The EU Noise Policy and the Related Research Needs

Acta Acustica (Stuttgart)

Volumn 89, Issue 5, 2003, Pages 735-742

  Wolde, Tjeert Ten ^a  

^a TNO   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

PUBLIC POLICY; RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT; SOCIAL ASPECTS;

ECONOMIC ASPECTS;

NOISE POLLUTION CONTROL;

EID: 0141951892     PISSN: 16101928     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Directive 2002/49/EC of the European parliament and the council of 25 june 2002 relating to the assessment and management of environmental noise. Official Journal of the European Communities L 189/12, 18 July 2002.
2. T. ten Wolde: The EU policy on environmental noise. Proceedings Inter-noise 2000, Nice, 2000, 1880-1883.
3. B. M. Ross, T. ten Wolde: Global and continental policy as a support for local noise control. Noise Control Eng. J. 49 (2001) 162-164.
4. U. Sandberg: Tyre/road noise - myths and realities. Proceedings Inter-noise 2001, The Hague, 2001, 35-56.
5. International Organization for Standardization: ISO 19962: 1987. Acoustics - Description and measurement of environmental noise. Part 2: Acquisition of data pertinent to land use. Geneva, 1987.
6. Measurement of noise around Schiphol airport. Accuracy of possible measurement systems (in Dutch). TNO report 008.01246, prepared by TNO, NLR and TU Delft, Delft, June 2001.
7. S. Jonkhart: The existing methodologies for the calculation of aircraft noise load in the EEC member states. Internoise '93, Leuven, 1993, 143.
8. M. van den Berg, E. Gerretsen: Comparison of road traffic noise calculation models. Journal of Building Acoustics 3 (1996) 13-22.
9. M. van den Berg, E. Gerretsen: Comparison of noise calculation models. Proceedings Inter-noise '96, Liverpool, 1996, 311-317.
10. Environmental noise descriptors in Europe - comparison of definitions and prediction methods. TNO -report TPD-HAG-RPT-960059, Delft, July 1996.
11. J. J. A. van Leeuwen: Noise prediction models to determine the effect of barriers placed alongside railway lines. J. Sound and Vibr. 1996 (193) 269-276.
12. U. Isermann: On the accuracy of the computation of aircraft noise (in Dutch). Geluid, December 1996.
13. E. M. Salomons: Reduction of the performance of a noise screen due to screen-induced wind speed gradients - Numerical computation and wind tunnel experiments. JASA 105 (1999) 2287-2293.
14. K. B. Rasmussen, M. Calindo Arranz: The insertion loss of screens under the influence of wind. JASA 104 (1996) 2692-2698.
15. E. M. Salomons: Computational atmospheric acoustics. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, Hingham, MA, 2001.
16. K. Attenborough et al.: Benchmark cases for outdoor sound propagation models. JASA 97 (1985) 173-191.
17. J. Kragh: News and needs in outdoor noise prediction. Proceedings Inter-noise 2001, The Hague, 2001, 2573-2582.
18. F. de Roo: Trends in sound propagation modelling. Proceedings Inter-noise 2001, The Hague, 2001, 2289-2294.
19. F. Besnard et al.: Validation and evolution of the road traffic noise prediction model NMPB-96-Part 1: Comparison between calculation and measurement results. Proceedings Internoise 2001, The Hague, 2001, 2401-2406.
20. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration: INM Integrated Noise Model, latest versions.
21. B. Plovsing: Nord2000. Comprehensive model for predicting outdoor sound propagation. Experience from validating the model. Proceedings Inter-noise 2001, The Hague, 2001, 2567-2572.
22. http://www.harmonoise.org.
23. H. M. Miedema, H. Vos: Exposure-response relationships for transportation noise. JASA 104 (1998) 3432-3445.
24. European Communities: Position paper on dose-response relationships between transportation noise and annoyance. prepared by Working Group 2 - Dose-effect, 2002.
25. http://www.ranchproject.org.
26. International Institute of Noise Control Engineering (I-INCE): Noise emission of road vehicles, effect of regulations, final report. 2001.
27. M. G. Dittrich, M. H. A. Janssens: Measurement procedures for determining railway noise emission as input to calculation schemes. Proceedings Inter-noise 2001, The Hague, 2001, 171-176.
28. CETIM report 707720/492.m: A study into the available technology offering noise reduction for lawnmowers as presented to the European Union market. Senlis, April 2002.
29. Report on the EC workshop on costs and benefits, see. http://www.europa.eu.int/comm/environment/noise /internoise_workshop.pdf.
30. M. Vainio: Comparison of hedonic price and contingent valuation methods in urban traffic noise context. Proceedings Inter-noise 2001, The Hague, 2001, 1865-1870.
31. F. Elbers: Cost-benefit calculation to prevent more than 65 dB(A) for railway noise in The Netherlands,. Proceedings Inter-noise 2001, The Hague, 2001, 1871-1876.
32. A. Lenders et al.: Cost-benefit analysis of rail-noise mitigation programmes at European level: Methodological innovations from EURANO and STAIRRS. Proceedings Inter-noise 2001, The Hague, 2001, 1891-1894.
33. Thematic network CALM, see http://www.CALM-Network.com.
34. http://www.leiserverkehr.de.
35. European Commission: Position paper on EU noise indicators. ISBN 92-828-8953-X, Brussels, 2000.