Facility Siting in the Asia-Pacific: Perspectives on Knowledge Production and Application

1. Introduction

1 Introduction Tung Fung and Kin-che Lam All societies require a full array of facilities to provide services and support for societal development . While some of these facilities may be greeted warmly by local communities, others are less welcome and are increasingly being rejected by those communities . This phenomenon is often referred to as Locally Unwanted Land Uses (LULUs) and the Not In My BackYard (NIMBY) dilemma . Facilities such as power plants, hospitals, highways, prisons, waste treatment facilities, landfills, incinerators, chemical waste disposal, and treatment plants are in demand in the Asia-Pacific region . The need for these facilities is of little dispute among citizens, particularly at the national level . While planners and decision makers need to determine where to locate these facilities , it has become an increasingly daunting task . While such projects can bring significant gains to both local and national communities, the negative spillover effects, including environmental, social, economic, and health impacts imposed on the local communities are often insurmountable . More often than not, local communities raise serious concerns that often lead to protest and opposition . This can result in project delays, increased developments costs, and even cancellation of projects . Certainly, local communities are vulnerable to the risks associated with facility siting and the challenge for decision makers is to find ways to provide sound communication, effective assessment, and management of the risks involved . The mismatch between who gains and who loses from the development of projects leads to conflict and, hence, the siting of projects requires a conflict resolution process . The success of this process often rests on the ability of promoters to build up trust and equity in a situation where there is considerable tension amongst the interest groups . Different countries and governments have attempted a variety of methods for facilities siting, with some Facility_final2207.indd 1 22/07/2011 5:32 PM 2 | Facility Siting in the Asia-Pacific adopting a more “decide-announce-defend” approach, while others attempt a more voluntary siting approach . Independent of the approach, there have been varying degrees of success, and cases of failure, in particular, draw intense media attention and can exacerbate the problem . Evidence from the Asia-Pacific suggests that the siting problem has emerged independent of the form of government or level of economic development of nations in the region . The inability to manage conflicts in a timely fashion has serious implications for the achievement of national and regional policy priorities . Research on facilities siting has both academic merit and practical relevance to various stakeholders . Since the 1980s, there has been a significant growth in the literature that deals with the origins and management of conflicts involved in siting facilities that are perceived to be public “nasties .” This book adds to the literature in three ways . First, it evaluates the extent to which a focus on siting in the Asia-Pacific can enhance our knowledge of siting theoretically and comparatively . Much of the facility siting literature originates from experience in North America and Europe . Many of the books on siting continue to focus on Western experience, although there have been some works on Asian experience (mainly in Japan and Taiwan) . This book, by explicitly focusing on Asia-Pacific experience and covering countries such as China, Singapore, and Vietnam that have not been covered adequately in the literature, seeks to make a major contribution to the growing comparative siting literature . Second, it explores the extent to which the literature provides insights to policy practitioners involved in managing siting disputes . The siting literature is highly policy-relevant . Criticisms of bringing policy relevance back into social science do not hold up in the case of siting . Yet, ironically , there is little analysis on how the literature can assist policy makers in developing better siting policies and effectively managing siting conflicts . Third, it explores the scope of the subject matter covered by the siting literature . Much of the literature makes two critical assumptions . The first is that it presumes the only conflicts that matter are those involved between host communities and developers, whether they be private or public or some combination . The second is that it assumes the siting issue ends during the preconstruction stage . This book challenges both assumptions and stresses the importance of neighbouring communities in siting conflicts and the need to consider postconstruction conflicts, both of which can have significant implications for siting processes and outcomes . S. Hayden Lesbirel, in the next chapter, provides the first extensive survey of the siting literature since the mid-1970s and...