The state-of-the-art of practice of traffic noise regulations in Ghana

Abstract

Noise pollution is one of Ghana’s environmental risks and it has become the norm in metropolitan areas to the point where residents in these locations experience noise nuisance and may be at risk of hearing loss. Most developed and developing countries have established traffic noise standards as a control mechanism to reduce traffic noise exposure emissions. This study aims to investigate current practices of traffic noise regulations and policy. Various agencies responsible for the control of noise pollution and the urban road sector were interviewed about traffic noise standards and practices, and it was observed that these agencies’ noise practices were based on Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) established guidelines, which did not include transportation noise regulation. Except for a Driver and Vehicle Licensing Authority (DVLA), regulation that allows a certain vehicle horning system for specific vehicle users, this study discovered that this policy is not fully implemented. A preliminary survey was conducted to collect traffic field data and inhabitants’ perceptions of traffic noise. Of the 30 respondents, 26 respondents (86.7%) affirmed that they experience traffic noise pollution at various locations, while 23 respondents (76.7%) reported various health effects due to exposure to traffic noise. This can be related to the observed noise levels which exceeded the dissatisfaction score of 5 (89 dB(A)), and also Leq value (109.1 dB(A)) was greater than the environmental permissible limit of the EPA standard of 70 dB(A). This indicates that roadside residents suffer from noise annoyance. It is recommended that transport, and environmental-related agencies work unanimously to ensure that effective control of traffic noise pollution is developed, enforced, and implemented.

Keywords

Road traffic noise environmental pollution regulations annoyance health impacts

Introduction

Health outcomes of noise pollution on human and the environment is a concern in both developed and developing countries. Noise is generated from different sources: agriculture, industries, construction, and transportation (i.e., road traffic, and aeroplane activities, among others). According to Therrien, Tummala, noise has many adverse effects on both human hearing and health.¹ Also, Murphy et al. defined environmental noise as any unwanted sound created by human activities that are considered harmful or detrimental to human health and quality of life.² Furthermore, noise emissions from various industries, such as transport, industries and recreational activities, have been reported to affect humans.^3–6 Therefore, by definition, noise as pollution should be avoided, controlled, regulated, or eliminated due to its negative impact on humans and human-environment relations.

The relationship between noise pollution and human health has been a subject of considerable research. Studies on various aspects of noise in terms of how it has been generated and the effects on human health and the environment have been studied.^7–19 These studies revealed that individuals experience health problems, sleep disturbance, and annoyance as a result of traffic noise exposure; under certain circumstances, traffic noise exposure also affects work efficiency and quality of life. For instance, noise level above 70 dB, causes hearing impairment and cardiovascular disease^20,21 which may lead to a reduction in one’s productivity. Some of these traffic noise-related impacts are shown in Table 1.

Table 1.

Traffic noise-related impacts.

Health impacts	References
Annoyance	10,17
Cardiovascular disease	17
Adiposity	8,14,15
Myocardial infarction/hypertension	9,11,13,18
Building	22
Plants and animals	5,7

The focus of this study is on traffic noise sources and their impact on the environment, as it is the most dominant source of noise, as shown in Figure 1. Traffic noise is a combination of noises produced from several sources. The sources include tire-pavement noise, aerodynamic noise; (which is related to the turbulent airflow around the vehicle), and the power unit noise (engine, fan, exhaust, transmission, etc.).²³ Despite previous findings, there is still more to understand and contribute to knowledge in the area of traffic noise exposure modelling. Therefore, this research aims to determine the state of practise of traffic noise regulations in Ghana. Over the centuries, industrialization and massive rise in motorization intensified noise drastically and as such, Citizens within and outside of cities have been impacted by traffic noise to a greater extent. Typically, motor vehicles do not make enough noise to directly harm hearing, but they do make enough noise to bother, worry, and disrupt sleep. Noise may unintentionally aggravate cardiovascular or psycho-physiological problems.^13,24 Although people may get used to noise, they can still be negatively affected. Traffic noise has gained more attention than other fields of transportation and environmental studies in most Asian, American and European cities.^23,25–31 Furthermore, studies carried out in Sub-Saharan Africa cities^6,32–37 on traffic noise. In Ghana, from existing literature noise studies have been conducted but, not in the area of traffic noise.^3,38–43

Figure 1.

The proportion of noise generation. Norwegian Pollution Control Authority.⁴⁴

Existing noise regulations and standards of practice

Studies conducted by researchers to obtain information regarding existing noise regulations^20,45,46 have shown that especially in developed cities significant efforts have been made to establish traffic noise regulations and standards as a means of control policy to mitigate traffic noise exposure. Currently, there are several established noise regulations and control policies for most developed and developing countries. However, some of these established guidelines covered other sources of noise apart from traffic noise.

In 2020, the European Union (EU) developed environmental noise guideline and control policy that applies to all countries within Europe. This guideline is a revision of the 2018 WHO guideline and consists of noise generated by road traffic, air, rail, industry and construction.⁴⁷ The goal of this amendment was to account for the influence of road, air, and rail in existing recommendations so that noise pollution and noise exposure from these activities may be considerably reduced. To meet this objective, the EU identified the need to implement an updated EU noise policy aligned with the latest scientific evidence, as well as measures to reduce noise at the source, including improvements in city design. Similarly, other institutions from different continents have developed the same overall objective.

In addition, in Africa, many countries (Ghana, Nigeria, Kenya, South Africa, Liberia, etc.) have established general noise regulations and control policies based on WHO-recommended guidelines from 1995.^48–50 With these established guidelines, scholars and environmental specialists have conducted several types of research to understand the effectiveness of the noise regulations that have been implemented and to what extent the noise guidelines have been violated. There are complaints about noise every day, according to a report by the Environmental Health and Sanitation Unit of the Madina Municipal Assembly of La Nkwantanang. ‘People have become very interested and aware of the danger that noise poses, so complaints are coming in’.⁵¹ Even with the complaints and awareness, effective noise regulation and implementation of appropriate control policy is lacking. For example, ‘it took 14 years of tenacity and indescribable pain and suffering for two residents on the outskirts of Accra to be awarded damages in a high court ruling against two noisy neighbouring churches’.⁵¹ From the literature, it has been revealed that control policy and practices on the continent need to be considered^20,52 and policy enforcement should be enhanced to achieve the WHO goal as recommended. Especially, in Ghana, the noise pollution control policy and enforcement remain a challenge in all sectors. Despite the established regulations and control policy on noise pollution, traffic noise guidelines and control policy have not been fully formulated as other types of noise pollution. The state of practise in Ghana and other developing nations is also another challenge that needs to be improved.

Developing countries with traffic noise guidelines and control policy

Despite the challenges of traffic noise pollution faced by many developing countries, especially in sub-Saharan African countries (Ghana, Nigeria, Kenya, Ivory Coast, among others), little attention is paid to it compared to other noise pollution (construction and industrial). Some of these countries have developed regulations and control policies regarding general noise pollution including vehicular noise limits based on vehicle acceleration. In Nigeria, there are established regulations and enforcement policies that seek to minimise environmental noise.⁴⁹ However, the established guidelines on the maximum permissible noise levels for all states are construction sites, entertainment places, public announcements, worship centers, and accelerating vehicles. Additionally, these sound level regulations were captured for both day and night and various noise sources. Though for motor vehicles, the vehicle maximum permissible noise was based on vehicle acceleration. For example, the permissible noise limit for vehicles intended for the carriage of passengers and having a maximum mass greater than 3.5 tones is 78 dB(A).⁴⁹ Also, similar to Nigeria, Liberia’s noise regulations and control policy covered all aspects of every county.⁵⁰ The noise levels for traffic considered vehicle acceleration and capacity. The maximum permissible noise levels are: for vehicles having a mass of more than 3.5 tonnes with engine power more than 150 kW is 80 dB(A) while engine power less than 150 kW is 83 dB(A).⁵⁰ In Kenya, the Environmental Pollution Agency and these guidelines indicate that motor vehicle noise thresholds as 84 dB(A).⁵³ This established regulation has no specifications regarding types of vehicles and the associated noise-induced. In other words, the regulations set up are generally for all types of vehicles, regardless of the vehicle type. It is important these guidelines be formulated based on the vehicle specification; which may enhance the control policy and make enforcement easy to carry out. This regulation is obvious in South Africa which has a noise regulation act that includes traffic noise regulation standards for all vehicle types and its associated noise limit.

Developing countries with no traffic noise guidelines and control policy – the case of Ghana

One of the most significant environmental impact associated with transport is that of the noise that emanates from the movement of the various transport modes. In Ghana, road transport is the most dominant transportation infrastructure, with rail and aviation serving only a small number of domestic passengers, and this is a major environmental threat to the country in relation to noise pollution.⁵⁴ Noise pollution in Ghana’s capital, Accra, is currently at an alarming level, posing a serious health danger to people in both the public and private sectors, and as such, some locations may soon approach a pain threshold, perhaps resulting in irreversible hearing loss.⁴⁴ Noise in urban residences has become a norm although people are becoming more aware of and irritated by the frequent and loud sounds in their community, as a result of urban development.⁵⁴

One of the primary agencies in Ghana that works to protect and improve the environment is the Environmental Protection Agency. They are committed to ensuring the quality of air, soil, water, and sea for the benefit of present and future generations. Noise regulating agencies like the EPA are present in some regions of the country, working with the Ghanaian government on all phases of policy implementation and administration, inspecting possible pollution incidents, and responding quickly to them. In addition to identifying and disseminating information and administering directives, the EPA has the responsibility of issuing notices to bodies that take steps to regulate the level, severity, and nature of environmental noise (EPA, Act 490, 1994).

Noise pollution is one of the environmental hazards in Ghana, and it has become a norm in urban residences to the extent that, these urbanised areas suffer from noise annoyance and may be at risk of hearing problems. However, literature reveals that there is limited research conducted on traffic noise pollution, its effect, and control,⁵⁵ in that most of the research has been directed at construction, industrial, among others.^{3,39,42,43,56,57} The current noise practice covers all sections of noise pollution but there are no criteria/standards set for traffic noise. There is a requirement in Ghana, under the Health Protection-Requirements For Ambience Noise Control which mandates an entity responsible for a construction site, construction and operation of airports and railways, operation of recreational and religious activities, and for jingle purposes; that helps to protect the citizens from hazardous noise exposure (Table 2),⁵⁸ but there is no guideline that specifically protects workers exposed to excessive noise from road transport-related noise. Furthermore, this indicates that the issues surrounding traffic noise are yet to be investigated by many research institutions in terms of regulations and control policy in the country.

Table 2.

Requirement for ambient noise control policy.

Zone	Permissible noise level in dB(A)
Zone	Day (06:00 a.m. −10:00 p.m.)	Night (10:00 p.m. – 06:00 a.m.)
A	55	48
B	55	50
C	60	55
D	65	60
E	75	65
F	70	60
G	70	70

Source: Ref. 58.

Table 2 presents the noise pollution guidelines in Ghana, the different locations classification were based on zones: Zone A (residential areas), Zone B (schools, hospitals, offices, and law courts), Zone C (mixed use areas), Zone D (areas with light industrial activities), Zone E (commercial), Zone F (light industrial areas) and Zone G (heavy industrial areas).

Scenario formulation and discussion

Every country’s environmental policies take noise into account; hence, to achieve this, noise research is crucial for predicting noise levels in the environment.⁵⁹ To support the need for extensive research and the establishment of traffic noise guidelines in Ghana, a survey that consisted of different sections was tested (Figure 2).

Figure 2.

Framework of the study.

The findings are summarised below in the form of scenarios. Each scenario is evaluated and discussed on the basis of feedback received from roadside residents, field measurements, and relevant agencies presented in Figure 2.

Scenario 1 – key agencies

To confirm previous studies, an interview was conducted among various agencies responsible for managing noise pollution and the urban road sector in Ghana. The purposive sampling method was adopted; this is also known as judgemental, selective, or subjective sampling, which depends on the researcher’s judgement when choosing the units (such as persons, cases/organisations, events, or pieces of data) that are to be researched.⁶⁰ This method was used because its main objective is to concentrate on specific demographic characteristics that are of interest to best address the research concerns.⁶¹ In this case, our target agencies/institutions were Environment Protection Agency (EPA), Kumasi Metropolitan Assembly (KMA), Driver and Vehicle Licensing Authority (DVLA), and the Department of Urban Roads (DUR), they were selected because they had particular characteristics that are of interest to the study. Four agencies were surveyed and direct canvassing method was used for the survey. For effectiveness and compliance, the direct canvassing method has shown to have a greater influence on the respondents’ feedback.⁶² A structured interview was conducted among the four purposively selected agencies and institutions. Respondents were asked to identify existing traffic noise-related policies and practices.

According to the survey, responses from the Environment Protection Agency (EPA) indicate that Ghana has established guidelines and control policy on noise pollution.⁵⁸ However, there is no specific section that captures traffic noise limits within the existing criteria. Therefore, this indicates that there is no permissible noise limit on traffic noise including vehicle classification which implies that restrictions and penalties regarding defaulters on road noise pollution do not exist. Also, an interview was conducted at KMA, DVLA, and DUR regarding the traffic noise guidelines and practices, and it was confirmed that the noise practices at these agencies were based on established guidelines from EPA and of which transportation noise regulation is not included (Figure 3).

Figure 3.

Response from target agencies.

Additionally, DVLA personnel stated that the current traffic noise assessment is based on the vehicle horn system and is categorised for specific vehicle users. That is, a person driving a motor vehicle must ensure that it is equipped with a pneumatic horn that gives a single note when pressed and no motor vehicle must fix a warning appliance (a siren) other than the approved type, except for government vehicles occupied by executives, fire service, ambulance and bullion van. However, it is obvious from this research that this is not fully enforced.

Scenario 2: Roadside residents

Furthermore, a preliminary survey was conducted to obtain initial traffic field data and residents’ perceptions of traffic noise. A paper-based questionnaire survey was conducted to evaluate the opinions of residents living in close proximity to the highway at the study location. The questionnaire comprised of questions concerning socio-demographic data of the respondent, knowledge of the respondent on traffic noise, respondent perception of traffic noise, self-related health response on few traffic noise effects, and traffic noise characteristics. The need for perception studies is a result of the challenges in clinically assessing the long-term effects of exposure to noise levels mostly generated from urban traffic.⁶³

In 2001, the International Commission on Biological Effects of Noise (ICBEN) Group 6 issued a proposal for a series of fundamental standardized noise response concerns for community noise assessments.⁶⁴ These questions and the corresponding scales of answers were included in this survey. Face-to-face surveys were used to obtain information on how the public reacts to road traffic noise at Stadium road, Asokwa, Kumasi. The smartphone noise app Noise Capture was used to record the traffic noise levels every second from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. for a four-time band at every two-hour duration. The measurement procedure adopted was in accordance with the Ghana Standards Authority for ambient noise control⁵⁸ and international standards; CoRTN and FHWA.^65,66

Fifty questionnaires were randomly distributed and 30 respondents gave their feedbacks, as a rule of thumb, the sample size is satisfactory for a pilot study.⁶⁷ Among the participants in the survey, 20 (67%) were male and 10 (33%) were female, with ages between 18 and 65 years and above. The variation in gender is a true reflection of the study area as most of the respondents were commercial and private workers and these businesses are majorly operated by males. Out of the total respondents, 14 (47%) were in the age group of 18–30 years, 10 (33%) of 30–45 years, and 6 (20%) of 45–65 years. This indicates that majority of respondents are predominantly of the younger age.

From the survey, in terms of noise sensitivity, 26 (87%) affirmed that they experience traffic noise pollution at various locations, while 23 (77%) reported various health effects (stress, headache, sleep disturbance, hypertension, and lack of concentration) due to exposure to traffic noise. These health effects were more prevalent for the male respondents. While 7 (23%) of the total respondents are unaware of any health effects due to traffic noise exposure (Figure 4).

Figure 4.

Descriptive statistics of respondents.

Regarding the major sources of noise, 69% of the respondents considered traffic noise as the major source of noise pollution, followed by 18% of the respondents who considered commercial activities, 8% choose community noise, and 5% choose religious activities as the major sources of noise in the study area. These results support the findings of earlier studies, in which traffic noise contributed significantly to environmental noise, and its effects were primarily non-auditory, such as annoyance, which interferes with sleep, learning, communication and other tasks.^68–70

Scenario 3: Measured noise levels

The evaluation of the measured noise levels was calculated for various noise indices (L₁₀, L₅₀, L₉₀, and L_eq) (Table 3) and the resultant values were compared to the EPA noise standard (Table 2) which were also compared with the noise levels pertaining to the scores of the dissatisfaction parameter (Table 4).⁷¹ According to the Rao and Rao, dissatisfaction scores 2, 3, and 5 represent a slight uncomfortable feeling, mild disturbances, and noise annoyance respectively. Results from the study area with respect to the dissatisfaction score of various noise parameters are represented in Table 3. The measured noise levels exceeded all the dissatisfaction scores but were close to the higher end of the scale (score 5). Also, the L_eq value was greater than the permissible limit of the EPA standard of 70 dB(A). Overall, these indicate that roadside residents are suffering from high noise annoyance.

Table 3.

Dissatisfaction score with respect to noise descriptors.

L₁₀	L₅₀	L₉₀	L_eq
111.40	103.70	93.80	109.10
Score 5	Score 5	Score 5	Score 5

Table 4.

Prohibited levels of environmental traffic noise indices.⁷¹

Noise index	Upper noise limits in dB(A)
Noise index	Dissatisfaction score 2	Dissatisfaction score 3	Dissatisfaction score 5
L₁₀	64	74	93
L₅₀	58	67	85
L₉₀	52	61	79
L_eq	58	68	89

Leq. is sound level equivalent, which is frequently used by state road agencies as a traffic noise descriptor.

L₁₀ is the level exceeded 10% of the time.

L₅₀ is the level exceeded 50% of the time.

L₉₀ is the level exceeded 90% of the time. It is generally considered to represent the background or ambient level of a noise environment.^72–74

Furthermore, a quality control chart (Figure 5) was used to check the variations of Leq noise levels with time and to determine the disparity range at level 3 sigma (+/− 3 standard deviation from the mean). The upper-class limit and lower-class limit are 89 and 59 dB(A) respectively (Table 4). From the readings there was a slight variation in the morning from the specified class limits and a major variation in the evening; this resulted in a one-point control rule violation (less than −3 sigma).

Figure 5.

Leq quality control chart.

The effects of road traffic noise in urban areas have been examined not only due to traffic volume, but also due to the high rate of annoyance response that road traffic noise can generate, leading to a reduction in urban quality of life.⁷⁵

Conclusion

Every government’s overall road noise control policies are to ensure that a satisfactory noise environment is achieved and maintained to safeguard public well-being and to protect people from excessive noise. Therefore, many institutions have made numerous efforts to curb the problem associated with road traffic noise through the establishment of a control policy.

The essence of this study was to understand the current traffic noise practices in terms of guidelines and control policies. In the case of developing countries, specifically in sub-Saharan Africa, the regulation of traffic noise is limited, including the evaluation criteria and the state of practise. This is evident from the findings from the survey at the different agencies of this study as little is known when it comes to the state of practice for traffic noise and policy in Ghana.

When considering the assessment of traffic noise, noise measurement is required as the base process to determine the level of noise and its associated underlying factors.⁷⁶ From the measurements it was observed that the noise levels were above the permissible limit and as such cause annoyance, which may lead to other health related problems. The country, which is still developing and already faces economic difficulties, may be impacted by this, if not addressed. Ghana cannot risk losing its vibrant working class to noise-induced hearing loss or other self-reported health effects caused by environmental noise pollution, specifically traffic noise.

The study will further be expanded to carry out evaluation and measurement of traffic noise levels at various locations in the city. This would help develop a model that could be used to predict traffic noise exposure for the country.

Therefore, it is recommended that all stakeholders, transport, health, and environmental agencies, work unanimously to ensure that effective control of traffic noise pollution is developed, enforced, and implemented. In addition, enlighten the population about the possible health outcomes due to traffic noise exposure as well as the various measures that can help in reducing the exposure. It is also recommended that the relevant authorities introduce a road traffic noise monitoring scheme. This will establish a system for reporting to the Transportation Ministry on road traffic noise abatement measures.

Footnotes

Declaration of conflicting interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This work is supported by the Regional Transport Research Education Centre Kumasi.

Ethical approval

The study was carried out according to the procedures and requirements of the Human Research, Publications & Ethics Committee of Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology, Kumasi with certificate number CHRPE/AP/8211/22.

ORCID iD

Fidelma Ibili

References

Therrien

Tummala

. D noise sources. In: Probability and Random Processes for Electrical and Computer Engineers. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, 2020, pp. 421–426.

Murphy

King

Rice

. Estimating human exposure to transport noise in central Dublin, Ireland. Environ Int 2009; 35: 298–302.

Armah

Odoi

Yawson

, et al. Mapping of noise risk zones derived from religious activities and perceptions in residential neighbourhoods in the cape coast metropolis, Ghana. Environ Hazards 2010; 9: 358–368.

Johnbosco

Njoku

Richard

. Preliminary survey of noise levels at major traffic hot-spots in Owerri, Imo State Nigeria. J Multidiscip Eng Sci Technol 2020; 7: 11558.

Sordello

Ratel

Flamerie De Lachapelle

, et al. Evidence of the impact of noise pollution on biodiversity: a systematic map. Environ Evid 2020; 9: 20–27.

Ibili

Owolabi

Ackaah

, et al. Statistical modelling for urban roads traffic noise levels. Sci Afr 2022; 15: e01131. DOI: 10.1016/j.sciaf.2022.e01131.

Alva Käte

. Health effects of road traffic noise in childhood and adolescence. Stockholm, Sweden: Karolinska Institutet, 2019.

Wallas

Ekström

Bergström

, et al. Traffic noise exposure in relation to adverse birth outcomes and body mass between birth and adolescence. Environ Res 2019; 169: 362–367.

Halonen

Dehbi

Hansell

, et al. Associations of night-time road traffic noise with carotid intima-media thickness and blood pressure: the Whitehall II and SABRE study cohorts. Environ Int 2017; 98: 54–61.

10.

Ouis

. Annoyance from road traffic noise: a review. J Environ Psychol 2001; 21: 101–120.

11.

Bluhm

Berglind

Nordling

, et al. Road traffic noise and hypertension. Occup Environ Med 2007; 64: 122–126.

12.

Anna

Blangiardo

Fortunato

, et al. Aircraft noise and cardiovascular disease near heathrow airport in London: small area study. BMJ 2013; 347: 1–16.

13.

Recio

Linares

Banegas

, et al. The short-term association of road traffic noise with cardiovascular, respiratory, and diabetes-related mortality. Environ Res 2016; 150: 383–390.

14.

Weyde

Krog

Oftedal

, et al. A longitudinal study of road traffic noise and body mass index trajectories from birth to 8 years. Epidemiology 2018; 29: 729–738.

15.

Christensen

Hjortebjerg

Raaschou-Nielsen

, et al. Pregnancy and childhood exposure to residential traffic noise and overweight at 7 years of age. Environ Int 2016; 94: 170–176.

16.

Gan

Davies

Demers

. Exposure to occupational noise and cardiovascular disease in the United States: the national health and nutrition examination survey 1999–2004. Occup Environ Med 2011; 68: 183–190.

17.

Ndrepepa

Twardella

. Relationship between noise annoyance from road traffic noise and cardiovascular diseases: a meta-analysis: Noise Health, 2011; 13: 251–259.

18.

Dratva

Phuleria

Foraster

, et al. Transportation noise and blood pressure in a population-based sample of adults. Environ Health Perspect 2012; 120: 50–55.

19.

Sørensen

Andersen

Nordsborg

, et al. Road traffic noise and incident myocardial infarction: a prospective cohort study. PLoS One 2012; 7: e39283–e39287.

20.

Nijland

Wee

GPV

. Traffic noise in europe: a comparison of calculation methods, noise indices and noise standards for road and railroad traffic in europe. Transp Rev 2005; 25: 591–612. DOI: 10.1080/01441640500115850.

21.

Saber

Lweis

Ahmad

FAH

, et al. On the comparison of traffic noise in different countries. Int J Adv Appl Sci 2014; 1: 1–10.

22.

Bateman

Day

Lake

. The effect of road traffic on residential property values: a literature review and hedonic pricing study. Edinburgh, UK: Scottish Executive, 2001.

23.

Sirin

. State-of-the-art review on sustainable design and construction of quieter pavements — part 2: factors affecting tire-pavement noise and prediction models. Sustainability 2016; 8: 692.

24.

Shin

Kim

, et al. Influence of noise exposure on cardiocerebrovascular disease in Korea. Sci Total Environ 2019; 651: 1867–1876.

25.

Dai

, et al. Development of a traffic noise prediction model on inland waterway of China using the FHWA. Sci Total Environ 2014; 482–483: 480–485.

26.

Kumar

Nigam

Kumar

. Vehicular traffic noise modeling using artificial neural network approach. Transp Res C Emerg Technol 2014; 40: 111–122.

27.

Sharma

Vijay

L Bodhe

, et al. Adoptive neuro-fuzzy inference system for traffic noise prediction. Int J Comput Appl 2014; 98: 14–19.

28.

Bąkowski

Radziszewski

Dekys

. Modelling of road traffic noise. MATEC Web Conf; 2018, 157: 02001. DOI: 10.1051/matecconf/201815702001.

29.

Hamad

Ali Khalil

Shanableh

. Modeling roadway traffic noise in a hot climate using artificial neural networks. Transp Res D Transp Envir 2017; 53: 161–177.

30.

Lee

Jerrett

Ross

, et al. Assessment of traffic-related noise in three cities in the United States. Environ Res 2014; 132: 182–189.

31.

Ramírez

Domínguez

. Modeling urban traffic noise with stochastic and deterministic traffic models. Appl Acoust 2013; 74: 614–621.

32.

Ana

GREE

Shendell

Brown

, et al. Assessment of noise and associated health impacts at selected secondary schools in ibadan, Nigeria. J Environ Public Health 2009; 2009: 739502. DOI: 10.1155/2009/739502.

33.

Oyedepo

. Development of noise map for Ilorin metropolis, Nigeria. Int J Environ Stud 2013; 70: 503–514.

34.

Ogunseye

Jibiri

Akanni

. Noise exposure levels and health implications on daily road side petty traders at some major roundabouts in Ibadan, Nigeria. Int J Phys Sci 2018; 13: 257–264.

35.

Oyedepo

Saadu

. A comparative study of noise pollution levels in some selected areas in Ilorin Metropolis, Nigeria. Environ Monit Assess 2009; 158: 155–167.

36.

Sieber

Ragettli

Brink

, et al. Land use regression modeling of outdoor noise exposure in informal settlements in Western Cape, South Africa. Int J Environ Res Public Health; 2017; 14: 1262. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph14101262.

37.

Stansfeld

Clark

. Health effects of noise exposure in children. Curr Environ Health Rep 2015; 2: 171–178.

38.

Atmaca

Peker

Altin

. Industrial noise and its effects on humans. Polish J Environ Stud 2005; 14: 721–726.

39.

Boateng

CAS

Amedofu

. Industrial noise pollution and its effects on the hearing capabilities of workers: a study from saw mills, printing presses and corn mills. Afr J Health Sci 2004; 11: 55–60.

40.

Essandoh

. A study of occupational noise exposure among gold miners at Anglo Gold Ashanti Limited (Obuasi). Kumasi, Ghana, Kwame Nkrumah University Of Science and Technology, 2011. DOI: 10.16194/j.cnki.31-1059/g4.2011.07.016.

41.

Arnold

A-B

DANSO

. Noise-induced hearing loss among workers at the Kotoka international airport. Kumasi, Ghana: Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology, 2011. DOI: 10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004.

42.

Zakpala

Armah

Sackey

, et al. Night-time decibel hell: mapping noise exposure zones and individual annoyance ratings in an urban environment in Ghana. Scientifica (Cairo) 2014; 2014: 1–11.

43.

Essandoh

Armah

Afrifa

EKA

, et al. Determination of ambient noise levels and perception of residents in halls at the university of cape coast, Ghana. Environ Nat Resour Res 2011; 1: 181. DOI: 10.5539/enrr.v1n1p181

44.

Amundsen

Klæboe

. A Nordic perspective on noise reduction at the source. Oslo, Norway: Transportøkonomisk institutt, 2005.

45.

Schwela

. Environmental noise challenges and policies in low- and middle- income countries. S F J Health 2021; 2: 26–45.

46.

Jongens

AWD

. Reducing road traffic noise in South Africa. In: 27th South African Transport Conference (SATC 2008), Pretoria, South Africa, 7–11 July 2008.

47.

EEA . Environment noise in Europe 2020.

48.

Haq

Schwela

. Transport and environment in Sub-Saharan Africa, 2012.

49.

National Environmental (Noise Standards and Control) . Federal republic of Nigeria, 2009.

50.

EPA/ERS/IEIATRC . Republic of liberia environmental protection agency noise pollution control and standards regulation, 2017.

51.

Knott

Kwasi

. ‘If you complain they see you as evil’: Accra’s religious noise problem | cities. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2019/mar/27/if-you-complain-they-see-you-as-evil-accras-religious-noise-problem

52.

Héroux

Babisch

Belojevic

, et al. WHO environmental noise guidelines for the European Region. Copenhagen, Denmark: WHO, 2018.

53.

Environmental management and coordination. The environmental management and coordination (noise and excessive vibration pollution) (control) regulations, 2009.

54.

Yirenya-Tawiah

Dzidzo

. Noise Pollution and Our Health. Accra, Ghana: Institute for Environment and Sanitation Studies, 2012, 2, pp. 1–2.

55.

Clark

Alli

Nathvani

, et al. Space-time characterization of community noise and sound sources in Accra, Ghana. Sci Rep 2021; 11: 11113–11114.

56.

Quartey

LNK

Amos-Abanyie

Afram

. Noise exposure levels in basic school environments in a city in Ghana. Open J Civ Eng 2021; 11: 81–95.

57.

Ekow Baffoe

Duker

. Application of multiple linear regression technique to predict noise pollution levels and their spatial patterns in the tarkwa mining community of Ghana. Am J Math Comput Model 2019; 4: 36.

58.

Ghana Standards Authority . Health protection - requirements for ambient noise control, 2018.

59.

Flimel

Dupláková

. The noise study as a tool of the building urbanistic management. Noise Vib Worldw 2019; 50: 103–111.

60.

Given

Purposive sampling. The SAGE Encyclopedia of Qualitative Research Methods. SAGE Publications, Inc, 2012, doi:https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412963909.n349

61.

Ames

Glenton

Lewin

. Purposive sampling in a qualitative evidence synthesis: a worked example from a synthesis on parental perceptions of vaccination communication. BMC Med Res Methodol 2019; 19: 26–29.

62.

Gerber

Green

. The effects of canvassing, telephone calls, and direct mail on voter turnout: a field experiment. Am Polit Sci Rev 2000; 94: 653–663.

63.

Koushki

. Bus transit terminal noise and users’ perceptions. Noise Vib Worldw 2002; 33: 12–15.

64.

Fields

De Jong

Gjestland

, et al. Standardized general-purpose noise reaction questions for community noise surveys: research and a recommendation. J Sound Vib 2001; 242: 641–679.

65.

Barry

Regan

. FHWA highway traffic noise, 1979.

66.

Calculation of road traffic noise. Dept of transport calculation of road traffic noise.pdf. London, UK: Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, 1988.

67.

Nulty

. The adequacy of response rates to online and paper surveys: what can be done? Assess Eval High Educ 2008; 33: 301–314.

68.

Bodin

Björk

Ardö

, et al. Annoyance, sleep and concentration problems due to combined traffic noise and the benefit of quiet Side. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2015; 12: 1612–1628.

69.

Okokon

Turunen

Ung-Lanki

, et al. Road-traffic noise: annoyance, risk perception, and noise sensitivity in the finnish adult population. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2015; 12: 5712–5734.

70.

Shepherd

McBride

Dirks

, et al. Annoyance and health-related quality of life: a cross-sectional study involving two noise sources. J Environ Prot (Irvine, Calif) 2014; 05: 400–407.

71.

Ramalingeswara Rao

Seshagiri Rao

. Community reaction to road traffic noise. Appl Acoust 1992; 37: 51–64.

72.

Oyedepo

Adeyemi

Olawole

, et al. A GIS – based method for assessment and mapping of noise pollution in Ota metropolis, Nigeria. MethodsX 2019; 6: 447–457.

73.

Kumar

KVD

Srinivas

. Study of noise levels at commercial and industrial areas in an urban environment. Int J Eng Res Appl 2015; 5: 89–92.

74.

Ibili

Adanu

Adams

, et al. Traffic noise models and noise guidelines: a review. Noise Vib Worldw 2021; 53: 095745652110526.

75.

Argalášová-Sobotová

Lekaviciute

Jeram

, et al. Environmental noise and cardiovascular disease in adults: research in central, Eastern and South-Eastern Europe and Newly Independent States. Noise Health 2013; 15: 22–31.

76.

Ibili

Adanu

Adams

, et al. Traffic noise models and noise guidelines: a review. Noise Vib Worldw 2022; 53: 65–79. DOI: 10.1177/09574565211052693.