Índice de qualidade das Áreas de Preservação Permanente dos recursos hídricos urbanos: APPHidro

Vasconcelos, Francisca Dalila Menezes; Mota, Francisco Suetônio Bastos; Figueirêdo, Maria Cléa Brito de

Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

Brasil

Español English

sumário « anterior atual seguinte »

Sumário

ARTICLES • Rev. Ambient. Água 16 (1) • 2021 • https://doi.org/10.4136/ambi-agua.2589 copiar

Índice de qualidade das Áreas de Preservação Permanente dos recursos hídricos urbanos: APPHidro

Autoria SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

Resumo

Os impactos da expansão urbana nos recursos hídricos é uma relação amplamente aceita. Propor e aplicar um índice composto para avaliar a qualidade das Áreas de Preservação Permanente (APP), que protegem os rios urbanos, é o objetivo deste trabalho. O APPHidro agrega informações de seis indicadores: esgotamento sanitário, assentamento precário, drenagem urbana, nível de ocupação, Unidades de Conservação e Zona de Preservação instituídas pelo plano diretor municipal. Aplicado nas sub-bacias inseridas na cidade de Fortaleza-Ceará, a quinta mais populosa do Brasil. O índice mostra que as localidades menos assistidas por infraestrutura de saneamento, e com menos hectares de áreas protegidas, registram APP mais vulneráveis. O índice APPHidro apresenta-se como uma ferramenta importante na orientação do planejamento urbano ambiental, formulação e gestão de políticas públicas no âmbito da proteção dos mananciais urbanos. Além de subsidiar gestores municipais sobre as zonas ambientalmente sensíveis que necessitam de recuperação.

Palavras-chave:
águas urbanas; desenvolvimento urbano; indicadores urbanos ambientais

Indexes/ Indicators	Locality/Author/Year	Measurement parameters	Contribution
Land use indicators and Water quality parameters	China. Zhaoet al. (2015).	LUP: level of urbanization, environmental management, expansion of the industrial zone, land-use composition. WQP: Biochemical oxygen demand, nitrate, and phosphorus.	Correlates urban expansion to water quality.
	Peru. Carpio and Fath (2011)CARPIO, O. V.; FATH, B. D. Assessing the Environmental Impacts of Urban Growth Using Land Use/Land Cover, Water Quality and Health Indicators: A Case Study of Arequipa, Peru. American Journal of Environmental Sciences, v. 7, n. 2, p. 90-101, 2011. https://doi.org/10.3844/ajessp.2011.90.101 https://doi.org/10.3844/ajessp.2011.90.1... .	LUP: pasture, agriculture, volcanic material, water, empty land. WQP: fecal coliforms. Absolute numbers of cases of gastrointestinal diseases.	Studies the direct relationship of urban expansion with changes in river flow, water quality, and waterborne diseases.
	Puerto Rico. Uriarteet al. (2011).	LUP: agriculture, forest, pasture, water, urban area, swamp. WQP: turbidity, dissolved oxygen, total phosphorus, nitrogen, fecal coliforms, and streptococci.	Links urban expansion and pasture to water quality.
	India. Singhet al. (2016).	LUP: agriculture, built area, and vegetation. Applying the Water Quality Index (WQI).	States that urbanization is the cause of water pollution.
	United States. Carstens and Amer (2019).	LUP: agriculture, forest, pasture, water, urban area. WQP: dissolved oxygen, total phosphorus, nitrogen, and fecal coliform.	The results state that urbanization has a negative impact on water quality.
Environmental indicators of PPA	Brazil. Freitaset al. (2013).	Parameters: land use, proximity to vegetation and urban areas, proximity to the road network, risk of erosion, capacity to sustain the native forest, order of drainage channels, and PPA category.	The study found that 44% of local PPAs were in compliance.
Urban Environmental Quality Index	Brazil. Ribeiro and Mendes (2015).	LUP: vegetation coverage, basic infrastructure, and demographic data.	Methodological contributions applying remote sensing and multivariate analysis.
Sustainability Indicators	Brazil. Dellamoraet al. (2013).	LUP: land use, green areas, water resources, and PPA land.	Methodological contributions applying remote sensing and Geographic Information System.
Environmental Vulnerability Index	Brazil. Barroset al. (2015).	LUP: declivity, land and area of riparian forest PPA, i.e., the 30 m required by law.	Relates PPA with social vulnerability, infrastructure, and urban flood risk.

Indicators	1: UI-1	2: UI-2	3: UI-3	4: EI-1	5: EI-2	6: EI-3	Sum of lines
1: UI-1: sewerage coverage around PPA	0	2	3	1	1	1	8
2: UI-2: incidence of precarious settlement in PPA	2	0	1	2	1	3	9
3: UI-3: drainage system around the PPA	3	2	0	1	1	1	8
4: EI-1: PPA with vegetation coverage	1	3	1	0	3	3	11
5: EI-2: CU in PPA	0	0	0	2	0	2	4
6: EI-3: municipal macro-zoning in PPA	1	3	1	3	3	0	11
Sum of columns	7	10	6	9	9	10

Dimension	Code	Description of the Indicators	Weighting (AHP)	Equations
Urban	UI-1	Percentage of PPA area with sewage system.	0.26050	Equation 1: $U I 1 x, y = (\frac{\sum A P P s e}{P P A t o t a l}) 100$
	UI-2	Percentage of PPA area with no incidence of precarious settlement.	0.63335	Equation 2: $U I 2 x, y = 100 - (\frac{\sum P S}{\sum P P A t o t a l}) 100$
	UI-3	Percentage of PPA area served by urban drainage system.	0.10616	Equation 3: $U I 3 x, y = (\frac{\sum D S}{\sum P P A t o t a l}) 100$
Environmental andmanagerial	EI-1	Percentage of PPA area with plant coverage.	0.64339	Equation 4: $E I 1 x, y = (\frac{\sum P P A v c}{P P A t o t a l}) 100$
	EI-2	Percentage of PPA area included in CUs.	0.07377	Equation 5: $E I x, y = (\frac{\sum C U p p a}{\sum P P A t o t a l}) 100$
	EI-3	Percentage of PPA area considered in municipal macro-zoning.	0.28284	Equation 6: $E I x, y = (\frac{\sum P P A m z}{P P A t o t a l}) 100$

Instituto de Pesquisas Ambientais em Bacias Hidrográficas Instituto de Pesquisas Ambientais em Bacias Hidrográficas (IPABHi), Estrada Mun. Dr. José Luis Cembranelli, 5000, Taubaté, SP, Brasil, CEP 12081-010 - Taubaté - SP - Brazil
E-mail: ambi.agua@gmail.com

Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

[1] ^*Corresponding author: Francisca Dalila Menezes Vasconcelos, e-mail: menezes.dalila@gmail.com

Description of the levels	Interval
Unconcerned management of PPAs	0 - 20
Inefficient PPA management	21 - 40
Regular management of PPAs	41 - 60
Concerned management of PPAs	61 - 80
Efficient management of PPAs	81 - 100