An awareness survey on childcare facilities and acoustic environment in Japan's residential areas

Although the demand for childcare facilities in Japan is high, many children have not been able to utilize these facilities until recently.^1,2 In response, the government has taken a variety of measures, including the establishment of new childcare facilities, deregulation, and increasing the number of childcare workers.³ However, when plans to build new childcare facilities are presented to residents near the proposed sites, they object for various reasons. One of the reasons for the objections is the fear that children's voices will be too loud and disturb residents' peace, causing some communities to abandon their construction plans.⁴ On the other hand, existing childcare facilities have received complaints about children's voices. Similar problems exist in other countries, and the Association of Australasian Acoustical Consultants has established acoustic guidelines for childcare facilities to coexist with the local community.⁵ 

In a previous study, Hashimoto et al. surveyed residents of Tokyo, Saitama, Kanagawa, and Chiba prefectures to determine their attitudes toward childcare facilities and the noise created by the voices of children in childcare facilities.⁶ They found that a major reason residents were resistant to the construction of new childcare facilities was the change in the acoustic environment resulting from the new facilities. Furthermore, Hashimoto et al. reported on the acoustic characteristics of sound emitted from childcare facilities, including children's voices: Under conditions of 100 children playing in the yard, L_Aeq exceeded 70 dB at 10 m from the facility, and a peak in the frequency spectrum was observed in the 1–2 kHz frequency range.⁷ A survey by Nishikawa on elementary and junior high school administrators about their attitudes toward daily activities and sounds, such as student voices, reported that school administrators in large cities were more attentive to the impact of generated sounds on their neighborhoods than school administrators in rural areas.⁸ 

However, these studies did not comprehensively investigate the actual sounds emitted from childcare facilities and the attitudes of residents living near childcare facilities toward the acoustic environment.^6–8 Therefore, to foster the coexistence of childcare facilities with the local community, we first conducted a measurement survey on the sounds emitted from said facilities and used a questionnaire to analyze how these sounds are perceived by the residents living near them.⁹ The survey on residents' attitudes was conducted in several areas with different sound environment characteristics¹⁰ to determine whether residents hear the sounds generated by childcare facilities on a daily basis and the impact of other noise sources, such as road and railroad traffic.

The previous study found that sound impressions from childcare facilities were not related to acoustic characteristics, such as hours of care or noise levels.⁹ The results further showed no difference in residents' opinions regarding the construction of new childcare facilities, with few negative responses obtained.¹⁰ By contrast, residents with higher noise sensitivity responded more negatively to the construction of new childcare facilities near their homes.

We considered the possibility that the socioeconomic attributes of the respondents might be related to these attitudes and decided to examine this possibility. In this study, we conducted a survey in an area with different socioeconomic characteristics and compared the results with those of previous studies that conducted surveys in areas with different sound environments.¹⁰ 

A previous study investigated several regions with different sound environments but found no differences in the percentage of approval or disapproval of new childcare facilities by site.¹⁰ Therefore, this study focused on new regions with different economic backgrounds. The socioeconomic characteristics generally studied include income, educational level, and occupation.¹¹ However, collecting information such as income and occupation is difficult owing to its sensitive nature. Therefore, this study focused on the land prices in the study area rather than on the socioeconomic characteristics. More affluent neighborhoods have been indicated to have higher rents and increased demand for 0-year-old childcare services,¹² and some studies have analyzed the relationship between residents' income and land prices.^13,14 These studies suggest that residents' socioeconomic backgrounds can be estimated from land prices of their residential areas. To investigate residents' attitudes toward childcare facilities and the surrounding acoustic environment at sites with different socioeconomic attributes, we selected two sites (sites G and H) with higher land values than those in the previous studies.¹⁰ Table 1 shows the published land prices for the selected sites as well as those in previous studies (sites C, D, E, and F).¹⁰ 

All surveyed sites were residential areas in Fukuoka, Japan. Figure 1 shows the survey sites of this study, with the sites enclosed by black lines. A childcare facility is present at site G, but not at site H. There is a road to the west of site G and a park with a pond to the east. Site H has a river to the east and a main road to the south.

In a previous study, the survey area at site C was defined as the area within a 300 m radius of the childcare facility.¹⁰ In the present study, the survey area at site G was determined in a similar manner. However, in site G, sounds can be heard from the road to the west of the childcare facility and the nearby primary school; these areas of site G were excluded from the study area, because it was difficult to analyze the relationship between the acoustic environment and the childcare facility. Site H, which has no childcare facilities, was selected based on its proximity to site G and the fact that its land value is higher than those of the previously surveyed sites. A major road can be seen to the south of site H. Therefore, the residences fronting the road were excluded from the survey site. This site contains a large number of apartment buildings and a high number of dwellings.

A measurement survey was conducted to determine the physical conditions of the acoustic environments at the target sites. Sites G and H (sites surrounded by black lines in Fig. 1) were separated at 50 m intervals, and measurement points were placed near the center of each 50 m square, as indicated by the black dots in Fig. 1.

At each measurement point, the A-weighted sound pressure level was measured every 100 ms for 10 min with a sound level meter (NL-52, RION Co. Ltd., Tokyo, Japan) during daytime hours (11:00–15:00) on weekdays. The sound level meter was installed at a height of 1.3 m above the ground. Environmental sounds were recorded with the same equipment (16-bit resolution, 48 kHz sampling rate). L_Aeq,10min was calculated from A-weighted sound pressure level data.

Figure 1 displays the color map corresponding to L_Aeq,10min values at each measurement point in sites G and H. In site G, L_Aeq,10min values were higher at the measurement points closer to the road. The measurement points near the childcare facility were approximately 55–65 dB. At site H, L_Aeq,10min values were generally low, except for one high value point when many emergency vehicles passed by. The arithmetic mean and standard deviation (SD) of L_Aeq,10min were calculated through all measurement points at each site (site G, mean value: 58.8 dB, SD = 5.7 dB; site H, mean value: 54.2 dB, SD = 6.0 dB). The noise level of site G was relatively higher in the L_Aeq,10min values of previous survey sites, while that of site H was lower, as shown in Table 1.

A questionnaire was designed to investigate the residents' attitudes toward childcare facilities and the acoustic environment. It contained questions on personal characteristics, living conditions, living environment status, and the study participants' attitudes toward childcare facilities. Additionally, if the participants lived near a childcare facility, they were asked about the sounds from the childcare facility and their perception of these sounds. This survey was conducted from August 2021 to September 2021, during the spread of the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19). However, the participants were asked to imagine the situation before the pandemic. Questionnaires were distributed by posting them in the residents' mailboxes in August 2021, and the completed questionnaires were mailed to the laboratory at Kyushu University by the residents. The questionnaire was completed by residents who spent most of their time at home and also included a shortened version of Weinstein's noise sensitivity scale to assess the participants' sensitivity to sound.^15–17 At site G, 645 questionnaires were distributed, and 128 were returned (response rate: 19.8%). At site H, 1176 questionnaires were distributed, and 283 were returned (response rate: 24.1%). Site H had a higher percentage of respondents raising children than site G (site G: 17.9%; site H: 32.1%). Such respondents are likely to be more interested in issues related to childcare facilities. This may explain the higher response rate in site H. However, the response rates for both sites were similar to those in the previous study.¹⁰ 

The majority of participants at both sites were female respondents (60%). Regarding the age of the respondents, most (>80%) of the respondents were in their 50s or older at site G and in their 40s or older at site H. In terms of length of residence, approximately 30% (30.2%) of the respondents at site G had lived in their home for “more than 20 years,” and approximately 20% each in the “1–5 years,” “6–10 years” and “11–20 years” categories; at site H, many of the residents fell under the “11–20 years” category (38.5%), followed by “1–5 years” (26.8%). Regarding the number of people in the household, the highest percentage at both sites was for “two people.” Of these, 94.7% reported living with two adults, and 5.3% reported living with one adult and one child. Furthermore, 70% of respondents at both sites had been home “every day” or “a few days a week.” Regarding the number of night shifts (sleeping during the day) per week, over 90% of the respondents at both sites selected “almost never.”

In the questionnaire, respondents were asked to mark the relevant category on a five-point category scale ranging from “very dissatisfied” to “very satisfied” in terms of their satisfaction with the surrounding acoustic environment. As a result, approximately 70% of respondents answered “very satisfied” or “satisfied” for both sites (site G: 72.6%, site H: 67.5%). Responses regarding the degree of satisfaction with the acoustic environment were scored as follows: very satisfied: 5; satisfied: 4; neither or nor: 3, dissatisfied: 2; and very dissatisfied: 1. The relationship between L_Aeq,10min values and satisfaction with the acoustic environment was examined for the present and previous survey sites (sites C, D, E, and F). Figure 2 shows the relationship between L_Aeq,10min and the mean score for satisfaction with the acoustic environment. The results showed that the respondents' satisfaction with the acoustic environment was higher at sites with lower L_Aeq,10min. The relationship between L_Aeq,10min and the mean score for satisfaction with the acoustic environment at the survey sites was statistically significant (Pearson's correlation coefficient r = −0.85, p = 0.0189). Multiple comparisons of the mean scores between survey sites using Holm's method showed statistically significant differences between the sites, except for sites E, G, and H.

The respondents' attitudes toward the establishment of new childcare facilities were compared across all survey sites, including G and H. Figure 3 shows the response rates for and against the establishment of new childcare facilities at each site. Approximately 35% of respondents at sites G and H responded positively (sum of “strongly agree” and “agree,” site G: 34.7%, site H: 35.7%).

There were fewer responses favoring establishment of childcare facilities at the present survey sites compared to those of the previous study (sites C, D, E, and F).¹⁰ Moreover, negative responses were less than 10% at both the sites (sum of “strongly disagree” and “disagree,” site G: 8.4%, site H: 6.3%). The response rates for disapproval of the establishment of new childcare facilities were similar to those of the previous survey. To examine differences in results between survey sites, the responses on approval or disapproval of the establishment of new childcare facilities were scored as follows: strongly agree: 1; agree: 2; neither agree nor disagree: 3; disagree: 4; and strongly disagree: 5. Multiple comparisons of the mean scores between survey sites using Holm's method showed a statistically significant difference between sites D and H (site D: 2.48, site H: 2.69, p = 0.034). The result indicates that residents of site H with a high land price are more negative toward the establishment of new childcare facilities.

Respondents with negative perceptions about the new facilities (“strongly disagree” or “disagree”) were asked to provide their reasons using an open-ended question. Their prime concerns were traffic congestion and children's and parents' voices.

The relationship between respondents' satisfaction with the acoustic environment and hearing of sounds from childcare facilities at home was examined using the data obtained at site G and the previous survey sites (sites C and D).¹⁰ Specifically, all respondents at sites C, D, and G were grouped into those who could hear sounds from childcare facilities and those who could not. Subsequently, the difference in satisfaction level with the acoustic environment was examined. A total of 206 respondents (42.8% of respondents in the surveyed sites C, D, and G) reported that they heard sounds from the childcare facility, while 275 (57.2% of respondents in the surveyed sites C, D, and G) responded that they could not hear sounds. Figure 4 depicts the satisfaction level of the two groups with the surrounding acoustic environment.

As shown in Fig. 4, 69.8% of the group that answered “inaudible” were “very satisfied” or “satisfied.” Conversely, 70.9% of those who answered “audible” were “very satisfied” or “satisfied.” The responses to the degree of satisfaction with the acoustic environment were measured as “very satisfied: 5,” “satisfied: 4,” “neither: 3,” “dissatisfied: 2,” and “very dissatisfied: 1.” The mean satisfaction of the group of participants who heard sounds from childcare facilities was compared with the mean satisfaction of the group who did not hear similar sounds, and a t test was performed on the difference. The result showed that there was no significant difference in the satisfaction responses (“audible” group: 3.84, “inaudible” group: 3.81; t (423) = 0.39, p = 0.69). The response rate of “very dissatisfied” was higher in the “audible” group than in the “inaudible” group. However, the rate of negative responses including “very dissatisfied” and “dissatisfied” is almost equal in both groups. On the other hand, the “audible” group had a higher response rate of “very satisfied” than the “inaudible” group. Due to these overall trends in the responses, it is supposed that there was no significant difference in the mean satisfaction of the two groups. This finding suggests that hearing of sounds from childcare facilities is unrelated to satisfaction with the acoustic environment.

A logistic regression analysis was performed using the questionnaire results obtained from all survey sites, including sites C, D, E, and F, to identify the factors contributing to respondents' negative attitudes toward the establishment of new childcare facilities.¹⁰ Respondents were placed in the “disagree” category if they were negative toward the establishment of new childcare facilities (i.e., “strongly disagree” and “disagree”), while others were placed in the “strongly agree,” “agree,” or “neither for nor against” categories. The response rate of the “disagree” category was used as the dependent variable in the logistic regression model.

The independent variables included personal attributes, housing type, noise sensitivity, and awareness of public events held at childcare facilities. In addition, the presence of a childcare facility in the survey site, L_Aeq,10min value, and official land value were also added to the variables. Regarding the inclusion or non-inclusion of a childcare facility, sites C, D, and G were marked as “has a childcare facility,” and sites E, F, and H were marked as “has no childcare facilities.” An equivalent continuous A-weighted sound pressure level was used for the average value of L_Aeq,10min for each site. For the official land price, the study selected two areas with the highest official land value in Fukuoka. The logistic regression analysis was performed using R version 3.4.3, an open source statistical analysis programming language, for the analysis.

The results of the logistic regression analysis are presented in Table 2. Among the independent variables, noise sensitivity was statistically significant at the 5% level with a positive regression coefficient value of 0.884. The explanatory variables set as “low-sensitivity group: 1” and “high-sensitivity group: 2” suggested that the high-sensitivity group was more negative about the construction of new childcare facilities. Participants who reported hearing sounds from the childcare facility were asked what sounds they heard from the childcare facility and their impressions of those sounds. Among the participants who reported hearing sounds from the childcare facility, the rate of high-sensitivity participants who responded that the sounds were bothersome was higher than the rate of low-sensitivity participants who gave a similar response (high-sensitivity group: 14 of 55, 25.5%; low-sensitivity group: 8 of 53, 15.1%). In particular, high-sensitivity participants were more likely to point to “babies crying,” “parents' voices,” and “whistles.” Attention by childcare facilities to the generation of such sounds may help to reduce the negative opinions of sensitive residents toward the facilities.

Moreover, “willingness to participate in public events” was also significant at the 1% level. The regression coefficients were positive for “willingness to participate in public events.” As the explanatory variables were set to “Yes: 1” and “No: 2,” respondents unwilling to participate in public events were more likely to disapprove of the construction of childcare facilities. In other words, residents willing to actively participate in public events held at childcare facilities may be more positive about the establishment of new childcare facilities.

Additionally, “ownership” was observed to be a significant variable. The regression coefficient exhibited a positive value; thus, the respondents who owned the house had a more negative opinion toward the construction of new childcare facilities than the respondents who rented it. This can be attributed to the fact that homeowners cannot easily change their residences and, thus, will resist changes in their surrounding environment due to the construction of new childcare facilities. The results indicate that women have more negative perceptions on the establishment of childcare facilities, though a rational explanation could not be provided. However, this requires further examination in the future.

“Whether or not there is a childcare facility nearby” was not a significant variable. It was found that whether or not there is a childcare facility nearby is not related to attitudes in favor of or against the establishment of new childcare facilities.

Another issue for further study would be to determine how the operators and staff of childcare facilities feel about the noise associated with educational activities, their consideration for neighborhood residents, and their level of awareness. This survey was conducted at a time when the novel coronavirus infection (COVID-19) was endemic. However, participants were asked to recall the pre-pandemic situation and to respond to the status of the acoustic environment. The pandemic would therefore have had little impact on the results of this survey.

To investigate factors influencing opinions on the construction of new childcare facilities, such as respondents' noise sensitivity, socioeconomic background, and attitudes toward childcare facilities, as well as personal characteristics, questionnaire surveys were conducted in areas with higher land prices in Fukuoka, Japan. The results were compared with those of previous studies that conducted surveys in areas with different land prices and different acoustic environments.

Respondents living in areas with high land prices and respondents with high noise sensitivity were more negative toward the establishment of new childcare facilities. Furthermore, respondents who were less willing to participate in public events were more negative toward the establishment of new childcare facilities. In other words, residents who are willing to actively participate in public events held at childcare facilities may be more positive about the establishment of new childcare facilities. Public events that attract residents' interest may improve their negative attitudes toward childcare facilities. The validity of the study's findings will be confirmed in the future by organizing public events in conjunction with childcare facilities and observing changes in relationships with residents.

See the supplementary material for questions presented in the questionnaire survey and maps of the survey sites of the previous study,10 including acoustic measurement results.

We would like to thank all staff at the childcare facilities and all participants for their cooperation in the present study. This study was supported by JSPS KAKENHI (Grant Nos. JP 20J10381 and JP 23K12742).

The authors have no conflicts to disclose.

Kyushu University has given ethics approval under the title “Study on the Effects of Sound Generated from Childcare Facilities on the Surrounding Sound Environment,” Permit No. 413.

The data from the survey questionnaire that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.