NIMBY


Not in my back yard, or NIMBY for short, is the opposition by residents to proposed real estate development and infrastructure developments in their local area, as well as support for strict land use regulations. It carries the connotation that such residents are only opposing the development because it is close to them and that they would tolerate or support it if it were built farther away. The residents are often called nimbys, and their viewpoint is called nimbyism. The opposite movement is known as YIMBY.
Some examples of projects that have been opposed by nimbys include housing development, high-speed rail lines, homeless shelters, day cares, schools, universities and colleges, music venues, bike lanes and transportation planning that promotes pedestrian safety infrastructure, solar farms, wind farms, incinerators, sewage treatment systems, fracking, and nuclear waste repositories.

Rationale

Developments likely to attract local objections include:
The claimed reasons against these developments vary, and some are given below.
  • Increased traffic: more jobs, more housing or more stores correlates to increased traffic on local streets and greater demand for parking spots. Industrial facilities such as warehouses, factories, or landfills often increase the volume of truck traffic.
  • Harm to locally owned small businesses: the development of a big box store may provide too much competition to a locally owned store; similarly, the construction of a new road may make the older road less traveled, leading to a loss of business for property owners. This can lead to excessive relocation costs, or to loss of respected local businesses.
  • Loss of residential property value: homes near an undesirable development may be less desirable for potential buyers. The lost revenue from property taxes may, or may not, be offset by increased revenue from the project.
  • Environmental pollution of land, air, and water: power plants, factories, chemical facilities, crematoriums, sewage treatment facilities, airports, and similar projects may—or may be claimed to—contaminate the land, air, or water around them. Especially facilities assumed to smell might cause objections.
  • Light pollution: projects that operate at night, or that include security lighting, may be accused of causing light pollution.
  • Noise pollution: in addition to the noise of traffic, a project may inherently be noisy. This is a common objection to wind power, airports, roads, and many industrial facilities, but also stadiums, festivals, and nightclubs which are particularly noisy at night when locals want to sleep.
  • Visual blight and failure to "blend in" with the surrounding architecture: the proposed project might be ugly or particularly large, or cast a shadow over an area due to its height.
  • Loss of a community's small-town feel: proposals that might result in new people moving into the community, such as a plan to build many new houses, are often claimed to change the community's character.
  • Strain of public resources and schools: this reason is given for any increase in the local area's population, as additional school facilities might be needed for the additional children, but particularly to projects that might result in certain kinds of people joining the community, such as a group home for people with disabilities, or immigrants.
  • Disproportionate benefit to non-locals: the project appears to benefit distant people, such as investors or people from neighboring areas.
  • Increases in crime: this is usually applied to projects that are perceived as attracting or employing low-skill workers or racial minorities, as well as projects that cater to people who are thought to often commit crimes, such as the mentally ill, the poor, and drug addicts. Additionally, certain types of projects, such as pubs or medical marijuana dispensaries, might be perceived as directly increasing the amount of crime in the area.
  • Risk of an disaster, such as with drilling operations, chemical industry, dams, or nuclear power plants.
  • Historic districts: the affected area is on a heritage register, because of its many older properties that are being preserved as such.
The cause of NIMBYism is seen by some due to spatially concentrated costs and diffuse benefits together with regulatory transaction costs which result in a failure of conflict resolution.
As hinted by the list, protests can occur for opposite reasons. A new road or shopping center can cause increased traffic and work opportunities for some, and decreased traffic for others, harming local businesses.
People in an area affected by plans sometimes form an organization which can collect money and organize the objection activities. NIMBYists can hire a lawyer to file formal appeals, and contact media to gain public support for their case.

Origin and history

The acronym first appeared in a February 1979 newspaper article in Virginia's Daily Press.
The article may have been quoting Joseph A. Lieberman, a member of the United States Atomic Energy Commission. The phrase '"not in my back yard" syndrome,' without the acronym, also appeared in an environmental journal in February 1980. The Oxford English Dictionary's earliest citation is a Christian Science Monitor article from November 1980, although even there the author indicates the term is already used in the hazardous waste industry.
The concept behind the term, that of locally organized resistance to unwanted land uses, is likely to have originated earlier. One suggestion is it emerged in the 1950s.
In the 1980s, the term was popularized by British politician Nicholas Ridley, who was the Conservative Secretary of State for the Environment. Comedian George Carlin used the term in 1992 for his Jammin' in New York special, implying that people had already heard of it.
The NIMBY acronym has also been used by social scientists since the early 1980s to describe the resistance of communities to the siting of controversial facilities and land use.
The term's connotation has harshened since its introduction in the 1980s. Beyond their impact on any single development or neighborhood, NIMBY organizations and policies are now painted as worsening racial segregation, deepening economic inequality, and limiting the overall supply of affordable housing. There have been a variety of books and articles on how to address NIMBY perspectives. One such article discussing NIMBY opposition to affordable housing by the National Low Income Housing Coalition.

Variations

NIMBY and its derivative terms nimbyism, nimbys, and nimbyists, refer implicitly to debates of development generally or to a specific case. As such, their use is inherently contentious. The term is usually applied to opponents of a development, implying that they have narrow, selfish, or myopic views. Its use is often pejorative.

Not in my neighborhood

The term Not in my neighborhood, or NIMN, is also frequently used. "NIMN" additionally refers to legislative actions or private agreements made with the sole purpose of maintaining racial identity within a particular neighborhood or residential area by forcefully keeping members of other races from moving into the area. In that regard, "Not in My Neighborhood," by author and journalist Antero Pietila, describes the toll NIMN politics had on housing conditions in Baltimore throughout the 20th century and the systemic, racially based citywide separation it caused.

BANANA and CAVE

BANANA is an acronym for "build absolutely nothing anywhere near anything". The term is most often used to criticize the ongoing opposition of certain advocacy groups to land development. The term is commonly used within the context of planning in the United Kingdom. Sunderland City Council lists the term in their online dictionary of jargon.
In the United States, the related phenomenon CAVE people or "CAVE dwellers" serves as an acronym for "citizens against virtually everything." It is a pejorative term for citizens who regularly oppose any changes in their community, organization or workplace. A reference to the term "CAVE dwellers" can be found in the September 30, 1990, edition of the Orlando Sentinel. The term apparently existed before the publication of the article.
CAVE/BANANA people are characterized by implacable opposition to change in any form, regardless of what other local residents and stakeholders feel. This attitude is manifested in opposition to changes in public policy as varied as tax levies, sewer rates, public transportation routes, parking regulations and municipal mergers or annexations. CAVE/BANANA people often express their views publicly by attending community meetings, writing letters to the local newspaper, or calling in to talk radio shows, similar to NIMBYs.
The terms "CAVE people" and "BANANAs" were used in a 2022 op-ed to describe the populace of Stamford, Connecticut. The op-ed was written by a former municipal employee and described CAVE people as seeing "no issue simultaneously arguing conflicting points so long as nothing changes."
Similar is "NIABY" or "not in anyone's backyard".