CHALLENGES IN URBAN FOREST MANAGEMENT: DEGRADATION BEHAVIOR IN MATA DO PASSARINHO RESERVE (OLINDA-PE)
Keywords:Degradação Ambiental, Floresta Urbana, Gestão, Reserva, Unidade de Conservação
AbstractABSTRACT The Urban Forest Reserve Mata do Passarinho, located in Olinda - Pernambuco, has a long and complicated history of degradation, bringing to the political stage of the environment the social agents and the government. The first, driven by housing demands and subject to low socio-economic development of the locality, constitute the main degrading agent, while public power's secretaries and departments are premised to ease the situation of fires, irregular disposal of solid waste and illegal invasions. From questionnaire applied to three groups defined as important to the problem, observations were made like the most harmful types of degradation and its reasons. From the results, the need of both punitive and educational policies to assist the management of the Conservation Unit was clarified.
COELHO, Maria de Pompéia Corrêa de Araújo (1997). Parecer Técnico: Mata do Passarinho, Olinda – PE. Recife: ASPAN.
CONSTANZA, R. et al. The Value of The World’s Ecosystem Services and Natural Capital. Nature, London, v. 387, p. 253-260, 1997.
HOLLING, Crawford Stanley. Resilience and Stability of Ecological Systems. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, California, vol. 4, p. 1-23, 1973.
INSTITUTO BRASILEIRO DE GEOGRAFIA E ESTATÍSTICA. Censo 2010. Brasília: 2011.
LEFF, Enrique. Saber Ambiental: Sustentabilidade, racionalidade, complexidade, poder. Petrópolis: Vozes, 2009.
MASSMANN, F.; WEHRHAHN, R. Qualitative Social Vulnerability Assessments to Natural Hazards: Examples from coastal Thailand. Revista da Gestão Costeira Integrada, Lisboa, vol. 14, n. 1, p. 3-13, 2013.
PERNAMBUCO. Lei n. 13.787, de 08 de junho de 2009. Institui o Sistema Estadual de Unidades de Conservação da Natureza – SEUC, no âmbito do Estado de Pernambuco, e dá outras providências. Diário Oficial do Estado, c. 01, p. 03, 09 jun. 2009.
ROCHA, Juliana; BURSZTYN, Maria Augusta. A Importância da Participação Social na Sustentabilidade do Desenvolvimento Local. Interações Revista Internacional de Desenvolvimento Local, Campo Grande, v. 7, n. 11, set. 2005.
SECRETARIA DE MEIO AMBIENTE E SUSTENTABILIDADE; AGÊNCIA ESTADUAL DE MEIO AMBIENTE. Plano de Manejo da Reserva de Floresta Urbana – FURB Mata de Passarinho. Recife: SEMAS/CPRH, 2013.
TURNER, B. L. et al. A Framework For Vulnerability Analysis in Sustainability Science. Proceedings of The National Academy of Sciences of The United States of America, Washington D.C., vol. 100, n. 14, p. 8074-8079, 2003.
How to Cite
To access the DECLARATION AND TRANSFER OF COPYRIGHT AUTHOR’S DECLARATION AND COPYRIGHT LICENSE click here.
Ethical Guidelines for Journal Publication
The Ciência e Natura journal is committed to ensuring ethics in publication and quality of articles.
Conformance to standards of ethical behavior is therefore expected of all parties involved: Authors, Editors, Reviewers, and the Publisher.
Authors: Authors should present an objective discussion of the significance of research work as well as sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the experiments. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Review Articles should also be objective, comprehensive, and accurate accounts of the state of the art. The Authors should ensure that their work is entirely original works, and if the work and/or words of others have been used, this has been appropriately acknowledged. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Authors should not submit articles describing essentially the same research to more than one journal. The corresponding Author should ensure that there is a full consensus of all Co-authors in approving the final version of the paper and its submission for publication.
Editors: Editors should evaluate manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit. An Editor must not use unpublished information in the editor's own research without the express written consent of the Author. Editors should take reasonable responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper.
Reviewers: Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should be conducted objectively, and observations should be formulated clearly with supporting arguments, so that Authors can use them for improving the paper. Any selected Reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the Editor and excuse himself from the review process. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.