1992•Recherche Transports SécuritéRequires access

WHAT POLICY TO FIGHT URBAN ROAD TRAFFIC NOISE

Jacques Lambert

Open publisher page 0 citations

Abstract

Without ambitious policies, exposure to road traffic noise will remain globally unsatisfactory even though local improvements may be brought about by implementing measures such as construction of noise barriers or the rerouting of traffic. Recent French research using cost-effectiveness analysis clearly demonstrates the long term advantages to be gained from a combination of certain local and national measures. Local measures would relate to both new and existing roads, traffic, and buildings. The national measures would be in particular the reduction of vehicle noise emission limits. If this policy were applied, by 2010, only 4% of the urban population would be exposed to noise levels in excess of 65 dB(A) and less than 30% would be exposed to noise levels of between 55 dB(A) and 65 dB(A). Implementing a program of this type would be of considerable cost to the community. The public expenditure three times that currently devoted to combating road noise, could be financed by an additional tax on fuel without seriously penalizing motorists. Prior to introducing such a policy it would be necessary, in order to achieve a coherent system, to define clearly its aims, the roles and the responsibilities of the different levels of decision-making so that to ensure the coherence of the public action; attention would also need to be paid to training and informing those passively or actively involved in noise abatement.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Without ambitious policies, exposure to road traffic noise will remain globally unsatisfactory even though local improvements may be brought about by implementing measures such as construction of noise barriers or the rerouting of traffic. Recent French research using cost-effectiveness analysis clearly demonstrates the long term advantages to be gained from a combination of certain local and national measures. Local measures would relate to both new and existing roads, traffic, and buildings. The national measures would be in particular the reduction of vehicle noise emission limits. If this policy were applied, by 2010, only 4% of the urban population would be exposed to noise levels in excess of 65 dB(A) and less than 30% would be exposed to noise levels of between 55 dB(A) and 65 dB(A). Implementing a program of this type would be of considerable cost to the community. The public expenditure three times that currently devoted to combating road noise, could be financed by an additional tax on fuel without seriously penalizing motorists. Prior to introducing such a policy it would be necessary, in order to achieve a coherent system, to define clearly its aims, the roles and the responsibilities of the different levels of decision-making so that to ensure the coherence of the public action; attention would also need to be paid to training and informing those passively or actively involved in noise abatement.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Without ambitious policies, exposure to road traffic noise will remain globally unsatisfactory even though local improvements may be brought about by implementing measures such as construction of noise barriers or the rerouting of traffic. Recent French research using cost-effectiveness analysis clearly demonstrates the long term advantages to be gained from a combination of certain local and national measures. Local measures would relate to both new and existing roads, traffic, and buildings. The national measures would be in particular the reduction of vehicle noise emission limits. If this policy were applied, by 2010, only 4% of the urban population would be exposed to noise levels in excess of 65 dB(A) and less than 30% would be exposed to noise levels of between 55 dB(A) and 65 dB(A). Implementing a program of this type would be of considerable cost to the community. The public expenditure three times that currently devoted to combating road noise, could be financed by an additional tax on fuel without seriously penalizing motorists. Prior to introducing such a policy it would be necessary, in order to achieve a coherent system, to define clearly its aims, the roles and the responsibilities of the different levels of decision-making so that to ensure the coherence of the public action; attention would also need to be paid to training and informing those passively or actively involved in noise abatement.

Key concepts: Noise (video), Traffic noise, Transport engineering, Noise control, Order (exchange), Business, Public economics, Risk analysis (engineering)

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
WHAT POLICY TO FIGHT URBAN ROAD TRAFFIC NOISE — Research Paper | ScholarLens