For a long time, environmental activists have been labelled as “NIMBY’s”, which stands for Not In My Back Yard.
The idea, from their critics, is that people who complain about “progress”, such as a landfill, an incinerator, a power plant, a transmission line, a pipeline, etc. are all taking the stance that the facility may be OK, but you can’t put it here!
For the latest example, here’s an article in the Toronto Star about people in a Scarborough neighbourhood getting together to fight a proposed power line going south from Markham, through Scarborough, into Toronto, delivering nuclear power to the City.
Generally, I would categorize people who are motivated to “fight city hall” into one of three groups:
- True NIMBY’s. These don’t really care about the facility, or whether it’s justified. They may actually agree that it’s a good idea. Just so long as it’s not anywhere near where they live. I’d have to think this is a very small group.
- Situational NIMBY’s. Closer to group 3 than group 1, these people range from those that don’t support the project at all to those that have doubts about it, but are only motivated to become involved because it’s in their back yard. Typically, this is by far the largest group. These are often people who have never been activists, don’t want to be activists, but are forced to get involved by an accident of geography. Many will not be
- NIABY’s. Stands for Not In Anybody’s Back Yard. These are the people who make up the real activist ranks. Most start out as Situational NIMBY’s, due to a project that affects them, and through the process learn that the system is highly stacked against citizens or they learn that political activism is actually something they enjoy (Yuck, I know). As such, this group is a smaller subset of Group 2.
In talking to people, and reading polls on how people’s opinion has shifted about climate change, it seems to me that there are many people who are realizing that we can’t continue to ignore problems just because they are down the road. Out of sight is no longer out of mind.
My favourite quote from the article linked above is “How does creating more energy fit with creating less greenhouse gas emissions?”
Doesn’t that just say it all?
