What is a nimby?

[kristopher]

It isn't that I don't already know about the acronym and how it is used, I'm just soliciting the thoughts of others.

Without referring to a dictionary can you give me your thoughts about what nimby means or what it is or what is does etc?

Inquiring minds want to know...

[Richardo]

1. Not In My Back yard

I agree with the solution to the problem, but I don;t want to have to look at it or possibly even pay for it.

[TexasBushwhacker]

4. and then there's BANANA

Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anyone

[LSparkle]

2. Do-gooders (or not) that don't want anything in their own back yard

Yes, I want wind power ... but not on Cape Cod. Yes, I'm in favor of mass
transit ... just don't run those rail or bus lines through MY neighborhood.

Some of these people have good intentions, until having to act on them requires
a little inconvenience, then suddenly it's ... "never mind."

[IndyOp]

3. It is usually used when people are rejecting having a homeless shelter,

or halfway house, or community center for teens near their home --- they think that kind of thing is fine in someone else's neighborhood but not their own.

[bbinacan]

5. It means

yes we need alternative energy like windmills, but not in my backyard. This is where eminent domain is a good thing. FU Cape Cod.

[HysteryDiagnosis]

6. Gumby's distant but nimble cousin... n/'t

[kristopher]

19. * Winner of Wit Award 3/12/08 nt

[Selatius]

7. NIMBY is invoked a lot with the issue of nuclear power or nuclear waste disposal.

People want nuclear power, but they don't want a nuclear power station in their neighborhood. Or, they want nuclear power, but they don't want the waste to be stored in their neighborhood.

[kirby]

8. As long as others have to sacrifice, but not me, I'm okay n/t

[mcscajun]

9. "Build more prisons!"

"but not here."

Another on the money line from...George Carlin

[kristopher]

10. Thank you, may I follow up?

There seems to be agreement about nimby being a resistance to paying a personal cost for (societal?) projects that you otherwise support. Is that close?

If it is, what about this scenario: I live in development, and they want to put in a sidewalk. I agree that sidewalks are generally good, but I don't think one is needed in my development.
Since I don't want the neighborhood's community management organization to put one in I take action (ex: picket their meeting with contractors) to influence the outcome.

Is that nimby?

Why or why not?

[trof]

11. Not in my book.

You just have a disagreement with 'the powers that be'(?) about the necessity of sidewalks. Are you able to appear before them to argue your position?

[kristopher]

17. Sure, of course. Typical neighborhood association

This is a hypothetical, btw.

[GliderGuider]

12. No, it's not.

NIMBY reactions spring from the perceived negative impact that the proposed development will have on the objector's lifestyle. That's not at all the same as objecting on utilitarian grounds as you are doing Presumably if you felt the sidewalk was needed in your neighbourhood you'd have no objection to it.

A number of years ago I was asked to sign a petition against the establishment of a halfway house for juvenile offenders a few blocks from my house. The canvasser was surprised when I refused to sign, and shocked when I said it sounded like a good idea and that our neigbourhood seemed like a great place to help young people re-integrate into society. I went on to explain that to my knowledge such halfway houses in normal residential areas don't contribute significantly to the crime rate already caused by the unsupervised teenage kids of existing residents. NIMBY seems to be very much taken for granted in such situations, and I was delighted to do my part to upset the applecart.

[kristopher]

18. How do you differentiate if a nimby uses utilitarian argument?

And why is a utilitarian argument more valid than a less defined opposition based on perceptions of damage. In both cases the imapct on the person affected is real. The only difference is that one can be measured easily while the other can't.

[Nihil]

13. Sorry to be contrarian ...

... but from the information provided, I'd say yes, you are being a NIMBY.

Reasoning:
> I agree that sidewalks are generally good

i.e., you agree with the principle

> but I don't think one is needed in my development.

i.e., you disagree with having one of those "generally good" things
in your locality

> Since I don't want the neighborhood's community management organization
> to put one in I take action to influence the outcome.

i.e., you intend to take action to block the attempt to implement
something you agree with for the sole reason that it is in your locality
= NIMBY.

Like I said at the top of this post, I'm only working from the brief summary
that you gave so if there are other issues involved, my view may change.
You asked for my opinion so ... :hi:

[kristopher]

20. You've kept to the essentials. Care to wander the reservation a little?

For example, what circumstances would change your evaluation?

[Nihil]

22. Couple of quick thoughts ...

> what circumstances would change your evaluation?

1) If the proposed path was duplicating an existing path (e.g., if someone
wanted one on both sides of the road rather than just one side then your
objections would be perfectly fair on the basis of reducing waste).

2) If the only property gaining access from the path was your own.
(i.e., if you were at the end of the path, you would be perfectly
justified to ask that the path stops at the previous house - though
this would obviously impact any future owner of your place so it's not
quite as strong an argument as the above.)

3) If the proposed path would negatively impact an environmental issue
(e.g., cause a stream to be blocked/re-routed, requiring the felling
of old-growth woodland). I doubt this would apply as I'm working on
the assumption that a "sidewalk" is literally "a path by the side of
an existing road".

Is this any use? :hi:

[OKIsItJustMe]

14. No, because the sidewalk is unlikely to be constructed in your back yard.

Clearly, this is an example of NIMFY (or if you live on a corner NIMFASY.)


However, in all seriousness, I guess I have to come back to your objection... "I don't think one is needed."

Okay... apparently others feel one is needed. Perhaps you need to discuss this with your neighbors. Do a majority of them feel that a sidewalk is needed? Why do they feel it is needed?

If there's one person on the board who thinks sidewalks are "pretty" and most members of the development agree with you that a sidewalk simply isn't needed, then that does not make you a NIMBY. (The sidewalk if it is of benefit to anyone will most likely be of benefit to those living in the development. If the majority of residents don't believe there is sufficient need, then so be it.)

Is this a simple difference of opinion? Does one side feel there is a safety issue involved? Are there children in the neighborhood who need refuge from heavy traffic? On the other hand; I know of a sidewalk on a steep hill near my home. Especially during the Winter, I tend to walk beside that stretch of sidewalk, as the concrete can easily become treacherous.

If your objection is simply, "I don't want to lose part of my yard." or "I don't want strangers walking so close to my house." then you may be a NIMBY. In most places, the "right-of-way" extends several feet beyond the side of the road. (What you perceive to be your yard is not.)

If your objection is that you will be required to maintain the sidewalk, you may be a NIMBY. (You may not be aware that you're required to maintain the current right-of-way.)


Have you been given an opportunity to state your case? (Either before your neighbors or the management organization?) Have you been denied your right of free speech?

[OKIsItJustMe]

15. Further thoughts...

The classic NIMBY scenario involves something which everyone generally agrees must be built somewhere like a sewage treatment plant for example. The NIMBY says, "Don't build it here, build it someplace else!"

If you said, "Yes, we need a sidewalk, but let's put it on the other side of the street." That would be NIMBYism.

If you say, "I don't think we need a sidewalk." That's not NIMBYism (although it may be obstructing.)

[kristopher]

21. You focus on participation in the decision.

And the validity of majority decision-making.
Is there a relationship between the urgency of the need for the sidewalk, and the degree to which you feel the majority has a right(?) to abandon consensus style decision making in favor of the majority oppressing the minority style?

I mean, if the person isn't accepting majority rule, what does that say? Are they nimby or are they oppressed?

[OKIsItJustMe]

24. "Are they nimby or are they oppressed?" - They may be neither.

The key to NIMBYism is that the NIMBY agrees that something is necessary, just NIMBY.

So... a person who sincerely opposes a sidewalk as being unnecessary is not a NIMBY.

If the majority feel there is an urgent need for a sidewalk, that implies a safety issue. In this case, the opposition is not oppressed; the group has simply decided against them.

That's the way society works. We can't all get things our way all of the time.


I think it's more interesting to look at the opposite side of this scenario. i.e. What if a single individual believes there is an urgent need for a sidewalk, while the majority does not?

This is a true test of a society. Are the majority willing to cede their power to an impassioned minority?

[kristopher]

16. So a judgement of selfishness is required for nimby? NT

[jberryhill]

23. Yes

Because a classic NIMBY is not saying "don't build it".

The NIMBY is saying don't build it *in my backyard*.

If you were fine with everyone else having a sidewalk in your neighborhood, but wanted your yard to be sidewalk-free - THAT would be a closer situation.

Personally, the absence of sidewalks discourages neighborliness, but YMMV.

[kestrel91316]

25. Selfishness is the very essence of NIMBYism.

Because it's all about ME and MY money and MY property values and MY convenience. To hell with the general good if I'm going to have to suffer in the slightest.

[NNadir]

Robert F. Kennedy Junior.

He wants no wind plants near his Mom's house, but he doesn't give a rat's ass about dangerous fossil fuel terminals off the coast of Malibu, unless, of course, he moves to Malibu.

[NNadir]

26. Robert F. Kennedy Junior.

He wants no wind plants near his Mom's house, but he doesn't give a rat's ass about dangerous fossil fuel terminals off the coast of Malibu, unless, of course, he moves to Malibu.