摘要
Abstract
For the inconsistent quantification methods and the lack of standardized norms for environmental damage caused by noise pollution,the application of the resource value model and the Logistic model were systematically compared in this study,using a construction noise pollution case in Shenzhen as an example.The findings indicated that the resource value model,based on the Environmental Protection Tax Law of the People's Republic of China,was straightforward and yielded authoritative results,but failed to account for re-gional economic disparities and receptor sensitivity.In contrast,the Logistic model established a theoretical linkage between noise exposure and economic loss,integrating factors such as noise intensity,affected population size,and regional economic levels,which led to assessment results that better reflected actual damage.However,its parameters were highly subjective and lacked empirical support.The two models are applicable to different scenarios-administrative enforcement and judicial litigation,respectively-and both have room for optimization.Accordingly,this paper proposes the formulation of specialized noise assessment guidelines,strengthening localized empirical research on key parameters,establishing cross-departmental data-sharing mechanisms,and optimizing the models by introducing regional adjustment coefficients and empirically calibrating parameters,so as to advance the scientific and standardized assessment of noise-induced environmental damage.关键词
声环境/噪声污染/环境损害评估/价值量化/模型优化Key words
Acoustic environment/noise pollution/environmental damage assessment/value quantification/model optimization分类
资源环境
