Abstract
The purpose of this paper is to present a new perspective on the theory of the beneficial and costly spheres by means of case studies on conflicts in the siting of waste disposal facilities.
This theory is one of the main paradigms in environmental sociology in Japan, but it has not adequately analyzed the relation between a costly sphere and its precedent. The construction of a second waste disposal facility in Kashiwa city reduced the burden of waste disposal, which was earlier concentrated in another part of the city. In contrast to this, the second waste disposal facility in Hinode town was constructed at the same site as the first facility. As a result, Hinode town not only faces problems from the first facility but must also bear the additional cost of the second facility.
Thus, the two cases of siting locally unwanted facilities widely differ with regard to their problem structures. I call the former case "cost sharing siting" and the latter, "cost overlapping siting." In cost sharing siting, the purpose of constructing the facility is to achieve "fairness of distribution"; thus, the locals who oppose the siting tend to claim that public officials are unfair with regard to the siting process. However, in cost overlapping siting, people opposing the project support "fairness of distribution." Further, the former type can achieve local consensus on the necessity of the facility more easily than the latter.
