The noise matrix: time to reload?

12th April 2012

Related Topics

Related tags

  • Noise ,
  • Construction ,
  • Property



Practitioners from AMEC examine the strengths and weaknesses of using matrices to assess the significance of noise effects in developments

Environmental impact assessment (EIA) requires the identification of “likely significant” effects, but since most guidance documents used by acousticians do not directly define significance, it is for practitioners to develop methods to determine what is a significant noise effect.

To provide clarity and rationalise assessments, many EIA practitioners have developed assessment techniques based on matrices. This aids in the determination of significance of noise effects and provides a framework for both the assessments that are undertaken and the conclusions they present.

The evolution of the matrix

In general, matrices have evolved over time from simply indicating that an effect, such as noise, needs to be assessed, to more complex matrices which take into account features such as: the likelihood of an effect occurring, effect weightings, spatial dispersal of effects and sensitivity of receptors.

It’s important to remember that magnitude (the size or degree of change) does not always equate with significance (the importance for decision making). For example, a large increase in noise levels may be considered to have a high magnitude, but it may not be significant if the activity causing the increase noise is of very short duration.

The magnitude of effects is objective, whereas the determination of significance is more subjective as it involves value judgments.

The matrix revolution

Over time guidance documents have increasingly provided methodologies which align with the matrix approach. For example, early guidance presented example categorisations of significance based on noise-level change but did not introduce a matrix-based approach to assessment. More recent guidance, on the other hand, provides an example as to how the magnitude of noise effects can be combined with the sensitivity of receptors in a matrix to conclude the overall level of significance.

Further evidence that matrices are increasingly viewed as good standard practice is evident within the 2009 revision to BS 5228.

A review of environmental or acoustic consultancies, revealed that some have adopted matrix-based approaches which determine levels of significance on a sliding scale, whereas others simply use matrices to conclude effects as either significant or not. It also found marked differences in the structure of the matrices adopted by consultants and the terminology used.

Strengths and weaknesses

Like all tool, matrices have potential strengths and weaknesses. Benefits include:

  • They are clear and easy to understand – providing an assessment method which can be followed by those with limited expertise in assessing noise and allowing guideline noise values, benchmarks, noise level thresholds and noise level changes to be consolidated into levels of effect
  • They are easy to reproduce – different practitioners can undertake assessments of similar developments in a consistent manner.
  • They are particularly appropriate for noise assessment methodologies – such techniques lend themselves to matrix approaches and allow matrix-based assessments to be automated based upon the output of computational noise models.
  • They allows consideration of receptor sensitivity – assessment matrices aid this through a variety of approaches and guide assessments towards considering receptor groups allowing separate assessment criteria to be developed specifically for them.

However, weaknesses include:

  • Due to the objective and subjective nature of noise, it is not possible to develop a matrix which can take into account all of the factors that require consideration within EIA.
  • Consideration of multiple noise indicators is difficult – it is challenging to account for all factors, such as times of day or noise sources of differing character, within a single matrix.
  • Reliance on conclusions from assessment matrices can be dangerous – professional judgement must be made as to the overall significance of effects.
  • Site-specific factors can be overlooked – an assessment matrix developed for one planning application may not be as appropriate for another, regardless of the development similarities.

The matrix reloaded

Clearly matrix approaches are viewed as good practice providing clarity, traceability and reproducibility to EIA, but they have limitations and should be viewed as one of many assessment tools available to practitioners and not as a narrow assessment framework or the complete assessment methodology in itself.

It is critical that practitioners are allowed to set out an assessment matrix they feel is appropriate, without being constrained by it. It is acceptable to make conclusions based on subjective professional judgements which perhaps address factors not included in the matrix, however, any deviation away from the conclusions suggested by a matrix approach must be fully justified.

“Unfortunately, nobody can be told what the matrix is…” – the practitioner should develop an applicable matrix which reflects the nature of the proposed development, the locality of the site, and relevant guidance and policy.

Once developed the matrix should be used only as an aid to assessment, not the sole driver. “The answer is out there and it’s looking for you...”

This article was written as a contribution to the EIA Quality Mark’s commitment to improving EIA practice.

Ian Hepplewhite, James Trow and Gail Hitchins work for AMEC E&I UK.

This article was adapted from a paper produced for Proceedings of the Institute of Acoustics Vol 33, part 4, 2011, pp.156-162


Subscribe to IEMA's newsletters to receive timely articles, expert opinions, event announcements, and much more, directly in your inbox.

Transform articles

Advice note on health impact assessments

An advice note on health impact assessments and health in environmental assessments is set to be published by IEMA soon.

31st May 2024

Read more

IEMA’s Impact Assessment Network is delighted to have published A Roadmap to Digital Environmental Assessment.

2nd April 2024

Read more

Lisa Pool on how IEMA is shaping a sustainable future with impact assessment

27th November 2023

Read more

IEMA responded in September to the UK government’s consultation on the details of the operational reforms it is looking to make to the Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects (NSIP) consenting process as put forward in the NSIP reform action plan (February 2023).

24th November 2023

Read more

Members of IEMA’s Impact Assessment Network Steering Group have published the 17th edition of the Impact Assessment Outlook Journal, which provides a series of thought pieces on the policy and practice of habitats regulations assessment (HRA).

26th September 2023

Read more

In July, we published the long-awaited update and replacement of one of IEMA’s first published impact assessment guidance documents from 1993, Guidelines for the Environmental Assessment of Road Traffic.

1st August 2023

Read more

Are we losing sight of its intended purpose and what does the future hold for EIA? Jo Beech, Tiziana Bartolini and Jessamy Funnell report.

15th June 2023

Read more

Luke Barrows and Alfie Byron-Grange look at the barriers to adoption of digital environmental impacts assessments

1st June 2023

Read more

Media enquires

Looking for an expert to speak at an event or comment on an item in the news?

Find an expert

IEMA Cookie Notice

Clicking the ‘Accept all’ button means you are accepting analytics and third-party cookies. Our website uses necessary cookies which are required in order to make our website work. In addition to these, we use analytics and third-party cookies to optimise site functionality and give you the best possible experience. To control which cookies are set, click ‘Settings’. To learn more about cookies, how we use them on our website and how to change your cookie settings please view our cookie policy.

Manage cookie settings

Our use of cookies

You can learn more detailed information in our cookie policy.

Some cookies are essential, but non-essential cookies help us to improve the experience on our site by providing insights into how the site is being used. To maintain privacy management, this relies on cookie identifiers. Resetting or deleting your browser cookies will reset these preferences.

Essential cookies

These are cookies that are required for the operation of our website. They include, for example, cookies that enable you to log into secure areas of our website.

Analytics cookies

These cookies allow us to recognise and count the number of visitors to our website and to see how visitors move around our website when they are using it. This helps us to improve the way our website works.

Advertising cookies

These cookies allow us to tailor advertising to you based on your interests. If you do not accept these cookies, you will still see adverts, but these will be more generic.

Save and close