Hostname: page-component-8678677fb7-zddkp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-10-05T08:41:53.521Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Public Resistance to New Houses of Worship

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 October 2024

Eliska Schnabel Open the ORCID record for Eliska Schnabel [Opens in a new window]
Eliska Schnabel*
Affiliation:
Political Science Department, Albion College, Albion, MI, USA
*
Email: eschnabel@albion.edu
Get access

Abstract

How do residents evaluate zoning relief applications for new houses of worship? Do they decide based on the facility’s expected level of nuisance, the religion of the house of worship, or the attitudes of neighbors and local officials? Using a conjoint survey experiment, this paper shows that religion is the most important predictor of resistance. People are more likely to resist new mosques than Christian churches, irrespective of other facility properties. Furthermore, this paper highlights the significant role of partisanship in residents’ evaluation of zoning relief applications. Republican respondents were more likely to reject minority houses of worship and support Christian churches than Democrats, moderating the influence of religion. Such bias has important implications for the zoning relief application process. Local officials should evaluate residents’ opposition differently when the application concerns minority groups.

Keywords

Zoninghouses of worshipNIMBYreligious minoritiesbiasconjoint survey experimentpartisanship

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Race, Ethnicity, and Politics , Volume 9 , Issue 3 , November 2024 , pp. 642 - 667
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Race, Ethnicity, and Politics Section of the American Political Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Allport, GW (1954) The Nature of Prejudice. Cambridge, Mass: Addison-Wesley Pub. Co.Google Scholar
Ansolabehere, S and Konisky, DM (2009) Public attitudes toward construction of new power plants. Public Opinion Quarterly 73, 566–577.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Association of Statisticians of American Religious Bodies (ASARB) (2020) U.S. Membership Report. Indianapolis, IN: The Association of Religion Data Archives.Google Scholar
Astor, A (2012) Memory, community, and opposition to mosques: the case of Badalona. Theory and Society 41, 325–349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Astor, AY (2011) Mobilizing Against Mosques: The Origins of Opposition to Islamic Centers of Worship in Spain (Doctoral Dissertation). Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan.Google Scholar
Bansak, K et al. (2018) The number of choice tasks and survey satisficing in conjoint experiments. Political Analysis 26, 112–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beck, H (2002) A hidden agenda or hidden prejudices? Building a Turkish mosque in Tilburg. In Shadid, WAR and van Koningsveld, PS (eds), Intercultural Relations and Religious Authorities: Muslims in the European Union. Leuven: Peeters, pp. 49–66.Google Scholar
Ben-Moshe, L (2020) Resistance to inclusion and community living: NIMBY, desegregation, and race-ability. In Ben-Moshe, L (ed), Decarcerating Disability. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press, pp. 161–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Betz, H-G and Meret, S (2009) Revisiting Lepanto: the political mobilization against Islam in contemporary Western Europe. Patterns of Prejudice 43, 313–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Birnbaum, P and Katznelson, I (2014) Paths of Emancipation: Jews, States, and Citizenship. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Blalock, HM (1967) Toward a Theory of Minority-Group Relations. New York: Wiley Publishers.Google Scholar
Brauer, SG (2017) How many congregations are there? Updating a survey-based estimate. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 56, 438–448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, G and Glanz, H (2018) Identifying potential NIMBY and YIMBY effects in general land use planning and zoning. Applied Geography 99, 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clingermeyer, JC (1994) Electoral representation, zoning politics, and the exclusion of group homes. Political Research Quarterly 47, 969–984.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clowney, S (2007) An empirical look at churches in the zoning process. The Yale Law Journal 116, 859–868.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davidson, PJ and Howe, M (2013) Beyond NIMBYism: understanding community antipathy toward needle distribution services. International Journal of Drug Policy 25, 624–632.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Davis, BC and Bali, AV (2008) Examining the role of race, NIMBY, and local politics in FEMA trailer park placement. Social Science Quarterly 89, 1175–1194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doyle, NJ and Ahmad, I (2013) Islamophobia, European modernity and contemporary illiberalism. Politics, Religion & Ideology 14, 167–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Druckman, JN (2004) Political preference formation: deliberation, and the (Ir)relevance of framing effects. The American Political Science Review 98, 671–686.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Druckman, JN (2012) The politics of motivation. A Journal of Politics and Society 24, 199–216.Google Scholar
Esaiasson, P (2014) NIMBYism - a re-examination of the phenomenon. Social Science Research 48, 185–195.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fields, G and Deveaux, TA (2024) Yes, we’re divided. But new AP-NORC poll shows Americans still agree on most core American values. AP News. April 3. Available at https://apnews.com/article/ap-poll-democracy-rights-freedoms-election-b1047da72551e13554a3959487e5181a (accessed 3 April 2024).Google Scholar
Gale, R (2004) The multicultural city and the politics of religious architecture: urban planning, mosques and meaning-making in Birmingham, UK. Built Environment (1978) 30, 30–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gravelle, TB (2021) Explaining islamophobia in Australia: partisanship, intergroup contact, and local context. Australian Journal of Political Science 56, 132–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gravelle, TB, Medeiros, M and Nai, A (2021) In the shadow of the tower: spatial proximity to mosques, visible diversity, and support for the radical right. Political Geography 91, 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Green, TH (2010) The resistance to minarets in Europe. Journal of Church and State 52, 619–643.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hainmueller, J, Hopkins, DJ and Yamamoto, T (2013) Causal inference in conjoint analysis: understanding multidimensional choices via stated preference experiments. Political Analysis 22, 1–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hainmueller, J, Hangartner, D and Yamamoto, T (2015) Validating vignette and conjoint survey experiments against real-world behavior. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 112, 2395–2400.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hamilton, M (2003) The Federal Government’s Intervention on Behalf of Religious Entities in Local Land Use Disputes: Why It’s a Terrible Idea. Eagan, MN: FindLaw.Google Scholar
Hopkins, DJ (2010) Politicized places: explaining where and when immigrants provoke local opposition. American Political Science Review 104, 40–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hunter, S and Leyden, KM (1995) Beyond NIMBY: explaining opposition to hazardous waste facilities. Policy Studies Journal 23, 601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jonker, G (2005) The Mevlana mosque in Berlin-Kreuzberg: an unsolved conflict. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 31, 1067–1081.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jost, JT, Baldassarri, DS and Druckman, JN (2022) Cognitive-motivational mechanisms of political polarization in social-communicative contexts. Nature Review Psychology 1, 560–576.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kalmoe, NP and Mason, L (2022) Radical American Partisanship: Mapping Violent Hostility, Its Causes, and the Consequences for Democracy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kantar (2019) Special Eurobarometer 493. Discrimination in the European Union. Brussels: Directorate-General for Communication.Google Scholar
Key, VO (1949) Southern Politics in State and Nation. New York: Knopf.Google Scholar
Lajevardi, N (2020) Outsiders at Home: The Politics of American Islamophobia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Landman, N and Wessels, W (2006) The visibility of mosques in Dutch towns. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 31, 1125–1140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laycock, D and Goodrich, LW (2012) RLUIPA: necessary, modest, and under-enforced. Fordham Urban Law Journal 39, 1021–1072.Google Scholar
Leeper, TJ, Hobolt, SB and Tilley, J (2020) Measuring subgroup preferences in conjoint experiments. Political Analysis 28, 207–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lenard, PT (2010) What can multicultural theory tell us about integrating Muslims in Europe?” Political Studies Review 8, 308–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liedtke, R and Wendehorst, S (1999) The Emancipation of Catholics, Jews and Protestants: Minorities and the Nation State in Nineteenth Century Europe. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
Lober, DJ and Green, DP (1994) NIMBY or NIABY: a logit model of opposition to solid-waste-disposal facility siting. Journal of Environmental Management 40, 33–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Luney, WR (1957) Municipal corporations: zoning: exclusion of churches from residential areas. Michigan Law Review 55, 601–603.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maney, GM and Abraham, M (2008–09) Whose backyard? Boundary making in NIMBY opposition to immigrant services. Social Justice 35, 66–82.Google Scholar
Mansfield, C, Van Houtven, G and Huber, J (2001) The efficiency of political mechanisms for siting nuisance facilities: are opponents more likely to participate than supporters?” Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics 22, 141–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maussen, M (2009) Constructing Mosques: The Governance of Islam in France and the Netherlands. Amsterdam: Amsterdam School for Social Science Research (ASSR).Google Scholar
Maussen, M (2004) Policy discourses on mosques in the Netherlands 1980–2002: contested constructions. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 7, 147–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayer, J-F (2011) A country without minarets: analysis of the background and meaning of the Swiss vore of 29 November 2009. Religion 41, 11–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, BJ (2020) Religious freedom and local conflict: religious buildings and zoning issues in the New York City region, 1992–2017. Sociology of Religion 81, 462–484.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Monogan, JE (2013) The politics of immigrant policy in the 50 US states, 2005–2011. Journal of Public Policy 33, 35–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oakley, D (2002) Housing homeless people: local mobilization of federal resources to fight NIMBYism. Journal of Urban Affairs 24, 97–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Orth, T (2022) Americans’ views on 35 religious groups, organizations, and belief systems. YouGov. December 23. Available at https://today.yougov.com/society/articles/44850-americans-views-religious-groups-yougov-poll?redirect_from=%2Ftopics%2Fsociety%2Farticles-reports%2F2022%2F12%2F23%2Famericans-views-religious-groups-yougov-poll (accessed 24 December 2022).Google Scholar
Oskooii, KAR, Dana, K and Barreto, MA (2021) Beyond generalized ethnocentrism: Islam-specific beliefs and prejudice toward Muslim Americans. Politics, Groups, and Identities 9, 538–565.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Petrova, MA (2016) From NIMBY to acceptance: toward a novel framework - VESPA - for organizing and interpreting community concerns. Renewable Energy 86, 1280–1294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pew Research Center (2017) Americans Express Increasingly Warm Feelings Toward Religious Groups. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center.Google Scholar
Pew Research Center (2022a) Key Findings from the Global Religious Futures Projects. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center.Google Scholar
Pew Research Center (2022b) Religious Composition by Country, 2010–2050. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center.Google Scholar
Pew Research Center (2012) The Global Religious Landscape. A Report on the Size and Distribution of the World’s Major Religious Groups as of 2010. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center.Google Scholar
Pratt, D (2013) Swiss shock: minaret rejection, European values, and the challenge of tolerant neutrality. Politics, Religion & Ideology 14, 193–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Qualtrics (n.d.) Conjoint Analysis White Paper. Qualtrics. https://www.qualtrics.com/support/conjoint-project/getting-started-conjoints/getting-started-choice-based/conjoint-analysis-white-paper/ (accessed 2 May 2021).Google Scholar
Rasmussen, TH (1992) Not in MyBackyard: the politics of siting prisons, landfills, and incinerators. State & Local Government Review 24, 128–134.Google Scholar
Schattschneider, EE (1957) Intensity, visibility, direction and scope. The American Political Science Review 51, 933–942.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schively, C (2007) Understanding the NIMBY and LULU phenomena: reassessing our knowledge base and informing future research. Journal of Planning Literature 21, 255–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schnabel, E (2023a) Contested Faith: Resistance to New Mosques in Chicago Suburbs and Berlin. Chicago, IL: University of Illinois at Chicago.Google Scholar
Schnabel, E (2023b) Local rebels: How local governments get around federal and state laws to resist new mosques. Journal of Urban Affairs 45, 258–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sinclair, B (2012) The Social Citizen: Peer Networks and Political Behavior. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sniderman, PM, Hagendoorn, L and Prior, M (2004) Predisposing factors and situational triggers: exclusionary reactions to immigrant minorities. The American Political Science Review 98, 35–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stephan, WG and Stephan, CW (1996) Predicting prejudice. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 20, 409–426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Subiza-Pérez, M et al. (2000) Explaining social acceptance of a municipal waste incineration plant through sociodemographic and psycho-environmental variables. Environmental Pollution 263, 114504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sunier, T (2009) Houses of worship and the politics of space in Amsterdam. In Nell, L and Rath, J (eds), Ethnic Amsterdam: Immigrants and Urban Change in the Twentieth Century. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, pp. 159–176.Google Scholar
Tevington, P (2023) Americans Feel More Positive than Negative About Jews, Mainline Protestancts, Catholics. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center.Google Scholar
Verkaaik, O (2020) The anticipated mosque: the political affect of a planned building. City & Society 32, 118–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wehener, AL (1993) When a house is not a home but a church: a proposal for protection of home worship from zoning ordinances. Capital University Law Review 22, 491.Google Scholar
Wike, R et al. (2019) European Public Opinion Three Decades After the Fall of Communism. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center.Google Scholar
Ybarra, VD, Sanchez, LM and Sanchez, GR (2016) Anti-immigrant anxieties in state policy: the great recession and punitive immigration policy in the American States, 2005–2012. State Politics & Policy Quarterly 16, 313–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zaller, JR (1992) The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zoning Ordinances Affecting Churches (1984) Zoning ordinances affecting churches: a proposal for expanded free exercise protection. University of Pennsylvania Law Review 132, 1131–1162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Schnabel supplementary material 1

Schnabel supplementary material
Download Schnabel supplementary material 1(File)
File 782.3 KB
Supplementary material: File

Schnabel supplementary material 2

Schnabel supplementary material
Download Schnabel supplementary material 2(File)
File 186.6 KB