Sustentabilidade socioambiental e efetividade de gestão de unidades de conservação

Abstract

The objective of this paper was to analyze management effectiveness and the socioenvironmental sustainability of the Jenipabu Environmental Protection Area – APAJ, located on the eastern coast of the state of Rio Grande do Norte, Brasil. The research is divided into two parts: one on a state scale, where was conducted an integrated study of the protected areas – PAs located in the state of Rio Grande do Norte from spatial variables and instruments of planning and management; and another on local scale, where were investigated the main socio-environmental conflicts, the effectiveness of management and the sustainability of the APAJ. Were used the dialectical method and the systemic approach, and the methodological procedures involved: field surveys, application of the questionnaire and form, content analysis, aerial photogrammetric mapping using unmanned aerial vehicle, temporal analysis of aerial images, assembly of a geographic database through GIS, selection and analysis of the sustainability indicators applied to protected areas and use of descriptive statistics techniques. The results of the research are divided into four paper: in the first one was made an analysis of the context of the PAs located in the state of Rio Grande do Norte from spatial variables and instruments of planning and management, in order to serve as subsidies for the planning and management of these protected areas. In the second paper the main socio-environmental conflicts of the APAJ were investigated. In the third paper, an adaptation of the RAPPAM methodology was developed to analyze and measure the management effectiveness of the study area. In the last paper was made an analysis of the sustainability of the APAJ from of the selection of sustainability indicators. The data obtained on a state scale showed that of the 27 PAs located in the state, 12 have management board and eight have a managing plan. The marine biome has 173,183 ha of area protected by PAs, the Atlantic forest 89,587 ha and the Caatinga biome has 43,565 ha. The set of PAs analyzed presented some geospatial asymmetries, which are: there is a higher concentration of PAs located on the eastern coast; the Atlantic forest biome has approximately 25% of its protected territory, while the caatinga biome, which occupies most of the Potiguar territory, has less than 1% of protected area to PAs; the majority of PAs and most of the territory protected by these areas belong to the category of sustainable use, that provides less protection to biodiversity than integral protection PAs. Given this scenario, it is necessary to prioritise the creation of UCS in the Caatinga biome and establish the areas of integral protection as a priority management group for the creation of new PAs. Regarding the results at local scale, seven types of socioenvironmental conflicts were identified in the APAJ, the main one of them was the irregular occupation of the fixed and movable dunes fields by residences and commercial properties. In addition, its implementation did not lead to territorial reordering of the area. Regarding the effectiveness of management, the APAJ has an average degree of effectiveness of 42.25%, however, very close to the degree of low effectiveness. The main pressures and threats were human occupation, tourism and recreation and collection of non-timber products. The indicators of the RAPPAM methodology that presented the lowest values were: financial resources, human resources, results, infrastructure and research, evaluation and monitoring. The results of the research point to a framework of unsustainability and that APAJ does not have a strategic planning and management that lead to the achievement of its creation goals. In addition, the results suggest a pessimistic future scenario with possible reduction of effectiveness and sustainability, if no measures are taken to increase financial and human resources, strategic planning and management, implementation of the monitoring and control instruments of the management plan.