Abstract
Background: Light pollution is increasingly an area of concern for health and quality of life research. Somewhat surprisingly, there are relatively few descriptions of perceptions of light pollution in the literature. The current study examined such perceptions in a Irish sample. Methods: A survey was circulated as part of a citizen science initiative of a national newspaper; the survey included questions regarding night sky brightness and the impact of light at night on sleep and animal behaviour. Complete responses from 462 respondents were analysed. Results: Urban location was, as anticipated, associated with reported brighter night skies, and public lighting was reported as the main source of light at night for urban settings, whilst neighbours’ domestic lighting was the most commonly reported source for rural settings. Respondents from rural settings were more likely to report that light at night impinged on sleep, whilst city dwellers were more likely to report recent changes in wildlife behaviour. Conclusions: Citizen science approaches may be useful in gathering data on public perceptions of light pollution and its impacts. In the current study, this perception was strongly influenced by location, highlighting the importance of assessing experiences and attitudes across a number of geographical settings.
Highlights
Man-made light pollution is an area of increasing concern from a sustainability, ecological and health perspective [1]
This study addresses an important gap in the literature regarding public perceptions of the prevalence and intrusiveness of artificial light at night
There was a strong association of location with the source of lighting (Pearson’s chi-square = 190, df = 16, p < 0.001; Figure 1B), with own domestic lighting and neighbours’ lighting being important sources only in rural settings, and public lighting being the most important reported source across all settings
Summary
Man-made light pollution is an area of increasing concern from a sustainability, ecological and health perspective [1]. Health and ecological concerns centre on the potential of light at night to act physiologically to disrupt homeostatic and behavioural control systems, such as the circadian clock that regulates daily rhythms in activity, physiology and sleep [3]. A number of studies have implicated man-made artificial light at night (ALAN) with health concerns such as increased risk of hormone-dependent cancers [5] and mood disorders [6]. Respondents from rural settings were more likely to report that light at night impinged on sleep, whilst city dwellers were more likely to report recent changes in wildlife behaviour. Conclusions: Citizen science approaches may be useful in gathering data on public perceptions of light pollution and its impacts. This perception was strongly influenced by location, highlighting the importance of assessing experiences and attitudes across a number of geographical settings
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
