Introduction: Urban waste transfer stations, as essential infrastructures within municipal waste management systems, may generate significant social consequences when located in close proximity to residential settlements. Although such facilities are functionally necessary for improving collection efficiency and optimizing waste transportation processes, their spatial placement can directly influence the quality of life of nearby communities. The present study aims to analyze the social impacts of establishing an urban waste transfer station on the local community and to examine the role of spatial siting in intensifying or mitigating these impacts.
Materials and Methods: This study adopts a descriptive–analytical approach and employs a mixed qualitative–quantitative research design. Transfer Station No. 1 in Mashhad was selected as the case study. The analytical framework of the research is grounded in Social Impact Assessment (SIA). In order to assess the intensity, direction, and temporal pattern of social impacts, Effect Trend Analysis (ETA) was incorporated as a complementary quantitative tool within the SIA framework.
Data were collected from three primary sources. First, documentary analysis was conducted, including the review of planning documents, feasibility studies, and operational reports related to the establishment and functioning of the station. Second, in-depth and semi-structured interviews were carried out with 23 stakeholders, including local residents, shopkeepers, community representatives, and municipal officials. Third, a structured questionnaire survey was administered to 381 residents of the surrounding neighborhoods, selected through stratified random sampling based on Cochran’s formula.
The validity of the research instrument was confirmed through expert-based content validity assessment. The reliability of the questionnaire was verified using Cronbach’s alpha coefficient (0.81), indicating acceptable internal consistency. Qualitative data were analyzed using content analysis, while quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, including mean values and frequency distributions. Within the ETA framework, impact variables were evaluated according to their intensity (measured on a Likert scale), direction (positive or negative), and temporal pattern (immediate, gradual, or delayed), enabling a structured assessment of cumulative and long-term social effects.
Results and Discussion: The findings indicate that the establishment of the transfer station in proximity to residential areas has been associated with decreased perceived psychological security, weakened sense of place attachment, increased perceived health concerns, depreciation of property values, and intensified institutional distrust. Spatial analysis further demonstrates that the adjacency of the station to socio-economically disadvantaged urban areas plays a significant role in concentrating and intensifying these social impacts.
Quantitative results reveal that several impact indicators fall within the “high” and “very high” categories, with mean scores exceeding 3.5. The spatial findings suggest that the severity of impacts is not determined solely by physical distance from the station; rather, it is significantly related to neighborhood-level socio-economic vulnerability and historical marginalization. In this context, the waste transfer station functions as a locally unwanted land use (LULU), reinforcing territorial stigma and contributing to the reproduction of spatial inequality. Based on the findings, relocating the station outside the urban boundary is proposed as the most effective strategy for reducing social tensions and improving the quality of life of the local community.
Conclusion: The study emphasizes the necessity of integrating social impact considerations into infrastructure siting decisions within urban planning processes. Technical improvements within the facility alone are insufficient to resolve the broader social tensions associated with stigmatized infrastructure. Relocating the transfer station outside densely populated residential areas emerges as the most effective long-term strategy for mitigating social conflicts and enhancing community well-being. More broadly, neglecting social dimensions in spatial decision-making may lead to the reproduction of spatial inequality, erosion of institutional trust, and constraints on local development. Therefore, revising siting policies and simultaneously incorporating social and spatial considerations into urban waste infrastructure planning are essential for improving the quality of life of affected communities.