Traffic Noise in Europe: A Comparison of Calculation Methods, Noise Indices and Noise Standards for Road and Railroad Traffic in Europe

Nijland, Hans; Wee, G.P. van

doi:10.1080/01441640500115850

Cited by 45 publications

(40 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…These results indicate that the use of different software packages implementing the same standard, with the same input data, will have a significant affect on resulting noise maps. Other research has reported variances of up to 6dB(A) due to different interpretations of the Dutch national calculation method RMV2 (Nijland and Van Wee, 2005). Indeed, King and Rice (2009) argue that to truly achieve standardisation in noise studies competent authorities would be required not only to apply the same calculation procedures but also to employ the same calculation software.…”

Section: Variation In Results Of Several Road Traffic Noise Predictiomentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Furthermore, Wolde (2002, 16) states that -it is obvious that the differences in computation methods seriously undermine the possibilities for comparison of results‖. Nijland and Van Wee (2005) summarise previous studies that investigate the variance between different calculation methods. They report that Van den Berg and Gerretsen found differences of 6-10 dB(A) when calculating different road traffic situations using the Austrian, German, French and Dutch methods (Van den Berg and Gerretsen,1996).…”

Section: Variation In Results Of Several Road Traffic Noise Predictiomentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Strategic environmental noise mapping: Methodological issues concerning the implementation of the EU Environmental Noise Directive and their policy implications

Murphy

King

2010

Environment International

151

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. This paper explores methodological issues and policy implications concerning the implementation of the EU Environmental Noise Directive (END) across member states. Methodologically, the paper focuses on two key thematic issues relevant to the Directive: (1) calculation methods and (2) mapping methods. For (1), the paper focuses, in particular, on how differing calculation methods influence noise prediction results as well as the value of the EU noise indicator L den and its associated implications for comparability of noise data across EU states. With regard to (2), emphasis is placed on identifying the issues affecting strategic noise mapping, estimating population exposure, noise action planning and dissemination of noise mapping results to the general public. The implication of these issues for future environmental noise policy is also examined.

show abstract

Section: Variation In Results Of Several Road Traffic Noise Predictiomentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Variation In Results Of Several Road Traffic Noise Predictiomentioning

confidence: 99%

Strategic environmental noise mapping: Methodological issues concerning the implementation of the EU Environmental Noise Directive and their policy implications

Murphy

King

2010

Environment International

151

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Andersson et al [1] also concluded that the spatial dependence would only have a negligible effect on the welfare estimates, hence the OLS and the spatial-lag model revealed similar estimates of marginal WTP. In addition they also examined the effect by using 55 dB as the threshold level, a level often used by authorities as a limit value below which no measures are taken to mitigate the noise [50]. They found that the results were sensitive to the threshold level chosen, a problem usually ignored in the literature where results based on only one level are reported.…”

Section: Econometric Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Benefit measures for noise abatement: calculations for road and rail traffic noise

Andersson

Jönsson

Ögren

2013

Eur. Transp. Res. Rev.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The aim of this study is to estimate monetary abatement values for road and rail traffic noise that can be used for policy purposes. However, a main objective is to critically discuss the assumptions necessary to convert the monetary values elicited in willingness to pay (WTP) studies to values than can be use for policy purposes. Methods We employ the hedonic regression technique on Swedish data to elicit individuals' preferences for noise abatement. Our elicited values are then converted to policy values and critically examined based on findings from a literature review. Results We show that WTP for road and rail not only differs in levels but also that the relationship between the noise level and the marginal value differs between the two sources. We also show that a health cost component added to the WTP estimate, based on the assumption of uninformed property buyers, will be small but not negligible and that also modest differences in the assumption of the discount rates will have a significant effect on the estimated values. Conclusions The main implications from this study are: (i) WTP for road and railway noise abatement differs not only on absolute but also marginal levels, (ii) Even small differences in the chosen discount rate, which is necessary to convert WTP values from a hedonic price study to policy values, have large effects on the policy values, and (iii) We show how to add a health cost component to the WTP estimates in order for the monetary estimates to reflect the total social cost. However, we argue that the motivation for doing so is weak and that more research is needed on this issue.

show abstract

“…Les résultats ne peuvent toutefois pas être comparés étant donné l'utilisation de méthodes d'évaluation différentes selon les pays. Pour ne citer qu'un exemple, une recherche consacrée à la comparaison des méthodes de calcul du bruit causé par le trafic routier et ferroviaire (Nijland Van Wee, 2005) montre que des différences d'environ 15 dB (A), qui ne peuvent être expliquées par des compositions différentes de la flotte ou encore du style de conduite, proviennent d'artefacts méthodologiques du fait de l'utilisation de méthodes différentes. Etant donné l'intérêt croissant porté à la comparaison de données nationales ainsi qu'à l'obtention de données homogènes à l'échelle internationale, l'harmonisation des méthodes utilisées au niveau national devient essentielle.…”

unclassified

Évaluation de l’impact du trafic sur les régions traversées

Arnaud¹

2006

developpementdurable

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Traffic Noise in Europe: A Comparison of Calculation Methods, Noise Indices and Noise Standards for Road and Railroad Traffic in Europe

Cited by 45 publications

References 7 publications

Strategic environmental noise mapping: Methodological issues concerning the implementation of the EU Environmental Noise Directive and their policy implications

Strategic environmental noise mapping: Methodological issues concerning the implementation of the EU Environmental Noise Directive and their policy implications

Benefit measures for noise abatement: calculations for road and rail traffic noise

Évaluation de l’impact du trafic sur les régions traversées

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About