. 45 refs., 5 figs., 3 tabs.« less

[1]  Paul R. Kleindorfer,et al.  A compensation mechanism for siting noxious facilities: Theory and experimental design , 1987 .

[2]  James Flynn,et al.  Risk Perception, Trust, and Nuclear Waste: Lessons from Yucca Mountain , 1991 .

[3]  Ralph L. Keeney,et al.  METHODOLOGIES FOR SITING ENERGY FACILITIES , 1980 .

[4]  Chris Zeiss,et al.  Community decision-making and impact management priorities for siting waste facilities , 1991 .

[5]  Howard Kunreuther,et al.  Incentives Policies to Site Hazardous Waste Facilities , 1991 .

[6]  William R. Freudenburg,et al.  Risk and Recreancy: Weber, the Division of Labor, and the Rationality of Risk Perceptions , 1993 .

[7]  Michal Heiman,et al.  From ‘Not in My Backyard!’ to ‘Not in Anybody's Backyard!’ , 1990 .

[8]  Howard Kunreuther,et al.  Wheel of Misfortune: A Lottery/Auction Mechanism for Siting of Noxious Facilities , 1991 .

[9]  William Samuelson,et al.  Status quo bias in decision making , 1988 .

[10]  Mario Ristoratore SITING TOXIC WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITIES IN CANADA AND THE UNITED STATES: PROBLEMS AND PROSPECTS* , 1985 .

[11]  Detlof von Winterfeldt,et al.  Patterns of Conflict About Risky Technologies , 1984 .

[12]  A. Tversky,et al.  Loss Aversion in Riskless Choice: A Reference-Dependent Model , 1991 .

[13]  S. Rayner,et al.  How Fair Is Safe Enough? The Cultural Approach to Societal Technology Choice1 , 1987 .

[14]  R. Kasperson,et al.  Social Distrust as a Factor in Siting Hazardous Facilities and Communicating Risks , 1992 .

[15]  D. Easterling,et al.  Fair rules for siting a high-level nuclear waste repository , 1992 .