IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0303581.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluation of flow, supply, and demand for noise reduction in urban area, Hamadan in Iran

Author

Listed:
  • Shiva Gharibi
  • Kamran Shayesteh

Abstract

Noise pollution is one of the consequences of urbanization that can cause environmental disturbances in urban areas. Urban ecosystems provide noise reduction services through Urban Green infrastructures (UGIs). Many studies have been conducted to evaluate and model traffic noise, but none have addressed the flow, supply, and demand of noise reduction ecosystem services. The main purpose of this paper is to present a new methodology for estimating flow, supply, and demand for noise reduction in Hamadan city that has not been mentioned in any paper so far. UGIs were classified into six main categories: agricultural lands, gardens, parks, abandoned lands, single trees, and street trees. A total of 57 sampling stations for sound measurement were made in August 2018. The current map of noise pollution (flow) was created using the Kriging method. The amount of supply was measured up to a distance of 50 meters from the main roads based on two approaches (the distance effect and the sound barrier effect). To quantify the demand, the current sound intensity level in the noise-sensitive land uses was compared with standards. Zonal statistics was used for spatial analysis of supply-demand in the urban neighborhood as a working unit. Results showed that at distances of 5m, 10m, 15m, and 20m, the average noise reduction was found to be 1.61, 2.83, 3.92, and 5.33 dB, respectively. Sound barriers at distances of 5m and 10m resulted in an average sound reduction of 1.61 and 2.83 dB, respectively. Individual trees, strip trees, abandoned lands, parks, and gardens led to a decrease in traffic noise by 0.3, 1, 0.1, 3.5, and 4.5 dB, respectively. The clustering analysis revealed a significant spatial clustering of noise pollution in Hamedan. The results and new methodology of this research can be used in similar areas to estimate the supply and demand of noise reduction and also for decision-makers to take management actions to increase supply and meet the demand for noise reduction service.

Suggested Citation

  • Shiva Gharibi & Kamran Shayesteh, 2024. "Evaluation of flow, supply, and demand for noise reduction in urban area, Hamadan in Iran," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 19(6), pages 1-19, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0303581
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0303581
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0303581
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0303581&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0303581?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Larondelle, Neele & Lauf, Steffen, 2016. "Balancing demand and supply of multiple urban ecosystem services on different spatial scales," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(PA), pages 18-31.
    2. Bolund, Per & Hunhammar, Sven, 1999. "Ecosystem services in urban areas," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 293-301, May.
    3. Chang Zhao & Heather A Sander, 2015. "Quantifying and Mapping the Supply of and Demand for Carbon Storage and Sequestration Service from Urban Trees," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(8), pages 1-31, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Veerkamp, Clara J. & Schipper, Aafke M. & Hedlund, Katarina & Lazarova, Tanya & Nordin, Amanda & Hanson, Helena I., 2021. "A review of studies assessing ecosystem services provided by urban green and blue infrastructure," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 52(C).
    2. De Valck, Jeremy & Beames, Alistair & Liekens, Inge & Bettens, Maarten & Seuntjens, Piet & Broekx, Steven, 2019. "Valuing urban ecosystem services in sustainable brownfield redevelopment," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 139-149.
    3. Natalia Levashova & Alla Sidorova & Anna Semina & Mingkang Ni, 2019. "A Spatio-Temporal Autowave Model of Shanghai Territory Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(13), pages 1-13, July.
    4. Johnson, Daniel & Geisendorf, Sylvie, 2019. "Are Neighborhood-level SUDS Worth it? An Assessment of the Economic Value of Sustainable Urban Drainage System Scenarios Using Cost-Benefit Analyses," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 194-205.
    5. Patrycia Brzoska & Aiga Spāģe, 2020. "From City- to Site-Dimension: Assessing the Urban Ecosystem Services of Different Types of Green Infrastructure," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-18, May.
    6. Martina Artmann & Olaf Bastian & Karsten Grunewald, 2017. "Using the Concepts of Green Infrastructure and Ecosystem Services to Specify Leitbilder for Compact and Green Cities—The Example of the Landscape Plan of Dresden (Germany)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-26, February.
    7. Baró, Francesc & Gómez-Baggethun, Erik & Haase, Dagmar, 2017. "Ecosystem service bundles along the urban-rural gradient: Insights for landscape planning and management," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 147-159.
    8. Wei, Hejie & Fan, Weiguo & Wang, Xuechao & Lu, Nachuan & Dong, Xiaobin & Zhao, Yanan & Ya, Xijia & Zhao, Yifei, 2017. "Integrating supply and social demand in ecosystem services assessment: A review," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 15-27.
    9. Karsten Grunewald & Benjamin Richter & Martin Behnisch, 2019. "Multi-Indicator Approach for Characterising Urban Green Space Provision at City and City-District Level in Germany," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(13), pages 1-20, June.
    10. Francesca Vignoli & Claudia de Luca & Simona Tondelli, 2021. "A Spatial Ecosystem Services Assessment to Support Decision and Policy Making: The Case of the City of Bologna," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-19, March.
    11. Cortinovis, Chiara & Geneletti, Davide, 2019. "A framework to explore the effects of urban planning decisions on regulating ecosystem services in cities," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 1-1.
    12. Goran Krsnik & Sonia Reyes-Paecke & Keith M. Reynolds & Jordi Garcia-Gonzalo & José Ramón González Olabarria, 2023. "Assessing Relativeness in the Provision of Urban Ecosystem Services: Better Comparison Methods for Improved Well-Being," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-16, May.
    13. Gaodi Xie & Wenhui Chen & Shuyan Cao & Chunxia Lu & Yu Xiao & Changshun Zhang & Na Li & Shuo Wang, 2014. "The Outward Extension of an Ecological Footprint in City Expansion: The Case of Beijing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(12), pages 1-16, December.
    14. P. Hlaváčková & D. Šafařík, 2016. "Quantification of the utility value of the recreational function of forests from the aspect of valuation practice," Journal of Forest Science, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 62(8), pages 345-356.
    15. Alexander V. Rusanov, 2019. "Dacha dwellers and gardeners: garden plots and second homes in Europe and Russia," Population and Economics, ARPHA Platform, vol. 3(1), pages 107-124, April.
    16. Hui, Ling Chui & Jim, C.Y., 2022. "Urban-greenery demands are affected by perceptions of ecosystem services and disservices, and socio-demographic and environmental-cultural factors," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    17. Monika Kopecká & Daniel Szatmári & Konštantín Rosina, 2017. "Analysis of Urban Green Spaces Based on Sentinel-2A: Case Studies from Slovakia," Land, MDPI, vol. 6(2), pages 1-17, April.
    18. Ahmet Tolunay & Çağlar Başsüllü, 2015. "Willingness to Pay for Carbon Sequestration and Co-Benefits of Forests in Turkey," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-27, March.
    19. Vasileios A. Tzanakakis & Andrea G. Capodaglio & Andreas N. Angelakis, 2023. "Insights into Global Water Reuse Opportunities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(17), pages 1-30, August.
    20. Massoni, Emma Soy & Barton, David N. & Rusch, Graciela M. & Gundersen, Vegard, 2018. "Bigger, more diverse and better? Mapping structural diversity and its recreational value in urban green spaces," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(PC), pages 502-516.

    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:plo:pone00:0303581. 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.