The most frequent licensing modalities performed in cities in the northern region of state of Rio Grande do Sul
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5902/2236130814805Keywords:
Licensing, Environmental conservation, Natural resourcesAbstract
Licensing is a powerful mechanism to encourage sectoral dialogue, breaking the trend of individualized corrective and support a precautionary approach to actions, but proactive, with different users of natural resources. It is a moment of application of the transverse nature of public and private sector policies that interfaceam environmental issues. The policy of mainstreaming for licensing is, by definition, a policy of sharing the responsibility for environmental conservation through sustainable development. For its effectiveness, the precepts of environmental protection should definitely be incorporated into the planning of the sectors that make use of natural resources. The objective of this study was to examine how licenses issued more frequently, both by the secretariat of the environment of municipalities High Ronda, Rondinha, Sarandi and Three Palms, as the company Forestry and Environmental FTS, which provides consulting services this region.Downloads
References
CETESB: Companhia ambiental do estado de São Paulo. Disponível em: http://www.cetesb.sp.gov.br/licenciamento/licenciamento-ambiental. Acesso em: 12 jun. 2014.
FEPAM: Fundação Estadual de Proteção Ambiental. Disponível em: http://www.fepam.rs.gov.br. Acesso
em: 8 jun. 2014.
FIORILLO, Celso Antônio Pacheco. Curso de direito ambiental brasileiro. 4. ed. São Paulo: Saraiva, 2003.
IBAMA: Instituto brasileiro do meio ambiente e dos recursos naturais renováveis. Disponível em: http://www.ibama.gov.br/licenciamento. Acesso em: 10 jun. 2014.
IBRAM: Instituto Brasília Ambiental. Disponível em: http://www.ibram.df.gov.br/servicos/licenciamento
-ambiental. Acesso em: 12 jun. 2014.
MACHADO, Paulo Affonso Leme. Direito ambiental brasileiro. 13. ed. São Paulo: Malheiros, 2005.
Ministério do meio ambiente. Disponível em: http://www.mma.gov.br/. Acesso em: 7 jun. 2014.
SEMA: Secretária do Meio Ambiente. Disponível em: http://www.sema.rs.gov.br/. Acesso em: 11 jun. 2014.
SMAM: Secretária municipal do Meio Ambiente. Disponível em: http://www2.portoalegre.rs.gov.br/smam. Acesso em: 8 jun. 2014.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Ethical guidelines for journal publication
The REMOA 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.
In particular,
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. Reviews 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 referee 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.
