Attitudes Towards Environm Ental Noise from Concerts (NANR 292) a Survey of Concert and Music Event Attendees and Residents Local to Those Events
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Attitudes towards environm ental noise from concerts (NANR 292) A survey of concert and music event attendees and residents local to those events Legal notice © 2011 Ipsos MORI – all rights reserved. The contents of this report constitute the sole and exclusive property of Ipsos MORI. Ipsos MORI retains all right, title and interest, including without limitation copyright, in or to any Ipsos MORI trademarks, technologies, methodologies, products, analyses, software and know-how included or arising out of this report or used in connection with the preparation of this report. No license under any copyright is hereby granted or implied. The contents of this report are of a commercially sensitive and confidential nature and intended solely for the review and consideration of the person or entity to which it is addressed. No other use is permitted and the addressee undertakes not to disclose all or part of this report to any third party (including but not limited, where applicable, pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act 2000) without the prior written consent of the Company Secretary of Ipsos MORI. Contents Summary ........................................................................................2 Local residents........................................................................................... 2 Concert attendees...................................................................................... 5 Background ....................................................................................9 Policy / research context ............................................................................ 9 An updated evidence base....................................................................... 10 Research objectives................................................................................. 11 Methodology.................................................................................13 Local residents......................................................................................... 14 Sampling .................................................................................................. 15 Attendees of music events ....................................................................... 16 Piloting of the questionnaire..................................................................... 18 Comparison with recorded noise data...................................................... 18 Limitations of the survey data................................................................... 19 Local residents.............................................................................22 Profile of respondents .............................................................................. 22 Awareness of music events...................................................................... 24 Concerns held before music events take place........................................ 30 Impact of music events – hearing the music ............................................ 34 Impact of music events – being annoyed by the concert noise ................ 37 Positive and negative effects of concerts ................................................. 48 Support for music events ......................................................................... 53 Expressing views about concerts............................................................. 59 Views of concert attendees .........................................................67 Sample profile .......................................................................................... 67 Event attendance and music preference.................................................. 70 Unprompted likes and dislikes of music events........................................ 71 Importance of sound level and quality...................................................... 76 Satisfaction with sound level and quality.................................................. 79 Sound quality – Importance versus Rating............................................... 87 Sum m ary 1 © 2011 Ipsos MORI. Sum m ary Presented below is a summary of the key findings of this research project into views of concert noise. The overall aim of the research was to prepare and conduct face-to-face social surveys of nearby residents, in order to understand the attitudes to environmental noise from these concerts. Concert attendees were also included within the scope of the research to establish that the sound levels within the event were sufficient to not hamper concert-goers’ enjoyment of music events. The results from the surveys will be used to inform the revision of the Noise Council’s code of practice. Local residents Awareness of concerts ° There was a great deal of variation between concerts in the level of prior awareness local residents had of the event taking place; while the majority of all residents surveyed (61%) knew the concert was going to happen, this ranged from 99% among local residents to the Pride festival (an annual and high profile event in Brighton) to just 16% around the Wembley Arena concert (an indoor event where concerts take place most regularly of the surveyed venues). ° Prior awareness of the event also fell the further away people are from the venue, perhaps suggesting that some concert organisers proactively try to pre-warn those residents most likely to be affected. However, the single most common way of finding out about these concerts was via friends and/or neighbours (26% found out this way). Receiving a leaflet or flyer through the door was most common for those living within 250 metres of the venue, however (40%, compared to 7% further away). ° Being made aware of the events was relatively important to local residents as more than half of those who were not aware (53%) said they would have liked to have been informed of the concert before it took place, while a greater proportion closer to the venue felt this way (63% within 500 metres). Furthermore, almost half (43%) disagreed that there was enough publicity about their local event. When asked what more could have been done to help publicise concerts such as these, two in five (38%) believed letters or leaflets should be handed out to local households, while three in ten (29%) said nothing more could have been done. 2 © 2011 Ipsos MORI. Impact of concerts ° Of the local residents who knew their local concert was going to happen, a slight majority (54%) had no concerns about it taking place. The most commonly mentioned issues were about parking (16%) and traffic (14%), while just 13% had a concern about the possible noise levels (although this rises to 22% within 500 metres of the venue). ° Just under half (45%) of all people surveyed could hear the concert music inside their home, although this ranged from three quarters (75%) at the Green Day, Manchester concert to one in seven (14%) around the Kiss gig at Wembley Arena – the only indoor venue. ° Likelihood of hearing the music also decreased as the distance to the venue increased; 62% of people living within 500 metres heard the music, compared to 44% within 501- 1,000 metres and 24% beyond 1,000 metres. It is important to note, however, that there are a variety of other local factors which will influence how audible concert music is, such as the venue type, wind direction, local topography, background noise, urbanity, the type of music being played and factors related to the individual responding to the survey (for example their age, the direction the house faces and whether windows are double-glazed). ° The majority of residents surveyed were not annoyed by the concert noise; 55% of people did not hear the music, while 36% heard it but were not annoyed by it and 9% heard it and were very or fairly annoyed as a result. However, there is variation between different events; just 2% of all residents surveyed around the Proms concert were annoyed, while 29% of people living around the Green Day concert in Manchester expressed annoyance. Moreover, a relatively small proportion of those who heard the music were annoyed by it; one in five (20%) said they were annoyed, a quarter (23%) were not very annoyed, but the majority (56%) were not at all annoyed. ° It should be noted, however, that certain subgroups (of those who heard the music) showed higher levels of annoyance, including: ‹ People within 500 metres of the music venue (24%, compared to 18% further away); ‹ Men (23% compared to 17% of women), irrespective of their distance from the venue; ‹ Households with children aged under 9 (26% compared to 20% overall); ‹ People who are deaf, deafened or hard of hearing (35% compared with 19% of people without any hearing impairment); 3 © 2011 Ipsos MORI. Owner occupiers (22% compared to 16% of people renting); Those who could hear the music even with their windows closed (33% compared to 13% who could hear it only with windows open); Households with double-glazed windows (22% compared to 11% of households with single-glazing); and Those unaware of the event before it began (35% compared to 14% of those who had prior warning). ° This last point is key; prior awareness of the concert appears to be important to managing residents’ expectations and allaying concerns. As prior awareness of the concert increases, the likelihood of being annoyed by the noise falls. As currently suggested in the Code of Practice, public relations are therefore crucial and concert organisers should continue to be encouraged to advertise these events to local residents, wherever possible. ° Being able to hear