However, it soon became apparent to researchers, notably those of the Centre for Research on Sonic Space and Urban Environment (CRESSON) in Grenoble, that it was the negative aspects that were predominant in the discussions between the different actors. “The researchers in CRESSON have therefore developed specific methodological tools aimed at creating a debate around this object which is rarely put into words and which have made possible the construction of theoretical ideas to take account of ordinary listening. In this way they have demonstrated the contribution of sounds to the identity of places, and in return, the relevance of the social and cultural context in the sonic reading of spaces”. Paul-Louis Colon has combined access by ordinary experience with access by annoyance in order to deal with noise and the annoyance it can cause. He has therefore studied the way these factors combine and cause a feeling of annoyance and how the affected individual can remedy this annoyance. In the context of his study, he has conducted 25 in-depth interviews generally carried out in people’s homes, that is to say in the place where nuisance is generally caused. These interviews have been contextualized by observing meetings, citizens’ actions, informal discussions and documents produced by the different participants. While studies of annoyance are generally aimed at a precise category of sonic sources, the analysis has compared different situations involving a wide variation of noise annoyance (air traffic, road traffic, neighborhood, recreational activities, industries, etc.).

Emergence of annoyance

“Noise encompasses different meanings. There is the sound that disturbs the sound that is objectively strong, the sound that something produces, etc. Anything can be noise. For a given acoustic level, not everyone necessarily experiences annoyance. It is a very subjective subject but this is not why it is personal. It is subjective in the sense that it mobilizes the individual; it is not personal because different people in different situations experience noise in accordance with similar processes. And yet, this subjective dimension is rarely taken into account. In many cases, we have a normative approach. Below certain norms there is not considered to be any noise annoyance. This is the core of the problem because, nonetheless, the fact remains that even if annoyance no longer legally exists, it is still present,” continues Paul-Louis Colon. We are constantly evolving in a sonic environment and annoyance appears when there is a change in the attention brought to bear on this environment. Yet it is still true that not all sounds that are produced necessarily cause annoyance. Some are temporary; others are only felt a “long time after they have appeared. This identification then has a “revelation” effect as illustrated by the case of an individual living alone in a rural house and who is badly affected by noise from aircraft. The individual concerned therefore states that the noise only began to annoy them from the moment they became aware that it was a problem even though the noise already existed beforehand. The change came about when a friend pointed out to them that a plane passed over their balcony every three minutes. In another case, a woman only became aware of the noise of planes over her house when visiting a new house. Once they have become aware of the annoyance, people want to identify what is annoying them and this often varies from one person to another.