English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Open

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Insights

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Zendy Tools

Zendy Plus

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Climate change policy is difficult. Noise policy is even more difficult because of its complexity. There is such a wide range of society’s processes/activities in which noise problems are integrated. There are win/win situations. Lower noise emissions facilitate healthy quiet compact cities. Compact cities save land use and fuel, have typical shorter travelling distances, lower speeds are possible. Barrier effects can be reduced. Walking and bicycling can be promoted. There are conflicts. Demands upon reduced fuel consumption and cleaner exhaust gases from road vehicles and jet engines make the noise emission problems tougher. Traffic safety demands on roads may collide with ways to reduce the noise emissions. Politicians in national and international bodies call noise a local problem which, however, local politicians cannot solve if not the source levels get reduced which is an area for international agreements. National industrial interests delay progress towards quieter products. Economic sub-optimization lead to unfortunate end results. To get a really quieter world demands that planners, builders, industries, etc. all do more. Speed policy is an important area. Few politicians understand the real complexity of the noise problems. We, noise professionals, have to spend more time on teaching and influencing them.

Noise policy - Integration with climate and natural resource policies