Traffic related noise and air quality valuations: evidence from stated preference residential choice models

Wardman, Mark; Bristow, A

doi:10.1016/s1361-9209(03)00042-7

Cited by 70 publications

(53 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The research reported here provides, alongside other recent papers (Eliasson et al, 2002;Galilea and Ortúzar, 2005;Wardman and Bristow, 2004), a contribution to developments in this area.…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 70%

Stated choice valuations of traffic related noise

Arsénio

Bristow

Wardman

2006

Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper reports a novel application of the stated choice method to the valuation of road traffic noise. The innovative context used is that of choice between apartments with different levels of traffic noise, view, sunlight and cost with which respondents would be familiar. Stated choice models were developed on both perceived and objective measures of traffic noise, with the former statistically superior, and an extensive econometric analysis has been conducted to assess the nature and extent of householders' heterogeneity of preferences for noise. This found that random taste variation is appreciable but also identified considerable systematic variation in valuations according to income level, household composition and exposure to noise. Self-selectivity is apparent, whereby those with higher marginal values of noise tend to live in quieter apartments. Sign and reference effects were apparent in the relationship between ratings and objective noise measures, presumably reflecting the non-linear nature of the latter. However, there was no strong support for sign, size or reference effects in the valuations of perceived noise levels. © 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved

show abstract

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 70%

Stated choice valuations of traffic related noise

Arsénio

Bristow

Wardman

2006

Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In their study on life satisfaction in Germany, however, Rehdanz and Maddison (2006) found that people, although in general more annoyed by noise, are more affected by a change in perceived air quality. In addition, most stated preference studies seem to find that air pollution reductions are valued slightly higher than noise reductions (see, for instance, Hunt, 2001;Saelinsminde, 1999;Wardman and Bristow, 2004). Kroesen et al (2010) include both calculated aircraft exposure measures, as well as perceived aircraft, road traffic and railway noise nuisance, alongside personal variables and dwelling characteristics to measure residential satisfaction in a Dutch neighborhood near Schiphol Amsterdam Airport in 1996/1997.…”

Section: Accessibility Nuisance and Residential Satisfactionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Mixed results are found with respect to the relative importance of noise and air nuisance; some studies finding noise more important (Buys and Miller, 2012), while others find air pollution to be more important (e.g. Rehdanz and Maddison, 2006;Wardman and Bristow, 2004). As several studies indicate the strong influence of neighborhood appearance on people's residential satisfaction (e.g.…”

Section: E1: Accessibility and Nuisances Are Of Comparable Explanatormentioning

confidence: 99%

Residential satisfaction close to highways: The impact of accessibility, nuisances and highway adjustment projects

Hamersma

Tillema

Sussman

et al. 2014

Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper we focus on gaining insight into the residential satisfaction of households near highways, based on survey data collected among 1,225 respondents in the Netherlands living within 1,000 meters from a highway. Ordinal regression was used to study the impact of highway externalities on residential satisfaction. Moreover, we gained first insights into the reactions of people on highway adjustment projects, by studying people's expectations towards residential satisfaction as a consequence of the project with use of a multinomial logistic regression analysis. On average, 85 percent of respondents reported being satisfied with living near a highway. Regarding explanatory characteristics, subjective evaluations of air and noise nuisance and of accessibility are of comparable importance and seem to outperform objective exposure calculations or distance from the highway or access lane in explaining residential satisfaction. Moreover highway interest is directly reflected in a higher satisfaction. However, other factors such as neighborhood design, traffic safety and social cohesion are important as well. People react differently to highway adjustment plans, negative expectations being highly driven by current negative feelings towards nuisance, and positive expectations by personal interest in accessibility and a positive attitude towards cars. An important implication could be the notion that exposure is not the same as perceived nuisance, which may give reason to be cautious when making transportation planning decisions based solely on calculations. In addition, the finding that other (neighborhood) factors are also very important in explaining residential satisfaction is interesting when thinking about compensating for the negative effects of a highway in the neighborhood. Also, the results regarding reactions to an announced highway adjustment project might be used to better adjust the planning process to the characteristics of the residents in the area. Further research is necessary to deepen the results, for example through the addition of other road project locations, interviews and longitudinal data.Keywords: highway infrastructure planning, accessibility, nuisance, residential satisfaction, planned highway adjustment projects. Highlights We studied the impact of negative (nuisance) and positive (accessibility) highway externalities and a highway adjustment project on residential satisfaction near highways.  Perceived nuisance and accessibility influence residential satisfaction, but other neighborhood factors are also important.  Perceptions of accessibility and nuisance outweigh objective measures (exposure levels, distance from highway/accesslane).  Highway users show a higher satisfaction level.  Expectations towards highway adjustment projects are mixed; highway users and people who like driving in particular have more positive expectations, currently hindered people more negative expectations.3

show abstract

“…16 In order to transfer the results from Lerum to the rest of Sweden, differences in income between regions ought to be considered. Empirical estimations of income elasticity vary between 0.5-1.6 [5,13,44,57,69]. Since most of the estimations lie in the lower interval and nearer 1, we choose, like [44], to set θ = 1.…”

Section: Abatement Values For Transport Noisementioning

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

Traffic related noise and air quality valuations: evidence from stated preference residential choice models

Cited by 70 publications

References 39 publications

Stated choice valuations of traffic related noise

Stated choice valuations of traffic related noise

Residential satisfaction close to highways: The impact of accessibility, nuisances and highway adjustment projects

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

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About