NIMBYism is the biggest obstacle to the evolution of vibrant urban communities, but the incentives for some to use public forums to impose restrictions on neighboring properties are great. Local politicians often bow to the most vocal residents, often with minority opinions, to avoid making waves, but their impositions are at the expense of the overall community (and the environment).
In a recent ULI post and on his own blog, Rob Goodspeed discussed NIMBYism:
NIMBY (Not In My Back Yard) activism is as bad as ever and getting worse, according to startling new statistics from a consulting company that specializes in overcoming opposition to development.
The third-annual Saint Index, a gauge of public opinion on urban development, found one-quarter of Americans say they or a family member have actively opposed a development project. That means Americans are twice as likely to oppose development than support it. Among the findings, 78 percent of Americans think there should be no new development in their community, 44 percent oppose new apartments or condominiums (up from 34 percent in 2006), and 69 percent say their local government is doing a fair to poor job on planning and zoning.
In his blog Rob discusses varying definitions of NIMBYism:
The key to understanding NIMBYism comes from political science, not the technicalities of zoning. NIMBYism occurs when a politically unrepresentative minority exacts unreasonable costs on the larger community, up to and including blocking otherwise supported developments. This definition comes from a provocative article by Morriss P. Fiorina titled “Extreme Voices: A Dark Side of Civic Engagement” that appears in this text.
Rob discusses strategies and solutions for dealing with activists. I tend to agree that as much as we would like to just ignore them, they don’t just go away. The best strategy is to be transparent and educate the community about the benefits. A vocal minority will have a more difficult time making waves when well-informed neighbors are brought into the discussion along with them.
The bottom line here is that people serious about changing the status quo in American cities must have a robust understanding and strategy for handling NIMBYism. Thanks to rapid changes in the mechanics of planning — the goals of written plans and character of the zoning — higher density, pedestrian and transit-oriented neighborhoods are increasingly legal again. What remains is the public engagement strategy to minimize the size and ranks of the vocal minority and convince American communities they’re the right form of development for our communities.
The use of the word, “vocal minorities” has been brought to my attention. I thought it was clear this meant vocal people with minority opinions, meaning not commonly held opinions. However, at least one person has misunderstood this to mean opinions of ethnic or racial minorities, which it certainly does not.
I have revised the wording to avoid further misunderstanding.
The use of the word, “vocal minorities” has been brought to my attention. I thought it was clear this meant vocal people with minority opinions, meaning not commonly held opinions. However, at least one person has misunderstood this to mean opinions of ethnic or racial minorities, which it certainly does not.
I have revised the wording to avoid further misunderstanding.
I’d like to think NIMBYs constitute a minority opinion that has achieved a disproportionate amount of power, but I don’t know if that is true. Doesn’t the Saint index itself claim that 78% of Americans oppose all new development in their communities. That sounds like a majority to me.
It seems to me that addressing this problem may run deeper than tweaking with the political system to ensure that voices carry an equal weight. We really need a sea change in the public perception of development and community life itself.
I’d like to think NIMBYs constitute a minority opinion that has achieved a disproportionate amount of power, but I don’t know if that is true. Doesn’t the Saint index itself claim that 78% of Americans oppose all new development in their communities. That sounds like a majority to me.
It seems to me that addressing this problem may run deeper than tweaking with the political system to ensure that voices carry an equal weight. We really need a sea change in the public perception of development and community life itself.
Great point! That 78% number is scary, isn’t it?
From my experience in urban areas, it is usually a very vocal minority opinion that shows up to complain. If you ask most neighbors, they are not concerned enough to take the time to protest. However, the handful of people who make the time to get involved, usually have an irrational fear of change (or sense of entitlement) and voice their opinion loudly.
I agree. Hopefully, blogs like ours can bring out some ideas and concepts that communities and developers can use to shift public opinion toward liberalization of development restrictions.
Great point! That 78% number is scary, isn’t it?
From my experience in urban areas, it is usually a very vocal minority opinion that shows up to complain. If you ask most neighbors, they are not concerned enough to take the time to protest. However, the handful of people who make the time to get involved, usually have an irrational fear of change (or sense of entitlement) and voice their opinion loudly.
I agree. Hopefully, blogs like ours can bring out some ideas and concepts that communities and developers can use to shift public opinion toward liberalization of development restrictions.
Calvin klein underwear, calvin klein steel and calvin klein 365 are three kinds of fashion underwear, every year sale well, its excellence is comfortable and beauty, you also can buy from? the internet. Its brand is aussieBum swimwear,which is underwear sale.