GESTÃO DE BACIAS HIDROGRÁFICAS URBANAS NA AMAZÔNIA

Sousa-Felix, R.C.; Figueiredo, C.M.S.; Sousa, R.P.C.

doi:10.4215/rm2025.e24002

Tabla de contenido Anterior Actual Siguiente

Tabla de contenido

Article • Mercator (Fortaleza) 24 • 2025 • https://doi.org/10.4215/rm2025.e24002 linkcopiar

GESTÃO DE BACIAS HIDROGRÁFICAS URBANAS NA AMAZÔNIA

Autoría SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

La Cuenca Hidrográfica de Tucunduba (CHT) es la segunda cuenca más grande de Belém, Pará, y abarca cuatro barrios densamente poblados-Marco, Canudos, Terra Firme y Guamá-con una población estimada de aproximadamente 200 mil habitantes. Este estudio tiene como objetivo analizar las condiciones socioambientales de la CHT, examinando los principales factores macroambientales esenciales para comprender la dinámica de la cuenca. El enfoque metodológico incluyó la realización de 44 entrevistas con residentes de la CHT para evaluar sus percepciones socioambientales, la aplicación del Evaluación Simplificada de Impacto Ambiental (ESIA) y la estimación de la carga de aguas residuales per cápita en los barrios dentro de la cuenca. Los resultados indican que el Índice de Calidad de Vida Urbana en el área de estudio es de aproximadamente 0,6, lo que refleja condiciones de vida moderadas. La ESIA también reveló impactos ambientales significativos, clasificados como altos o muy altos. Estos hallazgos evidencian la insuficiencia de los servicios públicos prestados a la población local y la fragilidad de la gestión urbana. Se requieren medidas urgentes para implementar una estrategia de gestión integrada de la CHT, mejorar el monitoreo ambiental y optimizar la prestación de servicios, garantizando una mejor calidad de vida y un entorno más saludable.

Palabras-clave:
Gestión Integrada; Impactos Ambientales; Macrodrenaje; Calidad de Vida

BIOPHYSICAL INDICATORS	WEIGHT	METHODS
Surrounding vegetation cover		Satellite unage analysis
No vegetation	0
Understory vegetation	1
Shrubland vegetation	2
Forest vegetation	3
Impacts on vegetation cover		Analysis of satellite images from 1976 to 2006
High impact with no vegetation	0
Mednun impact with 50% vegetation loss	1
Low impact with 50% vegetation gam	2
No impact	3
Surrounding fauna		Unstructured interviews and direct observation
Absence of native wildlife
Low presence of native wildlife	1
Moderate presence of native wildlife	7
High presence of native wildlife	3
Impacts on water quality (type of sewage)		Du ect observation and semi-structured interview
High pollution (septic pits)	0
Moderate pollution (septic tanks)	1
Little pollution (sewer networks/sewerage system)	2
No impact on water quality (treatment plant)	3
Presence of algal blooms/foam		Direct observation
Strong	0
Moderate	1
Weak	7
Absent	3
Odor		Direct observation
Strong	0
Moderate	1
Weak	7
Absent	3
Oils		Direct observation
Strong presence	0
Moderate presence	1
Slight presence	2
Absent	3
Solid waste (in the environment)		Direct observation and semi-structured interview
High availability of solid waste	0
Moderate availability of solid waste	1
Solid waste stored in containers	7
Absent	3

	Parameters	Ten a Fume (%)	Guama (%)	Canudos(%)	Marco (%)
	Water supply	65.2%	68.8%	100%	0
	Sewerage system	87%	87.5%	75%	0
Services that need to be	Garbage collection	34.8%	68.8%	0	0
implemented or	Drainage	82.6%	81.2%	75%	0
improved	Security	65.2%	93.8%	100%	0
	Health Units	78.2%	50%	75%	0
	Schools/Nursery	87%	68.8%	0	0
	Transportation	39.1%	25%	0	100%

POSITIVE ASPECTS	NEGATIVE ASPECTS
Reduction in flooding (40.9%)	Housing and community impacts (29.5%)
Improved road conditions and traffic flow (25%)	Flooding persistence (20.4%)
Enhanced landscape aesthetics (15.9%)	Construction Project (lack of transparency and community input) (15.9%)
Reduced pollution and cleaning (11.4%)	Delays and work stoppage (11.4%)
Urban organization and development (6.8%)	Garbage and pollution (9.1%)
Sewerage system improvements (4.5%)	Inefficient sanitation and lack of sewage treatment (4.5%)
Housing and social aspects (2.27%)	Safety concerns (2.2%)
Safety improvements (2.2%)	Public lighting (2.2%)
Public lighting improvements (2.2%)	Lack of trees coverage (2.2%)

Sample station	Score	Impact Rating
P1	8	High or Concerning
P2	7	High or Concerning
P3	6	Very High

Indicators	Pressure	Status	Response
Vegetation cover	Deforestation for agriculture and urbanization	Vegetation primarily composed of glasses or absent due to impermeable soil	Enforce legal compliance with environmental protection laws, restore degraded areas, and implement adequate urban planning to control further damage to the environment
Fauma	Biodiversity loss	Absence of native animals	Restore degraded areas and habitats, promote conservation measures to protect and enhance biodiversity
Water quality	Water pollution from untreated sewage and effluent discharge	Contaminated water sources	Implement comprehensive effluent treatment systems, strictly regulate sewage discharge, monitor water quality, and take necessary steps to prevent further pollution
Algae/Foam Proliferation	Water pollution from effluent and solid waste	Moderate presence of algae foam	Prohibit disposal of effluents in the affected basin, implement regular garbage collection in the affected areas, monitor water^* quality, and take necessary steps to prevent further pollution
Odor	Improper solid waste disposal	Moderate presence of foul odor	Implement regular garbage collection around the basin and ensure proper-disposal of waste to prevent further pollution
Solid Waste	Improper solid waste disposal	High amounts of garbage	Implement regular, structured, and signposted sites for proper collection, separation, and disposal of waste

location_on

Universidade Federal do Ceará UFC - Campi do Pici, Bloco 911, 60440-900 Fortaleza, Ceará, Brasil, Tel.: (55 85) 3366 9855, Fax: (55 85) 3366 9864 - Fortaleza - CE - Brazil
E-mail: edantas@ufc.br

rss_feed Acompañe los números de esta revista en su lector de RSS