Noise pollution needs sound solutions
How exposure to noise pollution, which reinforces health and economic inequalities, is overlooked by policymakers
Is your health slowly eroding due to radiation poisoning? That’s more likely than you might think, but not because of decaying atoms. Indeed, in spite of the widespread anxiety regarding the risks of nuclear radiation, data-driven politicians and scientists should condemn sound radiation as the more dangerous cousin. Sadly, they do not. Around the world, sound pollution is critically overlooked: it is nowhere to be found in the UN’s 169 targets for 2030, and it is consistently classified as an environmental concern of lesser importance by the EU.
It is not, at any rate, a new topic: close to two thousand years ago, Seneca already complained to his fellow statesman and poet Lucilius about “the assortment of sounds [in Rome], which are strong enough to make me hate my very powers of hearing”. As if mere pain and annoyance weren’t enough, noise pollution has alarming and well-characterised impacts on human health. Our ears have not evolved to process loud sounds, and the vibrations of the modern world put stress on our hair and nerve cells, which quickly lead to hearing loss.
But what is much more concerning is that noise pollution is – perniciously – one of the world’s most silent killers. Indeed, in addition to the expected hearing damage, overexposure to loud ambient sounds is known to cause a ghastly array of conditions, including tinnitus, cardiovascular disease, increased stress, sleep disturbance, and cognitive deficits. More incongruous examples include type 2 diabetes and low birth weight. Critically, all these symptoms are non-specific, and few would think of linking them back their root. Even less obvious, perhaps, is their link with inequality.
As with all types of pollution, the least privileged are disproportionately affected. The three main activities responsible for the bulk of sound pollution – namely air traffic, car traffic, and construction – are all noisier in less developed countries. Rapidly urbanising cities are bedevilled by the din of construction sites: in China, close to half of all pollution-related complains addressed to the relevant government organisation concern noise. Weak governance also favours lenient regulations for road and air traffic, be it in their legal grounding or subsequent enforcement.
Within countries themselves, noise pollution exacerbates ethnic and socioeconomic disparities. For instance in the United States, areas with low-income, low-education or otherwise marginalised individuals are statistically rowdier. Such an environment is responsible for childhood learning delays, cognitive impairment, and lower efficiency at work, meaning overlooked vicious cycles could very well be trapping individuals in soundproof glass ceilings.
Why then aren’t governments taking stronger action? The difficulty of gathering reliable data hinders the development of tailored solutions. The effects of sound pollution is notoriously patchy in low-income countries, with another recent study denouncing the “very low” quality of evidence for health impacts of noise in such regions. Cautious lawmakers are also reluctant to pass regulations that might drive the price of growth-stimulating items up.
Nevertheless, the popularity cost of tackling noise pollution wouldn’t be as great for governments as that of most environmental policies. Immediate changes, not limited to noise itself, would be felt immediately. A recent study estimated that rates of violent crime causatively increase by 1.6% for each additional decibel of noise level, suggesting that lowering these levels could rapidly save billions in crime costs alone (and the list of sound-related vexations that could be solved goes on).
On the bright side, since many sources of environmental damage such as air conditioning, transportation, or urban sprawl, are also guilty of emitting noise, laws aiming to curb one would help reduce the other. Similarly, initiatives promoting more sensible urban planning and better public transport systems – although often not designed nor publicised for this purpose – naturally alleviate the racket of agglomerations. As many countries enter an economic slump, the question remains to know if action will be taken. Without it, the quiet enjoyed solely by the most fortunate might give new and disheartening meaning to the term sound barrier.
