It feels like a lot of this has to do with the way contemporary activist groups are structured. Having lots of process points lets them demonstrate their legitimacy and effectiveness by giving them chances for "wins".
"When you give people carte blanche to build bigger and taller buildings with more housing units as a right—rather than something that is negotiated ad hoc with community benefits—that becomes dangerous. YIMBY groups would say, “Look, we need to allow for more upzoning in general,” but then that actually gets rid of a lot of the leverage that community groups have because they no longer need to bargain with people in that district for more units."
Process is definitely chum for the non-profit-industrial-complex and the associated professionalized activists. As long as there is lots of process they'll always have jobs.
It feels like a lot of this has to do with the way contemporary activist groups are structured. Having lots of process points lets them demonstrate their legitimacy and effectiveness by giving them chances for "wins".
https://www.publicbooks.org/we-want-more-housing-but-how-talking-with-max-holleran/
"When you give people carte blanche to build bigger and taller buildings with more housing units as a right—rather than something that is negotiated ad hoc with community benefits—that becomes dangerous. YIMBY groups would say, “Look, we need to allow for more upzoning in general,” but then that actually gets rid of a lot of the leverage that community groups have because they no longer need to bargain with people in that district for more units."
Process is definitely chum for the non-profit-industrial-complex and the associated professionalized activists. As long as there is lots of process they'll always have jobs.
Striking how similar this is to the property rights problems Hernando de Soto found in Peru and other poor countries
This makes a great case that processism is as much a problem as NIMBYism.
I'd argue that NIMBYism is one specific case of the generalized 'processism'