Sunday, October 16, 2005

On recognizing tradeoffs

The Star has an interesting article on NIMBYism, both in the Toronto area and in general:
People want to run their air conditioners all summer long. But the prospect of a generating station in their neighbourhood sent Newmarket residents into a frenzy. People want a subway line to the airport. But when people in Weston heard of the plan to run the rail through their community, they packed a public meeting in protest. We all agree we should build up instead of sprawling out, but when a developer pitched a plan for twin condos in the Annex, the local resident group went ballistic...

In the past, some NIMBY campaigns have led to real innovations. Enjoying your green bin? They are the direct result of the massive campaign against the city's plan to ship Toronto's garbage to the northern community of Adams Mine. Similarly, our blue box program stemmed from community resistance around the province to plans proposing new landfills.

Across the border, a campaign against building housing on toxic landfills led to a national pollution-prevention movement.

At that point, NIMBY becomes NIABY, says Keith Stewart of the Toronto Environmental Alliance. "If NIMBYism is simply about sending it somewhere else, then it should be properly critiqued. But if people say, `We don't want it here or anywhere else, we have to prevent this problem,' then you can have an incredible force for change."

Not much to add other than that Stewart has it exactly right. While we should be rightly critical of efforts to move necessary services away from one's own area, the response to a NIMBY movement offers opportunities to ask just which services are actually necessary - and which are so harmful as not to be worth building anywhere. And it's generally a bad sign if a project is already in the works before those questions have been posed.

No comments:

Post a Comment