IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/trapol/v10y2003i2p131-140.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Costs and benefits of noise abatement measures

Author

Listed:
  • Nijland, H. A.
  • Van Kempen, E. E. M. M.
  • Van Wee, G. P.
  • Jabben, J.

Abstract

Environmental effects of traffic like noise are typically external and typically unpriced. This makes monetisation of these effects difficult. Much work has been spent the last few years on developing methods for monetising these (external) environmental effects. However, the application of these methods does fall short. This paper describes a cost-benefit analysis of a number of (possible) noise abatement measures in the Netherlands. Benefits are calculated according to consumer's preferences for dwellings, and values applied are derived from two different methodologies (hedonic pricing and contingent valuation). Costs are shown to be surpassed by benefits. Some weaknesses are also demonstrated in valuing noise, particularly where issues of equity, benefit transfer and embedding are concerned. Further research on these issues is recommended.

Suggested Citation

  • Nijland, H. A. & Van Kempen, E. E. M. M. & Van Wee, G. P. & Jabben, J., 2003. "Costs and benefits of noise abatement measures," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 131-140, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:trapol:v:10:y:2003:i:2:p:131-140
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0967-070X(02)00064-1
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nakamura, H., 2000. "The economic evaluation of transport infrastructure: needs for international comparisons," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 3-6, January.
    2. Aude Lenders & Walter Hecq, 2002. "The cost and benefit functions in the STAIRRS project: Strategies and Tools to Assess and Implement noise Reducing measures for Railway Systems," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/138999, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    3. Schipper, Youdi & Nijkamp, Peter & Rietveld, Piet, 1998. "Why do aircraft noise value estimates differ? A meta-analysis," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 4(2), pages 117-124.
    4. Bristow, A. L. & Nellthorp, J., 2000. "Transport project appraisal in the European Union," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 51-60, January.
    5. Lee, D. B., 2000. "Methods for evaluation of transportation projects in the USA," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 41-50, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Marjainé, Szerényi Zsuzsanna & Harangozó, Gábor, 2014. "Mennyit ér a zajterhelés csökkenése?. Zajvédelmi intézkedések értékelése a haszonértékelések átvitelével [The value of silence. An application of benefit-transfer methodology for evaluating noise-c," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(1), pages 68-91.
    2. Swärdh, Jan-Erik & Andersson, Henrik & Jonsson, Lina & Ögren, Mikael, 2012. "Estimating non-marginal willingness to pay for railway noise abatement: application of the two-step hedonic regression technique," Working papers in Transport Economics 2012:27, CTS - Centre for Transport Studies Stockholm (KTH and VTI).
    3. Henrik Andersson & Lina Jonsson & Mikael Ögren, 2010. "Property Prices and Exposure to Multiple Noise Sources: Hedonic Regression with Road and Railway Noise," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 45(1), pages 73-89, January.
    4. Andersson, Henrik & Ögren, Mikael, 2007. "Noise charges in railway infrastructure: A pricing schedule based on the marginal cost principle," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 14(3), pages 204-213, May.
    5. Henrik Andersson & Mikael Ögren, 2013. "Charging the Polluters: A Pricing Model for Road and Railway Noise," Journal of Transport Economics and Policy, University of Bath, vol. 47(3), pages 313-333, September.
    6. Hu, Hongtao & Yuan, Jun & Nian, Victor, 2019. "Development of a multi-objective decision-making method to evaluate correlated decarbonization measures under uncertainty – The example of international shipping," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 148-157.
    7. Andersson, Henrik & Ögren, Mikael, 2007. "Noise Charges in Road Traffic: A Pricing Schedule Based on the Marginal Cost Principle," Working Papers 2007:15, Swedish National Road & Transport Research Institute (VTI), revised 17 Jun 2009.
    8. De Schepper, Ellen & Van Passel, Steven & Manca, Jean & Thewys, Theo, 2012. "Combining photovoltaics and sound barriers – A feasibility study," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 297-303.
    9. Montero, José-María & Fernández-Avilés , Gema & Mínguez, Román, 2011. "Spatial Hedonic Pricing Models for Testing the Adequacy of Acoustic Areas in Madrid, Spain," INVESTIGACIONES REGIONALES - Journal of REGIONAL RESEARCH, Asociación Española de Ciencia Regional, issue 21, pages 157-181.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Macharis, Cathy & Bernardini, Annalia, 2015. "Reviewing the use of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis for the evaluation of transport projects: Time for a multi-actor approach," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 177-186.
    2. Polydoropoulou, Amalia & Roumboutsos, Athena, 2009. "Evaluating the impact of decision making during construction on transport project outcome," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 369-380, November.
    3. Eda Ustaoglu & Brendan Williams & Laura O. Petrov & Harutyun Shahumyan & Hedwig Van Delden, 2017. "Developing and Assessing Alternative Land-Use Scenarios from the MOLAND Model: A Scenario-Based Impact Analysis Approach for the Evaluation of Rapid Rail Provisions and Urban Development in the Greate," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-34, December.
    4. Hayashi, Y. & Morisugi, H., 2000. "International comparison of background concept and methodology of transportation project appraisal," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 73-88, January.
    5. Major, Iván, 2004. "A korlátozó szabályozástól az ösztönző szabályozásig. A közlekedés szabályozása az Európai Unióban és Magyarországon [From restricting regulation to incentive regulation. Transport regulation in th," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(6), pages 501-529.
    6. Jan Anne Annema & Koen Frenken & Carl Koopmans & Maarten Kroesen, 2017. "Relating cost-benefit analysis results with transport project decisions in the Netherlands," Letters in Spatial and Resource Sciences, Springer, vol. 10(1), pages 109-127, March.
    7. Nicanor R. Roxas & Alexis M. Fillone, 2016. "Establishing value of time for the inter-island passenger transport of the Western Visayas region, Philippines," Transportation, Springer, vol. 43(4), pages 661-676, July.
    8. Marleau Donais, Francis & Abi-Zeid, Irène & Waygood, E. Owen D. & Lavoie, Roxane, 2019. "Assessing and ranking the potential of a street to be redesigned as a Complete Street: A multi-criteria decision aiding approach," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 1-19.
    9. Nir Sharav & Yoram Shiftan, 2021. "Optimal Urban Transit Investment Model and Its Application," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-29, August.
    10. Jan Anne Annema, 2013. "The use of CBA in decision-making on mega-projects: empirical evidence," Chapters, in: Hugo Priemus & Bert van Wee (ed.), International Handbook on Mega-Projects, chapter 13, pages 291-312, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    11. Trojanek, Radoslaw & Huderek-Glapska, Sonia, 2018. "Measuring the noise cost of aviation – The association between the Limited Use Area around Warsaw Chopin Airport and property values," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 103-114.
    12. Jonas Eliasson & Mattias Lundberg, 2011. "Do Cost--Benefit Analyses Influence Transport Investment Decisions? Experiences from the Swedish Transport Investment Plan 2010--21," Transport Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(1), pages 29-48, April.
    13. Holz-Rau, Christian & Scheiner, Joachim, 2011. "Safety and travel time in cost-benefit analysis: A sensitivity analysis for North Rhine-Westphalia," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 336-346, March.
    14. Maria Börjesson & Jonas Eliasson & Mattias Lundberg, 2014. "Is CBA Ranking of Transport Investments Robust?," Journal of Transport Economics and Policy, University of Bath, vol. 48(2), pages 189-204, May.
    15. Conny Grunicke & Jan Christian Schluter & Jani-Pekka Jokinen, 2020. "Implementation of a cost-benefit analysis of Demand-Responsive Transport with a Multi-Agent Transport Simulation," Papers 2011.12869, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2021.
    16. Jacek Batóg & Iwona Foryś & Radosław Gaca & Michał Głuszak & Jan Konowalczuk, 2019. "Investigating the Impact of Airport Noise and Land Use Restrictions on House Prices: Evidence from Selected Regional Airports in Poland," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-18, January.
    17. Chris Eves, 2017. "The impact of aircraft noise and complaints on Brisbane residential property investment performance," LARES lares_2017_paper_24, Latin American Real Estate Society (LARES).
    18. Indre Siksnelyte-Butkiene & Dalia Streimikiene, 2022. "Sustainable Development of Road Transport in the EU: Multi-Criteria Analysis of Countries’ Achievements," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(21), pages 1-25, November.
    19. Damart, Sébastien & Roy, Bernard, 2009. "The uses of cost-benefit analysis in public transportation decision-making in France," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 16(4), pages 200-212, August.
    20. Cundric, A. & Kern, T. & Rajkovic, V., 2008. "A qualitative model for road investment appraisal," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 15(4), pages 225-231, July.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:trapol:v:10:y:2003:i:2:p:131-140. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/30473/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.