The great debate wages on: how do we design and build a modern city in a way that everyone will benefit? Traditionally, you’re on one side of the urban war. You’re either a NIMBY, which stands for “Not In My Backyard”, meaning you oppose new development in your neighborhood, or you’re a YIMBY, who says “Yes In My Backyard”, and are pro-development, for one reason or another. But these blanket acronyms don’t describe the real issues that cause people to position themselves on one side of the never-ending tug-of-war between “No! Don’t build that!” and “Yes! Build that!”
As YIMBYism has grown in recent years, so has its opposition, in the derogatorily named NIMBYism movement, which in many places, grew from a desire to keep people out of cities and property values up. But this binary and adversarial dynamic is starting to blur, and become more cooperative, especially as cities continue to face the need for more public amenities and dense, yet affordable housing. Those who once protested new high-rises are now looking more favorably upon them if it means that more supply of homes means that prices will go down, and people from different socio-economic backgrounds can thrive and share the benefits of urban life- at least that’s the ultimate goal. Where YIMBYism shines is where NIMBYism is often times seen as short-sighted. In cities like Los Angeles and New York City, where the number of cranes that dot the sky will seemly never keep up with their projected population growth, more development rarely turns into too much development.
