Light Pollution Definition

From hms.sternhell.at
Jump to: navigation, search
 Light pollution is the introduction by humans, directly or indirectly, of
 artificial light into the environment.

Fuerteventura IAU/UNESCO Expert Meeting containing the full formulation http://www.starlight2007.net/pdf/FinalReportFuerteventuraSL.pdf

Notes to the Light Pollution Definition, by Friedel Pas

Von: Friedel Pas <friedel.pas@scarlet.be> Reply-to: "conference of \(European\) IDA section leaders" <ida@amper.ped.muni.cz> An: 'conference of (European) IDA section leaders' <ida@amper.ped.muni.cz> Betreff: Re: [Ida] definition of light pollution/ light nuisance Datum: 2010-07-13 12:44:26


Hi Wim and the rest,

The person you were referencing to in Armagh was me.

Your translations for light pollution and light nuisance are indeed the one you need to use. Working from the perception of light nuisance and light pollution can make also already a difference in how to handle with.

Were I was referencing in Armagh was to the expert meeting at Fuerteventura of the Starlight initiative. There was a discussion on this subject. The result was based on the definition of cinzano you were referencing to what was also already a conclusion on the symposium in Vienna that we need to use that definition. The words were formulated different to make it more matching with definitions that were used also in international juridical cases. So there is not so much difference between the two definitions, only in the way it is formulated. This resulted in the following text:

Light pollution is the introduction by humans, directly or indirectly, of artificial light into the environment. You can find that in the following document: http://www.starlight2007.net/pdf/FinalReportFuerteventuraSL.pdf

The reason the discussion was started was also that several countries are telling in their policy notes that there exist not an international accepted definition so they create their own definition and in that way limit directly the things were they want to work out policy on light pollution and were not. This part of the report became also a report for the UNESCO World Heritage committee and become so in the UNESCO's material. In that way it become more difficult for countries to state that there is no international accepted definition.

Except from those two definitions the most other definitions you found reference to consequences of light pollution. I believe it is not a good case to define your problem by defining the consequences and not the problem self. The research on consequences of light pollution is still ongoing and every year new things are discovered. That make this definitions also not very sustainable. This definitions do well. Several people not like the definition because it seems that no light at all can be used. For that reason it is important that some remarks are mentioned in combination with the definition. You can compare it with the definition of other types of pollution like air pollution. There we notice also that we will have always a number of air pollution or we need to stop living like we do in the modern world. The actions and policy their followed is to take those actions to reduce the impact of the consequences to an acceptable minimum. That is exact also what we want to do with policies on light pollution.

Light nuisance is not much used for the moment. Especially for legislative reasons the use of light nuisance is chosen because there exists already longer legislation about nuisance where they can make use about also for light.

Regards,

Friedel

20:17, 26. Jul. 2010 GuentherWuchterl 

WH --GW (talk) 15:14, 28 April 2016 (CEST)