| Summary: | 碩士 === 淡江大學 === 建築學系 === 87 === The NIMBY facility is an undesirable facility to local residents but inevitable one to governments to achieve specific public good. For example, the siting of incinerator is to prevent the environmental disaster resulted from the limited capacity of landfills, and the siting of prison is to provide space for the settlement of criminals. However, with the increasing number of opposition from residents, it has been realized that the siting of NIMBY facility is unfair to landowners whose land are taking, and it will affect the land use and life quality of surrounding area. Even more, residents have to face the fear of danger life and disasters from long term pollution. As a result, one of the arguable issues of NIMBY facilities is that residents living near the facility must bear the negative localized externality effects resulted from the NIMBY facility, but residents living far away from it received the public good services provided by the facility. Hence, how to deal with the issue of localized externality effects from NIMBY facilities to reduce the opposition from local residents and provide a fair policy to them has become the motivation of this study.
In order to realize the acceptance of different scenario from residents, the context of the study survey is based on the literature review of related case studies regarding to the policy of reducing NIMBY opposition from residents. Furthermore, by interviewing with related authorities and experts, this study found the practical approach governments take to reduce the opposition from local residents and the difference between the government policies and residents'' expectation. This study takes Neihu incinerator and Sanchuku landfill as empirical examples, and the spatial area includes 29 alley within Neihu District and 18 alley within Nangang District. The research goals are to:
1. Know how to deal with the issue of localized externality effects resulted from NIMBY facilities to reduce the opposition from residents and provide fair policy to them.
2. Discuss the attitude and acceptance level of residents to those existing garbage treatment facilities, and analyze the understanding and satisfaction of residents to the existing compensation mechanism.
3. Exam related research about the understanding of the distance of accepting NIMBY facilities and the level of acceptance to compensation.
4. Propose suggestions of compensation package for siting NIMBY facilities as advice for government.
In the scenario of this research, it was assumed that the opposition from residents would be reduced by economic incentives. However, according to the analysis results, even thought there is a high correlation between economic incentives and resident acceptance, most of residents and supervisors from urban planning department believe that the siting of NIMBY facility should consider an overall plan in each period. In addition, more than 50% of those questionnaires don''t know that Taipei City government has had budget and application for compensation fee. Economic incentives could be treated as an approach to avoid or reduce the conflict between local community and NIMBY facilities; however, the application of the compensation package should be taken under a completed plan. Furthermore, as siting NIMBY facilities, governments should consider not only the real demand of those facilities from the society and related regulations, but also the understanding of the attitude of community residents and the real need of compensation strategies. Therefore, the opposition from local residents could be reduced and the compensation budget can be used properly as the facility sited.
The conclusions of this research are: 1.the relation between literature review and the research results. 2.the acceptance of NIMBY facility. 3.related policy of the siting of NIMBY facility. 4. The attitude of dealing with residents when they are unsatisfied with the siting NIMBY facility plan. 5.The risk management from government and a supervisor commission organized by local residents can control the management of the NIMBYs facility. 6.The application of the compensation budget. 7. The risk reducing policy should include the prevention in advance and the control. 8. Governments should recognize that they are united when they are dealing with the issue of NIMBY facility. 9. The impacts of social and economic environment to the willingness of accepting NIMBY.
The suggestions of this study are : (1) Propose an overall application and mechanism for the compensation budget. (2) Draw the advanced spatial distribution map after a survey of the satisfaction government administration to the local residents. (3) Discuss the impact of life cycle of public facility to the feedback of NIMBYs. (4) An overall plan-development-management and reuse strategy should be proposed for the siting of NIMBY facility. (5) Combing with the developing GIS system, draw the completed street map through an overall survey. (6) Considering characters of different NIMBY facility, adjust the management space properly as siting NIMBY facility. (7) Develop individual ability of risk management.
|
|---|
