Living in a world that exposes us to a cacophony of noise, many of us are becoming increasingly aware of the detrimental impacts of environmental noise in our urban landscapes. Yet, only a few would consider the social inequalities embedded in environmental noise pollution. 

Noise can further accentuate social health inequalities through its unequal levels and distributions of exposure between socioeconomic groups, with those perceived to be of lower socio-economic status generally experiencing higher levels of exposure to environmental noise and its concomitant health problems (Dreger et al., 2019). 

This is because socio-economic background shapes people’s privileges and ability to afford particular living spaces. As such, those who are unable to afford these privileges tend to live and work in areas with higher levels of noise pollution (Dreger et al., 2019). While many environmental noise policies and regulations take into consideration the health impacts of noise, such as the EU Noise Directive, not many account for the social inequalities associated with noise (Lakes et al., 2014).

Thus, it is imperative that we bring in the concept of environmental justice to address the socio-economic dimensions of noise pollution. Environmental justice advocates for “the equitable treatment” (Todd and Zografos, 2005: 484) of people regardless of their socio-economic background in the context of environmental laws, regulations, and initiatives. Founded on the premise that everyone deserves the right to live in a healthy environment with access to adequate environmental resources to lead a healthy life, environmental justice strives to ensure a fairer distribution of environmental costs and benefits associated with economic development (Todd and Zografos, 2005). 

Paavola and Adger (2002) argue that environmental justice should be examined from two angles: distributive justice and procedural justice. Distributive justice puts forth the equitable distribution of environmental positives and negatives, going against our current capitalist system which exacerbates the uneven distribution of goods. On the other hand, procedural justice supports the empowerment of disadvantaged communities by arguing for their involvement and participation in environmental decision-making processes. 

In the final entry, we will examine how environmental justice can be integrated into residential areas in Berlin to better address the socio-economic inequalities embedded in environmental noise pollution.

 

References:

Dreger, S., Schüle, S. A., Hilz, L. K., & Bolte, G. (2019). Social inequalities in environmental noise exposure: A review of evidence in the WHO European Region. International journal of environmental research and public health, 16(6), 1011.

Lakes, T., Brückner, M., & Krämer, A. (2014). Development of an environmental justice index to determine socio-economic disparities of noise pollution and green space in residential areas in Berlin. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 57(4), 538-556.

Paavola, J. and Adger, W.N. (2002). Justice and Adaptation to Climate Change. Tyndall Centre Working Paper.

Todd, H., & Zografos, C. (2005). Justice for the environment: developing a set of indicators of environmental justice for Scotland. Environmental Values, 14(4), 483-501.