Group items tagged

Uma das grandes limitações postas a implantação e operação das estruturas de governança das Areas marinhas protegidas dada as suas dimensões e complexidade, é o a capacitação e o custo necessário ao seu monitoramento. Aqui, Daniel Kachelriess e seus companheiros tratam das possibilidades abertas o sensoriamento remoto no monitoramento de tais areas, o que implica a possibilidade de mobilizar-e novas competências e, a depender da situação com redução dos custos e aumento a qualidade do monitoramento, em especial em areas de graandes dimensões. Marine protected areas (MPAs) are importanttools for the conservation of marine biodiversity but their designation and effective monitoring require frequent, comprehensive, reliable data. We aim to show that remote sensing (RS), as demonstrated for terrestrial protected areas, has the potential to provide key information to support MPA management. We review existing literature on the use of RS to monitor biodiversity surrogates, e.g. ecological (e.g., primary productivity) and oceanographic (e.g., Sea Surface Temperature) parameters that have been shown to structure marine biodiversity.We then highlight the potential for RS to inform marine habitat mapping and monitoring, and discuss how RS can be used to track anthropogenic activities and its impacts on biodiversity inMPAs. Reasons for low integration of RS in MPA management and current limitations are also presented. This work concludes that RS shows great promise to support wildlife managers in their efforts to protectmarine biodiversity around the world,in particular when such information is used in conjunction with data from field surveys Ecological Indicators 36 (2014) 169-177

" 1 Introduction THE QUESTION OF 'philosophical foundations' of environmental thinking in law may strike the lawyer, as much as the legal philosopher, asa strange one. For while a search for the philosophical commitments of envi-ronmental thinking undoubtedly makes sense in the context of ethics, or political theory, environmental law (it might be felt) lacks any such philosophicalunderpinning: in the eyes of many professional lawyers, environmental regula-tion manifests itself almost exclusively through an array of statutory provisions,severally concerned with curbing certain negative consequences arising fromparticular spheres of human action. Although these various measures have thecommon purpose of achieving a reduction in the erosion of our quality of life,there is not (on this view) to be found any deeper rationale or overarchingprinciple beyond this purely instrumental concern with human wellbeing. Legalregulation of the environment is, therefore, largely a set of facts to be learnedabout the way the law deals with environmental issues. Particular statutoryprovisions and judicial decisions will, of course, raise some quite interestingquestions of interpretation or application, but such questions, it is felt, areresolved within the ordinary standards and criteria which influence legal argu-ment, and do not require deeper philosophical explication.Much of the intuitive appeal of this view derives from a related, though some-times implicit, claim about the nature of environmental law. Environmentallaw, it is sometimes said, is not in the strictest sense a distinctive area of the lawat all, but merely a convenient umbrella term for the collection of particularlegal provisions which are relevant to environmental protection. There may bemany reasons why it is useful and informative to group a set of legal provisionsin a certain way, but (we might say) the underlying motivation for so doing willalways be pedagogic rather than reflective of some penetrati

Aqui a Elinor Ostrom ressalta as implicações econômica da distinção entre o estoque e fluxo de recursos de propriedade comum. O estoque ela associa a um bem público e o fluxo a um bem privado, mas dado os custos de estabelecer uma propriedade muitos dos recursos de propriedade comum são de fato de acesso livre. Para ela é, portanto necessário que, c.p, é necessário dar-se um tratamento institucional distinto ao estoque e ao fluxo (pode ser agasalhadas institucionalmente no direito de propriedade (ITQs,TURFs, e, em decorrência comprado e vendido), mas chama atenção que o mero estabelecimento de um direito de propriedade sobre o fluxo pode não ser suficiente para assegurar a sustentabilidade da exploração do estoque, por meio do que chama atenção para a relevância da de estrutura de governança por meio da qual se revela toda a hibridez das organizações e instituições necessárias . Ihering Guedes Alcolforado "Let me now provide some definitions, so we can share a common language for analysis. First, let us define common-pool resources. Common-pool resources (CPRs) are natural or human-made facilities (or stocks) that generate flows of usable resource units over time. CPRs share two characteristics: (1) it is costly to develop institutions to exclude potential beneficiaries from them, and (2) the resource units harvested by one individual are not available to others (E. Ostrom, Gardner, and Walker 1994; Gardner, Ostrom, and Walker 1990). The first characteristic is held in common with those goods and services referred to as public goods. The second characteristic is held in common with those goods and services referred to as private goods in the economics literature. Given that it is difficult and costly to design institutions that successfully exclude some potential beneficiaries from access to CPRs, many CPRs are in fact open-access resources where anyone who wishes can gain access and appropriate resource units. Given that

Evidenciada a natureza hibrida (nem mercado, nem estado) dos recursos de propriedade comum, Elinor Ostrom considera as instituições como um capital social que evolui ao longo do tempo: "[....] institutions are a form of social capital resulting from the time and effort invested by their creators in improving their productivity. The institutions, of course, have not remained entirely fixed over their lifetimes. Ali of them are complex and have had to change over time", mas chama atenção para sua relativa estabilidde, já que para ela as " institutions are, however "robust" or in "institutional equilibrium" in the sense defined by Shepsle (1989, 143), who regards "an institution as 'essentially' in equilibrium if changes transpired according to an ex ante plan (and hence part of the original institution) for institutional change." Esta estabilidade associa as rules-in-use (mas não associa a um conjunto de regras particlares) que se origina dos "[....] the appropriators (users) designed their own rules, created organizations to undertake the day-to-day management of their resources, and modified their own rules over time in light of past experience. The specific rules-in-use, however, differ markedly from one case to the next. Given the great variation in rules-in-use, the sustainability of these resources and their institutions cannot be cxplained by the presence or absence of particular rules. That the rules do differ partly explains the sustainability of these systems. By differing, the rules take into account specific attributes of the physical systems, cultural views of the world, and the economic and politicai relationships that exist in the setting. Without different rules, appropriators could not take advantage of the positive features of a local CPR or avoid potential pitfalls that could occur in one setting but not in others.

Special Issue: The Commons and The Common Call for Papers The Commons (or the common) is of interest to radicals on the left for many reasons. Most obvious at present is the condition of the earth we share-everyone's common. Global warming and environmental degradation threaten human existence and that of other living creatures and things. Yet agreement on how to better treat planet Earth has proven elusive. Another reason for interest in the commons is the left's fight against privatization, for decades now a hallmark of neoliberalism. Enclosure of common space and resources was part of the development of the capitalist system, and it continues today. Can this process be stopped; reversed? The terms commons and common do not simply refer to open access resources (res nullins). This category of common resource is the air we breathe, or the ocean. Another category of the commons is res communis, a commonly held resource. It has figured prominently in projects and aspirations of socialists, anarchists, feminists, and communists. Privatization can be associated with a world of scarcity, and the common with abundance. In addition, more than property is held in common. Language, stories, images, humor, culture and other aspects of communal interaction share this root. In addition, more than property is held in common. Language, stories, images, humor, culture and other aspects of communal interaction share this root. How can a clearer sense of the commons help inform a renewal of left trajectories: a more egalitarian and sustainable world? While advocated to overcome problems presumed to be inherent in managing the commons, privatization substitutes problems fundamental to an individualized world. One of the most obvious of these problems is inequality: of access, control, income, and resources. Inequality is reflected in class-riven societies, as well as those characterized by differential a