APPLYING A SUSTAINABILITY INDEX TO THE JAPARATUBA RIVER WATHERSHED IN SERGIPE STATE1

MAYNARD, ISABELLA FERREIRA NASCIMENTO; CRUZ, MARCUS AURÉLIO SOARES; GOMES, LAURA JANE

doi:10.1590/1809-4422ASOC0057R1V2022017

ISABELLA FERREIRA NASCIMENTO MAYNARD

.Master in Water Resources, Federal University of Sergipe (UFS). PhD student in Health and Environment at Tiradentes University. Aracaju, Sergipe, Brazil. E-mail: isabellafnm@hotmail.com.

MARCUS AURÉLIO SOARES CRUZ

.PhD in Water Resources and Environmental Sanitation by the Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul (2004), Master in Water Resources and Environmental Sanitation at Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul (1998) and a Civil Engineering from the Federal University of Piauí (1995). He is Researcher at Embrapa Coastal Tablelands. E-mail: marcus.cruz@embrapa.br

LAURA JANE GOMES

.PhD in Agricultural Engineering at State University of Campinas (2002), Master in Forestry Engineering at Federal University of Lavras (1998) and Forest Engineering from the Federal University of Lavras (1994). She is currently an Associate Professor in the Department of Forestry Sciences of the Federal University of Sergipe. E-mail: laurabuturi@gmail.com

	Pressure	State	Response
Indicators	Parameters
Hydrologycal	Water availability variation per capita in the watershed in 2005-2010	Water availability per capita in the watershed (2010)	Water use efficiency evolution (2005-2010).




			Sewage treatment evolution (2005-2010).
	Water Quality Index (WQI)* variation in the watershed in 2005-2010	Annual water quality average in the watershed (2010)



Environmental	Anthropogenic Pressure Index (API) in the watershed during the studied period (2005-2010)	% of watershed area holding natural vegetation (2010)	Evolution of conservation areas in the watershed (Protected Areas and Good Management Practices - GMPs) 2005-2010.
Life	Human-Income Development Index ** variation per capita in the watershed (2005-2010).	Human Development Index in the watershed (2010)	HDI evolution in the watershed (2005-2010).
Political	Human-Education Development Index variation in the watershed (2005-2010)	Institutional and legal capacity for the Integrated Water Resource Management in the watershed.	Evolution in the expenditures on Integrated Water Resource Management in the watershed (2005-2010).

PRESSURE
Indicator	Parameter	Level	Score
	∆1- Water availability variation per capita in the period (m3/inhab/year).	∆1< -20%	0.00
		-20% ≤ ∆1 < -10%	0.25
		-10% ≤ ∆1< 0%	0.50
		0 ≤ ∆1< +10%	0.75
		∆1 ≥ +10%	1.00
Hydrological	∆2- WQI variation in the watershed in the period (mean)	∆2 < -10%	0.00
Hydrological		-10% ≤ ∆2 < 0%	0.25
		0 ≤ ∆2 < 10%	0.50
		20% ≥ ∆2 > 10%	0.75
		∆2 >20%	1.00
Environmental	Watershed API in the period.	EPI >20%	0.00
		20% ≥ EPI > 10%	0.25
		10% ≤ EPI <5%	0.50
		5% ≤ EPI <0%	0.75
		EPI ≤0%	1.00
Life	HDI-Income variation per capita in the watershed, in the period.	∆ < -20%	0.00
		-20% ≤ ∆ < -10%	0.25
		-10% ≤ ∆< 0%	0.50
		0 ≤ ∆< +10%	0.75
		∆ ≥ +10%	1.00
Political	HDI-Education variation in the period.	∆ < -20%	0.00
	HDI-Education variation in the period.	-10% ≤ ∆ < -20%	0.25
		-20% ≤ ∆ < 0%	0.50
		0 ≤ ∆ < +10%	0.75
		∆ ≥ +10%	1.00
STATE
Indicator	Parameter	Level	Score
	Water availability per capita in the watershed (Wa) in m³ / inhab / year.	Wa < 1700	0.00
		1700 ≤ Wa < 3400	0.25
		3400 ≤ Wa < 5100	0.50
		5100 ≤ Wa < 6800	0.75
		Wa ≥ 6800	1.00
Hydrological	Current Water Quality Index (WQI).	0 ≤ IQA < 20	0.00
Hydrological		20 ≤ IQA < 37	0.25
		37 ≤ IQA < 52	0.50
		52 ≤ IQA < 80	0.75
		80 ≤ IQA ≤ 100	1.00
Environmental	Percentage (%) of natural vegetation remaining in the watershed (Av).	Av < 5	0.00
		5 ≤ Av < 10	0.25
		10 ≤ Av < 25	0.50
		25 ≤ Av < 40	0.75
		Av ≥	1.00
Life	Watershed HDI	IDH<0.5	0.00
		0.5 ≤ IDH < 0.6	0.25
		0.6 ≤ IDH < 0.75	0.50
		0.75 ≤ IDH < 0.9	0.75
		IDH ≥ 0.9	1.00
Political	Legal and institutional capacity for the Integrated Water Resource Management (IWRM) in the watershed.	Very poor	0.00
		Poor	0.25
		Intermediate	0.50
		Good	0.75
		Excellent	1.00
RESPONSE
Indicator	Parameter	Level	Score
	Water use efficiency evolutionin the watershed, in the period.	Very poor	0.00
		Poor	0.25
		Intermediate	0.50
		Good	0.75
		Excellent	1.00
Hydrological	Sewage treatment and disposal evolution in the watershed, in the period.	Very poor	0.00
Hydrological		Poor	0.25
		Intermediate	0.50
		Good	0.75
		Excellent	1.00
Environmental	Evolution in the watershed protected areas (Reserves and Good Management Practices), in the period.	∆ < -10%	0.00
		-10% ≤ ∆ < 0%	0.25
		0% ≤ ∆ < 10%	0.50
		10% ≤ ∆< 20%	0.75
		∆ ≥ 20%	1.00
Life	Watershed HDI variation in the period.	∆ < -10%	0.00
		-10% ≤ ∆ < 0%	0.25
		0% ≤ ∆ < 10%	0.50
		10 ≤ ∆ < 20%	0.75
		∆ ≥ 20%	1.00
Political	Evolution in the expenditures on Integrated Water Resource Management in the watershed, in the period.	∆ < -10%	0.00
		-10% ≤ ∆ < 0%	0.25
		0% ≤ ∆ < 10%	0.50
		10 ≤ ∆ < 20%	0.75
		∆ ≥ 20%	1.00

INDICATORS		PRESSURE		STATE		RESPONSE		SUBTOTAL
INDICATORS		Level	Score	Level	Score	Level	Score	SUBTOTAL
Hydrological	Quant.	- 0.07%	0.50	2.643	0.25	Very poor	0.00	0.25	0.33
Hydrological	Qualit.	8.11%	0.50	63.25	0.75	Very poor	0.00	0.41	0.33
Environmental		-3.6%	1.00	11.03	0.50	5.85%	0.50	0.66
Life		17%	1.00	0.613	0.50	37%	1.00	0.83
Political		67%	1.00	Intermediate	0.50	97%	1.00	0.83
TOTAL							0,66

[TFN1] Source: Adapted from Chaves & Alipaz (2007CHAVES, H.M.L.; ALIPAZ, S.; An Integrated Indicator for Basin Hydrology, Envi-ronment, Live, and Policy: The Watershed Sustainability Index. Water Resources Management. v. 21, n. 5, p 883-895. 2007.) and translated by the authors of the current study.

[TFN2] * The original methodology by Chaves & Alipaz (2007CHAVES, H.M.L.; ALIPAZ, S.; An Integrated Indicator for Basin Hydrology, Envi-ronment, Live, and Policy: The Watershed Sustainability Index. Water Resources Management. v. 21, n. 5, p 883-895. 2007.) used a Biochemical Oxygen Demand, whereas the present study used the Water Quality Index - WQI.

[TFN3] ** The original methodology by Chaves & Alipaz (2007CHAVES, H.M.L.; ALIPAZ, S.; An Integrated Indicator for Basin Hydrology, Envi-ronment, Live, and Policy: The Watershed Sustainability Index. Water Resources Management. v. 21, n. 5, p 883-895. 2007.) used the GDP variation per capita, whereas the present study has made the option for adapting the methodology by Chaves (2009), who used HDI-Income.

Brasil

Brasil

Abstract