Wednesday, 21. November 2012

This is one of the support definitions most including. To be sustainable, any human enterprise must be ecologically correct, viable, economically socially just and culturally accepted. But these concepts, that seem obvious, simple signals of common-sense, unhappyly still are far from practical the daily one of many people, groups, companies and governments. As much that a world-wide movement for the support appears as reply to its opposite: the insustentabilidade provoked for what ecologically it is made a mistake, impracticable, economically socially unjust, culturally inaceitvel’ ‘.

Therefore this article intends to focar some of the main questions related with these aspects and which they are some of the possible passages to be taken. MAN, ENVIRONMENT AND QUALITY OF LIFE According to Minayo (1998), all the debate that turns around estimated the surrounding subject part of two basic ones: the first one is the relation to be human being-nature and as, in which drift of this relation, is the environment concept, understands as it, it is constructed by the action of the man, and of this form it can be rethink, be reconstructed and be modified, in view of our present and future responsibility with the existence, the conditions and the quality of life, not only of the human beings, but as of all the biosfera. Currently we are witnessing the effect caused for the urbanization process, arriving practically to disentail the human being of its relationship with the nature. The development of the urban way results in intense and deep manipulation of the environment. From there to elapse accented modifications that fall again on the landscape, the community, the psychological and physiological state of inhabitants, beyond giving to origin the cultural factors, economic as politicians who, isolatedly or collectively, influence or in such a way same determine the quality of life of the there resident population (FORATTINI, 1991, P.

Comments are closed.