Public perceptions of air quality and quality of life in urban and suburban areas of London

Abstract

A comparative study was undertaken at two different sites (one urban, one suburban) in Greater London in order to examine whether there was a relationship between publicly available air quality data and the public's perception of air quality. Perceptions of air quality and its role as a potential quality of life indicator was also investigated. A total of 200 people were interviewed in Wood Green and Wimbledon in 1999 and air quality data were obtained simultaneously from the nearest appropriate monitoring station. The study has enabled a comparison between the public's perception of air quality and the actual monitored concentration values. The survey results reveal how seriously the public regards air pollution from road traffic in terms of their quality of life and identifies the attitudes of the public to nuisance from road traffic. The results reveal that the public's perception of air quality is not a reliable indicator of the actual levels of air pollution in their area. The results also revealed that air pollution issues generated as a result of road traffic are of high importance in terms of people's quality of life when compared to other aspects of their quality of life. The study revealed that residents in the urban area (Wood Green) were more disturbed by road traffic than residents in the suburban area (Wimbledon). Out of all the disturbances listed, it was found that residents were more disturbed by vehicle-derived fumes, dust and dirt than other aspects of road traffic related nuisance. The TELETEXT/CEEFAX service on air quality was little used by the public as a means of obtaining information on air pollution.

Association between annoyance and individuals' values of nitrogen dioxide in a European setting

“…They found a better correlation for subjects living in urban areas than for those living in residential areas 2. Williams and Bird6 showed that the perception of air pollution was not a reliable indicator of the actual levels when using the measurements from the nearest monitoring station in Greater London. They did not compare among different cities but they showed that inside the same city, subjects living in urban areas were more disturbed than subjects living in suburban areas.…”

Public Perceptions of Urban Air Pollution Risks

“…This is an important question, because it would explain why experts, who rely more on physical data, perceive problems differently from the general public. A comparative study was undertaken at two different sites (one urban, one suburban) in Greater London in order to examine whether there was a relationship between publicly available air quality data and the public's perception of air quality (Williams and Bird 2003). The survey results revealed how seriously the public regards air pollution from road traffic in terms of their quality of life and identifies the attitudes of the public to nuisance from road traffic.…”

The Relationship between Odour Annoyance Scores and Modelled Ambient Air Pollution in Sarnia, “Chemical Valley”, Ontario

“…This exposure estimation technique incorporates broader scopes and domains such as quality of life and community values [10,11]. Invariably, there are contrasting reports showing the relationship between annoyance scores and modelled ambient exposures.…”

“…When comparing self-reported traffic intensity to modelled air pollution from traffic in three birth cohorts from three countries: the Netherlands; Germany; and Sweden, Heinrich et al [14] found weak association between the subjective self-reported assessments of exposure and NO 2 modelled estimates. In addition, while examining the relationship between publicly available air quality data and public perception of air quality in London, UK, Williams and Bird [11] reported that perception of pollution exposure was not consistent with air quality data for urban and suburban areas although there were some trends with women and older people perceiving higher levels of air pollution than their female and younger counter parts.…”