During the Covid-19 pandemic and resulting lockdowns, road traffic volumes reduced significantly leading to reduced pollutant concentrations and noise levels. Noise and the air pollution data during the lockdown period and loosening of restrictions through five phases in 2021 are examined for a school site in the United Kingdom. Hourly and daily average noise level as well as the average over each phase, correlations between noise and air pollutants, variations between pollutants, and underlying reasons explaining the temporal variations are explored. Some strong linear correlations were identified between a number of traffic-sourced air pollutants, especially between the differently sized particulates PM1, PM2.5, and PM10 (0.70 < r <0.98) in all phases and an expected inverse correlation between nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and ground-level ozone (O3) (–0.68 < r < –0.78) as NO2 is a precursor of O3. Noise levels exhibit a weak correlation with the measured air pollutants and moderate correlation with meteorological factors, including wind direction, temperature, and relative humidity. There was a consistent and significant increase in noise levels (p < 0.01) of up to 3 dB with initial easing, and this was maintained through the remaining phases.

>Road traffic is the main source of air and noise pollution in urban environments causing negative impacts on human health, especially on children in school environments (Khan et al., 2018). Many schools are located near busy roads providing access to school children, teachers, staff, and parents. Queues of idling cars during drop-off and pick-up hours emit disproportionally higher pollutants adjacent to schools, exposing the school children to air and noise pollution (Ibrahim and Richard, 2000; Kumar et al., 2020a). As a chronic stressor, noise has the potential to disrupt executive functioning in school children, which includes working memory, decision making, and self-regulation of emotions/behaviours (Belojevic et al., 2012). According to the European Environment Agency (2020), approximately 82 million people living in urban areas in Europe are exposed to noise pollution (Lden ≥ 55 dB). Hänninen et al. (2014) found transportation noise (along with secondhand smoke and radon) second only to air pollution with respect to the environmental burden of disease in six countries (Belgium, Finland, France, Germany, Italy, and the Netherlands). Their study included only severe sleep disturbance (with a fairly low onset threshold of 35 dB), and heart disease from road traffic noise, the annoyance which has by far the largest and most widespread impact according to the World Health Organization (2018), was excluded. As transportation is a source of both air and noise pollution, research has explored correlations between air and noise pollution sourced from traffic. This has been done for two key reasons: first, identifying the variability in correlations between air and noise pollution is essential to understand their impacts on human health, and second, to explore the potential of proxy measures for the more difficult to measure pollutants. Examples include Davies et al. (2009) finding a moderate correlation between noise and NO2 (0.53) and NOx (0.64) during a 2-week measurement period, Fecht et al. (2016) reporting moderate correlations between modelled noise and air pollution (0.34–0.55), and Khan et al. (2020) using an aggregate modelling approach and finding a weak to moderate correlation between noise and air pollutants (0.01–0.42) in two Danish cities. Dekoninck et al. (2015), however, find noise to be a good proxy for black carbon. A comprehensive review by Khan et al. (2018) showed a substantial variation in air and noise pollution correlation (0.05–0.74) among studies. Although moderate to strong correlations (up to 0.74) have been reported between noise pollution and some of the traffic-related air pollutants, a solid conclusion cannot be drawn. The number of road lanes, vehicles, presence of major intersections, and the spatial unit could influence the degree of correlation and variability in readings (Fecht et al., 2016; Hänninen et al., 2014).

Although traffic is known as one of the main sources of noise pollution for schools in urban areas (Bhang et al., 2018; Clark and Paunovic, 2018; Minichilli et al., 2018; Zijlema et al., 2020), the pandemic and resulting lockdowns in many countries have provided a unique opportunity to observe significant changes in travel behaviour and impacts on noise and air pollution (Bar, 2021; Kumar et al., 2020b; Yang et al., 2021). The significance of this study is to continuously collect noise data on an hourly basis at a school site in a trafficked urban area, which is correlated with the environmental variables and air pollution data. This study aimed to investigate the changes in noise and air pollution levels at a primary school site in Guildford, UK, during 2021 through a series of lockdown eases. We first explored the levels of noise pollution in each phase. Then, we investigated the strength of any correlations between noise and air pollution at the school site during a subsequent easing of restrictions and possible ways forward for noise abatement and control.

The Sandfield Primary School is located on a heavily trafficked conjunction of two busy roads in Guildford which exacerbates the air quality issues and may create air pollution hotspots at the school premises. This study is a collaboration between the school and Guildford Living Lab (GLL) at the Global Centre for Clean Air Research (GCARE) at the University of Surrey, UK. The collaboration builds upon community engagement and citizen-science activities on air quality with schools in Guildford (see Kumar et al., 2020c; Mahajan et al., 2020). Figure 1 shows the location of the school and the pollution monitor with respect to the roads. The location was determined by the need to identify a site inside the school grounds giving the smallest distance from both roads and the junction, and a requirement to be mounted in a safe place and face towards the South (as it is powered by a fixed solar panel). Apart from the capital and operating cost associated with each unit, performing single point monitoring to gain more understanding about the situation is quite common in research-led studies.

FIG. 1.

(Color online) The location of the primary school (dark enclosure). The AQMesh pod was installed on a playground cage facing south, approximately 20 metres from road 2 and 30 metres from road 1.

FIG. 1.

(Color online) The location of the primary school (dark enclosure). The AQMesh pod was installed on a playground cage facing south, approximately 20 metres from road 2 and 30 metres from road 1.

Close modal

The United Kingdom (UK) was under stringent lockdown measures from January 2021 (beginning of Phase 1). These measures included: (i) stay at home, with limited exceptions; (ii) school closures; and (iii) closure of non-essential shops and services (Prime Minister's Office, 2021). Some schools were open for children of key workers, including this one, but with small numbers of pupils and staff on site. On March 8 (beginning of Phase 2), schools reopened but other measures stayed in place. Subsequent changes on April 12 (beginning of Phase 3) saw the opening of non-essential retail and hospitality venues serving outside and on May 17 (beginning of Phase 4), indoor hospitality and larger outdoor gatherings including some sporting events with spectators. Finally, lockdown measures were removed from July 19 (beginning of Phase 5). Therefore, we defined five phases of lockdown ease: covering January 1 to March 7 (Phase 1); March 8 to April 11 (Phase 2); April 12 to May 16 (Phase 3); May 17 to July 18 (Phase 4); and July 19, 2021 onwards (Phase 5), accordingly.

The wireless air quality compact system called AQMesh (AQMesh, 2020) is an ambient air quality multi-sensor unit capable of measuring particulate matter (PM) of different size fractions (PM1, PM2.5, and PM10), electrochemical gas sensors [nitrogen dioxide (NO2), carbon monoxide (CO), and ozone (O3)], air pressure (accuracy of 5 mb), temperature (accuracy of 2 °C), relative humidity (accuracy of 5%), and an omnidirectional microphone for noise measurement (accuracy of 1 dB). For the noise analysis, daily average (Lday) (7 AM to 7 PM), evening average (Levening) (7 PM to 11 PM), and night average Lnight (11 PM to 7 AM) of noise level during different phases for weekdays and weekends are defined accordingly. The specification of the main sensors is listed in Table I. The versions of the AQMesh platform for gas protocol and particle protocol were 5.1 and 3.0, respectively. The NO2 sensor is designed to reject O3 and thus, minimise O3-NO2 cross sensitivity issues. The recorded raw data were uploaded via a Subscriber Identity Model (SIM) card through General Packet Radio Services (GPRS) communication to a cloud database. While the AQMesh can provide 15 min averaged data, a standard averaging period of 1 h during the period of January to October 2021 is reported here to reduce random noise. Hourly and daily average equivalent noise (Leq,1h and Leq,24h) were downloaded from this server for data analysis.

TABLE I.

The specifications of the main sensors used in the monitoring study in Guildford, UK.

Sensor Type Rangea LOD Precisionb Accuracyc
Noised  Omnidirectional mic  35–100 dB  20–20 000 Hz  >0.8  1 dB 
PM  Optical particle counter  0–100 000 (PM1 0 μg m−3  (PM1 and PM2.5) >0.9  5 μg m−3 
0–150 000 (PM2.5 (PM10) > 0.85 
0–250 000 (PM10
All in μg m−3 
NO2  Electrochemical  0–20 000 ppb  <1 ppb  >0.85  4 ppb 
O3  Electrochemical  0–20 000 ppb  <1 ppb  >0.9  5 ppb 
CO  Electrochemical  0–1 000 000 ppb  <50 ppb  >0.8  20 ppb 
Sensor Type Rangea LOD Precisionb Accuracyc
Noised  Omnidirectional mic  35–100 dB  20–20 000 Hz  >0.8  1 dB 
PM  Optical particle counter  0–100 000 (PM1 0 μg m−3  (PM1 and PM2.5) >0.9  5 μg m−3 
0–150 000 (PM2.5 (PM10) > 0.85 
0–250 000 (PM10
All in μg m−3 
NO2  Electrochemical  0–20 000 ppb  <1 ppb  >0.85  4 ppb 
O3  Electrochemical  0–20 000 ppb  <1 ppb  >0.9  5 ppb 
CO  Electrochemical  0–1 000 000 ppb  <50 ppb  >0.8  20 ppb 
a

Obtained from the manufacturer's specification datasheet under standard test conditions (20 °C and 80% of RH) in the absence of any interfering gasses.

b

Reported after extensive global colocation experiments against the reference.

c

Best accuracy without any local scaling and calibration against the reference.

d

Average noise is calculated using all noise samples over the period.

The meteorological data were obtained from Royal Horticultural Society Garden Wisley, United Kingdom [National Grid Reference (NGR) = 5062E 1579 N; altitude = 38 m], which is the closest station to Guildford. All datasets were screened for quality control and quality assurance. The deployed AQMesh pod was calibrated by the manufacturer (Environmental Instruments Ltd, Stratford-upon-Avon, UK) prior to setup and left in operation for a minimum of 2 weeks for stabilisation as advised. The AQMesh exported file comes with a status tag; only data points with valid tags were retained here. Additionally, all negative, N/A, and out-of-spec entries (see Table I) were visually removed from the clean file. Although AQMesh is not designed for regulatory purposes, studies have shown its reliable performance in relative terms (Castell et al., 2018; Margaritis et al., 2021; Wahlborg et al., 2021). The cleaned dataset was analysed using the open-source Openair tools (Carslaw and Ropkins, 2012) in the statistical computing software, R (R Development Core Team, 2013).

Aggregate data for Great Britain shows road traffic levels running at 60%–70% of “normal” levels before March 8 (far higher than in the 2020 first lockdown periods) with goods vehicles at or above normal levels and car use at 50%–60%. After March 8, levels increase to 80% in March and 90% in April approaching normal levels by May and June. It is worth noting that within this car, traffic is running below comparator year levels (90%+) while light and heavy good vehicles are above at around 110% and this continues into October 2021. Interestingly, the largest gap between the comparator year and 2021 is at weekends where traffic levels are consistently higher than they were in a “normal” year; this is most clear for heavier vehicles running 120%–130% of normal—especially on Sundays (Department for Transport, 2021). We, therefore, expect to see some changes in local traffic levels and behaviours, especially at a newly reopened school site. The level of average noise pollution is plotted under different phases of lockdown eases, including Leq,1h (Fig. 2; both on weekdays and weekends), Leq,24h (Fig. 3), daily Lday, Levening, and Lnight (Fig. 4), and the overall average of each phase (Fig. 5). The data in Fig. 2 seem to support this premise with a small but consistent increase in noise levels especially after Phase 1. On an hourly basis, as shown in Fig. 2, the relative difference started to increase from morning hours around daily commuting time (at around 6:00 am) and continued into the evening (at around 8:00 pm). Figure 2 indicates a similar pattern at weekends, which is in line with the national traffic data. During the lockdown ease period (Phase 2–5), the noise level exceeded by up to 15 dB the recommended average exposure limit of 53 dB Lden (World Health Organization, 2018). As our noise measure is not weighted, the exceedance is probably higher. This is a repeated trend, which is also visible in Leq,24h (Fig. 3) as well as Lday, Leevening, and Lnight (Fig. 4). As shown in Fig. 3, starting from Phase 2, school reopening on March 8, Leq,24h (95% confidence interval) reached to almost the same level as upcoming phases, which indicated that further loosening of restrictions did not make a significant change. The average noise level in the monthly plot (Fig. 3) reveals a steady growth in the fitted line. The average noise levels before and after March 8 were found to be statistically significantly different (p < 0.01) using a pairwise t-test. It can be concluded that the school reopening on March 8 was also significant in permitting more freedom of movement for many parents. Despite the comparatively low noise pollution in Phase I, the least variation in Lday is detected, starting from the school reopening phase, as shown in Figs. 2 and 4. Notably, the modest difference in Leq,24h during latter phases, see Fig. 5, was extended to weekends, when only <2 dB difference was recorded, as shown in Table II. Such noise pollution from road traffic could result in adverse health effects to both school children and nearby residents.

FIG. 2.

Hourly average equivalent noise (mean Leq,1h) during different phases of lockdown eases for weekdays and weekends.

FIG. 2.

Hourly average equivalent noise (mean Leq,1h) during different phases of lockdown eases for weekdays and weekends.

Close modal
FIG. 3.

(Color online) Daily average equivalent noise (Leq,24h). The line shows a trend and the shaded area around it indicates the 95% confidence interval. The lockdown phases are separated by the vertical lines.

FIG. 3.

(Color online) Daily average equivalent noise (Leq,24h). The line shows a trend and the shaded area around it indicates the 95% confidence interval. The lockdown phases are separated by the vertical lines.

Close modal
FIG. 4.

(Color online) Time series plot of average Lday (7 AM to 7 PM solid line), Levening (7 PM to 11 PM in dashed line), and Lnight (11 PM to 7 AM in dashed line) noise level during different phases for weekdays and weekends. The phases are separated by vertical black lines.

FIG. 4.

(Color online) Time series plot of average Lday (7 AM to 7 PM solid line), Levening (7 PM to 11 PM in dashed line), and Lnight (11 PM to 7 AM in dashed line) noise level during different phases for weekdays and weekends. The phases are separated by vertical black lines.

Close modal
FIG. 5.

(Color online) Boxplot of average Leq,24hs during different phases at the school site. The lower and upper boundaries of box plots represent the 25th and 75th percentiles, respectively. The lines inside boxes represent median values, while lower and upper error lines represent 1.5*interquartile range below the 3rd quartile and above the 1st quartile, respectively.

FIG. 5.

(Color online) Boxplot of average Leq,24hs during different phases at the school site. The lower and upper boundaries of box plots represent the 25th and 75th percentiles, respectively. The lines inside boxes represent median values, while lower and upper error lines represent 1.5*interquartile range below the 3rd quartile and above the 1st quartile, respectively.

Close modal
TABLE II.

Mean Leq,24h, mean Ld, Le, and Ln ± Standard Deviation (SD) during different phases of lockdown easing for weekdays and weekends.

Day Phase Leq,24hrs Lday Levening Lnight
Weekday  Phase I  58.0 ± 5.8  62.8 ± 1.9  58.7 ± 2.3  51.4 ± 3.4 
Phase II  60.1 ± 6.6  65.9 ± 1.0  60.5 ± 1.2  52.7 ± 3.4 
Phase III  60.5 ± 7.3  66.8 ± 1.2  61.2 ± 2.0  53.3 ± 2.2 
Phase IV  60.4 ± 6.9  66.4 ± 1.5  60.8 ± 2.1  52.9 ± 2.0 
Phase V  59.9 ± 6.5  65.9 ± 1.1  60.8 ± 1.2  52.4 ± 1.7 
Weekends  Phase I  56.4 ± 5.7  60.6 ± 2.3  58.1 ± 2.8  50.9 ± 5.0 
Phase II  58.5 ± 6.0  63.4 ± 1.5  59.3 ± 1.2  52.3 ± 4.3 
Phase III  59.5 ± 6.7  65.5 ± 1.7  60.1 ± 2.0  51.8 ± 2.5 
Phase IV  59.5 ± 6.4  65.0 ± 1.5  61.5 ± 3.4  51.9 ± 1.0 
Phase V  58.8 ± 5.8  63.8 ± 1.2  60.0 ± 1.8  52.4 ± 1.8 
Day Phase Leq,24hrs Lday Levening Lnight
Weekday  Phase I  58.0 ± 5.8  62.8 ± 1.9  58.7 ± 2.3  51.4 ± 3.4 
Phase II  60.1 ± 6.6  65.9 ± 1.0  60.5 ± 1.2  52.7 ± 3.4 
Phase III  60.5 ± 7.3  66.8 ± 1.2  61.2 ± 2.0  53.3 ± 2.2 
Phase IV  60.4 ± 6.9  66.4 ± 1.5  60.8 ± 2.1  52.9 ± 2.0 
Phase V  59.9 ± 6.5  65.9 ± 1.1  60.8 ± 1.2  52.4 ± 1.7 
Weekends  Phase I  56.4 ± 5.7  60.6 ± 2.3  58.1 ± 2.8  50.9 ± 5.0 
Phase II  58.5 ± 6.0  63.4 ± 1.5  59.3 ± 1.2  52.3 ± 4.3 
Phase III  59.5 ± 6.7  65.5 ± 1.7  60.1 ± 2.0  51.8 ± 2.5 
Phase IV  59.5 ± 6.4  65.0 ± 1.5  61.5 ± 3.4  51.9 ± 1.0 
Phase V  58.8 ± 5.8  63.8 ± 1.2  60.0 ± 1.8  52.4 ± 1.8 

The Pearson correlation coefficients (r), as plotted for all phases in Fig. 6, show a strong linear correlation between some traffic-sourced pollutants, especially amongst PM1, PM2.5 and PM10 (0.70 < r <0.98) with that between PM1 and PM2.5 always above 0.90. The inverse NO2-O3 correlation (r = –0.68 to –0.78) is expected as NO2 is one of the precursors of ground-level O3. However, there was a time (Phase 4) when no correlation was found between NO2-O3. Other correlations between air pollutants vary from moderate to weak either positive or negative correlations (r < 0.70), which are shown by moderate/light cool/warm colours and smaller font size. Noise has moderate correlations with wind direction and temperature (positive correlation) and relative humidity (negative correlation), while there is no evident correlation with any of the air pollutants. Moderate to weak positive correlations (0.29 < r < 0.53) between noise and O3 were observed. The relatively weak correlations between noise and other air pollutants are probably due to the monitoring station being some distance from the roadside. Further investigations are warranted to also explore the impact of other factors, such as the meteorological parameters (e.g., wind speed and direction) or traffic flow conditions in future studies. For example, Weber and Litschke (2008) also concluded that the homogeneous spatial distribution of noise as compared to the inhomogeneous distribution of PMs could lead to weaker correlations. Correlations between noise and air pollutants have been found to be higher along highways and major roads, roads with multiple lanes, and sampling very close to roads (r = 0.53 between Leq,5min and NO2; Davies et al., 2009), which was not the case here.

FIG. 6.

(Color online) Correlation matrix among hourly Leq,1h, meteorological parameters and air pollutants during the sampling period (January to end of October 2021) at the school site. The intensity of shading represents the strength of the correlation. Very weak correlations (R < ±0.1) are shown in white and smaller font size.

FIG. 6.

(Color online) Correlation matrix among hourly Leq,1h, meteorological parameters and air pollutants during the sampling period (January to end of October 2021) at the school site. The intensity of shading represents the strength of the correlation. Very weak correlations (R < ±0.1) are shown in white and smaller font size.

Close modal

The study showed a noticeable increase in noise levels in the school site, Guildford, UK, most notably after the March 8 reopening of schools. The data show that the level of noise pollution in the school site exceeds the World Health Organization guideline of 53 dB Lden. It is likely that the elevated noise pollution is due to an increase in road vehicles after loosening the restrictions. As lockdown eased, noise levels increased by up to 3 dB throughout the week, suggesting the potential for greater noise disturbance at weekends than pre-pandemic. Significant correlations were found between traffic-related air pollutants, especially the different sized particulates. Published literature has reported variations from modest correlation to strong correlations (0.05 and 0.74) between noise pollution and some of the traffic-related air pollutants (Khan et al., 2018). Correlations are usually higher when measured close to the source (i.e., roadside) and weaken with distance. Moreover, unlike noise, the dispersion of air pollutants from the source into the surrounding areas is also driven by atmospheric dispersion conditions, such as wind speed and wind direction. A relatively weaker correlation observed in our case reflects these generic features observed elsewhere as our monitoring was carried out ∼20–30 m away from the source to explain the correlations observed in our case.

This work is supported by Guildford Living Lab (GLL) and the UK Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council-funded project INHALE (grant EP/T003189/1). We thank the Sandfields Primary school, its governors, and the parent group for supporting this work.

1.
AQMesh
(
2020
).
Technical specification.
https://www.aqmesh.com/products/technical-specification/ (Last viewed 25 January 2022).
2.
Bar
,
H.
(
2021
). “
COVID-19 lockdown: Animal life, ecosystem and atmospheric environment
,”
Environ. Develop. Sustain.
23
,
8161
8178
.
3.
Bhang
,
S. Y.
,
Yoon
,
J.
,
Sung
,
J.
,
Yoo
,
C.
,
Sim
,
C.
,
Lee
,
C.
,
Lee
,
J.
, and
Lee
,
J.
(
2018
). “
Comparing attention and cognitive function in school children across noise conditions: A quasi-experimental study
,”
Psychiatry Investig.
15
,
620
627
.
4.
Belojevic
,
G.
,
Evans
,
G. W.
,
Paunovic
,
K.
, and
Jakovljevic
,
B.
(
2012
). “
Traffic noise and executive functioning in urban primary school children: The moderating role of gender
,”
J. Environ. Psychol.
32
,
337
341
.
5.
Carslaw
,
D. C.
, and
Ropkins
,
K.
(
2012
). “
Openair - an R package for air quality data analysis
,”
Environ. Modell. Softw.
27
,
52
61
.
6.
Castell
,
N.
,
Schneider
,
P.
,
Grossberndt
,
S.
,
Fredriksen
,
M. F.
,
Sousa-Santos
,
G.
,
Vogt
,
M.
, and
Bartonova
,
A.
(
2018
). “
Localized real-time information on outdoor air quality at kindergartens in Oslo, Norway using low-cost sensor nodes
,”
Environ. Res.
165
,
410
419
.
7.
Clark
,
C.
, and
Paunovic
,
K.
(
2018
). “
WHO environmental noise guidelines for the European region: A systematic review on environmental noise and quality of life, wellbeing and mental health
,”
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health
15
,
2400
.
8.
Davies
,
H. W.
,
Vlaanderen
,
J. J.
,
Henderson
,
S. B.
, and
Brauer
,
M.
(
2009
). “
Correlation between co-exposures to noise and air pollution from traffic sources
,”
Occup. Environ. Med.
66
,
347
350
.
9.
Dekoninck
,
L.
,
Botteldooren
,
D.
,
Int Panis
,
L.
,
Hankey
,
S.
,
Jain
,
G.
,
Karthik
,
S.
, and
Marshall
,
J.
(
2015
). “
Applicability of a noise-based model to estimate in-traffic exposure to black carbon and particle number concentrations in different cultures
,”
Environ. Int.
74
,
89
98
.
10.
Department for Transport
(
2021
).
Domestic transport use by mode: Great Britain, since 1st March 2020, update 15th December 2021
. https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/transport-use-during-the-coronavirus-covid-19-pandemic (Last viewed 20 December 2021).
11.
European Environment Agency.
Environmental noise in Europe.
https://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/environmental-noise-in-europe (
2020
) (Last viewed 23 January 2022).
12.
Fecht
,
D.
,
Hansell
,
A. L.
,
Morley
,
D.
,
Dajnak
,
D.
,
Vienneau
,
D.
,
Beevers
,
S.
,
Toledano
,
M. B.
,
Kelly
,
F. J.
,
Anderson
,
H. R.
, and
Gulliver
,
J.
(
2016
). “
Spatial and temporal associations of road traffic noise and air pollution in London: Implications for epidemiological studies
,”
Environ. Int.
88
,
235
242
.
13.
Hänninen
,
O.
,
Knol
,
A. B.
,
Jantunen
,
M.
,
Lim
,
T. A.
,
Conrad
,
A.
,
Rappolder
,
M.
,
Carrer
,
P.
,
Fanetti
,
A. C.
,
Kim
,
R.
,
Buekers
,
J.
, and
Torfs
,
R.
(
2014
). “
Environmental burden of disease in Europe: Assessing nine risk factors in six countries
,”
Environ. Health Perspectives
122
,
439
.
14.
Ibrahim
,
Z. H.
, and
Richard
,
H. K.
(
2000
). “
Noise pollution at school environment located in residential area
,”
Malaysian J. Civil Eng.
12
,
439
446
.
15.
Khan
,
J.
,
Ketzel
,
M.
,
Kakosimos
,
K.
,
Sørensen
,
M.
, and
Jensen
,
S. S.
(
2018
). “
Road traffic air and noise pollution exposure assessment–A review of tools and techniques
,”
Sci. Total Environ.
634
,
661
676
.
16.
Khan
,
J.
,
Kakosimos
,
K.
,
Jensen
,
S. S.
,
Hertel
,
O.
,
Sørensen
,
M.
,
Gulliver
,
J.
, and
Ketzel
,
M.
(
2020
). “
The spatial relationship between traffic-related air pollution and noise in two Danish cities: Implications for health-related studies
,”
Sci. Total Environ.
726
,
138577
.
17.
Kumar
,
P.
,
Omidvarborna
,
H.
,
Barwise
,
Y.
, and
Tiwari
,
A.
(
2020a
). “
Mitigating exposure to traffic pollution in and around schools: Guidance for Children, Schools and Local Communities
,” p.
24
, (Last viewed 25 January 2022).
18.
Kumar
,
P.
,
Hama
,
S.
,
Omidvarborna
,
H.
,
Sharma
,
A.
,
Sahani
,
J.
,
Abhijith
,
K. V.
,
Debele
,
S. E.
,
Zavala-Reyes
,
J. C.
,
Barwise
,
Y.
, and
Tiwari
,
A.
(
2020b
). “
Temporary reduction in fine particulate matter due to ‘anthropogenic emissions switch-off’ during COVID-19 lockdown in Indian cities
,”
Sustainable Cities Soc.
62
,
102382
.
19.
Kumar
,
P.
,
Omidvarborna
,
H.
,
Pilla
,
F.
, and
Lewin
,
N.
(
2020c
). “
A primary school driven initiative to influence commuting style for dropping-off and picking-up of pupils
,”
Sci. Total Environ.
727
,
138360
.
20.
Mahajan
,
S.
,
Kumar
,
P.
,
Pinto
,
J. A.
,
Riccetti
,
A.
,
Schaaf
,
K.
,
Camprodon
,
G.
,
Smári
,
V.
,
Passani
,
A.
, and
Forino
,
G.
(
2020
). “
A citizen science approach for enhancing public understanding of air pollution
,”
Sustainable Cities Soc.
52
,
101800
.
21.
Margaritis
,
D.
,
Keramydas
,
C.
,
Papachristos
,
I.
, and
Lambropoulou
,
D.
(
2021
). “
Calibration of low-cost gas sensors for air quality monitoring
,”
Aerosol Air Qual. Res.
21
,
210073
.
22.
Minichilli
,
F.
,
Gorini
,
F.
,
Ascari
,
E.
,
Bianchi
,
F.
,
Coi
,
A.
,
Fredianelli
,
L.
,
Licitra
,
G.
,
Manzoli
,
F.
,
Mezzasalma
,
L.
, and
Cori
,
L.
(
2018
). “
Annoyance judgment and measurements of environmental noise: A focus on Italian secondary schools
,”
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health
15
,
208
.
23.
Prime Minister's Office
(
2021
).
Prime Minister announces national lockdown, press release, 4th January 2021
. https://www.gov.uk/government/news/prime-minister-announces-national-lockdown (Last viewed 25 January 2022).
24.
R Development Core Team.
(
2013
). “
R: A language environment statistical computing
,”
1
16
.
25.
Wahlborg
,
D.
,
Björling
,
M.
, and
Mattsson
,
M.
(
2021
). “
Evaluation of field calibration methods and performance of AQMesh, a low-cost air quality monitor
,”
Environ. Monit. Assess.
193
,
251
.
26.
Weber
,
S.
, and
Litschke
,
T.
(
2008
). “
Variation of particle concentrations and environmental noise on the urban neighbourhood scale
,”
Atmos. Environ.
42
,
7179
7183
.
27.
World Health Organization
(
2018
).
WHO Housing and Health Guidelines
. Geneva: Table 8.11, Recommendations of the WHO Environmental noise guidelines for the European Region. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK535301/table/ch8.tab11/ (Last viewed 25 January 2022).
28.
Yang
,
Y.
,
Cao
,
M.
,
Cheng
,
L.
,
Zhai
,
K.
,
Zhao
,
X.
, and
De Vos
,
J.
(
2021
). “
Exploring the relationship between the COVID-19 pandemic and changes in travel behaviour: A qualitative study
,”
Transp. Res. Interdiscip. Perspect.
11
,
100450
.
29.
Zijlema
,
W. L.
,
De Kluizenaar
,
Y.
,
Van Kamp
,
I.
, and
Hartman
,
C. A.
(
2020
). “
Associations between road traffic noise exposure at home and school and ADHD in school-aged children: The TRAILS study
,”
Eur. Child Adolesc. Psychiatry
30
,
155
167
.