PROCEEDINGS of the
23rd International Congress on Acoustics
9 to 13 September 2019 in Aachen, Germany

Characteristics of urban soundscapes worthy of preservation
Yihong JIA1

Jian KANG1, 2

Hui MA1

1

2

School of Architecture, Tianjin University, China
UCL Institute for Environmental Design and Engineering, The Bartlett, University College London, UK

Abstract
Sound environment is an essential component of overall environment and reflects the characteristics of acity. Unfortunately, some precious soundscapes are gradually disappearing with the rapid development of
cities. Therefore, preserving urban soundscapes is as important as noise control in order to create a goodurban environment. In this study, a questionnaire survey was first carried out in Tianjin to investigate theurban soundscapes that should be preserved. Totally 2504 respondents, including residents and tourists
participated in the survey, and 158 urban soundscapes were chosen by them as being worthy of preservation.
Twelve of these soundscapes were selected as representatives for a group soundscape walk to explore thecharacteristics of soundscapes worthy of preservation. The result shows that relaxation, vibrancy,
representativeness, strength, and richness were prominent characteristics of the soundscapes deemedworthy of preservation. Meanwhile, the preservation level were positively correlated with their relaxation
and representativeness characteristics.
Keywords: Soundscape; Soundscape preservation; Characteristics, City

1. INTRODUCTION
Improving the sound environment is an essential way to improve overall urban environmental
quality, and to reflect the characteristics of a city (1). However, with rapid urbanization, the urban
sound environment is gradually degrading (2, 3). Most research and policies focus on noisepropagation and reduction in urban areas, however, the measures do not necessarily lead to better
acoustic comfort in urban areas (4, 5). Noise complaints in China accounted for almost 50% of thetotal number of environmental complaints in 2017, compared with 39.2% in 2013. Soundscapes, as
positive environmental resources, have proved to be effective in enhancing the impression of acity(6). Therefore, besides noise control, preserving original, positive soundscapes should also be
considered as a useful method of improving the sound environment in cities.
To identify the soundscapes worthy of preservation, previous projects and investigations havebeen performed in various types of spaces, including national parks and other naturally protectedareas (7-9), historical city centres (10, 11), and the whole country (12). Overall, previous soundscapepreservation studies have provided a quite detailed summary of the soundscapes worthy ofpreservation either from the point of view of the entire country or in specific blocks in urban areas.
It seems necessary that additional studies need to be conducted from the perspective of soundscapepreservation at the city level to create more active and vigorous cities.
Moreover, these previous researches involving soundscape preservation commonly focused onfield investigations and measurements (10), and in order to understand the soundscapes worthy ofpreservation more deeply, the characteristics need to be analysed. There have been numerous studies
investigating the characteristics of soundscapes in different urban areas (13-15). However, studies of
the characteristics from the viewpoint of soundscapes worthy of preservation are still lacking .
Additionally, these characteristics directly influence the preservation levels of the soundscapes
worthy of preservation, however, how these characteristics affect the level of preservation still needs
1jiayihong123@sina.com
jiankang@tju.edu.cn; j.kang@ucl.ac.uk
3mahui@tju.edu.cn
22521

clarification.
Therefore, the study aims to explore: (1) soundscapes worthy of preservation and their distribution
at the city scale, (2) the perceived characteristics and preservation levels of those soundscapes
worthy of preservation, and (3) the relationship between the characteristics and preservation levels.

2. METHODOLOGY
2.1 Social Survey
The study was conducted in Tianjin, which is located in the North of China (between 38°34' and40°15' N and 116°43' to 118°4' E). A great diversity of soundscapes have been formed in Tianjin
owing to its profound culture character and beautiful scenery (Marinelli, 2010). Meanwhile, as oneof the four municipalities in China, Tianjin also faces many environmental problems. The
destruction of a large number of soundscapes is in conflict with the development of the city. Thus,
the findings of this study can provide references for other cities.
The first step of this study was to determine what kind of urban soundscape should be preserved.
Both online and face-to-face investigations were conducted throughout a period of six months, i.e.
from June to December 2016, requiring respondents to recommend soundscapes that should bepreserved in the city based on their own experiences. The respondents in this survey were selected
randomly, including both locals and tourists. A total of 2504 valid questionnaires were collected andthe demographic information of the respondents was listed in Table 1.
Table 1 Demographic information of the respondents
Frequency
GenderAge groups

Education level

Occupation

Male

51%

Female

49%

<20

7%

20–29

59%

30–39

17%

40–49

8%

50–59

4%

>60

4%

Primary school

2%

Secondary school

19%

University

59%

Graduated

20%

Architect6%Student

32%

Working person

57%

Pensioner5%

2.2 Group Soundscape Walk
A group soundscape walk was conducted to explore the characteristics and preservation levels of
the soundscapes worthy of preservation. Twenty-three students aged 20 to 25 participated in thisstudy. They were graduate students majoring in Architecture and they could understand the purposeof this study well. Figure 1 showed the twelve evaluation locations of this group soundscape walk,which were recommended more than 20 times in the questionnaire survey. They are located in five2522

districts: Water Park, Italian Style Street, Five Old Street, Ancient Cultural Street and the Civic
Square. Water Park, the largest park in Tianjin, is an essential place for citizens to relax, which has
leisure and comforting characteristics. Italian Style Street is the only street in Asia with an Italianstyle. There are more than 200 European buildings in this area, which have been preserved for morethan 100 years. The Five Old Street is a famous attraction, with profound cultural and historicalcharacter. The horse carriage is still one of the transportation means in this area. The soundenvironment is relatively quiet in Five Old Street, as motor vehicles are limited in this district.
Ancient Cultural Street is a historical block with Chinese characteristics. This block still conserves
the traditional Chinese urban structure and organizational layout. Civic Square has a pleasantenvironment, and many children play in the square every day.

Musical instrument sound in

Birdsong inDance music in

Peking opera performance

Water Park

Water Park

Water Parkin Water Park

Music in Italian Style Street

Carriage sound in

Leaves rustling in

Tranquil environment inFive Old Street

Five Old Street

Five Old Street

Water sound of Haihe River

Water sound inSound of children playing in

Civic Square

Civic Square

Pedlary inAncient Culture Street

Figure 1 – Evaluation locations of the group soundscape walk
During the soundscape walk, the participants were asked to stay at each evaluation location for 30
minutes to experience the sound environment and complete the assessment questionnaire. T here are
two questions in the questionnaire. The first question was used to evaluate the characteristics of thesoundscapes using the semantic differential method. Seventeen semantic indicators were used in thequestionnaire, which were summarized from previous research studies (16) and our previous focus
group, including: gentle – harsh, fast – slow, simple – varied, natural – artificial, strong – weak, far –close, pleasant – unpleasant, relaxed – intensive, harmonious – disharmonious, light – heavy, quiet –noisy, comfort – discomfort, impure – pure, like – dislike, vibrancy – dull, directional – universal,
and representative – unrepresentative. The second question explored the preservation level of eachsoundscape. Participants used the ten-point rating scale to determine the level of preservation basedon their own understanding.

3. RESULTS
3.1 Soundscapes Worthy of Preservation
A total of 158 soundscapes were considered to be worthy of preservation according to therecommendations from respondents. Among those soundscapes, twenty-seven were recommended
more than 20 times (approximately 1% of total respondents), as sho wn in Figure 2.

2523

Music in Jingyuan Garden
Sound of the silversmith's old craftSound of skating on the surface of Haihe River
Reading sound in the classroom
Choir in Xikai Church
Running sound in Minyuan StadiumMusical instrument sound in Water Park
Crowd sound in Commercial Street
Dance music in Water Park
Carriage sound in Five Old Street
Sound from fallen leaves due to wind blowing
Sound in Dabei temple
Sound of children playing in Civic Square
Cicada sound in the campus
Campus Broadcast
Whistle on Haihe River
Peking opera performance in Water Park
Tranquil environment at Five Old Street
Conversations in bystreet using dialect
Leaves rustling in alley
Pedlary in Traditional Cultural Street
Water sound in Civic SquareMusic fountain in Civic SquareMusic in Italian Style Street
Bell of Tianjin Railway Station
Birdsong in Water Park
Water sound of Haihe River

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Recommendation Frequency(%)

Figure 2 – Soundscapes worthy of preservation
These recommended soundscapes are in urban parks or recreation areas, historical districts, andcommercial areas, with the respective proportions of 66.37%, 19.47%, and 14.16%. Urban parks
were the most important areas for soundscapes worthy of preservation. Because as important areas
for restoring the physical and mental health of citizens, urban parks often contain comfortablesoundscapes. Furthermore, the top three sound sources of these soundscapes were social/communal
sounds (talking, bells, laughter, and sounds from human activities), animal sounds (birdsongs andother sounds from non-domesticated animals) and water sounds, with the respective proportions of
34. 1%, 17. 7 %, and 15. 2 %. It was found that the soundscapes worthy of preservation often affectedlarger areas and larger populations. For example, the water sound of Haihe River was the mostfrequently mentioned as a soundscape worthy of preservation. Haihe River, as the mother r iver of
Tianjin, traverses the city from the North to the South, affecting a lot of people. The birdsong in Water
Park was also recommended frequently. Water Park is the largest park in Tianjin, with a large flow ofpeople. The music in Italian Style Street was also an important soundscape worthy of preservation. As
one of the most attractive scenic spots in Tianjin, Italian Style Street attracts many tourists. As for theperiodicity of these soundscapes, most of them were stable except some natural soundsc apes thatchanged with the seasons.
3.2 Characteristics of Urban Soundscapes Worthy of Preservation
Factor analysis was conducted using the 276 (23participants × 12 locations) responses obtained
through the soundscape walking. As a result, five factors were identified to describe thecharacteristics of the soundscapes worthy of preservation, as shown in Table 2.
Factor 1 (32%) called relaxation, including gentle-harsh, harmonious-disharmonious,
comfort-discomfort, like-dislike, fast-slow, relaxed-intensive, quiet-noisy, impure-pure. Factor 2(15%) was generally associated with vibrancy, including pleasant-unpleasant, light-heavy. Factor 3
(8%)
was
best
explained
asrepresentativeness,
includingnatural-artificial
andrepresentative-unrepresentative. Factor 4 (7%) was principally related to strength, including
far-close and strong-weak. Factor 5 (6%) was mostly associated with richness, including
simple-varied and directional-universal.
These five factors explained total of 69% of the variance, however, in many previous studies, only
2-4 factors were needed to explain basically equal or even more total variance (16, 17). This indicatedthat the characteristics of the soundscapes worthy of preservation in cities were more complicated.
Meanwhile, the weight of the relaxation characteristic was higher than that of other factors, whichindicating that the relaxation is the most important characteristic of the soundscapes worthy ofpreservation. This result reflected people’s urgent need for a highly relaxing sound environment in2524

modern cities.
Table 2 Results of factor analyses (where KMO=0.844, N: 276)
Semantic indicators
1 (32%) 2 (15%) 3 (8%) 4 (7%) 5 (6%)
Gentle–Harsh

0. 614

0. 2080. 206

0. 341-0. 293

Fast–Slow-0. 637

0. 422

0. 125-0. 328

0. 067

Relaxed–Intensive-0. 550-0. 440-0. 117-0. 177

0. 208Harmonious–Disharmonious

0. 557

0. 520-0. 014

0. 216-0. 112

Quiet–Noisy-0. 71-0. 115-0. 299-0. 196-0. 054

Comfort–Discomfort

0. 6750. 4880. 078-0. 059

0. 102

Impure–Pure-0. 634-0. 274-0. 332

0. 062-0. 278

Like–Dislike

0. 637

0. 552

0. 0590. 070-0. 077

Pleasant–Unpleasant

0. 131

0. 728-0. 017

0. 098-0. 067Light–Heavy

0. 236

0. 691

0. 155

0. 131-0. 226

Vibrancy–Dull

0. 052-0. 795

0. 2700. 1330. 132Natural–Artificial

0. 2340. 086

0. 719-0. 1960. 242

Representative–Unrepresentative

0. 154

0. 152-0. 761-0. 113-0. 155

Strong–Weak-0. 391

0. 120-0. 264-0. 633

0. 071

Far–Close-0. 226

0. 1030. 0800. 8850. 068

Simple–Varied

0. 065-0. 165

0. 394-0. 144

0. 692

Directional–Universal

0. 020-0. 012-0. 203

0. 1700. 850

3.3 The Relationship between Characteristics and Preservation Level of Soundscapes
Worthy of Preservation
Figure 3 showed the relationship between the preservation level and the characteristics of thesoundscapes worthy of preservation. It could be seen that the level of preservation increases with the
improvement of relaxation, representativeness, strength and richness, while decreases with theincrease of vibrancy evaluation. In Table 2, the correlation coefficients between the preservation level
and the evaluation of the characteristics are shown.
Table 2 Correlation between characteristics and the preservation level
Preservation Level

Relaxation

Vibrancy

RepresentativenessStrength

Richness

0.966**-0.5210.897**

0.488

0.430

There was a strong positive correlation between the preservation level and the relaxation andrepresentativeness characteristics, while no statistically significant correlation was observed on theother three characteristics. It meant that the soundscapes with outstanding relaxation or
representativeness usually get a high level of preservation. Thus, in urban areas, more attention shouldbe paid to preserving the relaxing soundscapes, such as the birdsong in parks, the water sound and thetranquil environment. Meanwhile, priority should also be given to the soundscapes that have highrepresentativeness such as the bells and pedlary in historical areas. As part of theintangible cultural
heritage, these representative soundscapes can effectively avoid homogeneity of urban areas.

2525

10

8
6
4
2
0
-3 -2 -1

0

1

2

8
6
4
2
0
-3 -2 -1

30

1Evaluation of
RerpresentativenessEvaluation of Relaxation

2

3

8
6
4
2
0
-3 -2 -1

0

1

2

3

Evaluation of Vibrancy

10

Preservation Level

10

Preservation Level

10

Preservation Level

Preservation Level

Preservation Level

10

8
6
4
2
0
-3 -2 -1

0

1

2

3

8
6
4
2
0
-3 -2 -1

Evaluation of Strength

0

1

2

3

Evaluation of Richness

Figure 3 – The relationship between the preservation level and the characteristics of the soundscapes
worthy of preservation

4. CONCLUSIONSThis study investigated the characteristics of urban soundscapes worthy of preservation. The main
conclusions can be summarized as follows:
1. The urban soundscapes worthy of preservation recommended by the participants were situated invarious locations. Among them, parks and historical districts were the most important urban
contexts for these soundscapes. Furthermore, the top three sound sourc es of these recommended
soundscapes were social/communal sounds (talking, bells, laughter, and sounds from humanactivities), animal sounds (birdsong, and other sounds from non-domesticated animals), and watersounds. It was also found that the soundscapes which could affect larger areas and crowds weremore frequently recommended by the participants.
2. Five major factors were identified to evaluate the soundscapes worthy of preservation, including
relaxation, vibrancy, representativeness, strength, and richness. These five factors covered 68%of the total variance, while half of the variance was explained by the relaxation factor.
3. Relaxation and representativeness were positively correlated with the preservation level ofsoundscapes worthy of preservation, which meant that residents would like to preserve
soundscapes with a higher sense of relaxation and representativeness.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This study is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Project No.
51678401), and the authors would like to express appreciation for all participants in the social survey
and the soundscape walk.

REFERENCES
1. Kang J. Urban sound environment: CRC Press; 2006.
2. Iglesias C, Diaz L, Soliño M. Noise pollution in national parks: Soundscape and economic valuation.
Landscape and Urban Planning. 2014;123:1-9.
3. Hong JY, Jeon JY. The effects of audio–visual factors on perceptions of environmental noise barrier
performance. Landscape and Urban Planning. 2014;125:28-37.

2526

4. Yang W, Kang J. Acoustic comfort evaluation in urban open public spaces. Applied Acoustics.
2005;66(2):211-29.
5. Kang J. Sound propagation in interconnected urban streets: A parametric study. 2001.
6. Kang J, Aletta F, Gjestland TT, Brown LA, Botteldooren D, Schulte-Fortkamp B, et al. Ten questions on
the soundscapes of the built environment. Building and Environment. 2016;108:284-94.
7. Weinzimmer D, Newman P, Taff D, Benfield J, Lynch E, Bell P. Human Responses to Simulated
Motorized Noise in National Parks. Leisure Sciences. 2014;36(3):251-67.
8. Miller NP. US National Parks and management of park soundscapes: A review. Applied Acoustics.
2008;69(2):77-92.
9. Dumyahn SL, Pijanowski BC. Soundscape conservation. Landscape Ecology. 2011;26(9):1327-44.
10. Huang L, Kang J. The sound environment and soundscape preservation in historic city centres—the casestudy of Lhasa. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design. 2015;42(4):652-74.
11. Yelmi P. Protecting contemporary cultural soundscapes as intangible cultural heritage: sounds of Istanbul.
International Journal of Heritage Studies. 2016;22(4):302-11.
12. Daimon SM, Kazuya. Soundscape preservation policy and local society correspondence: A case of “100Soundscapes of Japan”. INTER-NOISE

Congress and Conference Proceedings, Hong Kong CHINA2017.

13. Liu J, Kang J, Behm H, Luo T. Effects of landscape on soundscape perception: Soundwalks in city parks.
Landscape and Urban Planning. 2014;123:30-40.
14. Yu BY, Kang J, Ma H. Development of Indicators for the Soundscape in Urban Shopping Streets. Acta
Acustica united with Acustica. 2016;102(3):462-73.
15. Meng Q, Kang J. The influence of crowd density on the sound environment of commercial pedestrian
streets. Sci Total Environ. 2015;511:249-58.
16. Kang J, Zhang M. Semantic differential analysis of the soundscape in urban open public spaces. Building
and Environment. 2010;45(1):150-7.
17. Cain R, Jennings P, Poxon J. The development and application of the emotional dimensions of asoundscape. Applied Acoustics. 2013;74(2):232-9.

2527