GEO Brasil - UNEP

An interesting system to define possible work ecosystems/
biomes within the Brazilian context was proposed by Egler
(2001), who redesigned the national territory with the use of
landscapes demarcations and administrative limits
(municipalities). Figure 1 in Chapter 4 presents this
proposal.
As indicated, the definition of management by ecosystem/
biome has a policy, in addition to a functional structural
dimension.
“...management per ecosystem is much more related
to population than anything else... the success or
failure of the management by ecosystem in
protecting environments, revamping the economy
or restoring communities’ health, starts and ends
with the population and their choices – not with
nature preservation, databases, ecological
classifications, or any other technological
instruments that are only mere useful means for
desired purposes.” (Salwasser 1994, apud Crober
1999)
At last, it is important to indicate that the management by
ecosystem/ biome requires a deeper understanding of social
and economic systems and their interactions with
biophysical systems.
“... we need much more accurate knowledge on what
public attitudes are and how they vary in accordance
with socio-economic factors, such as: age, education,
income and social classes... and most importantly,
we need to know why certain attitudes are kept and
what the commitments between cultural attitudes
for the protection of the environment and the
economic gains from the use of natural resources
are.” (Marcin 1995, apud Crober 1999)
Another important aspect of considering the SEA process
refers to the reasons that have justified the need to adopt
and implement it. There are two main reasons to insert SEA
in the present political and environmental agenda.
The first reason is the potential capacity of this process to
overcome technical deficiencies identified in the
Environmental Impact Study – EIS – process, specially in
relation to the reactive, rather than the proactive nature of
this process. Therefore, issues such as the consideration of
different alternatives (for example, scale, place, time,
technology) and the mitigating measures are understood
and considered and already decided upon at the project
level (the EIS process application level). This limits
possibilities for modification. In addition to that, the project
EISs are regularly limited to the consideration of the direct
impacts caused by the activity, without considering several
other possible impacts, which are usually called cumulative
impacts.
The second reason that justifies the adoption of SEA
procedures is the role this process may play in the promotion
of development sustainability. Thus, if sustainable
development is a practice to be achieved, together with
other measures 1 , through the integration of environmental,
social and economic dimensions in the decision-making
process, SEA may perform a decisive role for such
integration, by acting as a co-ordination procedure within
the different levels of governmental planning activities.
The first reason will be discussed in the next item, when the
control stage of the Integrated Environmental Management
process is considered. It will indicate the problems that
must be overcome, and also the solutions that have been
proposed. Wider discussion of the second reason,
sustainability promotion, is necessary. Other aspects
important to the effective implementation of a SEA process
must also be taken into consideration.
An issue already considered to be relevant is the need to
overcome the fragmented treatment given to the
environment, for proposals like sustainable development
to be viable. Nevertheless, it is important to observe that
this practice has not been limited to the environment only.
It has extended to other activities such as planning and
formulation of local, sector, regional and national policies.
The SEA process can be described as analysis and
assessment of both environmental impacts and social and
economic effects of policies, plans and programmes
established in a determined context (national, regional, local
or sector).
introduction
1
The other defended measures to achieve sustainable development are: (1) the establishment of environmental quality goals and/or emission rates that make the
achievement of these goals viable; (2) the institutional strengthening to promote the combined achievement of environmental quality and economic development
goals; and (3) the intensive use of economic instruments to guide the economy to ways that enable effective sustainable development.
13