Qual a Percepção dos Brasileiros em Relação às Áreas Verdes Urbanas?
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.59072/rper.vi67.555Palavras-chave:
Ecosystem Services, Parks;, Green AreasResumo
Áreas verdes urbanas são essenciais para a qualidade de vida das pessoas que residem nas cidades. Estas áreas prestam serviços ecossistêmicos que possibilitam por exemplo, a redução de temperatura, melhoram a qualidade do ar e facilitam a absorção das águas das chuvas, entre outros. A partir deste contexto, o objetivo deste estudo é identificar a percepção que os brasileiros têm sobre as áreas verdes e a prestação de serviços ecossistêmicos. Para tal, utilizou-se a literatura para a elaboração de um questionário online, aplicado a 511 indivíduos, residentes em Mato Grosso do Sul. A coleta de dados seguiu a estrutura bola de neve. A partir dos dados coletados, foi realizada análise fatorial, além da utilização de estatística descritiva e testes não paramétricos para o tratamento das informações coletadas. Os resultados apontaram em relação as áreas verdes, três fatores: i- Benefícios da existência de parques na área urbana; ii- Influência das áreas verdes na saúde humana; e iii- Problemas causados pelas áreas verdes urbanas. A percepção dos respondentes é neutra quanto ao primeiro fator, porém, quanto ao segundo fator, os respondentes concordam com a importância da existência de áreas verdes urbanas, bem como, com os benefícios que trazem à saúde humana.
Referências
Accioly, I., Sánchez, C. 2012. Antiecologismo no Congresso Nacional: o meio ambiente representado na Câmara dos Deputados e no Senado Federal. Revista Desenvolvimento e Meio Ambiente, 25, 97 – 108.
Arnberg, A. 2006. Recreation use of urban forests: An inter-area comparison. Urban Florestry & Urban Greening, 4(3-4), 135-144.
Baker, J.L. (Ed.). 2012. Climate Change, Disaster Risk, and the Urban Poor: Cities
Balmford, A., Green, J.M., Anderson, M. et al. 2015. Walk on the wild side: estimating the global magnitude of visits to protected areas. PLoS Biol., 13(2).
Baur, J.W.R., Tynon, J.F., Gómez, E. 2013. Attitudes about urban nature parks: a case study of users and nonusers in Portland, Oregon. Landscape Urban Plann. 117, 100–111.
Benzon, N. 2018. Discussing Nature, ‘Doing’ Nature: For an emancipatory approach to conceptualizing young people's access to outdoor green space. Geoforum, 93, 79-86.
Bernardo, L.V.M., De Lima, J.F., Farinha, M.J.U. 2018. Gestão fiscal e a transparência eletrônica em Mato Grosso do Sul. Revista Brasileira de Desenvolvimento Regional, 6 (1), 137-160.
Bolund, P., Hunhammar, S. 1999. Ecosystem Services in Urban Areas. Ecological Economics, 29, 293-301.
Brandli, L.L., Prietto, P.D.M., Neckel, A. 2014. Estimating the willingness to pay for improvement of an urban park in southern Brazil using the contingent valuation method. J. Urban Plann. Dev., 140 (4), 1-10.
Brasil. Lei n° 9.985. Regulamenta o art. 225, § 1o, incisos I, II, III e VII da Constituição Federal, institui o Sistema Nacional de Unidades de Conservação da Natureza e dá outras providências. 2000. Disponível em: http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/leis/l9985.htm. Acesso em: março 2000.
Brasil. Lei nº 12.651. Dispõe sobre a proteção da vegetação nativa. 2012. Disponível em: http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_Ato2011-2014/2012/Lei/L12651.htm. Acesso em: jan. 2020
Brauman, K.A., Freyberg, D.L., Daily, G.C. 2014. Impacts of land-use change on
Bruijnis, M., Hogeveen, H., Garforth, C., Stassen, E. 2013. Dairy farmers' attitudes and intentions towards improving dairy cow foot health. Livestock Science, 155(1), 103-113.
Building Resilience for a Changing World. The World Bank.
challenges of a rapid urbanized economy. Habitat Int., 32, 28–40.
Chen, H., Jia, B., Lau, S.S.Y. 2008. Sustainable urban form for Chinese compact cities:
Chen, S., Wang, Y., Ni, Z., Zhang, X., Xia, B. 2020. Benefits of the ecosystem services provided by urban green infrastructures: Differences between perception and measurements. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 54, 1-15.
Chiabai, A., Quiroga, S., Martinez-Juarez, P., Suárez, C., Jalón, S.G., Taylor, T. 2020. Exposure to green areas: Modelling health benefits in a context of study heterogeneity. Ecological Economics, 167. 1-10.
Chiesura, A. 2004. The role of urban parks for the sustainable city. Landsc. Urban Plan.
Cohen, P., Potchter, O., Matzarakis, A. 2012. Daily and seasonal climatic conditions of green urban open spaces in the Mediterranean climate and their impact on human comfort. Building and Environment, 51, 285-295.
Collins, C.M.T., Cook-Moni, I., Raum, S. 2019. What do people know? Ecosystem services, public perception and sustainable management of urban park trees in London, U.K. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 43, 1-9.
Costa, C.S. 2010. Áreas Verdes: um elemento chave para a sustentabilidade urbana. Arquitextos, 11.
Costanza, R., D’arge, R., De Groot, R. 1997. The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature, 387, 253–260.
Curtis, P.G., Slay, C.M., Harris, N.L., Tyukavina, A., Hansen, M.C. 2018. Classifying drivers of global forest loss. Science, 361(6407), 1108–1111.
Daily, G.C., 1997. Nature's services: societal dependence on natural ecosystems. Pac. Conserv. Biol. 6, 220–221.
De Groot, R.S. 1992. Functions of Nature: Evaluation of Nature in Environmental Planning, Management and Decision Making. Wolters-Noordhoff BV, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Domingues, C.H.F., Borges, J.A.R., Ruviaro, C.F., Guidolin, D.G.F., Carrijo, J. R.M. 2020. Understanding the factors influencing consumer willingness to accept the use of insects to feed poultry, cattle, pigs and fish in Brazil. Plos One.
Dunn, R.R., Davies, T.J., Harris, N.C., Gavin, M.C. 2010. Global mapping of ecosystem disservices: the unspoken reality that nature sometimes kills us. Biotropica, 42, 555-557.
EEA. 2015. The European Environment—State and Outlook 2015: Synthesis Report.European Environment Agency, Copenhagen.
Erickson, D., Ernst, J. 2011. The real benefits of nature play every day. NACC Newsletter, 97-100.
Escobedo, F.J., Kroeger, T., Wagner, J.E. 2011. Urban forests and pollution mitigation: analyzing ecosystem services and disservices. Environ. Pollut., 159, 2078-2087.
Fiquepron, J., Garcia, S., Stenger, A. 2013. Land use impact on water quality: valuing forest services in terms of the water supply sector. J. Environ. Manag. 126, 113–121.
Forest Research. 2010. Forest Research benefits of green infrastructure. Report by Forest Research. Forest Research, Farnham, UK.
Garcia, D.A. 2017. Green areas management and bioengineering techniques for improving urban ecological sustainability. Sustainable Cities and Society, 30, 108-117.
Gibbs, H.K., Ruesch, A.S., Achard, F., Clayton, M.K., Holmgren, P., Ramankutty, N., Foley, J.A. 2010. Tropical forests were the primary sources of new agricultural land in the 1980s and 1990s. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci., 107 (38), 16732-16737.
Gomes, M. A. S. 2005. As praças de Ribeirão Preto-SP: uma contribuição geográfica ao planejamento e à gestão dos espaços públicos. 204 f. Dissertação (Mestrado) Universidade Federal de Uberlândia, Programa de Pós-Graduação em Geografia. Uberlândia.
González-Oreja, J.A., Bonache-Regidor, C., De La Fuente-Díaz-Ordaz, A. 2010. Far from the noisy world? Modelling the relationships between park size, tree cover and noise levels in urban green spaces of the city of Puebla, Mexico. Interciencia, 35, 486–492.
Gozalo, G.R., Morillas, J.M.B., González, D.M. 2019. Perceptions and use of urban green spaces on the basis of size. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 46, 1-10.
groundwater supply: ecosystem services assessment in Kona, Hawaii. J. Water Res.
Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tathanm, R. L., Black, W. C. 2005. Análise multivariada de dados. 5. ed. Porto Alegre, RS: Bookman.
Hartig, T., Mitchell, R., Vries, S., Frumkin, H. Nature and Health. 2014. Annual Review of Public Health, 35, 207-228.
Hernández-Morcillo, M., Plieninger, T., Bieling, C. 2013. An empirical review of cultural ecosystem service indicators. Ecol. Indic. 29, 434–444.
Hunter, M.D., Eickhoff, S.B., Pheasant, R.J., Douglas, M.J., Watts, G.R., Farrow, T.F.D., et al. 2010. The state of tranquility: subjective perception is shaped by contextual modulation of auditory connectivity. Neuroimage, 53 (2), 611–618.
IBGE. 2010. Censo Demográfico 2010. Características da população e dos domicílios: resultados do universo. Rio de Janeiro: IBGE.
Iojã, C., Rozylowiczl, L., Pãtroescu, M., Nitã, M.R., Vânau, G.O. 2011. Dog walkers’ vs. other park visitors’ perceptions: The importance of planning sustainable urban parks in Bucharest, Romania. Landscape and Urban Planning, 103(1), 74-82
Irvine, K. N., Warber, S. L., Devine-Wright, P., Gaston, K. J. 2013. Understanding urban green space as a health resource: A qualitative comparison of visit motivation and derived effects among park users in sheffield, UK. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 10(1), 417–442.
Jim, C.Y.; Chen, W. 2006. Perception and attitude of residents toward urban green spaces in Guangzhou (China). Environ. Manage. 38, 338–349.
Kaczynski, A.T., Potwarka, L.R., Saelens, B.E. 2008. Association of Park Size, Distance, and Features With Physical Activity in Neighborhood Parks. American Journal of Public Health, 98 (8), 1451-1456.
Kline, K., Martinelli, F., Oliveira, C., Venier, L., Sparovek, G., Mayer, A., Walter, A., Medeiros, R. 2015. Bioenergy and biodiversity: key lessons from the Pan American region. Environ. Manag., 56 (6), 1377-1396.
Ko, H., Son, Y. 2018. Perceptions of cultural ecosystem services in urban green spaces: A case study in Gwacheon, Republic of Korea. Ecological Indicators, 91, 299-306.
Kothencz, G., Blaschke, T. 2017. Urban parks: Visitors’ perceptions versus spatial indicators. Land Use Policy, 64, 233-244.
Krellenberg, K., Welz, J., Reyes-Päcke, S. 2014. Urban green areas and their potential for social interaction – A case study of a socio-economically mixed neighbourhood in Santiago de Chile. Habitat International, 44, 11-21.
Krosnick Ja,, Holbrook Al, Berent Mk, Carson Rt, Hanemann Kopp Rj, et al. 2002. The impact of “no opinion” response options on data quality non-attitude reduction or na invitation to satisfice?. Public Opinion Quarterly. 66, 371–403.
Kubitza, C., Krishna, V.V., Urban, K., Alamsyah, Z., Qaim, M. 2018. Land property rights, agricultural intensification, and deforestation in Indonesia. Ecol. Econ. 147, 312–321.
La Barrera, F., Reyes-Paecke, S., Banzhaf, E. 2016. Indicators for green spaces in contrasting urban settings. Ecological Indicators, 62, 212-219.
Lagbas, A.J. 2019. Social valuation of regulating and cultural ecosystem services of Arroceros Forest Park: A man-made forest in the city of Manila, Philippines. Journal of Urban Management, 8(1), 159-177.
Langemeyer, J., Baró, F., Roebeling, P., Gómez-Baggethun, E. 2015. Contrasting values of cultural ecosystem services in urban areas: the case of park Montjuïc in Barcelona. Ecosyst. Serv., 12, 178–186.
Lara, B., Rojo, J., Fernández-González, F., Pérez-Badia, R. 2019. Prediction of airborne pollen concentrations for the plane tree as a tool for evaluating allergy risk in urban green areas. Landscape and Urban Planning, 189, 285-295.
Larson, L.R., Keith, S.J., Fernandez, M., Hallo, J.C., Shafer, C.S., Jennings, V. 2016. Ecosystem services and urban greenways: What's the public's perspective?. Ecosystem Services, 22, 111–116.
Latinopoulos, D., Mallios, Z., Latinopoulos, P. 2016. Valuing the benefits of an urban park project: a contingent valuation study in Thessaloniki, Greece. Land Use Policy, 55, 130–141.
Lechtzin, N., Busse, A.M., Smith, M.T., Grossman, S., Nesbit, S., Diette, G.B. 2010. A randomized trial of nature scenery and sounds versus urban scenery and sounds to reduce pain in adults undergoing bone marrow aspirate and biopsy. J. Altern. Complement. Med., 16(9), 965–972.
Leichenko, R. 2011. Climate change and urban resilience. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 3(3), 164–168.
Li, S., Juhasz-Horvath, L., Trajer, A., Pinter, L., Rounsevell, M.D.A., Harrison, P.A. 2018. Lifestyle, habitat and farmers' risk of exposure to tick bites in an endemic area of tick-borne diseases in Hungary. Zoonoses Public Health, 65, e248-e253.
Likens, G., Cronon, W., Mcdonnell, M.J., Pickett, S.T. 2012. Humans as Components of Ecosystems: the Ecology of Subtle Human Effects and Populated Areas. Springer Science & Business Media, New York.
Liu, J., Wang, Y., Zimmer, C., Kang, J., Yu, T. 2019. Factors associated with soundscape experiences in urban green spaces: A case study in Rostock, Germany. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 37, 135-146.
Loft, L., Le, D.N., Pham, T.T., Yang, A.L., Tjajadi, J.S., Wong, G.Y. 2017. Whose EquityMatters? National to Local Equity Perceptions in Vietnam's Payments for Forest Ecosystem Services Scheme. Ecological Economics, 135, 164–175.
Lopes, H.S., Remoaldo, P.C., Ribeiro, V., Martin-Vide, J. 2021. Perceptions of human thermal comfort in an urban tourism destination – A case study of Porto (Portugal). Building and Environment, 205.
Lopes, H.S., Remoaldo, P.C., Ribeiro, V., Martin-Vide, J. 2022. Análise do ambiente térmico urbano e áreas potencialmente expostas ao calor extremo no município do Porto (Portugal). Cuadernos de Geografía, 31 (2), 281-302.
Macedo, S.S. 2003. Parques Urbanos no Brasil. São Paulo: Universidade de São Paulo, Imprensa Oficial da Universidade de São Paulo.
MAPBIOMAS, 2020. Estatísticas. Disponível em: https://mapbiomas.org/. Acesso em: Abril 2020.
Maruani, T., Amit-Cohen, I. 2007. Open space planning models: A review of approaches and methods. Landscape and Urban Planning, 81, 1-13.
Maxwell, S.L., Fuller,R. A., Brooks, T.M., Watson, J.E. 2016. The ravages of guns, nets and bulldozers. Nature, 536 (7615), 143-145.
Maya-Manzano, J.M., Fernández-Rodríguez, S., Monroy-Colín, A., Silva-Palacios, I., Tormo-Molina, R., Gonzalo-Garijo, A. 2017. Allergenic pollen of ornamental plane trees in a Mediterranean environment and urban planning as a prevention tool. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 27, 352-362.
MEA - Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, 2005. Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Synthesis.
Micheels, E.T., Nolan, J.F. 2016. Examining the effects of absorptive capacity and social capital on the adoption of agricultural innovations: A Canadian Prairie case study. Agricultural Systems, 145, 127-138.
Miller, K.A., Siscovick, D.S., Sheppard, L., Shepherd, K., Sullivan,J.H., Anderson, G.L., Kaufman, J.D. 2007. Long-term exposure to air pollution and incidence of cardiovascular events in women. N. Engl. J. Med., 356 (5), 447-458.
Moros, L., Corbera, E., Vélezc, M.A., Flechas, D. 2020. Pragmatic conservation: Discourses of payments for ecosystem services in Colombia. Geoforum, 108, 169-183.
Neckel, A., Da Silva, J.L., Saraiva, P.P., Kujawa, A., Araldi, J.C., Paladini, E.P. 2020. Estimation of the economic value of urban parks in Brazil, the case of the City of Passo Fundo. Journal of Cleaner Production, 264.
Nowlis Sm, Kahn Be, Dhar R. 2002. Coping with Ambivalence: The Effect of Removing a Neutral Option on Consumer Attitude and Preference Judgments. Journal of Consumer Research, 29, 319–333.
Nucci, J.C. 2008. Qualidade ambiental e adensamento urbano: um estudo de ecologia e planejamento da paisagem aplicado ao distrito de Santa Cecília (MSP). 2ª ed. Curitiba: O Autor. 150 p.
Oppenheim, A.N. 1992. Questionnaire Design, Interviewing, and Attitude Measurement. London: Pinter.
Ostoic, S. K., Van Den Bosch, S. K. 2015. Exploring global scientific discourses on urban forestry. Urban For. Urban Green. 14 (2), 129–138.
Ostoic, S.K., Van Den Bosch, C.C.K., Vuletic, D. et al. 2017. Citizens’ perception of and satisfaction with urban forests and green space: Results from selected Southeast European cities. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 23, 93-103.
Paccatiello, A. F. O. 2011. Políticas públicas ambientais no Brasil: da administração dos recursos naturais (1930) à criação do Sistema Nacional de Unidades de Conservação (2000). Revista Desenvolvimento e Meio Ambiente, 24, 71 – 82.
Peschardt, K.K., Stigsdotter, U.K. 2013. Associations between park characteristics and perceived restorativeness of small public urban green spaces. Landscape and Urban Planning, 112, 26-39.
Peters, K., Elands, B., Buijs, A. 2010. Social interactions in urban parks: Stimulating social cohesion?. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 9, 93-100.
Pham, T.T., Moeliono, M., Nguyen, T.H., Nguyen, H.T., Vu, T.H. 2012. The context of REDD+ in Vietnam: drivers, agents and institutions. Technical report, Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR), Bogor, Indonesia.
Pinto, F. S. T., Fogliatto, F. S., Qannani, E. M. 2014. A method for panelists’ consistency assessment in sensory evaluations based on the Cronbach’s alpha coefficient. Food Quality and Preference, 32, 41-47.
Queiroz, R.G., Domingues, C.H.F., Canozzi, M.E.A. et al. 2018. How do Brazilian citizens perceive animal welfare conditions in poultry, beef, and dairy supply chains?. Plos One.
Sanesi, G., Lafortezza, R., Bonnes, M., Carrus, G. 2006. Comparison of two different approaches for assessing the psychological and social dimensions of green spaces. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 5, 121–129.
Schipperijn, J., Stigsdotter, U.K., Randrup, T.B., Troelsen, J. 2010. Influences on the use of urban green space −A case study in Odense, Denmark. Urban For. Urban Green. 9, 25–32.
Slama, R., Darrow, L., Parker, J., Woodruff, T.J., Strickland, M., Nieuwenhuijsen, M., Kalinka, J. 2008. Meeting report: atmospheric pollution and human reproduction. Environ. Health Perspect., 116(6), 791-798.
Song, M., Cen, L., Zheng, Z., Fisher, R., Liang, X., Wang, Y., Huisingh, D. 2017. How would big data support societal development and environmental sustainability? Insights and practices. J. Clean. Prod. 142, 489–500.
TEEB. 2015. TEEB for Agriculture & Food: an Interim Report United Nations Environment Programme, Geneva.
Tyrvainen, L. 2001. Economic valuation of urban forest benefits in Finland. J. Environ. Manag., 62, 75-92.
Ulrich, R. S., Simons, R.F., Losito, B.D., Fiorito, E., Miles, M.A., Zelson, M. 1991. Stress recovery during exposure to natural and urban environments. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 11 (3), 201-230.
Van Den Berg, M., Wendel-Vos, W., Van Poppela, M., Kempera, H., Van Mechelena, W., Maas, J. 2015. Health benefits of green spaces in the living environment: a systematic review of epidemiological studies. Urban For. Urban Green. 14(4), 806–816.
Venter, O., Ainhoa Magrach, A., Outram, N., Klein, C.K., Hugh, H.P., Possingham, P., Di Marco, M., Watson, J.E.M. 2017. Bias in protected-area location and its effects on long-term aspirations of biodiversity conventions. Conserv. Biol., 32, 127-134.
Watts, G. 2017. The effects of “greening” urban areas on the perceptions of tranquillity. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 26, 11-17.
Who. 2016. Urban Green Spaces and Health. A Review of Evidence. World Health Organization, Regional Office for Europe, Copenhagen.
Wright Wendel, H. E. 2011. An Examination of the Impacts of Urbanization on Green Space Access and Water Resources: A Developed and Developing World Perspective. Dissertação. University of South Florida. 305p.
Wright Wendel, H.E., Zarger, R.K., Mihelcic, J.R. 2012. Accessibility and usability: green space preferences, perceptions, and barriers in a rapidly urbanizing city in Latin America. Landsc. Urban Plan. 107, 272–282.
Yan, H., Zhan, J., Wu, F., Yang, H. 2016. Effects of climate change and LUCC on terrestrial biomass in the lower Heihe River basin during 2001–2010. Energy, 9, 260.
Zhan, J., Chu, X., Li, Z., Jia, S., Wang, G. 2019. Incorporating ecosystem services into agricultural management based on land use/cover change in Northeastern China. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 144, 401-411.
Zhang, G., Zheng, D., Tian, Y., Li, S. 2019. A dataset of distribution and diversity of ticks in China. Scientific Data, 6, 105.
Downloads
Publicado
Como Citar
Edição
Secção
Licença
Direitos de Autor (c) 2024 RPER
Este trabalho encontra-se publicado com a Creative Commons Atribuição-NãoComercial 4.0.
A RPER é o jornal oficial da 