Impacts of environmental noise on biodiversity (Signal)

Key messages: Noise pollution potentially disrupts biodiversity, affecting species behaviour, physiology, habitat quality/use and ecosystem functioning. Transportation noise is a major contributor. While EU legislation like the Environmental Noise Directive primarily focuses on human health, other EU policies address the impact of noise on biodiversity, either directly (e.g. the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD)) or indirectly (e.g. the birds and habitats directives).

Noise pollution affects not only humans but also significantly impacts biodiversity, influencing various behavioural, physiological, communication and sensory perception processes (EEA, 2019).

The MSFD protects marine biodiversity from the harmful effects of environmental noise. Underwater noise from shipping, offshore construction and marine exploration harm marine life, causing stress and behavioural changes, particularly in endangered species. Noise can interfere with the vital sounds animals use for communication and survival, especially affecting vocal species like whales and dolphins (EEA and EMSA, 2021). The signal on Underwater noise pollution in Europe’s seas estimates the impact of various measures on reducing underwater radiated noise (URN) across EU waters.

Although there is legislation to address noise pollution in the marine environment directly, this is not the case for terrestrial ecosystems and species. In this case, all kinds of pressures on protected habitat types and species are dealt with together (with no explicit mention of noise) in the birds and habitats directives. As required by the Zero Pollution Action Plan, the MSFD sets EU threshold values for underwater noise.

On land, noise from transportation, which includes roads, railways and aircraft, is one of the primary sources of noise pollution in urban and rural areas (EEA, 2019). As human activities expand and intensify, the effects of transportation noise on biodiversity have become an increasingly important area of research.

Table and Figure present a comprehensive overview of the diverse impacts of transportation noise on various species. It is important to note that not all species are affected equally by noise; research has been more extensive for certain groups. Most studies have focused on birds, followed by mammals, amphibians, insects, reptiles and arachnids (McClure, 2021).

Overview of impacts of environmental noise on terrestrial biodiversity


Behavioural changes	Transportation noise can alter animal behaviour. Many species rely on sound for communication, navigation and detecting predators or prey. Noise can interfere with these activities, leading to changes in foraging, mating and territorial behaviours (Luo et al., 2015; Derryberry et al., 2020; Bent et al., 2021; Chou et al., 2023).
Physiological stress	Chronic exposure to noise can cause physiological stress in animals. This stress can lead to a range of effects, including elevated heart rates, changes in hormone levels and weakened immune responses, which can impact overall health and fitness (Berlow et al., 2022; Zaffaroni-Caorsi et al., 2022; Meillère et al., 2024).
Habitat use and distribution	Noise pollution can cause animals to avoid otherwise suitable habitats, leading to changes in species distribution. Some species may be forced into less optimal areas, affecting their survival and reproductive success (Khanaposhtani et al., 2019; Senzaki et al., 2020; da Silva et al., 2023).
Reproductive success	Noise can interfere with mating calls and other reproductive behaviours, leading to reduced reproductive success. For example, birds that rely on song to attract mates may find it harder to communicate in noisy environments (Bent et al., 2021).
Interference with predator-prey dynamics	Noise can mask the sounds of predators approaching or the sounds prey animals make, disrupting the natural predator-prey relationships. This interference can lead to increased predation risk or decreased hunting success (Chou et al., 2023).
Community structure	The presence of noise can lead to changes in community composition. Species that are more tolerant of noise may outcompete those that are more sensitive, leading to shifts in the types of species that dominate an area (McClure et al., 2015).
Ecosystem functioning	Changes in species behaviour, distribution and community structure can have cascading effects on ecosystem processes. For example, if noise affects the pollinators in an area, it could impact plant reproduction and the overall health of the ecosystem (Francis et al., 2012; Dominoni et al., 2020; Phillips et al., 2021).

A European assessment from 2016 showed that even protected areas created to preserve terrestrial biodiversity are affected by noise pollution. The study found that nearly one-fifth of the EU Natura 2000 protected areas are exposed to transportation noise levels exceeding 55dB for the day-evening-night period. Such levels can already detrimentally affect terrestrial wildlife (EEA, 2019).

Regarding EU policies, the Environmental Noise Directive (END) (EU, 2002) is the primary legislative framework for assessing and managing environmental noise. However, the obligations outlined in the END primarily focus on mitigating the impact of environmental noise on human health. While the directive acknowledges the importance of preserving areas of good acoustic quality, termed 'quiet areas', to safeguard the European soundscape, it does not establish a direct connection to wildlife.

Other EU policies contribute to the conservation of terrestrial biodiversity. Notable examples include the (EU, 1992), the Birds Directive (EU, 2009), the Biodiversity Strategy for 2030 (EC, 2020) the Nature Restoration Law (EU, 2024), and the 8th Environmental Action Plan (EU, 2022).

Additionally, other EU actions could help mitigate the impacts of noise on biodiversity. The Green City Accord for instance, seeks to make cities cleaner and healthier, with noise reduction identified as one of its priority areas. Furthermore, the Green Infrastructure (EC, 2013) highlights the creation of large green spaces, which can be essential for biodiversity conservation in urban environments (Arévalo, et al., 2022).

There are also several relevant projects funded under Horizon 2020 and Horizon Europe, including two new projects that kicked off in 2024. AquaPLAN aims to quantify the combined impacts of light and noise pollution on aquatic biodiversity in European waters and facilitate the implementation of empirically sound strategies for managing these pollutants through novel, interdisciplinary approaches. PLAN-B will increase understanding and support the reduction of light and noise pollution impacts on terrestrial biodiversity and ecosystem services. This is intended to address biodiversity decline, facilitate nature restoration activities and achieve objectives specified in the EU biodiversity strategy.

Please consult the relevant indicators and signals below for a more comprehensive overview on the topic.

Zero Pollution Action Plan 2030 target or policy objectives

Reduce air, water and soil pollution to levels no longer considered harmful to human health and ecosystems by 2050

Return to the main pages:

Ecosystems

Zero pollution monitoring assessment

Other relevant indicators and signals

Underwater noise pollution in Europe's seas (Indicator)

Exposure of Europe’s population to environmental noise (Indicator)

The health effects of transport noise and implications for future health risk assessments (Signal)

References and footnotes

EEA, 2019, Environmental noise in Europe — 2020, EEA Report No 22/2019, European Environment Agency.
^a^b
EEA and EMSA, 2021, European Maritime Transport Environmental Report 2021, European Environment Agency (https://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/maritime-transport) accessed 16 September 2024.
^↵
McClure, C. J. W., 2021, ’Knowledge gaps at the intersection of road noise and biodiversity’, Global Ecology and Conservation 30, pp. 2351-9894.
^↵
Luo, J., et al., 2015, ‘How anthropogenic noise affects foraging’, Global Change Biology 21 (9), pp. 3278-3289.
^↵
Derryberry, E. P. et al., 2020, ‘Singing in a silent spring: Birds respond to a half-century soundscape reversion during the COVID-19 shutdown’, Science 370, pp.575-579.
^↵
Bent, A. M., et al., 2021, ‘Anthropogenic noise disrupts mate choice behaviors in female Gryllus bimaculatus’, Behavioral Ecology 32(2), pp. 201-210.
^a^b
Chou, T. L., et al., 2023, ‘Interspecific differences in the effects of masking and distraction on anti-predator behavior in suburban anthropogenic noise’, PLoS ONE 18 (8), e0290330.
^a^b^c
Zaffaroni-Caorsi, V., et al., 2022, ‘Effects of anthropogenic noise on anuran amphibians’, Bioacoustics 32 (1), pp.90-120.
^↵
^a^b^c^d
Khanaposhtani, M. G., et al., 2019, ‘Effects of highways on bird distribution and soundscape diversity around Aldo Leopold’s shack in Baraboo’, Landscape and Urban Planning 192, 103666.
^↵
Senzaki M., et al., 2020, ‘Direct and indirect effects of noise pollution alter biological communities in and near noise-exposed environments’, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 287 (1923).
^↵
da Silva, J. N., et al., 2023, ‘Highway noise decreases the abundance of an understory rainforest bird’, Emu - Austral Ornithology 123 (4), pp.303-309.
^↵
McClure, C. J. W., et al., 2015, ‘A phantom road experiment reveals traffic noise is an invisible source of habitat degradation’, Ecology 112 (39), pp. 12105-12109.
^↵
Francis, C. D., et al., 2012, ‘Noise pollution alters ecological services: enhanced pollination and disrupted seed dispersal’, Proceeding of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 279, pp. 2727-2735.
^↵
Dominoni, D. M., et al, 2020, ‘Why conservation biology can benefit from sensory ecology’, Nature Ecology and Evolution 4, pp. 502-511.
^↵
Phillips, J. N., et al., 2021, ‘Long-term noise pollution affects seedling recruitment and community composition, with negative effects persisting after removal’, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 288 (1948), 20202906.
^↵
EU, 2002, Directive 2002/49/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 June 2002 relating to the assessment and management of environmental noise (OJ L 189, 18.07.2002, p. 0012-0026).
^↵
EU, 1992, Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7-50).
^↵
EC, 2020, Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions ‘EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030 — Bringing nature back into our lives’ (COM/2020/380 final).
^↵
EU, 2024, Regulation 2024/1991 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 June 2024 on nature restoration and amending Regulation (EU) 2022/869 (OJ L, 2024/1991, 29.7.2024).
^↵
EC, 2013, Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions ‘Green Infrastructure (GI) — Enhancing Europe’s Natural Capital (COM/2013/0249 final).
^↵
Arévalo, C., et al., 2022, ‘Urban noise and surrounding city morphology influence green space occupancy by native birds in a Mediterranean-type South American metropolis’, Scientific Reports 12 (4471).
^↵