Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2013, 10(7), 2741-2759; doi:10.3390/ijerph10072741
Quiet as an Environmental Value: A Contrast between Two Legislative Approaches
1
Noise Measurement Services Pty Ltd, Brisbane 4051, Australia
2
Department of Psychology, Auckland University of Technology, North Shore Auckland 0627, New Zealand
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Received: 18 March 2013 / Revised: 20 June 2013 / Accepted: 24 June 2013 / Published: 3 July 2013
(This article belongs to the Special Issue The Protection of Quiet Areas as a Public Health Aim Towards Sustainable Health: Approaches, Case Studies and Implementation)
Abstract
This paper examines the concept of “quiet” as an “environmental value” in terms of amenity and wellbeing from a legislative context. Critical review of two pieces of environmental legislation from Australia and New Zealand forms the basis of the paper. The Australian legislation is Queensland’s Environmental Protection Act, and the New Zealand legislation is that nation’s Resource Management Act. Quiet is part of the psychoacoustic continuum between a tranquil and an intrusively noisy sound environment. As such, quiet possesses intrinsic value in terms of overall sound within the environment (soundscape) and to individuals and communities. In both pieces of legislation, guidance, either directly or indirectly, is given to “maximum” sound levels to describe the acoustic environment. Only in Queensland is wellbeing and amenity described as environmental values, while in the New Zealand approach, amenity is identified as the core value to defend, but guidance is not well established. Wellbeing can be related to degrees of quietness and the absence of intrusive noise, the character of sound within an environment (“soundscape”), as well as the overall level of sound. The quality of life experienced by individuals is related to that person’s physical and mental health, sense of amenity and wellbeing. These characteristics can be described in terms of subjective and objective measures, though legislation does not always acknowledge the subjective.Keywords:
amenity; environmental legislation; environmental values; quiet; soundscape; wellbeing
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 3.0).
Scifeed alert for new publications
Never miss any articles matching your research from any publisher- Get alerts for new papers matching your research
- Find out the new papers from selected authors
- Updated daily for 49'000+ journals and 6000+ publishers
- Define your Scifeed now
Share & Cite This Article
MDPI and ACS Style
Thorne, R.; Shepherd, D. Quiet as an Environmental Value: A Contrast between Two Legislative Approaches. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2013, 10, 2741-2759.
Related Articles
Article Metrics
Comments
[Return to top]
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health
EISSN 1660-4601
Published by MDPI AG, Basel, Switzerland
RSS
E-Mail Table of Contents Alert