TY - JOUR
T1 - Economic valuation of noise pollution control policy
T2 - does the type of noise matter?
AU - Huh, Sung Yoon
AU - Shin, Jungwoo
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2018, Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.
PY - 2018/10/1
Y1 - 2018/10/1
N2 - As the average noise level and number of noise sources have increased, governments have taken various measures to make soundscapes sustainable. Wise policy decisions require information about the monetary value of noise-control policies. This study elicited people’s willingness to pay (WTP) for noise policies, separating traffic noise from residential noise to compare the value of controlling different types of noise. The contingent valuation method was used for the empirical analysis, with data from South Korea. The results show that the monthly mean WTP of respondents was KRW 3392.3 for residential noise reduction and KRW 3507.1 for transport noise reduction; thus, the WTP for the latter is slightly higher than that for the former. Moreover, about 80% of people are unwilling to pay for a noise policy at all, and that high ratio of people with zero WTP must be taken into consideration in the process of policy formulation and implementation. Respondents’ experiential and psychological factors were found to be more important than their demographics in explaining their WTP for a noise policy. Potential policy implications based on the analysis results are provided.
AB - As the average noise level and number of noise sources have increased, governments have taken various measures to make soundscapes sustainable. Wise policy decisions require information about the monetary value of noise-control policies. This study elicited people’s willingness to pay (WTP) for noise policies, separating traffic noise from residential noise to compare the value of controlling different types of noise. The contingent valuation method was used for the empirical analysis, with data from South Korea. The results show that the monthly mean WTP of respondents was KRW 3392.3 for residential noise reduction and KRW 3507.1 for transport noise reduction; thus, the WTP for the latter is slightly higher than that for the former. Moreover, about 80% of people are unwilling to pay for a noise policy at all, and that high ratio of people with zero WTP must be taken into consideration in the process of policy formulation and implementation. Respondents’ experiential and psychological factors were found to be more important than their demographics in explaining their WTP for a noise policy. Potential policy implications based on the analysis results are provided.
KW - Contingent valuation method
KW - Economic benefit
KW - Monetary value
KW - Residential noise
KW - Transport noise
KW - Willingness to pay
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85053393394&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s11356-018-3061-4
DO - 10.1007/s11356-018-3061-4
M3 - Article
C2 - 30178404
AN - SCOPUS:85053393394
SN - 0944-1344
VL - 25
SP - 30647
EP - 30658
JO - Environmental Science and Pollution Research
JF - Environmental Science and Pollution Research
IS - 30
ER -