城市规划和管理的参与性经验:系统回顾

IF 0.4 Q4 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
Maressa Correa Pereira Mendes, M. Fontes, R. Magagnin
{"title":"城市规划和管理的参与性经验:系统回顾","authors":"Maressa Correa Pereira Mendes, M. Fontes, R. Magagnin","doi":"10.5585/GEAS.V10I1.19346","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The democratization of discussions about urban planning and management is a relatively recent process. It is based on the articles 182 and 183 of the 1988 Brazilian Federal Constitution and Law 10,257/2001 (City Statute), which consolidated the Master Plans as a basic instrument of the developmental policy and urban expansion of municipalities and made popular participation mandatory during its design and implementation. Aim: To understand how the participatory experiences were during the Master Plans revision process in different Brazilian municipalities in consequence the obligatoriness established by Law 10.257/2001. Methodology: The methodologic procedure was a systematic review of academic researches (theses and dissertations) on Brazilian Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations – BDTD, data collected from participatory proceeding, systematization, and analysis of the results. Results: The review identified: (1) the main characteristics of the researches in terms of their structure, area of knowledge, keywords, (2) the instruments of democratic management provided for the urban legislation and the respective participatory tools proposed by the Ministry of Cities and adopted by the evaluated municipalities, and (3) the main difficulties faced, as well as the advances and potentialities of including participation in urban planning and management. Discussion: This research found out that the adoption of the instruments of democratic management, as well as the participatory tools, for a large number of studied municipalities do not support establishing that the participatory processes were effective, as a consequence of events that weakened them. Nevertheless, advances and potentialities to be consolidated were detected.","PeriodicalId":42069,"journal":{"name":"Revista de Gestao Ambiental e Sustentabilidade-GeAS","volume":"10 1","pages":"19346"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Experiências participativas no planejamento e gestão urbana: uma revisão sistemática\",\"authors\":\"Maressa Correa Pereira Mendes, M. Fontes, R. Magagnin\",\"doi\":\"10.5585/GEAS.V10I1.19346\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The democratization of discussions about urban planning and management is a relatively recent process. It is based on the articles 182 and 183 of the 1988 Brazilian Federal Constitution and Law 10,257/2001 (City Statute), which consolidated the Master Plans as a basic instrument of the developmental policy and urban expansion of municipalities and made popular participation mandatory during its design and implementation. Aim: To understand how the participatory experiences were during the Master Plans revision process in different Brazilian municipalities in consequence the obligatoriness established by Law 10.257/2001. Methodology: The methodologic procedure was a systematic review of academic researches (theses and dissertations) on Brazilian Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations – BDTD, data collected from participatory proceeding, systematization, and analysis of the results. Results: The review identified: (1) the main characteristics of the researches in terms of their structure, area of knowledge, keywords, (2) the instruments of democratic management provided for the urban legislation and the respective participatory tools proposed by the Ministry of Cities and adopted by the evaluated municipalities, and (3) the main difficulties faced, as well as the advances and potentialities of including participation in urban planning and management. Discussion: This research found out that the adoption of the instruments of democratic management, as well as the participatory tools, for a large number of studied municipalities do not support establishing that the participatory processes were effective, as a consequence of events that weakened them. Nevertheless, advances and potentialities to be consolidated were detected.\",\"PeriodicalId\":42069,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Revista de Gestao Ambiental e Sustentabilidade-GeAS\",\"volume\":\"10 1\",\"pages\":\"19346\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-06-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Revista de Gestao Ambiental e Sustentabilidade-GeAS\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5585/GEAS.V10I1.19346\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista de Gestao Ambiental e Sustentabilidade-GeAS","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5585/GEAS.V10I1.19346","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

关于城市规划和管理的民主化讨论是一个相对较新的过程。它以1988年巴西联邦宪法第182条和第183条以及第10257 /2001号法律(城市法规)为基础,该法律将总体规划作为城市发展政策和城市扩张的基本工具,并在其设计和实施过程中强制要求公众参与。目的:了解根据第10.257/2001号法律规定的义务,巴西不同城市在总体规划修订过程中的参与性经验。方法学:方法学过程是对巴西论文和学位论文数字图书馆(BDTD)的学术研究(论文和学位论文)进行系统回顾,从参与式程序中收集数据,系统化和结果分析。结果:(1)在结构、知识领域、关键词等方面确定了研究的主要特点;(2)为城市立法提供的民主管理工具以及由城市部提出并被评价城市采用的相应参与工具;(3)将参与纳入城市规划和管理面临的主要困难、进展和潜力。讨论:这项研究发现,对所研究的许多城市采用民主管理手段和参与性工具并不支持确定参与性进程是有效的,因为一些事件削弱了参与性进程。尽管如此,还是发现了一些进展和有待巩固的潜力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Experiências participativas no planejamento e gestão urbana: uma revisão sistemática
The democratization of discussions about urban planning and management is a relatively recent process. It is based on the articles 182 and 183 of the 1988 Brazilian Federal Constitution and Law 10,257/2001 (City Statute), which consolidated the Master Plans as a basic instrument of the developmental policy and urban expansion of municipalities and made popular participation mandatory during its design and implementation. Aim: To understand how the participatory experiences were during the Master Plans revision process in different Brazilian municipalities in consequence the obligatoriness established by Law 10.257/2001. Methodology: The methodologic procedure was a systematic review of academic researches (theses and dissertations) on Brazilian Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations – BDTD, data collected from participatory proceeding, systematization, and analysis of the results. Results: The review identified: (1) the main characteristics of the researches in terms of their structure, area of knowledge, keywords, (2) the instruments of democratic management provided for the urban legislation and the respective participatory tools proposed by the Ministry of Cities and adopted by the evaluated municipalities, and (3) the main difficulties faced, as well as the advances and potentialities of including participation in urban planning and management. Discussion: This research found out that the adoption of the instruments of democratic management, as well as the participatory tools, for a large number of studied municipalities do not support establishing that the participatory processes were effective, as a consequence of events that weakened them. Nevertheless, advances and potentialities to be consolidated were detected.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
20
审稿时长
4 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信