Noise legislation in Austria does not provide an assessment of the cumulative effect of noise from different sources. The desire of citizens for a total noise assessment is getting stronger. Within the pilot project “Gesamtlärmbetrachtung” (Total Noise Investigation) Innsbruck, data from 1031 face-to-face interviews were correlated with exposure data from road, rail and air traffic noise. The interviews were selected in clusters according to the exposure combinations of these three sources. In addition to exposure-response relationships, it has also been found that the annoyance response to air and rail traffic noise is independent of the background noise from road traffic. The total noise annoyance response shows a cumulative effect in each source considered. From the source specific exposure-response relationships, a total noise assessment model based on the annoyance equivalents model was developed. This model is more suitable than the dominant source model and thus also considerable for legal application.

Sleep disturbances caused by noise exposure are the most relevant outcome measured in disability adjusted life years (DALYs). In analogy to the combined effects of noise from multiple sources on annoyance, these are also of interest for sleep disorders. The study “Overall Noise Assessment” Innsbruck examined data from 1031 personal interviews. Aircraft, rail and road noise were correlated. To choose participants combined exposures were clustered into small, medium and severely affected living situations. The effect of demographic features, noise sensitivity, access to a silent façade and other factors on self-reported sleep disturbances was investigated applying bivariate analyses. Exposure-response curves and their 95% confidence intervals with cut-off values of 72% for “highly disturbed sleep” were generated and the results were discussed in comparison to recently published curves. Using source-specific exposure-response relationships, an overall model for evaluating sleep disorders was developed based on the “annoyance equivalents model”. The “total sleep disturbance response” shows an accumulative outcome for each source measured. A protective effect of road traffic noise as background noise for air and railroad sources could not be proven. Both the “Total Sleep Disruption Assessment Model” and the “Dominant Source Model” have a Spearman-Rho of 0.3 and are therefore suitable for use in noise assessment.

Land-use categories are often used to define the exposure limits of national environmental noise policies. Often different guideline values for noise are applied for purely residential areas versus residential areas with mixed-use. Mixed-use includes living plus limited activities through crafts, commerce, trade, agriculture, and forestry activities. This differentiation especially when rating noise from road, railway, and air traffic might be argued by different expectations and therefore noise annoyance in those two categories while scientific evidence is missing. It should be tested on empirically derived data. Surveys from two studies in the state of Tyrol in urban and rural areas were retrospectively matched with spatial data to analyze the potential different influences on noise effects. Using non-parametric tests, the correlation between land-use category on self-reported noise sensitivity and noise annoyance was investigated. Exposure–response for the two analyzed land-use categories showed no significant impact on noise sensitivity and exposure–response relationships for the three traffic noise sources. Including only noise annoyance, there is not sufficient evidence to define different noise policies for those two land-use categories.