Acoustic and economic valuation of soundscape: An application to the ‘Retiro’ Urban Forest Park

Urban Forestry and Urban Greening

Volumn 27, Issue , 2017, Pages 272-278

  Calleja, A ^a   Diaz Balteiro L ^a,b   Iglesias Merchan, C ^a,c   Solino M ^b,d  

^a UNIVERSIDAD POLITÉCNICA DE MADRID   (Spain)

^b UNIVERSITY OF VALLADOLID   (Spain)

^c CENERIC Research Centre   (Spain)

^d Instituto Nacional de Investigación y Tecnología Agraria y Alimentaria   (Spain)

Author keywords

Contingent valuation; Noise; Sound; Urban park; Willingness to pay

Indexed keywords

ACOUSTIC SURVEY; ACOUSTICS; CONTINGENT VALUATION; ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS; ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT; GREENSPACE; NOISE; NOISE POLLUTION; POLLUTION TAX; URBAN AREA; URBAN FORESTRY; URBAN PLANNING; VALUATION; WILLINGNESS TO PAY;

MADRID [SPAIN]; SPAIN;

EID: 85029151905     PISSN: 16188667     EISSN: 16108167     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ufug.2017.08.018     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Alberini, A., Kahn, J.R., Handbook on Contingent Valuation. 2006, 10.4337/9781845427917 North 449.
2. Ayuntamiento de Madrid, Intensidad Media Diaria (IMD) 2012 [WWW Document]. 2012 URL http://www.madrid.es/portales/munimadrid/es/Inicio/Ayuntamiento/Movilidad-y-Transportes/Circulacion/Intensidad-Media-Diaria-IMD-2012?vgnextfmt=relFicheros&vgnextoid=91111355068cc310VgnVCM2000000c205a0aRCRD&vgnextchannel=325d9ad016e07010VgnVCM100000dc0ca8c (Accessed 3 April 2017).
3. Barreiro, J., Sánchez, M., Viladrich-Grau, M., How much are people willing to pay for silence? A contingent valuation study. Appl. Econ. 37 (2005), 1233–1246, 10.1080/00036840500123234.
4. Bjørner, T., Combining socio-acoustic and contingent valuation surveys to value noise reduction. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 9 (2004), 341–356, 10.1016/j.trd.2004.05.002.
5. Blanco, J.C., Flindell, I., Property prices in urban areas affected by road traffic noise. Appl. Acoust. 72 (2011), 133–141, 10.1016/j.apacoust.2010.11.004.
6. Bolund, P., Hunhammar, S., Ecosystem services in urban areas. Ecol. Econ. 29 (1999), 293–301, 10.1016/S0921-8009(99)00013-0.
7. Brambilla, G., Gallo, V., Asdrubali, F., D'Alessandro, F., The perceived quality of soundscape in three urban parks in Rome. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 134 (2013), 832–839, 10.1121/1.4807811.
8. Brambilla, G., Gallo, V., Zambon, G., The soundscape quality in some urban parks in Milan, Italy. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 10 (2013), 2348–2369, 10.3390/ijerph10062348.
9. Brocolini, L., Lavandier, C., Quoy, M., Ribeiro, C., Measurements of acoustic environments for urban soundscapes: choice of homogeneous periods, optimization of durations, and selection of indicators. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 134 (2013), 813–821, 10.1121/1.4807809.
10. Cameron, T.A., Huppert, D.D., OLS versus ML estimation of non-market resource values with payment card interval data. J. Environ. Econ. Manag. 17 (1989), 230–246, 10.1016/0095-0696(89)90018-1.
11. Carvalho, A.P., Dias, R.C., Sound and noise in urban parks. J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 132, 2012, 1926, 10.1121/1.4755071.
12. Cohen, P., Potchter, O., Schnell, I., The impact of an urban park on air pollution and noise levels in the Mediterranean city of Tel-Aviv. Isr. Environ. Pollut. 195 (2014), 73–83, 10.1016/j.envpol.2014.08.015.
13. Domínguez-Torreiro, M., Soliño, M., Dealing with uncertainty in public preferences for rural development policies: a contingent valuation survey. Reg. Stud. 49 (2015), 555–567, 10.1080/00343404.2013.783694.
14. Dzhambov, A.M., Dimitrova, D.D., Green spaces and environmental noise perception. Urban For. Urban Green. 14 (2015), 1000–1008, 10.1016/j.ufug.2015.09.006.
15. EEA, Good Practice Guide on Quiet Areas. 2014, 10.2800/12611 Luxembourg.
16. EEA, Noise in Europe. 2014, 10.2800/763331 Luxembourg.
17. Evensen, K.H., Raanaas, R.K., Fyhri, A., Soundscape and perceived suitability for recreation in an urban designated quiet zone. Urban For. Urban Green. 20 (2016), 243–248, 10.1016/j.ufug.2016.09.003.
18. Filipan, K., Boes, M., Oldoni, D., De Coensel, B., Botteldooren, D., Soundscape quality indicators for city parks, the Antwerp case study. Forum Acusticum 2014, 2014.
19. Houthuijs, D.J.M., van Beek, A.J., Swart, W.J.R., van Kempen, E.E.M.M., Health Implication of Road, Railway and Aircraft Noise in the European Union Provisional Results Based on the 2nd Round of Noise Mapping. 2014, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven.
20. ISO 1996-2, Acoustics – Description, Measurement and Assessment of Environmental Noise – Part 2: Determination of Environmental Noise Levels. 2007.
21. Iglesias Merchan, C., Diaz-Balteiro, L., Soliño, M., Noise pollution in national parks: soundscape and economic valuation. Landsc. Urban Plan. 123 (2014), 1–9, 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2013.11.006.
22. Jim, C.Y., Chen, W.Y., Recreation-amenity use and contingent valuation of urban greenspaces in Guangzhou. China Landsc. Urban Plan. 75 (2006), 81–96, 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2004.08.008.
23. Konijnendijk, C.C., Annerstedt, M., Nielsen, A.B., Maruthaveeran, S., Benefits of urban parks—a systematic review. Int. Fed. Park. Recreat. Adm., 2013, 1–68.
24. Krinsky, I., Robb, A.L., On approximating the statistical properties of elasticities. Rev. Econ. Stat. 68 (1986), 715–719, 10.2307/1924536.
25. Lafon, J., Lavandier, C., Soundscape quality of urban parks and gardens. Euro Noise, 2015, 2383–2388.
26. Latinopoulos, D., Mallios, Z., Latinopoulos, P., Valuing the benefits of an urban park project: a contingent valuation study in Thessaloniki, Greece. Land Use Policy 55 (2016), 130–141, 10.1016/j.landusepol.2016.03.020.
27. Liu, H., Li, F., Li, J., Zhang, Y., The relationships between urban parks, residents’ physical activity, and mental health benefits: a case study from Beijing, China. J. Environ. Manag. 190 (2017), 223–230, 10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.12.058.
28. Łowicki, D., Piotrowska, S., Monetary valuation of road noise. Residential property prices as an indicator of the acoustic climate quality. Ecol. Indic. 52 (2015), 472–479, 10.1016/j.ecolind.2015.01.002.
29. Navrud, S., The state-of-the-art on economic valuation of noise. Final Report to European Commission, 2002.
30. Sakieh, Y., Jaafari, S., Ahmadi, M., Danekar, A., Green and calm: modeling the relationships between noise pollution propagation and spatial patterns of urban structures and green covers. Urban For. Urban Green. 24 (2017), 195–211, 10.1016/j.ufug.2017.04.008.
31. Szeremeta, B., Zannin, P.H.T., Analysis and evaluation of soundscapes in public parks through interviews and measurement of noise. Sci. Total Environ. 407 (2009), 6143–6149, 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2009.08.039.
32. Tobías, A., Recio, A., Díaz, J., Linares, C., Health impact assessment of traffic noise in Madrid (Spain). Environ. Res. 137 (2015), 136–140, 10.1016/j.envres.2014.12.011.
33. Tse, M.S., Chau, C.K., Choy, Y.S., Tsui, W.K., Chan, C.N., Tang, S.K., Perception of urban park soundscape. J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 131, 2012, 2762, 10.1121/1.3693644.
34. Ulmer, J.M., Wolf, K.L., Backman, D.R., Tretheway, R.L., Blain, C.J., O'Neil-Dunne, J.P., Frank, L.D., Multiple health benefits of urban tree canopy: the mounting evidence for a green prescription. Health Place 42 (2016), 54–62, 10.1016/j.healthplace.2016.08.011.
35. WHO, Burden of disease from environmental noise. Quantification of Healthy Life Years Lost in Europe, 2011, WHO Regional Office for Europe, Copenhaguen.
36. Weigher, J.C., Zerbst, R.H., The externalities of neighborhood parks: an empirical investigation. Land Econ. 49 (1973), 99–105, 10.2307/3145337.
37. Yang, W., Kang, J., A cross-cultural study of the soundscape in urban open public spaces. Proceedings of the 10th International Congress on Sound and Vibration, Stockholm Sweden, 2003, 2703–2710.
38. Yang, W., Kang, J., Soundscape and sound preferences in urban squares: a case study in sheffield. J. Urban Des. 10 (2005), 61–80, 10.1080/13574800500062395.