当前课程知识点：Socially-Responsible Real Estate Development: Learning to Use Impact Assessment Tools Effectively >  Module 4: Case Study: Forest City >  Readings >  Facility Siting and Public Opposition

返回《Socially-Responsible Real Estate Development: Learning to Use Impact Assessment Tools Effectively》慕课在线视频课程列表

Facility Siting and Public Opposition资料文件与下载

Facility Siting and Public Opposition


COMMENTARY 

We were unable to gain free access to this book excerpt for MOOC participants. For those without institutional access, we summarize the main points below. 

Many of the costs of large-scale projects fall disproportionately on people that live and work nearby, who may potentially have to relocate, live with higher risks, or see the value of their property diminish. By contrast, the benefits of such projects are normally spread widely across a region. This means that local opposition to a project is easier to organize and often more forceful than the more diffuse groups that might advocate for it. This uneven dynamic can sometimes derail a project that might offer substantial benefits for society overall.

What strategy should a developer adopt to attempt to deal with this type of imbalance? In this reading, an excerpt from Facility Siting and Public Opposition (pp. 67-76 and 85-91), authors Michael O'Hare, Lawrence Bacow, and Debra Sanderson argue that compensation agreements should play a central role, and in the right circumstances, can create an outcome somewhere between ‘build’ and ‘no build’ that actually increases the local opposition’s welfare. Note that they are not talking about compensation only in monetary terms.

O’Hare et al. argue that compensation is best determined through negotiations among opposing parties. They outline a number of conditions that must be met for a useful negotiation to occur. These are: 1) each party must have something to trade; 2) there must be some potential negotiation outcome that leaves each party better off than not trading at all; 3) each party must trust that the other parties will follow through on their commitments; 4) each party must trust that all the above conditions are true. In practice these conditions can be very difficult to achieve. According to the authors, this explains why more people do not attempt to negotiate compensation agreements, despite their potential as a way of making all parties better off.

Socially responsible developers should use EIA and SIA to determine the costs and benefits to local stakeholders if a project proceeds, and use these findings to negotiation agreements. Simply imposing arbitrary payouts on certain stakeholders, as Forest City initially did (to certain fishermen associations), is insufficient.

Reflection questions:

1. The authors claim that, in instances where the costs of a compensation agreement outweigh the benefits to the developer of a project, this should flag the project as undesirable and result in its cancellation. Do you think this is realistic, or might developers take other routes to avoid excessive compensation costs? 

2. In the Forest City case, what things other than cash payments might a developer and local opponents discuss in a compensation negotiation? 

3. How do you think contending groups can build the level of trust needed to ensure that parties honor any agreements they reach? 

READING

Facility Siting and Public Opposition


下一节:Practitioner Perspective

返回《Socially-Responsible Real Estate Development: Learning to Use Impact Assessment Tools Effectively》慕课在线视频列表

Socially-Responsible Real Estate Development: Learning to Use Impact Assessment Tools Effectively课程列表：

Introduction to the MIT STLx Series

-Welcome

--Welcome

Get Started

-Course Welcome

--Welcome

--Course Overview

-Entrance Survey

--Entrance Survey

-Entrance Survey

-Learning Objectives

--Learning Objectives

-Course Schedule

--Course Schedule

-Meet Your Course Instructors

--Professor

--Teaching Assistant

-Grading and Completion Criteria

--Grading and Completion

--html

Module 1: Introduction

-Introduction

--Introduction

--The Stakeholders

--DEVELOPER

--ENVIRONMENTALIST

--REGULATOR

--COMMUNITY REPRESENTATIVE

--TECHNICAL EXPERT

--BUSINESS REPRESENTATIVE

--FACILITATOR

--Community Discussion

--Module 1 Animation

-Lectures

--html

--Lecture 1

--Lecture 2

--Key Takeaways

-Readings

--Social Impact Assessment: The State of the Art

--Social Impact Assessment and Public Participation in China

-Developer Interview

--Module 1

--html

-Questions

-Assignment

--html

--Grading Overview

--html

--Submit and Review Peers

--Peer Assessment

-Debrief

--Assignment Debrief

--Discussion 1 - part 1

--Discussion 1 - part 2

--Discuss

Module 2: Environmental Impact Assessment

-Introduction

--Introduction

--Community Discussion

--Module 2 Animation

-Lectures

--EIA Primer

--Lecture 1

--Lecture 2

--Lecture 3

--Key Takeaways

-Readings

--Methods of Environmental Impact Assessment

--Public Participation and Environmental Dispute Resolution

--Environmental Impact Assessment for Developing Countries in Asia

--Importance of Nonobjective Judgements

--Example Environmental Impact Statement

-Developer Interview

--html

--Module 2

--html

-Questions

-Assignment

--html

--Submit and Review Peers

--Peer Assessment

-Debrief

--Assignment Debrief

--Discussion 2 - part 1

--Discussion 2 - part2

--Discuss

Module 3: Social Impact Assessment

-Introduction

--Introduction

--Text

--Module 3 Animation

-Lectures

--SIA Primer

--html

--Lecture 1

--Lecture 2

--Key Takeaways

-Readings

--Introduction to Social Impact Assessment

--Effectiveness in Social Impact Assessment

--Example Social Impact Statement

-Developer Interview

--Video

--Text

-Questions

-Assignment

--INSTRUCTIONS

--Submit and Review Peers

-Debrief

--Assignment Debrief

--Discussion 3 - part1

--Discussion 3 - part 2

--Discuss

Module 4: Case Study: Forest City

-Introduction

--Text

--Module 4 Animation

-Forest City Case Study

--Part 1

--Part 2

--Part 3

--Additional Forest City Information

-Lectures

--Lecture 1

--Lecture 2

--Key Takeaways

-Readings

--Dealing with An Angry Public

--Facility Siting and Public Opposition

-Developer Interview

--Practitioner Perspective

--Module 4

--Text

-Questions

-Assignment

--html

--INSTRUCTIONS

--SCENARIO

-Debrief

--Assignment Debrief

--Discussion 4

--Discuss

Module 5: Applying SIA and EIA in a Socially Responsible Manner

-Introduction

--Introduction

--Community Discussion

--Module 5 Animation

-Lectures

--Lecture 1

--Lecture 2

--Lecture 3

--Key Takeaways

-Readings

--Create More Value

--Why Would Corporations Behave in Socially Responsible Ways?

--Social Impact Assessments of Large Dams Throughout the World

--Environmental Sustainability Principles for the Real Estate Industry

-Developer Interview

--Module 5

--Practitioner Perspective

-Questions

-Assignment

--html

--INSTRUCTIONS

--SCENARIO

-Debrief

--Assignment Debrief

--Discussion 5

--Discussion

Course Wrap Up

-Further Resources

--Further Resources

-Thank You

--Thank you for taking the course

-Acknowledgements

--Acknowledgements

Facility Siting and Public Opposition笔记与讨论

也许你还感兴趣的课程:


  1. 过程装备制造工艺(2021秋)

  2. 无机元素化学(2021秋)

  3. 药理学(2021秋)

  4. Culture and Tourism（国际版）(Round 2)

  5. 无机化学(2021秋)

  6. 临床免疫学检验(2021秋)

  7. 书法鉴赏(2021秋)

  8. Acupuncture and moxibustion(Round 2)

  9. Clinical Physiology(Round 2)

  10. 教育管理学(2021秋)

  11. Socially-Responsible Real Estate Development(Self-Paced)

  12. Winning in Business:The Art of War by Sun Tzu(Round 1)

  13. Biopharmaceutical and Toxicological Analysis(Round 1)

  14. Great Charm of Sichuan Opera (Round 1)

  15. New Horizons in Chinese Philosophy(Self-Paced)

  16. Linear Algebra(Round1)

  17. Plant Landscape Planning and Design(Round 1)

  18. Low-Temperature Thermochronology(Round 1)

  19. Road Subgrade and Pavement Engineering(Round2)

  20. Environmental Accounting and Management(Round 1)
© 柠檬大学-慕课导航 课程版权归原始院校所有，
本网站仅通过互联网进行慕课课程索引，不提供在线课程学习和视频，请同学们点击报名到课程提供网站进行学习。