Elaboração de método para definição de áreas de preservação permanente de cursos hídricos de zonas urbanas consolidadas em atendimento à Lei n° 14.285/2021

Abstract

Historically, populations have utilized rivers, altering their course, polluting waters, and occupying surrounding areas, resulting in the removal of riparian forests that play a crucial role in protecting water bodies. Preserving these areas has become a socio-environmental demand, and a tool for this is Law 12,651/2012, the New Forest Code. Law 12,651/2012 defines Permanent Preservation Areas (PPAs) and their widths. However, the original text applies only to consolidated rural areas and lacks provisions for consolidated urban areas. Complementing Law 12,651/2012, Law 14,285/2021 was enacted, altering provisions and addressing PPAs in consolidated urban areas. This law establishes the need for a Socioenvironmental Diagnosis (SD) to demarcate these areas. As the topic is recent in legislative terms, there is no described methodology for preparing an SD. Furthermore, Resolution CONSEMA/RS 485/2023 was published, addressing this law and SD but lacking technical or methodological guidelines for the study. Specifically, there are no guidelines for converting SD information into effective proposals for watercourse PPAs. In this context, a methodology is proposed for Socioenvironmental Diagnoses, focusing on the application of a method for expert analysis. The specific objectives of this work are to develop the complete technical structure for an SD, investigate methodologies for expert analysis, identify criteria for decision-making on the most suitable expert consultation methodology, adapt the selected method, and apply it in a test round to identify improvement needs. To develop the technical structure of an SD, the Technical Note from FECAM and Resolution CONSEMA/SC served as a basis. The guidelines informed in these documents were adapted to the approach of this work, defining a methodological structure to be followed for the elaboration of SDs. To define the most suitable method, eight chosen methods were related in a decision matrix with fourteen criteria defined as important. Scores were established for each criterion. Thus, at the end of the matrix, the most suitable methodology was identified, which is the Delphi Method, obtaining the highest score, totaling 12 out of 14 possible points, narrowly surpassing the Multicriteria Analysis. Based on this choice, the expert consultation phase was initiated to define the most suitable PPAs for each case. The survey methodology was used for the expert analysis phase, consisting of a questionnaire based on scenario descriptions and hypothetical changes in these scenarios, applied to experts in the field. Furthermore, to make improvements, a test round was conducted with experts internal to the University of Caxias do Sul, and, finally, a final version of the questionnaire was consolidated for application to experts. [resumo fornecido pelo autor]