Like it or not, we are bound to one another in a multiplicity of ways. We all share our air, waters, and space. A scarcity of resources instigates a dispute as to who is most right in a conflict. The perpetual animosity between members of a community takes place in a number of forms. Say a factory opens up and the byproduct is acid rain. The factory profits from opening up in the area, but some members of the community may feel that they have a right to clean air. Or say a new cell phone tower is constructed as a convenience to some and eye sore and hindrance to others.
In both situations there is a dichotomy of opinions as to who has the rights. Should the factory be allowed to move into town when it's a known fact that it will produce harmful waste products? Making money or preserving the environment? Both have costs and benefits.
The factory could create jobs, but the acid rain, depending on how severe it is, could cause disease and deformation in newly born children.
I remember reading about a case that reminds me of the cell phone tower example. In this case, one homeowner decided to paint their house a bright purple hue. The neighbors were not so happy with what they perceived to be an eye sore and something that could potentially lower the value of the house in plain view of the purple house. So who has the right here: The homeowners to paint their house whatever color they so chose or the neighbors to an aesthetically sound view from their front yard?