Public perception on environmental noise pollution: A case study in Zaria city, Kaduna state, Nigeria

IF 1.3 Q4 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
Idoko Apeh Abraham, Igboro Bamedele Sunday, Sani Badrudden Saulawa, Umar Alfa Abubakar, Stephen James Ijimdiya
{"title":"Public perception on environmental noise pollution: A case study in Zaria city, Kaduna state, Nigeria","authors":"Idoko Apeh Abraham, Igboro Bamedele Sunday, Sani Badrudden Saulawa, Umar Alfa Abubakar, Stephen James Ijimdiya","doi":"10.34172/ehem.2022.15","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: One of the key indicators of the degradation of the environment is the noise level. This has necessitated this study on the evaluation of the public, perceptional awareness, sources, effects, and mitigation measures on environmental noise pollution. Methods: The population was estimated and 385 structured questionnaires were estimated and administered by random purposive sampling. About 358 questionnaires were retrieved. Data were analyzed using SPSS and Excel statistical software. Results: About 90.2% of the respondents had relevant awareness and its effects on environmental noise while 9.8% of the respondent did not. Traffic, generators, commercial and light industry sources of noise, and their severity were ranked in a descending order using the Likert scale. Hearing impairment, annoyance, stress, distraction during exposure were ranked in a descending order using the Likert scale. Single-factor ANOVA on the sources of noise and their severity, awareness of the various effects of noise, and responses during exposure showed that there were significant differences as P<0.05 using a confidence level of 95%. About 61.7% of respondents complained of environmental noise, 72.6% respondents received complaints about environmental noise, 87.7% of respondents were not aware of any government agency monitoring noise pollution, 72.2% of the respondents had done nothing regarding noise prevention, and 91.1% respondents wanted a proactive decision in mitigating environmental noise pollution. Conclusion: There is an inadequate coping strategy. Strategic planning in mitigating environmental noise in urban and semi-urban areas is a necessity and there is a need for public enlightenment by government monitoring agencies.","PeriodicalId":51877,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Health Engineering and Management Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental Health Engineering and Management Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.34172/ehem.2022.15","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Background: One of the key indicators of the degradation of the environment is the noise level. This has necessitated this study on the evaluation of the public, perceptional awareness, sources, effects, and mitigation measures on environmental noise pollution. Methods: The population was estimated and 385 structured questionnaires were estimated and administered by random purposive sampling. About 358 questionnaires were retrieved. Data were analyzed using SPSS and Excel statistical software. Results: About 90.2% of the respondents had relevant awareness and its effects on environmental noise while 9.8% of the respondent did not. Traffic, generators, commercial and light industry sources of noise, and their severity were ranked in a descending order using the Likert scale. Hearing impairment, annoyance, stress, distraction during exposure were ranked in a descending order using the Likert scale. Single-factor ANOVA on the sources of noise and their severity, awareness of the various effects of noise, and responses during exposure showed that there were significant differences as P<0.05 using a confidence level of 95%. About 61.7% of respondents complained of environmental noise, 72.6% respondents received complaints about environmental noise, 87.7% of respondents were not aware of any government agency monitoring noise pollution, 72.2% of the respondents had done nothing regarding noise prevention, and 91.1% respondents wanted a proactive decision in mitigating environmental noise pollution. Conclusion: There is an inadequate coping strategy. Strategic planning in mitigating environmental noise in urban and semi-urban areas is a necessity and there is a need for public enlightenment by government monitoring agencies.
公众对环境噪声污染的看法:以尼日利亚卡杜纳州扎里亚市为例
背景:环境退化的关键指标之一是噪音水平。这就需要对公众对环境噪声污染的评价、感知意识、来源、影响和缓解措施进行研究。方法:对人群进行估计,并通过随机目的性抽样对385份结构化问卷进行估计和管理。共收回约358份问卷。使用SPSS和Excel统计软件对数据进行分析。结果:约90.2%的受访者对环境噪声及其影响有相关认识,9.8%的受访者没有。交通、发电机、商业和轻工业噪声源及其严重程度使用Likert量表按降序排列。使用Likert量表按降序对暴露期间的听力障碍、烦恼、压力和分心进行排名。关于噪声源及其严重程度、对噪声各种影响的认识以及暴露期间的反应的单因素方差分析显示,使用95%的置信水平,存在显著差异,P<0.05。约61.7%的受访者投诉环境噪音,72.6%的受访者收到环境噪音投诉,87.7%的受访者不知道有任何政府机构监测噪音污染,72.2%的受访者在预防噪音方面无所作为,91.1%的受访者希望在减轻环境噪音污染方面做出积极的决定。结论:应对策略不足。在城市和半城市地区进行减少环境噪声的战略规划是必要的,并且需要政府监测机构的公众启蒙。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
37.50%
发文量
17
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信