Urban Environment 2013
DOI: 10.1007/978-94-007-7756-9_7
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Metropolitan Environmental Health: Asymmetrical Knowledge and Management in São Paulo, Brazil

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0
1

Year Published

2019
2019
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
1
1

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 15 publications
0
2
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…As regiões metropolitanas brasileiras caracterizam-se por unidades administrativas autônomas que não ocupam o território em acordo A contribuição das áreas verdes e parques para a saúde ambiental das cidades -7 com a distribuição dos ecossistemas e respectivas zonas de transição; esta realidade afetaria a resiliência dos ambientes urbanos diante da ocorrência de eventos naturais (GIATTI et al, 2013).…”
Section: Metrópoles E a Saúde Ambientalunclassified
“…As regiões metropolitanas brasileiras caracterizam-se por unidades administrativas autônomas que não ocupam o território em acordo A contribuição das áreas verdes e parques para a saúde ambiental das cidades -7 com a distribuição dos ecossistemas e respectivas zonas de transição; esta realidade afetaria a resiliência dos ambientes urbanos diante da ocorrência de eventos naturais (GIATTI et al, 2013).…”
Section: Metrópoles E a Saúde Ambientalunclassified
“…Hence, this paper explores these three ID pillars of governance approaches: (A) social, (B) environmental and (C) relational (Gupta et al, 2015;Gupta & Vegelin, 2016), linking them to six WatSan indicators: (A.1) access to minimum WSS (as a right) (Appelblad Fredby & Nilsson, 2013;Bisung et al, 2016), (A.2) access to WSS even if the urban poor do not have formal housing (Obrist et al, 2006;Appelblad Fredby & Nilsson, 2013), (B.1) domestic wastewater collection and treatment (Heller, 2009;Oteng-Ababio, 2014), (B.2) water availability (for WSS delivery) Giatti et al, 2013;Heller, 2015), (C.1) participation (of the urban poor) (Obrist et al, 2006;Bisung et al, 2016) and (C.2) low-income WSS subsidies (Attari & van Dijk, 2016;Fuente et al, 2016). The indicators selected potentially address exclusion, reflecting key issues of concern to the urban poor (Obrist et al, 2006;Oteng-Ababio, 2014;Chimankar, 2016;Murungi & Blokland, 2016b).…”
Section: Inclusive Discourses Inclusive Development Dimensions and Wmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Particularly in overcrowded neighbourhoods (e.g., urban poor informal settlements), poor WSS cause unhygienic circumstances and environmental degradation (Obrist et al, 2006). The EI approach in WatSan can be translated into two indicators: (B.1) domestic wastewater collection and treatment to minimise negative anthropogenic impacts on ecosystem services and human health (e.g., waterborne diseases), caused by domestic sewage discharge into the environment (Obrist et al, 2006;Heller, 2009;Oteng-Ababio, 2014;Murtha et al, 2015), and (B.2) water availability which relates to freshwater as the provisioning ecosystem service to be preserved (MEA, 2005;Cutolo et al, 2013;Giatti et al, 2013;UN, 2015), allowing WSS provision. While (B.1) refers to the local ecosystem where the urban poor live and reducing impacts downstream, (B.2) refers to ecosystem services of upstream sites often used as the freshwater source by WSS providers .…”
Section: Environmental Inclusiveness and Selected Watsan Indicatorsmentioning
confidence: 99%