• Journal of Environmental Policy
• /
• v.9 no.4
• /
• pp.125-154
• /
• 2010

Among the various contemporary issues that confront the nation or society, surely one of the most difficult to resolve are environmental disputes between government authorities, developers, local residents and advocacy groups. While such disputes can in some cases be the result of a selfish and illegal NIMBY("Not In My Back Yard") syndrome, they can also be an expression of rational and appropriate demands from local residents to preserve the ecology and quality of life for their communities, particularly with respect to the planning of "locally unwanted land uses(LULUs). Accordingly, rethinking NIMBYism entails several implications for planning of LULUs. Until the 20th century many planners considered only "functional rationality" in their decision making, in a confrontational "us versus them"process of "decide-announce-defend(DAD)". I believe, however, that a fair, voluntary, and negotiated process of alternative dispute resolution(ADR) based on consensus building is the means to resolving these disputes. A voluntary process is more desirable and feasible than a coercive one, making ADR well worth pursuing. From this perspective, I explore several factors which affect the resolution of environmental disputes. I suggest three main factors as follows: i) extension of citizen participation, ii) enhancement of equity, and iii) building of trust. Alternatives are presented based on these factors.