Gestão ambiental em escolas públicas do município de Erechim
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5902/2236130810945Palavras-chave:
Gestão Ambiental, Educação Ambiental, Legislação AmbientalResumo
Este trabalho foi desenvolvido com objetivo de avaliar a Gestão Ambiental (GA) implantada nas escolas públicas do município de Erechim – RS, procurando estabelecer a relação entre Educação Ambiental (EA) e Gestão Ambiental, bem como demonstrar sua importância para o enfrentamento dos desafios socioambientais. A técnica utilizada para a coleta de dados foi entrevista semi-estruturada, tendo como base um questionário de 26 questões, direcionado aos principais gestores das escolas públicas do município de Erechim
Downloads
Referências
BRASIL. Política Nacional de Educação Ambiental (Lei n° 9.795, de 27 de abril de 1999). Brasília, DF:
Senado Federal, 1999.
BRASIL. Agenda 21. Ministério do Meio Ambiente. Brasília, DF: 2012. Disponivel em:
mma.gov.br/responsabilidade-socioambiental/agenda-21/agenda-21-brasileira> Acesso em 22 ago. 2012.
BRASIL. Resolução Conama Nº 275 de 25 de abril de 2001. Disponível em: http://www.mma..gov.br/por/conama/res/res01/res27501.html. Acesso em: 8 out. 2012.
BRASIL. Resolução Conama N° 307 de 5 de julho de 2002. Disponível em: http://www.mma.gov.br/port/conama/legiabre.cfm?codlegi=307. Acesso em : 15 out. 2012
BRASIL. Decreto N° 7.083 de 27 de Janeiro de 2010. (Dispõe sobre o programa Mais Educação).
Brasília, DF: Senado Federal, 1999.
MARTURANO, Nadia Maria Pacheco; VIEIRA, Alex Sandro. Gestão Ambiental, Possibilidades
para área degradada. Curso de Administração. Faculdade Cenecista de Capivari – CNEC, 2010.
VILELA JR, Alcir; DEMAJOROVIC, Jacques. Modelos e ferramentas de gestão ambiental: desafios e perspectivas para as organizações. São Paulo: Senac, 2006.
Downloads
Publicado
Como Citar
Edição
Seção
Licença
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.
