Economic value of traffic noise reduction depending on residents’ annoyance level

被引:0
作者
Kyungah Kim
Jungwoo Shin
Myoungjin Oh
Jung-Kyu Jung
机构
[1] Seoul National University,Technology Management, Economics, and Policy Program, College of Engineering
[2] Kyung Hee University,Department of Industrial and Management Systems Engineering
[3] Korea Institute of Science and Technology Evaluation and Planning (KISTEP),Office of R&D Budget and Feasibility Analysis
来源
Environmental Science and Pollution Research | 2019年 / 26卷
关键词
Annoyance level; Contingent valuation method; Economic value; Traffic noise;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Noise is the most frequently encountered type of environmental pollution in everyday life and has a direct negative effect on humans. Individuals who are constantly exposed to noise tend to have a high incidence of cardiovascular disease and hypertension. Noise sources range from construction sites to political rallies and assemblies, but traffic is one of the most long-lasting and chronic sources of noise. Previously, researchers have conducted valuations of road traffic noise reduction, but they did not consider residents’ annoyance levels in response to traffic noise. However, individuals’ annoyance levels affect the economic value of noise reduction policies and thus must be considered to obtain an accurate estimate. Therefore, this study investigated residents’ willingness to pay for traffic noise reduction depending on their annoyance level. We used the contingent valuation method and a survey to analyze how much 1022 respondents in Korea were willing to pay for noise reduction. We found that people who were annoyed and extremely annoyed by noise had a willingness to pay KRW 8422 (US $7.55) and KRW 9848 (US $8.83) annually per household, respectively, to reduce their annoyance level to zero. In addition, we determined the economic benefits of noise reduction policies using the respondents’ willingness to pay to reduce noise by 1 dB(A), which totaled KRW 3.28 billion (US $2.91 million) per year. The results of this study provide estimates of the annual benefits of traffic noise reduction considering residents’ annoyance level.
引用
收藏
页码:7243 / 7255
页数:12
相关论文
共 103 条
  • [11] Babisch W(2011)Exposure to workplace noise and the risk of cardiovascular disease events and mortality among older adults Prev Med 53 390-394
  • [12] Bjørner T(1984)Welfare evaluations in contingent valuation experiments with discrete responses Am J Agric Econ 66 332-341
  • [13] Kronbak J(1996)Starting point bias in dichotomous choice valuation with follow-up questioning J Environ Econ Manag 30 112-131
  • [14] Lundhede T(2018)Economic valuation of noise pollution control policy: does the type of noise matter? Environ Sci Pollut Res 25 30647-30658
  • [15] Boyle K(2009)Survey of legislation, regulations, and guidelines for control of community noise I-INCE 9 1-46
  • [16] Bishop R(2011)A comparison between exposure-response relationships for wind turbine annoyance and annoyance due to other noise sources J Acoust Soc Am 130 37-46
  • [17] Chalermpong S(2006)A study on the conversion of annoyance using the noise standard in Korea T Korean Soc Noise Vibration Eng 5 641-645
  • [18] Klaiklueng A(2004)Road traffic noise–the relationship between noise exposure and noise annoyance in Norway Appl Acoust 65 893-912
  • [19] Cheramakara N(2016)Nudging farmers to enroll land into agri-environmental schemes: the role of a collective bonus Eur Rev Agric Econ 43 609-636
  • [20] Bristow A(2016)Road traffic noise reduction benefits of the noise barrier installation: contingent valuation method Financ Policy Bull 18 3-31