Towards standardization in soundscape preference assessment A.L. Brown a , Jian Kang b,⇑ , Truls Gjestland c a Urban Research Program, Griffith University, Nathan, Brisbane 4111, Australia b School of Architecture, University of Sheffield, Sheffield S10 2TN, United Kingdom c SINTEF ICT, N-7465 Trondheim, Norway article info Article history: Received 31 October 2009 Received in revised form 22 December 2010 Accepted 4 January 2011 Available online 31 January 2011 Keywords: Sound Soundscape Sound preference Standardization abstract The study of soundscapes involves diverse fields of practice, diverse approaches and diverse disciplinary interests. The field overlaps with the much larger and established field of environmental noise manage- ment, and also intersects, to various degrees, with other areas of acoustics such as sound quality, human acoustic comfort in buildings, and music—and also with non-acoustic fields such as wilderness and rec- reation management, urban and housing design, and landscape planning and management. Working Group 54 of ISO/TC 43/SC 1 has been formed with a remit of standardization for perceptual assessment of human sound preference (in outdoor space) using questionnaires. The working group began its work in 2009, with considerable and wide-ranging discussion amongst its members. This paper makes a range of observations, and sometimes suggestions, on matters pertinent to eventual definition of the soundscape; on outcomes of interest arising from experience of a soundscape; on the role of context in assessment; on sound sources in different places; and on relevant lessons for soundscape assessment from experience of questionnaire measurement of noise annoyance. It represents a personal view, though informed by a range of opinions from the Working Group meeting and from literature. Ó 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. 1. Introduction In 2008, a Working Group of ISO/TC 43/SC 1 was established to begin consideration of a standardized method for assessment of soundscape quality outdoors—such assessment being seen as not just a question of presence or absence of annoying sounds, but the positive aspects of sound environments as perceived by people. The proposal argued that such a standardized method could be uti- lized by researchers to achieve compatibility of results from vari- ous studies of relationships between perceived soundscape quality and acoustic, physical and visual properties of areas; by authorities in preparation of guidelines based on perceptual assessment of soundscape quality; and by city planners and others in investigation of soundscapes that could lead to creation of high quality soundscapes in recreational and residential areas. Potential application could be in outdoor recreational areas (e.g. city parks, urban squares, or wilderness) and in residential areas (e.g. outdoor places, gardens, or balconies of buildings) where high sound quality is desired. Matters that could be considered for stan- dardization included methodology, questionnaire protocols, identi- fication of sounds heard as part of the soundscape, ratings of human overall preference and of various perceptual dimensions of the soundscape, together with essential information to be re- corded on the setting and on human activity. The Working Group (WG54 – assessment of soundscape quality) held an initial meeting, early in 2009, in which its members, with a diverse range of interests in soundscapes (human perception stud- ies, urban design, wilderness management, noise control, transport, tranquility assessment, etc.) and a wide range of disciplinary back- grounds (acoustics, engineering, planning, architecture, design, park management, psychology, sound quality, sociology, geography etc.) attempted to tackle some of the issues that might be involved in moving the Working Group’s objectives forward. It was not surprising that such a varied group struggled not only with diverse views, concepts and levels of understanding of sound- scapes, but also with the purposes and intended outcomes of the Working Group. While there were some tentative agreements, much remains under debate, and in rather fundamental areas such as a working definition of soundscapes and the feasibility of using questionnaires to assess perception of soundscapes. This paper is the authors’ attempt to elaborate on some of the issues and principles that impact this topic. It is not an account of the proceedings or a majority view of the Working Group. 2. The soundscape A fundamental question that exercised the group was ‘‘What is a soundscape?’’ Some members sought a strict definition of the 0003-682X/$ - see front matter Ó 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.apacoust.2011.01.001 ⇑ Corresponding author. E-mail address: j.kang@sheffield.ac.uk (J. Kang). Applied Acoustics 72 (2011) 387–392 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Applied Acoustics journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/apacoust