Skills and challenges in environmental multidisciplinarity
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5902/223613088490Keywords:
Skill, Environmental, MultidisciplinarityAbstract
Currently environmental issues have increased significantly in importance. Thus, the elements involved in Environmental Law, which until recently were regarded as superfluous and unnecessary; now arouse the interest and attention of society. This study aims to analyze the challenges of instruments of proof in civil and criminal - expertise - with a focus on their use in environmental issues, emphasizing the key elements that generate barriers between technical and legal understanding, based in environmental legislation and the relationship between the rite and procedural expertise. The results show that the multidisciplinary is a reality for the development of forensic techniques used in both verification and determination of the causes of damage of such an event for the relevant compensation. Thus, the expertise becomes an important starting point for the resolution of environmental problems throughout its range, considering, however, restrictions on their application concerning costs.Downloads
References
ANDRADE, F. A V.; GULIN, M. A A V.; FREITAS, V. P. (org) Perícia Multidisciplinar no Direito Ambiental. In Direito Ambiental em Evolução. Ed. Juruá, 2002.
BARROS, A. J. S; LEHFELD, N. A. S. Fundamentos de metodologia científica: um guia para a iniciação científica. 2 ed. São Paulo: Makron Books, 2000, 122p.
BRASIL. Lei Federal 6.938 de 31 de agosto de 1981, Dispõe sobre a Política Nacional do Meio Ambiente,
seus fins e mecanismos de formulação e aplicação. Disponível em: http://pr.gov.br/meio ambiente/legislacao.shtml. Acesso em: 9.09.2012.
BRASIL. RESOLUÇÃO No 357. Dispõe sobre a classificação dos corpos de água e diretrizes ambientais para o seu enquadramento, bem como estabelece as condições e padrões de lançamento de efluentes, e dá outras providências. Publicado em: 17 de março de 2005.
BRASIL. RESOLUÇÃO No 430. Dispõe sobre as condições e padrões de lançamento de efluentes, complementa e altera a Resolução no 357, de 17 de março de 2005, do Conselho Nacional do Meio Ambiente-CONAMA. Publicado em: 13 de Maio de 2011.
FERRAZ, F. B.; FELIPE, T. J. S. Análise comparativa entre avaliação e estudo de impacto ambiental. Nomos: Revista do Programa de Pós-Graduação em Direito da UFC. v. 32.2, jul./dez. 2012.
GIL, A. C. Como elaborar projetos de pesquisa. 4 ed. São Paulo: Atlas, 2002, 175p.
JULIANO, K. A. A Perícia no direito ambiental, com ênfase na degradação do solo por mineração. Dissertação de Mestrado. UFPR. 2005.
LEFF, E. Racionalidade Ambiental: a reapropriação social da natureza. Rio de Janeiro: Civilização Brasileira, 2006.
LERNER, M., Grande Tecnologia e Técnicos Neutros. In: RUINTENBEEK, H.M. (Org.), O Dilema da Sociedade Tecnológica. Petrópolis: Vozes, 1971.
MASCARENHAS, L. M. A. Interdisciplinaridade, instrumentos legais de proteção ao meio ambiente e perícia ambiental. Tese de Doutorado. UFGO. 2009.
PACHECO, C. S. L. O Dano Ambiental Potencial. Disponível em: http://cristianopacheco.com/wpcontent/uploads/2012/03/O-Dano-Ambiental-Potencial-Cristiano-Pacheco-01.03.12.pdf. Acesso em: 20/02/2013.
PITASSI, C; BARROS, M. A. A. Tecnologia e Gestão Estratégica: O Caso da Vale Logística. Anais do 29o Encontro da ANPAD. Brasília, 2005.
PRADO, M. L. do. et al., Produção de conhecimento em um curso de mestrado em enfermagem no Brasil. XVII CIÊNCIA Y ENFERMERIA. Santa Catarina. nov. 2011. Disponível em: http://www.scielo.cl/pdf/cienf/v17n3/art05.pdf. Acesso em: 19 set. 2012.
SAMPAIO, Francisco José Marques, Evolução da Responsabilidade Civil e Reparação de Danos Ambientais. Ed. Rio de Janeiro: Lumen Juris, 1998.
VIEIRA, K. V. Perícia judicial ambiental: conhecimentos técnicos e jurídicos como suporte para tomada de decisão. Dissertação de Mestrado. Florianópolis - SC. 2010.
TESLLER, M. B. Direito Ambiental em Evolução, nº 2, Ed. Juruá, 2000.
YIN, R. K. Estudos de casos: planejamentos e métodos. 2 ed. Porto Alegre: Bokman, 2001, 205p.
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.
