8

https://doi.org/10.1121/1.1808219. 2. Bennie J, Davies WT, Cruse D, Gaston KJ. Ecological efects of artifcial light at night on wild plants. J Ecol. 2016;104(3):611–20. https://doi. org/10.1111/1365-2745.12551. 3. Bernath-Plaisted J, Koper N. Physical footprint of oil and gas infrastructure, not anthropogenic noise, reduces nesting success of some grassland songbirds. Biol Conserv. 2016;204(B):434–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. biocon.2016.11.002. 4. Brown AL. Measuring the efect of aircraft noise on sea birds. Environ Int. 1990;16(4–6):587–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/0160-4120(90)90029-6. 5. Brumm H. Ant Environmental Noise Our ears are constantly exploring our living environment for potential threats and opportunities. They are a vital part of the body’s defense mechanism: preparing our brains for fight-or-flight if needed and, as such, affecting many bodily functions. The plasticity of the human hearing system and the ability of the brain to block out irrelevant information from this permanently alert sensory system are remarkable. However, this perfectly evolved hearing system is under threat. Many people’s modern living environments are flled with low-quality sound that has little or no importance. Te sounds of cars, planes, trains, cooling systems, ventilation, machines, electronically amplifed music and announcements – or simply the sound of living closer together in a 24/7 city – are constantly present. Gating out these sounds can consume a signifcant fraction of cognitive resources and the body is frequently triggered in vain to prepare for fght-or-fight. Moreover, the information carried by this sound – mainly related to its source – infuences our appraisal of our person-environment relationship. Te feeling of not being in control of one’s living environment can lead to additional stress particularly in the absence of coping resources or mechanisms. Both the autonomous response and stress path could eventually lead to negative efects on health and wellbeing, such as an increased risk of high blood pressure or circulatory disease, as explained in this thematic issue. Health efects related to environmental noise result in a cost for society. Te loss of healthy life years is often valued in euros, but there are also indirect and hidden costs, such as the cost of medical treatment (e.g. medication for hypertension or mental illness); loss of efciency at work due to illness or fatigue resulting from sleep deprivation or inefective resting periods; reduced creativity and learning – and even less prosocial behaviour – caused by noise stress, resulting in safety and security costs. It is therefore essential that environmental sound is included in diferent policy areas efectively and efciently: in particular, at a preventive stage. Te papers presented in this Science for Environment Policy Tematic Issue explore research into the threat to health posed by environmental noise. Tey cover topics such as the link between environmental noise and serious health issues like cardiovascular disease and stroke; the efect of noise on vulnerable people and how sound afects our state of mind. In the EU, exposure to excessive noise is becoming recognised as a large environmental health concern. Estimates from available data suggest that 65% of Europeans living in major urban areas are exposed to high noise levels exceeding Lden 60 dBA (which could be due to attendance at social activities, such as bars and concerts), and that more than 20% are exposed to night-time noise levels exceeding 55 dBA, (the level at which there is an increased risk of adverse health efects occurring, according to the WHO). Although exact numbers are not available, recent estimates suggest that one to two million disability adjusted life years (DALYS) are lost to environmental noise every year in the EU. Nevertheless, health extends beyond the lack of disability: quality of life is also relevant here, so methodologies for determining optimal conditions may need to be adjusted accordingly. Currently, the European Commission is committed to meeting challenging targets on noise reduction through the 7th Environment Action Programme1 . In addition, the World Health Organization (WHO) is revising the Community Noise Guidelines2 for the European region. Te Guidelines will include a review of evidence on the health efects of environmental noise to incorporate signifcant recent research. Te EU’s Environmental Noise Directive (2002)3 aims at protecting people from the adverse impacts of noise and has triggered many new initiatives and raised awareness of noise at the urban and citizen level. Understanding how diferent soundscapes and, in particular, tranquil areas in the urban environment afect overall health and wellbeing is allowing for new types of urban design. Tese improvements may limit health efects from noise annoyance and improve wellbeing, while allowing noise activities in appropriate contexts – but will inevitably require an understanding of the spatial and temporal details at a fner granulation. Prevention-oriented health systems are crucial to meeting Europe’s challenges of the 21st century. And noise policy should also be strongly directed at avoiding any additional and preventable health efects. Accurate knowledge of noise’s efects on human health will help policymakers to decide whether limited resources should be focused on black spots – 

1   2    3    4    5    6   7   8   9   10   11   12   13   14   15   16   17   18   19   20   21   22   23   24   25