ANIMA D2.11 : Recommendations from exemplification case studies summary and implications for BP dissemination
Creators: name: Ohlenforst, Barbara
name: Hooper, Paul
name: Heyes, Graeme
name: Aalmoes, Roalt
name: Burtea, Narcisa
name: Jeram, Sonja
name: Konovalova, Olena
name: Rajé, Fiona
name: Flindell, Ian
name: Radulescu, Dan
name: Rahne, Sara
name: Zaporozhets, Oleksandre
name: Dragasanu, Luminita
name: Kuhlmann, Julia
name: Schreckenberg, Dirk
name: Peerlings, Bram
name: Vesel, Claudia
name: Garcia Sainz-Pardo, Ana
Publisher: name: Zenodo
Year: 2021

description: This study presents the analysis of seven airport exemplification case studies undertaken in the European project “Aviation Noise Impact Management through Novel Approaches – ANIMA”. Best practices related to aircraft noise management at airports in individual airport contexts were implemented and evaluated. Case studies on communication and community engagement in airport noise management were investigated at Heathrow (United Kingdom), Ljubljana (Slovenia) and Rotterdam The Hague (The Netherlands) airports. For Zaporizhzhia (Ukraine) and Iasi (Romania) airports, the implementation of interventions related to land use planning was examined. The interdependencies between noise and emissions were studied for the airport at Cluj (Romania) along with an exploration of key Quality of Life issues. All case studies were performed under the scope of the corresponding national legislation and guidelines. Individual characteristics of airport operations were taken into account. The case studies were aligned with expectations and priorities of all involved stakeholders, such as representatives of airport operators, local communities, civil aviation authorities and policy makers. The efficacy of the noise management case studies was assessed in terms of the capacity to negotiate consensus outcomes, the extent to which noise impact reductions were achieved, and the participants’ satisfaction with the process and outcomes. The case studies revealed the vital importance of community engagement in noise management if decisions are to be accepted and outcomes valued. In general, the earlier this engagement starts in the process of decision-making and implementation the better; although care needs to be taken in the selection of methods of engagement to ensure the tools used are appropriate to the engagement and communication task faced. In this way, overly long engagement should be avoided and with that the risk of increased uncertainty in outcomes. Such engagement should also ensure that decisions and subsequent interventions are tailored to local community concerns reflecting national, regional and cultural differences across Europe. <br> <strong>Key recommendations for communication and engagement are:</strong> Start early. Explain why this communication is taking place and the wider process into which the engagement is feeding, so as to manage resident and other stakeholder expectations. Accept that some issues are complex and will require the time and access to the expertise necessary to explain issues upon which opinions are being sought. Less extensive, but more intensive, qualitative tools can help foster quality dialogue. Communication with residents in forms that allow dialogue and mutual understanding are preferred over information sessions targeting larger audiences When principles are discussed, it is important that they are prioritised in order to inform later decision-making over proposed actions. Consensus on how best to articulate performance against any noise management principles is critical if the relative merits of specific change options is to be compared transparently. Trade-offs cannot be avoided in many circumstances; thus, both the quality of decision-making processes and input information will determine the acceptability of outcomes. In terms of less experienced airports: Clear legislative provision and collaboration between governance authorities is the bedrock of effective noise management. Targeted external support can provide the evidence base on which to develop current and future noise management interventions. Stakeholder and community engagement can help inform the development of governance systems and help build trust in control outcomes. Engagement with wider quality of life issues can complement efforts to minimise noise impacts and demonstrate good corporate citizenship by airports. Thinking holistically about noise and taking longer-term strategic approaches to noise management can help ensure that activity at the airport will be more likely to deliver successful outcomes. The case studies also highlighted the need for future research to: Better understand of the role of different engagement tools for different purposes. Define key management concepts such as ‘fairness’, especially in relation to concepts such as sharing, dispersal, concentration and respite. Identify and apply a suite of metrics to articulate performance against agreed management priorities. Understand the nature of strategic frameworks and methodologies that can support noise policy and the creation of noise action plans.