Author: Ericson M. Scorsim

Dubai, 14 October 2025 — Major food and grocery delivery platforms today launched an industry-led alliance to accelerate the shift to zero-emission food and grocery deliveries — the Deliver-E Coalition aims to switch to zero-emission two- and three-wheeler vehicles globally.

The founding Members of the Deliver-E Coalition – Delivery Hero, DoorDash, iFood, Mr D, Swiggy, Uber, Wolt, and Zomato — are accelerating the transition to zero-emissions deliveries of food and groceries. Together, these platforms operate across 96 countries and record an estimated 6 billion two- and three-wheeler deliveries every year.

The Coalition’s founding Charter unites Members to “dramatically speed up the implementation of zero-emission deliveries by shifting to electric vehicles, bicycles and other means of zero-emission two- and three-wheeler deliveries, thereby unlocking economic, social, and environmental benefits for all stakeholders and the wider society.”

Members will share best practices, track the progress of electrification, and develop solutions to common challenges. The UN Environment Programme (UNEP) will host the Coalition Secretariat, providing research, administrative and communications assistance, and facilitating the industry’s transition to zero-emission deliveries. The associated partners of Deliver-Coalition are ClimateWorks Foundation, the Government of the Netherlands, and Prosus.

“Deliver-E is industry leadership in action,” said Sheila Aggarwal-Khan, Director of UNEP’s Industry and Economy Division. “Zero-emission two and three-wheeler vehicles are ready to scale: they are cleaner, quieter, and increasingly cost-effective. Through Deliver-E, companies will share what works and move faster together than any one company could alone.”

Transitioning to zero-emission delivery vehicles offers significant benefits, including reduced urban air and noise pollution, lower climate emissions, cost savings, and jobs creation in the green economy through vehicle servicing and charging infrastructure deployment, as well as fleet management software development. 

Recent studies reveal that switching from internal-combustion two-wheelers to e-bikes can reduce last-mile delivery costs by about a quarter while cutting their emissions by nearly 90%—a significant impact on the transport sector, which remains the second‑largest source of greenhouse‑gas emissions after power generation, according to the latest UNEP Emissions Gap Report.

“Members shift to zero-emission deliveries to contribute to reducing greenhouse gas emissions, reducing air and noise pollution, enhancing the resilience of the livelihoods of drivers, and accelerating the wider electrification of mobility and transportation,” states the Coalition Charter. 

Why the industry is acting

Consumers are increasingly ordering online: global e-commerce sales generated US$25 trillion across 43 developed and developing economies in 2021— a 15% increase over pre-pandemic levels. 

Rising doorstep deliveries are creating fresh operational pressures for both cities and businesses. A United Nations assessment indicates that without changes to how cities and companies manage last-mile logistics, urban delivery emissions are on track to increase by over 30% in the top 100 cities globally.

The resulting pressure would raise traffic congestion by around 14%, increase healthcare costs by approximately 12%, and add about five minutes to daily commutes. Additionally, research shows that deliveries could account for as much as half of the transport sector’s emissions in cities by 2030.

Consumer expectations are shifting in parallel, with people placing growing value on having their purchases carried in zero-emission vehicles: independent assessments indicate that more than 70% of shoppers prefer sustainable delivery options.

Collaborative approach

The Coalition’s approach is distinctly collaborative, with the Deliver-E Charter establishing the creation of “a platform for knowledge exchange” where members will “share learnings and expertise for an industry-wide electrification effort”. 

The Coalition’s founding document also pledges to establish “a network of experts and essential stakeholders in the ecosystem, such as policy makers, technology companies, original equipment manufacturers (OEMs), fleet aggregators and financiers” while “supporting solutions to commonly identified barriers that prevent the vision from becoming commonplace.”

Initial priorities and work plan

In its initial phase, the Coalition will concentrate on accelerating the rollout of zero-emission two- and three-wheeler delivery operations. Members will work together under the Secretariat’s coordination to build a shared evidence base, assess technologies, exchange lessons learned and align practical steps, with progress tracked through periodic coalition reporting and regular coordination meetings.

NOTES TO EDITORS

About Deliver-E
Deliver-E is an industry-led alliance of major food and grocery delivery platforms to advance zero-emission deliveries, beginning with the rapid electrification of two and three-wheeler operations and complementary operational improvements. Members share learnings, collaborate with policymakers, technology providers, financiers, and ecosystem partners, and communicate progress on commitments through a platform curated by UNEP, which serves as the Secretariat through its Global Electric Mobility Programme. 

UNEP’s role includes supporting governance, technical workstreams, convening, and communications approved by Members. 

About the UN Environment Programme (UNEP)
UNEP is the leading global voice on the environment. It provides leadership and encourages partnership in caring for the environment by inspiring, informing and enabling nations and peoples to improve their quality of life without compromising that of future generations. 

For more information please contact:
News and Media Unit, UN Environment Programme

Fonte: https://www.unep.org/news-and-stories/press-release/global-platforms-launch-deliver-e-coalition-scale-zero-emission

Ericson M. Scorsim . Lawyer and Public Law Consultant. PhD in Law from USP. Author of the e-books “The Geopolitical Game of 5G Communications: United States, China, and the Impact on Brazil”, “Geopolitics of Communications”, and “Anti -Toxic Leadership in the Brazilian Presidency 2018–2022”, all available to the public through Amazon .

The U.S. government, through Executive Order 13.818 of July 30, 2025, signed by President Donald Trump, adopted a series of measures against Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes, including restrictions on his U.S. passport and the freezing of his assets and access to U.S. financial institutions, among other measures. The U.S. government alleged that Justice Alexandre de Moraes: “abused his judicial authority to threaten, harass, and intimidate thousands of political opponents, protect corrupt allies, and suppress dissent, to the detriment of American companies.” The US government’s action said nothing, but it appears that all proceedings against those investigated and accused include constitutional guarantees of due process, adversarial proceedings, and a full defense. The US government further alleged: “Minister Moraes unilaterally issued hundreds of orders to secretly censor his political critics. When US companies refused to comply with these orders, he imposed substantial fines, ordered the companies’ exclusion from Brazil’s social media market, threatened their executives with criminal prosecution, and, in one case, froze the assets of a US company in Brazil as a means of coercing compliance.” Furthermore, the US government’s decision did not specify that court fines are applied in cases of noncompliance with court orders and Brazilian law. There was no judicial censorship, only a restriction on the disclosure of an unlawful act. Finally, the US government stated: “Indeed, in addition to detaining individuals without trial for social media posts, Minister Moraes is currently overseeing the Brazilian government’s criminal prosecution of Paulo Figueiredo, a US resident, for statements made on US soil, and has supported criminal investigations against other US citizens after they reported his serious human rights violations and acts of corruption.” The statement fails to clarify that the individuals being prosecuted are for democratic acts, in accordance with Brazilian law, guaranteeing due process. The lawsuit fails to clarify that it is not the Brazilian government that is bringing the charges, but rather an autonomous body such as the Attorney General’s Office. Apparently, the Attorney General’s Office is investigating Mr. Paulo Figueiredo and his involvement in alleged crimes committed by Eduardo Bolsonaro, son of former President Jair Bolsonaro, such as obstruction of justice and procedural coercion, and his involvement in lobbying for sanctions imposed by the U.S. government against Supreme Court Justices. The US government’s action continues: “President Trump is defending American companies from extortion, protecting American citizens from political persecution, safeguarding free speech from censorship, and saving the U.S. economy from being subject to the arbitrary decrees of a tyrannical foreign judge.” There is no evidence that American companies are targets of extortion. Nor is there any evidence of judicial censorship; after all, restricting illicit content is perfectly possible.

Justice Alexandre de Moraes’ actions are in accordance with Brazilian law. One can criticize some of his decisions, but not accuse or attack a Minister of the Republic. These actions are being taken collectively, not by the Justice in question. This is the first time in the history of this country that a Supreme Court Justice has been attacked by a foreign government, with serious accusations. This very act of interference in the Brazilian Judiciary represents an attack on Brazil’s sovereignty. To make matters worse, the United States Embassy in Brazil published a press release with possible threats to members of the legislature and other Justices of the Supreme Federal Court. Furthermore, in the same act, the US government increased economic tariffs against Brazil. The focus here is to demonstrate abusive interference by a foreign government in Brazil’s sovereignty. This is a typical case of lawfare, that is, the use of US laws in the context of a trade and/or political war. The so-called Executive Order, a type of presidential decree, mentions the following laws: International Emergency Economy Powers Act, National Emergencies Act and Global Magnitsky Act. From an economic perspective, there is no justification for the tariff increase, since the United States has a trade surplus with Brazil. There is no economic emergency to justify the measure. Contrary to what the act stated, it is not judicial actions that cause harm to the US economy. Indeed, it is this action by the US government that causes harm to the Brazilian economy.

Magnitsky Act is used in cases of corruption and human rights abuses, which is clearly not the case here. This US law was created in the context of international relations between the United States and Russia. It is applicable to specific cases of serious human rights violations under authoritarian regimes. The US government’s action mentions alleged violations of the freedom of expression of US citizens, as determined by the Supreme Federal Court. The US government alleges substantial fines imposed on the US company, including the freezing of accounts, the suspension of funding, and censorship. The US government also mentions the political persecution of former President Jair Bolsonaro. This would prevent fair elections in 2026. Thus, the Brazilian government is harming the US economy and its companies by exercising freedom of expression. This is the US government’s narrative to manipulate facts, truth, and reality. What the US government’s action failed to mention is that the United States has a surplus in its trade accounts with Brazil. This alone would be grounds for rejecting the application of tariffs. There is no economic basis for imposing tariffs on Brazil. The US government’s tariffs are being used as an instrument of retaliation against Brazil, the Brazilian economy, and the Brazilian people. This issue is an aspect of geopolitics and geoeconomics and lawfare. And the US government has applied its legislation extraterritorially, interfering with the sovereignty of other countries.[1] There are a number of US laws that apply to the jurisdiction of other countries, including export control laws. This is a sensitive point that deserves debate and transparency, including at the international level. This is an issue that Brazil should debate. Incidentally, Brazil approved the “economic reciprocity law”, Law 15,122 of 2022, with criteria for the suspension of commercial concessions, investments, and obligations related to intellectual property in the face of unilateral measures adopted by other countries.

The U.S. government exerts intense control over other countries’ exports and investments, including in the context of trade wars. Therefore, it is important for Brazil to debate a broader law for its national defense in the face of lawfare and trade wars.

On the other hand, the US government’s act did not say that in the case of a US company fined by Minister Alexandre de Moraes for failing to comply with court orders, it is Trump Media, owned by President Donald Trump himself. This company, based in the United States, filed a lawsuit in the US courts against Minister Alexandre Moraes. Thus, the US president is using the government to advance his personal interests.

The U.S. government’s action fails to mention the Supreme Court’s June 2025 decision, in Extraordinary Appeals No. 103,7396 (General Repercussion Issue 987) and No. 105,738 (General Repercussion Issue 535), which established a series of obligations for social media companies. Therefore, this Supreme Court decision ran counter to the interests of U.S. companies and the U.S. government. Within the Superior Electoral Court, several decisions were made contrary to the interests of U.S. companies for noncompliance with electoral law.

Ultimately, it can be deduced that this action by the US government is retaliation against the decisions adopted in Extraordinary Appeals No. 103,7396 (General Repercussion Topic 987) and 105,738 (General Repercussion Topic 535), which established a series of obligations for social media companies. The US government action cites the defense of freedom of expression as one of its reasons for the measures. Now, as we know, freedom of expression is not an absolute right; in extreme situations, it can be restricted to preserve other fundamental values. Incidentally, the US judicial system has so-called “gag orders,” a judicial “gag order” to prevent the disclosure of information to third parties. Typically, when it comes to freedom of expression and human rights, the US government uses a double standard: when it wants to, it adequately defends freedom of expression and fundamental rights, but when it doesn’t, it doesn’t. of these fundamental freedoms. The U.S. government raises moral questions regarding the innovation of this type of discourse, including the use of government acts and lawsuits to subpoena political opponents. Another point is that the U.S. government’s action fails to mention that former President Jair Bolsonaro is a defendant in a criminal action brought by the Federal Public Prosecutor’s Office for the following crimes: attempted coup d’état and armed criminal organization, among others, based on Brazilian law.[2] To understand the historical facts related to former President Jair Bolsonaro’s government and his political strategy of using social media and his anti-democratic profile, there is literature on the subject.[3] The U.S. government’s action fails to mention that there is an entire social media campaign of intimidation, harassment, and coercion against Minister Alexandre de Moraes by political groups allied with former President Jair Bolsonaro, who is charged with attempted coup d’état. The U.S. government’s action fails to consider the existence of democratic rules for free, open, and transparent elections in Brazil. In fact, Brazil does not have an electoral college like the United States. Brazil has electronic voting, while the United States does not. he has.

Brazil has rules to prevent candidates convicted by the Electoral Court from running. The United States has essentially two political parties. Brazil has several political parties. On the other hand, it should be noted that The geopolitical and geopolitical dispute between countries lies in internet and application infrastructure. North American companies, known as “Big Tech”, dominate this social media application sector and earn immense fortunes from these businesses, as well as possess the ability to dominate the cognitive layer of the population. There is also the possibility of influence, information, and psychological operations being carried out by the US government’s intelligence services. In 2013, the National Security Agency spied on the Brazilian government, including Petrobras and other companies. Therefore, it is essential that Brazil adopt a new regulatory framework more suited to “Big Tech ,” in defense of national interests. On these topics, see: Scorsim, Ericson. Geopolitical game between the United States and China in 5G technologies: impact and Scorsim, Ericson. Geopolitics of Communications, both available on Amazon and published in 2022. The European Union, for example, strongly defends its digital and cyber sovereignty, with significant investments in communications infrastructure. The European Union also has trade defense and anti-coercion legislation to defend against economic threats from other countries. Furthermore, there are flaws in the legitimacy of government action regarding its motives. On January 6, 2021, extremist supporters of President Donald Trump stormed the U.S. Congress in the United States, attempting to prevent then-President-elect Joe Biden from taking office. In 2025, again during Trump’s presidency, he decided to pardon 1,500 people accused of storming the U.S. Congress. Therefore, there is a lack of legitimacy and credibility to seek to influence the Supreme Court’s trial of former President Jair Bolsonaro in his attempt to rescue and rehabilitate his electoral campaign for 2026. In short, the US government seeks to impose its arbitrary will on Brazil’s internal affairs, interfering with Brazilian sovereignty, and influencing the country’s electoral process! This is an illegitimate and reprehensible act!

---

[1] Laws on access to foreign data, foreign surveillance law, among others.

[2] See law on crimes against the Democratic State of Law, Law 14.197/2021.

[3] Scorsim, Ericson. Anti-Toxic Leadership in the Brazilian Presidency – 2018 – 2022, Amazon , 2022.

Crédito de imagem: Google.

Ericson M. Scorsim. Lawyer and Public Law Consultant. PhD in Law from the University of São Paulo. Co-founder of the Anti-Noise Environmental Monitoring Association. Author of the ebook “Cities Free of Noise Pollution,” published on Amazon in 2022.

The environmental issue is existential for Brazil and Brazilians. The fundamental and environmental rights of future and current generations are at risk. This is a time for widespread environmental awareness, especially now at the historic moment of the United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP 30), to be held in Brazil. Climate change and global warming demand urgent adaptation measures. In 2020, the coronavirus pandemic caused tragedy, killing millions of people in Brazil and around the world. This pandemic demonstrated that a biological agent has the power to kill millions and generate countless diseases. Hence the need to devise measures to protect the biosafety of cities and their populations. Furthermore, the fires and burning that occurred in Brazil in 2024, with smoke reaching practically all Brazilian cities, demand preventive measures to prevent this damage from occurring again. There are immense risks from droughts and water shortages for the population. Consider the case of the droughts in the Amazon and the Pantanal, which are of impressive magnitude. In 2024, floods hit Rio Grande do Sul, causing massive damage. Meanwhile, Brazilian beaches have been polluted year after year. Air quality has been worsening year after year. Noise pollution is also a factor in degrading environmental quality and quality of life, posing risks to public health. Chemical pollution is present in food and products; not even the population is aware of this chemical contamination. Soil pollution is a chronic problem. Plastic pollution contaminates the oceans. Forests are being lost, and they are being destroyed year after year. The environmental institutional paradigm is not suited to the urgent demands of environmental protection. The design of environmental law must ensure the efficiency, effectiveness, and effectiveness of environmental protection. Finally, the design of environmental law must ensure effective environmental competence in environmental protection. Furthermore, the environmental agency’s composition should include renowned scientists in their fields: air pollution, chemical pollution, noise pollution, epidemiology, biodiversity, forestry engineering, oceanographers, biologists, chemists , environmental engineers, environmental medicine, environmental psychology, among others. Currently, there are multiple environmental agencies, but a lack of command and control over environmental policy is lacking. Another essential aspect is environmental anticipation, with the role of technological innovations such as sensors, artificial intelligence, big data, satellites, and radars in predicting environmental changes, as well as monitoring water flow and green areas, and detecting flood and fire risks. Environmental governance standards, with environmental quality indicators, are needed at the federal, state, and municipal levels. There are problems with a lack of alignment between environmental policies, traffic policies, public transportation policies, urban mobility policies, electrical infrastructure policies, and others. Also, it is important to align environmental policy and energy policy, regarding the use of renewable clean energy sources and the issue of fossil fuels, in the context of the just energy transition.

It is necessary to ensure the coherence and unity of environmental policies. There are structural deficiencies in [1]the organization of environmental protection. An analysis of Supreme Court judgments reveals numerous cases demonstrating the structural deficiencies of the Brazilian State in environmental protection: Direct Action of Unconstitutionality – ADI 6.148/DF against Resolution No. 491/2018 of the National Environmental Council, which adopted air quality standards lower than those defined by the World Health Organization; ADPF No. 623 unanimously ruled that Federal Decree No. 9,806 of May 29, 2019, which altered the composition of the National Environmental Council (CONAMA) [2]to increase government representation and reduce civil society representation, was unconstitutional. The STF decision upheld the principle of prohibiting environmental regression and the right to environmental participation. ADPF No. 708/DF, regarding the federal government’s failure to fully allocate resources from the Climate Fund in 2019, and ADPFs No. 743, 746, and 857 (also unanimously) regarding failures to combat fires, [3]and ADPF No. 109 regarding the use of asbestos [4]. Furthermore, there are numerous international acts for Brazil to follow. UN Resolution No. 76 of 2002 enshrines the right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment. There’s also the UN Resolution on education for sustainable development. And also the UN Resolution on the right to peace. And then there’s the Paris Agreement on climate change, the Rio Declaration of 1992, the Escazú Treaty [5](on the right to environmental information, the right to environmental participation, the right to environmental transparency), the Aarhaus Treaty, officially called the Aarhus Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-Making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters [6](although applicable to European Union countries, it serves as a reference), and the Maastricht Principles. [7](States’ obligations regarding human rights and environmental rights, in relation to the rights of future generations. Furthermore, the environmental agency must be linked to the sustainable development goals of the United Nations 2030 Agenda: decent work (including “green” jobs), health and well-being (environmental health and well-being), zero hunger and sustainable agriculture, quality education, sustainable cities and communities (cities free of air pollution and noise pollution), responsible production and consumption (circular economy and sustainable product responsibility), innovation, industry and infrastructure (technical and responsible innovation, with the eco-design of industrial products, in favor of environmental eco-efficiency, clean, healthy and sustainable industry and clean, healthy and sustainable infrastructure), clean and affordable energy, climate change (set of laws, regulations, actions and responsible practices), gender equality, peace and effective institutions (environmental peace and effective, efficient and efficient environmental institutions), reduction of inequalities (environmental equity and environmental justice, access to water and environmental sanitation, protection of life on land, protection of life below water, partnerships and means of implementation).

Therefore, environmental innovation is essential to create an autonomous environmental agency, including the institution mandate for its leaders, independent of governments and the private sector. The environmental institutional design should maximize environmental protection and environmental assets, and their ecosystem context. It is an environmental institution, which must be multisectoral, with regulatory and oversight powers. [8]Some of the pillars for its structuring: the right to an ecologically balanced environment, the principle of cooperative environmental federalism, the principles of sustainable development, sustainable economy, decarbonization of the economy, environmental eco-efficiency, environmental sustainability, the principles of prohibiting environmental regression, the duty of environmental progressiveness, prevention of environmental damage, precaution of environmental damage, environmental defense, environmental security, and the polluter pays. Regarding the polluter-pays issue, a system for paying environmental compensation and indemnities to polluters should be established, including an environmental fund established with the collection of fines and other revenues to finance environmental protection actions. The financial autonomy of this environmental agency should be guaranteed, ensuring its own budgetary resources. Furthermore, there must be environmental transparency regarding the quantification of environmental damage. The economic value of natural capital must be rigorously measured. Thus, when there is a loss of natural capital or degradation of natural environmental quality, it is possible to quantify environmental costs, environmental damages, and environmental compensation and reparations in a fair and equitable manner.

This federal environmental agency should serve as an inspiration for state and municipal environmental agencies. This environmental agency must, without fail, approve indicators for the quality of environmental protection, the quality of environmental standards, and the quality of environmental oversight. Furthermore, the future environmental agency must foster an innovation ecosystem, using technologies and technological innovations for maximum environmental protection, as well as an ecosystem of environmental services. It must also foster environmental services, that is, services dedicated to environmental protection. Another point is monitoring environmental investments for maximum environmental protection. Another issue is environmental protection against products and services that are harmful to the environment. Another point is environmental diplomacy to include Brazil and its participation with other countries in environmental actions, with the definition of standards, protocols, and norms.

In short, restructuring the Brazilian State’s environmental functions is a fundamental condition for sustainable development and the Brazilian people’s right to an ecologically balanced and healthy environment, ensuring adequate environmental protection and environmental security for all. The human and environmental rights of future and current generations are at risk.

---

[1]The Supreme Federal Court ruled in ADI 6.148/DF that Resolution No. 491/2018 was on the verge of becoming unconstitutional because it adopted air quality control parameters that were inferior to those defined by the World Health Organization. Therefore, it set a deadline for CONAMA to issue a new Resolution that would comply with WHO standards.

[2]Federal Supreme Court (STF), ADPF 623 available at: https://jurisprudencia.stf.jus.br/pages/search/sjur483570/false

[3]Federal Supreme Court (STF), ADPF 743, available at: https://jurisprudencia.stf.jus.br/pages/search/sjur504935/false ,

[4]Federal Supreme Court (STF), ADPF 109, available at: https://jurisprudencia.stf.jus.br/pages/search/sjur397313/false

[5]See: https://www.un.org/en/development/desa/population/migration/generalassembly/docs/globalcompact/A_CONF.151_26_Vol.I_Declaration.pdf

[6]See: https://unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/env/pp/documents/cep43e.pdf

[7]See: https://www.etoconsortium.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/Maastricht-Principles-on-the-Human-Rights-of-Future-Generations_EN.pdf

[8]See, for example, the European Union Environment Agency. The European Union’s Court of Auditors monitors countries’ compliance with environmental targets.

Crédito de imagem: Google

Ericson M. Scorsim. Lawyer and Consultant in Public Law, founder of the Civil Association Monitor Ambiental Antirruídos. Author of the e-book Right to cities free from noise pollution.

Public passenger transport buses with combustion engines cause noise pollution in Curitiba every day, during the day and at night, during the week and on weekends. Noise pollution from buses is a symptom of urban underdevelopment. Noise pollution from the public passenger transport system is a symptom of administrative inefficiency and of the service provider. Now, the streets, a public asset where buses travel, are contaminated by noise pollution. The environment, close to where buses circulate, is contaminated by noise pollution. Public assets and environmental assets are impacted by noise pollution from buses with combustion engines. The fundamental premise to consider is that the natural sound environment is an environmental asset to be protected. It is an environmental heritage subject to environmental protection.

And the expectation of quality is a clean, healthy and sustainable city, free from noise pollution. Therefore, there is an urgent need for a new urban design based on the principles of sustainable development, ecodesign, environmental eco-efficiency and acoustic environmental sustainability, to guarantee the right to a clean, healthy and sustainable city, free from noise pollution. A new institutional design of these transport infrastructures is necessary, including measures for acoustic environmental monitoring and environmental compensation measures for the environmental damage caused, as well as measures to repair the damage caused to private property.

However, this public transportation system causes harm to the city of Curitiba and its population. Noise pollution is contrary to the sustainable development goals of the United Nations 2030 Agenda. Furthermore, according to The UN Resolution No. 76 of 2002, it deals with the right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment. Resolution N. 57/254 deals with education in sustainable development. The UN Resolution that deals with the right to peace is Resolution N. 39/11. Now, bus transportation infrastructure must be innovative and responsible for the environment and health. Furthermore, noise pollution from public transportation directly affects the right to property, as well as the right to housing and the right to privacy.[1] Now, the right to property is a guarantee for freedom, security, health and rest. Noise pollution is a systemic violence against these fundamental rights. Noise violence is an offense to the right to a sound and sustainable environmental peace. Studies show that a peaceful environment is better for the economy.[2] Furthermore, there are environmental rights and principles that are systemically violated by noise pollution. The principles of prohibition of environmental regression, duty of environmental progressiveness, prevention of environmental damage, precaution of environmental damage, environmental justice, intergenerational justice, sustainable environmental peace, environmental equity, environmental security, and polluter pays are systemically violated by noise pollution from buses. Thus, if a city wants to be clean, healthy, sustainable, and also intelligent, it needs to get rid of noise pollution. Public transportation buses are agents that cause degradation of environmental noise quality. Condominiums are impacted by noise pollution from public transportation buses. Commercial establishments are impacted by this noise pollution from public transportation buses. This noise pollution leads to loss of productivity. Internal combustion buses are agents that cause degradation of quality of life, by causing loss of well-being and environmental noise comfort in residential and commercial environments.[3] And to make matters worse, the emission of excessive, unnecessary, harmful noise is a risk factor for harm to health.

There are scientific studies on the psychological and physiological effects of noise on the human body. Excessive, unnecessary and harmful noise has an impact on the brain’s cognitive system, cardiovascular system, sleep, among others.[4]  According to the World Health Organization, noise levels above 50 dB (A) are a risk factor for harm to health. And, especially for the traffic and transportation sector, the World Health Organization determines that the noise emission limit for traffic and transportation should be 53 dB (A) during the day and 45 dB (A) at night.[5] The European Union follows the recommendations of the World Health Organization regarding the prevention and control of noise pollution. There is a plan to reduce noise pollution in traffic and transportation by 2030.[6] The European Environment Agency monitors the noise pollution reduction targets.[7] The economic, human, social and environmental costs resulting from environmental pollution caused by buses with combustion engines are not properly priced by the real estate markets. Economic studies show that noise pollution can imply a reduction in the value of real estate between 5% (five percent) and 10%. And differently, economic studies show the economic value of peace and quiet.

For this reason, the risks of environmental noise pollution in the value of properties are not properly measured, nor is the analysis by the real estate market. Curitiba does not monitor public transport buses and does not have proper environmental acoustic monitoring by public agencies, which is an illegal, unconstitutional and immoral situation. Currently, Curitiba has only 7 (seven) electric buses [8], despite having a budget of more than R$ 14.5 billion for 2025.[9] How can this delay in electric mobility in this capital be explained?

Therefore, the municipality has objective environmental responsibility for failing to monitor public transport buses for excessive, unnecessary, harmful and damaging noise emissions. The municipality is responsible for environmental damage caused by failing to control excessive, unnecessary and harmful noise emissions from combustion buses.

Santiago, the capital of Chile, has noise maps, electric buses to scale, and environmental education programs, as well as noise pollution prevention and control systems. Santiago, in Chile, has a fleet of 2,550[10] electric buses. The delay in the sustainable development of urban transportation infrastructure causes harm to property rights, housing rights, health rights, well-being rights, and comfort rights. There is a serious institutional problem regarding the regulation and monitoring of public transportation in Curitiba. There are flaws in the legislation; it is outdated and inadequate for modernizing the public transportation system. There are flaws in the monitoring of public transportation services. There are flaws in the institutional design of concession contracts. Therefore, a new institutional design is essential for an adequate law, adequate concession contracts, and efficient and effective monitoring of public transportation, with environmental performance indexes. Curitiba should adopt an environmental and acoustic governance system, with indicators of public transportation quality, indicators of efficiency and effectiveness of standards, quality indicators of acoustic environmental monitoring, quality indicators to eliminate, reduce, and isolate noise pollution, indicators of environmental compensation for damage caused by noise pollution, among other parameters. In fact, it is essential to impose an environmental compensation system for the excessive burdens caused by public transportation infrastructure by buses, to residential, commercial, and public areas affected by noise pollution.

For further information on this topic, see: Scorsim, Ericson. Cities, free from noise pollution. Curitiba. Author’s edition, 2024. At the Anti-Noise Environmental Monitor Civil Association, of which I am the founder, we defend the right to a clean, healthy and sustainable city, free from noise pollution. We defend the right to a clean, healthy and sustainable street, free from noise pollution. We defend the right to a residential environment, free from noise pollution. We defend the right to safe, clean, healthy and sustainable traffic, free from noise pollution. We defend the right to clean, healthy and sustainable public passenger transport, free from noise pollution. To learn more, see: https://antirruidos.wordpress.com/

---

[1] JHDales. Pollution, property & prices. University of Toronto Press, 1968.

[2]See: Institute for Economics & Peace. See website: economicsandpeace.org

[3]Even in the economic order the sensory dimension is important, see: Hayerk, Frederic. The sensory order. In inquiry into the Foundations of Theoretical Psychology . Martino Publishing. Mansfiel Centre 2014.

[4]See: ICBEN – International Commission on Biological Effects on Noise.

[5] World Health Organization (WHO) – https://cdn.who.int/media/docs/default-source/who-compendium-on-health-and-environment/who_compendium_noise_01042022.pdf

[6] https://environment.ec.europa.eu/strategy/zero-pollution-action-plan_en

[7] https://www.eea.europa.eu/pt/articles/a-poluicao-sonora-e-um#:~:text=A%20AEA%20%C3%A9%20respons%C3%A1vel%20pela,sobre%20o%20tema%20da%20AEA .

[8] https://ebusradar.org/#cidades , accessed on 05/07/2025.

[9] https://www.curitiba.pr.gov.br/noticias/seven-electric-buses-are-in-operation-in-curitiba/74702

[10] https://ebusradar.org/#cidades , accessed on 05/07/2025.

Ericson M. Scorsim . Lawyer and Consultant in Public Law. Founder and CEO of the Anti-Noise Environmental Monitor Association. Author of the Ebooks Healthy and sustainable cities, free from noise pollution. [1]And Healthy and sustainable residential buildings, free from noise pollution.[2]

Noise pollution generates immense costs, damages and losses. [3]Within this context, the emission of excessive, unnecessary and harmful noise causes various costs, damages and losses. Economic doctrine uses the term externality to deal with environmental pollution. Now, externality is an arbitrary action, through the imposition of  excessive, unnecessary and harmful costs to third parties. A new economy is needed, freeing it from the polluter and the pollution and from the costs, damages and losses caused by these two factors. The emitter of noise pollution must respond to all the economic, environmental and health costs caused to people and society. A sustainable economy is needed that adequately considers environmental assets and the environmental costs and benefits for their protection.[4]

It is urgent to design a sustainable economy, with acoustically sustainable products and services. It is urgent to design the new sustainable economy economically, with alignment between economic value and environmental value. The sustainable economy demands the appropriate valuation of natural capital, represented by the natural sound environment. It is urgent to price the costs, damages and losses of business models that cause environmental noise pollution. And the risks of damage to the natural environmental noise capital. There are inefficient and unsustainable structures and functions. They are authoritarian and degrading structures and functions. It is urgent to reengineer the industry and products with the power to emit excessive, unnecessary and harmful noise. The evaluation of investments and businesses must price risks associated with noise pollution. The business model must incorporate the valuation of environmental costs associated with noise pollution. It is urgent to price the hidden costs of failures of equipment, machines, tools, used in works and services, which cause excessive, unnecessary, harmful and damaging noise emissions. The starting point is the following premise. According to the World Health Organization, noise emissions above 50 dB (A) are a risk factor for harm to health. In addition, for traffic and transportation, the World Health Organization states that the noise emission limit during the day should be 53 dB (A) and at night 45 dB (A). These parameters should serve as quality indicators for environmental, urban, traffic and health management in cities.

There are economic costs associated with environmental noise pollution, such as the loss of productivity for companies due to disruption in workers’ cognition. Excessive, unnecessary, and harmful noises cause stress to the human body. Therefore, this is a sufficient reason in itself for companies to engage in the reduction of noise pollution in the city, demanding that the municipal government take measures to eliminate and reduce noise pollution. There is also the impact of environmental noise pollution on property rights. Properties lose economic value due to the depreciation of property values. Even properties in commercial areas are impacted by areas subject to environmental noise degradation. Imagine a company and a building construction site in its vicinity. These construction sites usually take more than two years to complete. During this period, the company will be affected by the noise pollution from the construction site. And, after the construction site is completed and the commercial spaces are sold, there will be individual construction sites within the commercial building. And what’s more, imagine a residential condominium and, without its neighbors, the construction of yet another residential building. For more than two years, residents of the residential condominium will be impacted by the noise of the construction. Then, to make matters worse, when the apartments are sold, new residents will move into the building and install furniture and decoration.

And the cycle of noise pollution continues, with endless construction work, whether in a condominium or in a neighboring condominium, and so on. And there is also noise pollution caused by traffic. Vehicles that pollute the environment, mainly irregular motorcycles, circulate throughout the city. There is also noise pollution caused by public passenger transport buses. These buses cause degradation of the sound quality of commercial and residential areas. This is yet another reason to demand urgent measures from the local government to replace buses with combustion engines with buses with electric engines. This is yet another reason for property owners and investors to act by demanding measures from the local government to eliminate noise pollution. Economic studies demonstrate the economic value of an environment with quiet and peace . On the other hand, they show the loss of economic value caused by noise pollution. Residential areas impacted by noise pollution lose economic value. Therefore, the degradation of sound quality is a factor that causes economic costs. unfair. This awareness about what environmental sound quality is and what is degradation of environmental sound quality is fundamental.

Environmental sound quality requires standards of acoustic environmental governance, acoustic environmental sustainability and acoustic environmental eco-efficiency . Clarity and precision regarding environmental sound quality indicators and environmental eco-efficiency and environmental sound sustainability indicators are essential. Therefore, the lack of technical quality of equipment, machinery, products and services is a factor in the degradation of environmental sound quality. On the other hand, for those who can afford it, noise pollution increases the costs of measures to promote acoustic insulation, in commercial and residential environments. There are human costs with the degradation of environmental sound quality caused by noise pollution. There are costs to private life, health, privacy, well-being and economic comfort. People lose the conditions of environmental well-being and economic well-being because of noise pollution. Noise pollution is a factor that generates economic costs to human health. There are psychological and biological effects caused by noise pollution. The human body and mind are severely impacted by the emission of excessive, unnecessary and harmful noise. [5]People affected by excessive, unnecessary, harmful noise are unfairly forced to spend money on medical consultations and/or medication to alleviate the effects of stress caused by noise pollution. There are social costs associated with noise pollution, due to the increase in social conflicts and the consumption of vital resources over time. There are environmental costs associated with the degradation of the noise environment. Therefore, measures are required to “clean up the noise environment”, with measures to eliminate, reduce and isolate the emission of excessive and unnecessary noise. There are costs for the defense of people affected by noise pollution, costs for lawyers, access to justice, and costs for producing evidence. There are public costs associated with activating the municipal government, the judiciary, and police and security forces to adopt the appropriate procedures to resolve the problem of noise pollution. Public values are destroyed because of noise pollution, such as sound environmental quality, public health, public well-being, and public peace and quiet.

Noise pollution and the emission of excessive, unnecessary noise are violence against the environment and violence against the physical, biological and psychological integrity of the human person . Therefore, in extreme cases it is necessary to call upon the justice authorities to investigate the crime of environmental noise pollution (art. 54, of the Environmental Crimes Law) and the criminal offense of disturbing work and peace (art. 42, item II, of the Criminal Offenses Law). There is a lack of indicators to measure the effectiveness of criminal law against polluters, offenders and emitters. On the other hand, as for the damages caused by the emission of excessive, unnecessary, harmful and abusive noises, there is the following classification. Economic damages caused by noise pollution to economic and social activities are immense and diffuse. Therefore, there are patrimonial damages that must be duly repaired by the person who caused the damages and by those who fail to prevent and control the emission of excessive, unnecessary noises. However, there are methods for calculating these economic damages. Methods for determining losses associated with noise pollution; loss of use value of areas, loss of hedonic value, among others. Here, the polluter pays principle must be applied; the polluter must pay all economic damages in full. There is damage to work and the work environment caused by the emission of excessive, unnecessary noise. People who perform work of an intellectual nature are severely impacted by the emission of excessive, unnecessary, harmful and damaging noise. There is damage to private autonomy, private life , personal damage, caused by the invasion of excessive, unnecessary noise, to the human body. There is compromise to the person, their personality and their rights; there is damage to the free development of personality. There are damages to neuroatypical , neurodiverse and neurodivergent people , vulnerable to exposure to noise . [6]There is environmental damage caused by noise pollution; there are also methods for this calculation.

Polluter pays principle also applies here ; the polluter must pay in full for environmental damages. Another point is that the authority that fails to prevent environmental damage is jointly liable for environmental damage. There is damage to biodiversity and fauna. Animals are severely impacted by noise pollution. Excessive, unnecessary noise impacts the natural habitat of birds. There is psychological damage caused by the emission of excessive, unnecessary, harmful noises. As mentioned, excessive noises generate psychological and psychological effects. There is damage to human health, with excessive noises generating the stress hormone, and having an impact on the cardiac, digestive, and sleep systems, among others. There is damage to people’s physical and mental health , caused by noise pollution and the emission of excessive, unnecessary noises. There is damage to education and the teaching and learning process with the emission of excessive, unnecessary, harmful noises. Concentration and cognitive activities are impossible in the context of excessive and unnecessary noise emission caused by equipment, machines and tools used in construction and services. There is damage to the culture of quality, culture of stillness, culture of tranquility, culture of well-being, culture of environmental sustainability, culture of non-violence, culture of peace and intellectual culture. There is damage to environmental aesthetics and the right to a natural environmental soundscape. There is also damage to environmental ethics with the antisocial, illicit conduct of causing damage to the quality of the sound environment . The emission of excessive and unnecessary noise is a symptom of underdevelopment; it is a type of toxic subculture of environmental contamination and degradation. There is existential damage caused to the person by restrictions and limitations imposed unfairly and illicitly. The person has their freedom in their life project sacrificed because of the polluter. There is moral damage to be imposed on the person causing the emission of excessive, unnecessary and harmful noise. The pain and psychological suffering caused by the emitting agent must be fully repaired. Here, there is an ethical dimension, the determination of moral damages must be determined with an educational function in mind and to dissuade the repetition of illicit conduct.  and abusive. Regarding the losses caused by noise pollution and the emission of excessive, unnecessary, harmful and damaging noise. There are losses of opportunity for companies, owners, investors, residents, citizens. There are economic losses, property losses, job losses, rest losses, health losses, environmental losses, cultural losses.

To avoid costs, damages and losses due to excessive, unnecessary and harmful noise emissions, there are several possible solutions . Directly hold those responsible for environmental noise pollution and excessive, unnecessary and harmful noise emissions accountable. In the case of manufacturers of equipment, machines and tools used in services and construction, directly hold the manufacturer of the product that is harmful to the environment and to health and the quality of private life, well-being and comfort accountable. Hold the manufacturer responsible for flaws in the mechanical design of the equipment, machinery and tools, and point out mechanical and/or electrical negligence of the industrial product. Point out flaws in the acoustic quality of the product. Hold the manufacturer, seller and trader responsible for environmentally unsustainable practices and misleading advertising. In the case of building constructors, hold the constructor directly responsible for environmental damages in neighborhood relations and to owners and residents. Directly hold condominiums and their service providers responsible for construction work that causes environmental noise pollution and excessive, unnecessary, harmful and damaging noise emissions. Hold motorcycle drivers who cause environmental noise pollution accountable, with the application of legal sanctions such as impounding the motorcycle and imposing severe fines. In the case of public passenger transport buses, hold the company and the city government directly responsible for environmental damage, economic damage, property damage, and health damage,  damage to mental health, damage to well-being and comfort, among others. In the case of municipal services that pollute the environment and emit excessive, unnecessary, harmful noise, hold the city hall and the company providing the service responsible. Also, hold the city hall responsible for failure to supervise works, services, traffic and public passenger transport. Educate consumers and citizens so that they are informed about the acoustic quality standards of products and services.

Another point is the adequacy of adequate taxation to deter antisocial and environmentally unsustainable behavior. And also to encourage development. Also, policies to encourage the manufacture and use of clean, healthy and sustainable technologies, with zero noise emissions . Encourage technologies for monitoring environmental sound quality and preventing and controlling noise pollution. It is necessary to update environmental legislation to enshrine the principle of environmental acoustic eco-efficiency and the principle of environmental sound sustainability, as well as to encourage the use of technologies for monitoring environmental sound quality (acoustic radars and acoustic chambers), as well as the use of clean, healthy and sustainable technologies, with zero noise emissions. It is necessary to implement the polluter pays principle, with effective measures to impose severe sanctions on environmental sound polluters. Adopt environmental acoustic governance indicators. For the public sector, especially for city governments, to adopt environmental sound quality indicators, with measures for preventing, managing and controlling noise pollution. Indicators to measure the city’s environmental sound quality, street sound quality, traffic sound quality, public passenger transport sound quality, airspace sound quality, residential sound quality, residential sound quality, among others. As mentioned, the environmental sound quality indicators must be associated with the rates of compliance with the noise emission limits in the transportation and traffic sector of 53 dB (A) during the day and 45 dB (A) at night. The indicators must also be associated with the presence of technologies to monitor environmental sound quality: noise maps, acoustic sensors, among others. The history of social transformation movements has countless successes, from campaigns against “smoking”, campaigns for the use of safety fives in vehicles, campaigns to restrict alcohol consumption while driving, campaigns to control vehicle speed on streets and highways. Now is the time for the campaign to eliminate and reduce noise pollution and the emission of excessive, unnecessary, harmful and damaging noise, to guarantee life, quality of life, environmental quality, health, private life and privacy, well-being and safety of all, as well as to promote the inclusion, protection and promotion of the rights of neuroatypical , neurodiverse and neurodivergent people , vulnerable to excessive, unnecessary and harmful noise.

You can also join this movement. To learn more, visit: https://antirruidos.wordpress.com/

---

[1]Available on Amazon.com . Acoustic Environmental Sustainability: The Right to Cities Free from Noise Pollution

[2]Available on Amazon . Healthy and sustainable condominiums, free from excessive noise and environmental noise pollution .

[3]This study is based on knowledge in systems theory, ecosystem theory, systems change theory, theory of institutions and institutional innovation, systems engineering theory, theory of command and control systems, intelligence and communications, quality theory, ecodesign theory , behavior change theory, engagement theories, theories of perception and cognitive dissociation, theories of industrial innovation, theory of sustainable economy, theories of sustainable development, theory of environmental peace, theory of polluter pays, theory of environmental eco- efficiency and environmental sound sustainability.

[4] See : Tientberg , Tom and Lewis, Lynne, Lewis. Environmental and natural resource economics . New York and London, 2018.

[5]The human body has dimensions: solid, liquid and gaseous. In other words, the body has parts of bones, muscles, water and air. For this reason, it is extremely sensitive to noise pollution and acoustic vibrations.

[6]Example: people with autism spectrum disorder, misophonia , hyperacusis , anxiety and depression, hyperactivity, attention deficit, among others.

Ericson M. Scorsim – Lawyer and consultant in Public Law; PhD in Public Law from USP; Author of the ebook Sustentabilidade Ambiental Acústica: Propostas Regulatórias para Cidades Livres de Ruídos Excessivos (2024), Amazon; Founder of the Anti-noise Environmental Monitor Association.

Sustainable urban development depends on environmentally and acoustically efficient public infrastructure. Noise pollution is the result of urban underdevelopment. For this reason, the urban passenger transportation sector, using fossil fuel engines, is one of the main sources of noise pollution. Excessive, unnecessary, and harmful noise disrupts one’s cognition, and affects the digestive, endocrine, sleep, and nervous systems, among others. Noise pollution is incompatible with sustainable urban development, and it is a symptom of urban underdevelopment in cities.

There are international standards to ensure environmental health, well-being, and environmental comfort. Cities must adopt better management in the public passenger transportation service in order to benefit the population. It is unacceptable that a public service is inefficient and inadequate and causes degradation of the environmental sound quality. It is unacceptable that a public service does not meet public health and environmental health protection standards. It is unacceptable that the quality of life of residents near bus routes and bus terminals be degraded by environmental noise pollution from buses. According to the World Health Organization, the limit standard for noise emissions in traffic and transportation should be 53 dB (A) during the day and 45 dB (A) at night.

The World Health Organization analyses the harmful effects of daily noise pollution.  Another point is the sustainable development goals defined by the United Nations regarding sustainable cities and communities, and innovation, infrastructure, and industry. The UN Resolution No. 76 guarantees the right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment. Therefore, it is essential that cities adopt an innovation program in urban traffic governance, prioritizing the right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable city, free from noise pollution and excessive, unnecessary and harmful noise and the right to environmental health, environmental well-being and sound comfort, free from environmental noise pollution. This governance plan for urban passenger transportation by bus and environmental noise sustainability must consider: objectives, indicators, and results to eliminate and reduce noise pollution. Public policies and regulations should include Noise maps, environmental noise education programs, and the use of technological innovations to monitor noise pollution, such as: acoustic radars, and artificial intelligence, among others. It is essential to update the legislation to incorporate the environmental health protection standard defined by the World Health Organization for traffic and transit, which is 53 dB (A) during the day and 45 dB (A) at night. Cities urgently need to adopt governance plans for urban passenger public transportation, integrating urban, traffic, environmental, health, and educational policies. Significant investments should be made to update environmental police powers and police powers to address noise pollution. Environmental compensation measures should be formulated to compensate residential and commercial areas impacted by noise pollution from circulating buses and bus terminals. Terminals and bus routes should be designed with measures to isolate noise emissions. Another point is to accelerate fleet renewal programs with the incorporation of electric buses, which are more sound and energy efficient. Tires should also have maximum noise absorption. And the asphalt paving of the streets where buses circulate should be highly efficient in absorbing noise and heat. In the context of public law in Brazil, the independence of transportation regulatory agencies must be guaranteed to avoid the risk of being captured by the interests of urban transportation licenced companies. Contracts must incorporate noise emission control standards for the transportation sector, observing the limit of 53 dB (A) for the daytime and 45 dB (A) for the nightime. The sustainable future of cities depends on public transportation governance programs to eliminate, reduce, and isolate noise pollution from buses.

Crédito de imagem: Google

Ericson M. Scorsim. Lawyer and Consultant in Public Law. PhD in Law from USP. Founder and President-Director of the Anti-Noise Environmental Monitor Civil Association. Author of the e-book Sustentabilidade Ambiental Acústica: Propostas Regulatórias para Cidades livres de Ruídos Excessivos, availabe on Amazon.

Noise pollution is a factor in the degradation of environmental quality and quality of life in cities. Noise pollution is a symbol of underdevelopment, environmental violence, and psychological violence. Sustainable urban development requires urgent measures to eliminate, reduce, and isolate excessive, unnecessary and harmful noise and noise pollution.

Also, noise pollution is a risk factor for public health and environmental health. Excessive, unnecessary, and harmful noise impacts the physical health, physiological health, cardiovascular health, hearing health, and mental health of the population. Moreover, it is a serious situation for people with neurodiversity and/or cognitive and auditory neurodivergence, such as autism spectrum disorder, misophonia , hyperacusis, phonophobia, anxiety, depression, attention deficit, hyperactivity, among other symptoms. These people are extremely vulnerable to excessive noise and noise pollution. According to the World Health Organization, noise levels above 50 dB (A) are a risk factor for the population’s health.

Furthermore, according to the World Health Organization, the health protection parameter for controlling noise in traffic and transportation is 53 dB (A) for the daytime and 45 dB (A) for the nighttime. The United Nations’ sustainable development goals establish the priorities of FOR sustainable cities and communities, innovation, industry and infrastructure, quality education, health and well-being, sustainable consumption, decent work, peace and effective institutions.

It is essential that City Halls adopt urban and environmental governance plans for the prevention, management, and control of noise pollution and excessive, unnecessary, and harmful noise.  It is essential to promote institutional innovations to train all Municipal Departments in the mission of preventing and controlling the emission of excessive noise and environmental pollution. In this aspect, the coordination and cooperation between all responsible agencies is essential, integrating urban, environmental, traffic, transportation, health, and education policies.

Therefore, public policies must prioritize a clean, healthy and sustainable city, free from excessive noise and noise pollution. Public policies must prioritize the right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable streets, free from excessive noise and noise pollution. Public policies must prioritize clean, healthy, and sustainable traffic, free from excessive noise and noise pollution. Public policies must prioritize urban passenger transportion WITH by clean, healthy, and sustainable buses, free from excessive and unnecessary noise and noise pollution. Public authorities must prioritize the acoustic environmental eco-efficiency of works, services and equipment in public procurement systems. Public authorities must encourage the use of clean, healthy, and sustainable technologies. Public policies must prioritize the right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable residential environment, free from excessive noise and noise pollution. Therefore, it is important to establish standards to protect the environment sound quality for clean, healthy and sustainable indoor and outdoor residential areas, encouraging the use of clean, healthy, and sustainable technologies with zero noise and/or reduced noise emissions. Public policies must prioritize the right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable working environment, free from excessive noise and noise pollution. It is essential that public policies implement the environmental principles of prohibition of environmental regression, , prevention and precaution of environmental damage, as well as the polluter pays, environmental security, sustainable environmental peace, among others.

Therefore, a smart city can only be characterized as such if it adopts intelligent measures which consider environmental intelligence and the use of technological innovations for the prevention, management, supervision, and control of the emission of excessive, unnecessary, and harmful noise and noise pollution. In my e-book Sustentabilidade Ambiental Acústica: Propostas Regulatórias para Cidades Livres de Ruídos Excessivos, available on Amazon , there is a presentation of a set of regulatory proposals for the urban and environmental governance of cities.

Crédito de imagem: Google

Our institutional goal is to promote acoustic environmental eco-efficiency, and acoustic industrial quality of equipment, machinery, and tools. we are also working to protect the natural environmental sound quality, the right to acoustic home inviolability, environmental health, standards of well-being, environmental comfort, and acoustic environmental sustainability.

Also, our commitment is to: implement the right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable city, free from the emission of excessive, unnecessary, and harmful mechanical noise.

– implement the right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment, free from the emission of excessive, unnecessary, and harmful noise.

– guarantee the right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable street, free from excessive, unnecessary, and harmful noise.

– advocacy fort the right to clean, healthy, and sustainable residential buildings, free from excessive, unnecessary, and harmful noise.

– implement the right to clean, healthy, and sustainable neighborhoods,  free from noise emissions.

In our first year of activities, we submitted several bill proposals to the city hall and to the city council in Curitiba:

•  A bill to promote the acoustic environmental quality of the city of Curitiba and promote the acoustic environmental sustainability of public transportation services;
• A bill to combat excessive, unnecessary, and harmful noise, as well as environmental noise pollution from noisy motorcycles;  
• A bill to promote acoustic environmental sustainability in civil construction works in the city of Curitiba;
• A bill to promote acoustic environmental sustainability and acoustic environmental education in residential areas;
• A bill to promote acoustic environmental quality for the protection of animals and birds;
• A bill to encourage environmental sustainability and environmental education in residential buildings, regulating the responsible use of pressure washers;
• A bill to include, protect and promote the rights of people with neurodiversity and/or cognitive and/or auditory neurodivergence;
• A bill to update Curitiba’s Environmental Policy Law and guarantee acoustic environmental eco-efficiency, acoustic environmental health, acoustic environmental sustainability, and acoustic environmental education.
• A bill to update the Curitiba Master Plan Law and guarantee acoustic environmental eco-efficiency , natural sound environmental quality, acoustic environmental sustainability, and acoustic environmental education.
• a bill to update the Curitiba Health Code.
• A bill to update the Curitiba Public Transportation Law and guarantee acoustic environmental eco-efficiency, protection of acoustic environmental health and acoustic environmental sustainability of the city.
• A bill to update Curitiba’s education plan.
• A billto update Curitiba’s organic law.

For the Federal Government, we present the following bill proposals:

• A bill to promote acoustic industrial innovation and acoustic environmental sustainability in protecting environmental sound quality;
• A bill to guarantee acoustic industrial quality, acoustic environmental eco-efficiency in the manufacture of equipment, machines, tools and objects with noise emission power;
• A bill to promote acoustic environmental quality and acoustic environmental sustainability in the workplace;
• A bill to modernize the Consolidation of Labor Laws and guarantee Workers’ Rights to the acoustic environmental quality of the work environment;
• A bill to modernize the Civil Code, in terms of property rights and condominiums, respect for fundamental rights, and the right to environmental health standards, acoustic and auditory environmental well-being, acoustic and auditory environmental comfort, clause acoustic environmental sustainability, to include respect for the democratic principle in elections and deliberations in condominiums, among others;
• A bill on acoustic environmental sustainability for residential buildings, and commercial buildings and housing units – Anti-noise law;
• A bill to modernize the Consumer Protection Code, to encourage acoustic environmental eco-efficiency of products and services and acoustic environmental sustainability;
• A bill to update the proposed legal framework for urban public transportation;
• A bill to update the law on federalism, collaboration and environmental cooperation between federative entities (Complementary Law No. 140, of 2011);
• A bill to include acoustic environmental eco-efficiency and acoustic environmental sustainability in the environmental information law;
• A bill to update the environmental education law to include acoustic environmental education;
• A bill to update the law on the city’s statute, in accordance with the principles of acoustic environmental eco-efficiency and acoustic environmental sustainability;
• A bill to include acoustic environmental eco-efficiency and acoustic environmental sustainability in the National Environmental Policy Law;
• A bill to incorporate the principle of acoustic environmental eco-efficiency and acoustic environmental sustainability into law 11,182, of 2005, which created the National Civil Aviation Agency | ANAC;
• A bill to update the National Traffic Code law and ensure acoustic environmental eco-efficiency and acoustic environmental sustainability of traffic;
• A bill to update the Unified Health System Law (law 8,080/1990) and include acoustic environmental health;
• A bill to update the Urban Mobility Law and ensure acoustic environmental eco-efficiency , acoustic environmental health of cities and acoustic environmental sustainability of urban traffic;
• A bill to update the Railways Law, and guarantee acoustic environmental eco-efficiency , acoustic environmental health and acoustic environmental sustainability of cities;
• A bill to update the Bidding and Administrative Contracts Law and ensure acoustic environmental eco-efficiency and acoustic environmental sustainability.

We also publish the following Booklets:

• Acoustic Environmental Sustainability – Clean Street;
• Acoustic Environmental Sustainability – Industry;
• Acoustic Environmental Sustainability – Environmental Citizenship;
• Acoustic Environmental Sustainability –Construction;
• Acoustic Sustainability – Duties and obligations of residential condominiums;
• Acoustic Environmental Sustainability – Fundamental Rights;
• Anti-noise booklet for residential areas;

You can also participate in the Anti-Noise Movement. Support the debate and approval of the bill proposals mentioned above. Forward messages, audios and videos, to contribute to the debate, to authorities, mayors, councilors, deputies and senators. Publicize the actions on social networks and in the media. Discover the publications of the Environmental Monitor Anti-Noise Civil Association: https://antirruidos.wordpress.com/ e https://twitter.com/antirruidos .

The United Nations has enshrined the right to a clean, sustainable and healthy environment. This topic is included in Resolution No. 76, of July 2022. Also, the United Nations has sustainable development objectives for 2030, among which are: ensuring a healthy life and promoting the well-being of everyone (goal 3 ), industry, innovation and infrastructure (goal 9), sustainable cities and communities (goal 11), sustainable consumption and production (goal 12), decent work and economic growth. Based on this standard of international environmental law that guarantees the right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment and the objectives of sustainable development, we can think about the right to a clean, healthy and sustainable street, free from noise and noise pollution. As a right of citizenship to sound environmental quality, free from mechanical noise.

Streets are environments polluted by noise from machines, equipment, services, infrastructure and vehicles. Mainly, traffic is one of the main sources of street noise pollution. Now, the street is a public asset for common use. It is a common infrastructure available to the public. Therefore, there is the right to clean, healthy and sustainable infrastructure. The acoustic space around the street is a common environmental asset. Therefore, it is the objective of legal protection. Any and all public assets that are part of public and environmental heritage must be protected from the risks of acoustic contamination. Any and all forms of environmental degradation must be addressed by the competent authorities. Citizens have the right to the environmental quality of streets, free from mechanical noise. The natural soundscape of the streets must be freed from mechanical noise. A healthy street is a street free from noise. A sustainable street is a street free from noise. Therefore, it is essential that urban, environmental and traffic policies adopt more rigorous measures to eliminate, reduce and isolate noise from machines, equipment, services and vehicles that cause environmental degradation on city streets. Here, the environmental principles of the polluter pays and the prohibition of environmental setbacks must be applied.

The local government must encourage the use of technological innovations for environmental monitoring of streets. Noise maps are essential for ensuring the environmental quality of streets, preventing environmental noise pollution. With this environmental monitoring it will be easier and faster to detect the polluter and thus impose the appropriate legal sanctions. Also, measures to restrict the circulation of acoustic polluters in the streets must be adopted by public authorities. Another aspect is the definition of areas of urban tranquility, free from noise, as well as areas where noise speeds are restricted.

To have clean, healthy and sustainable cities, we need clean, healthy and sustainable streets. Cities with environmental quality have anti-noise environmental inspection systems. A city that wants to have its ecological “branding” has to combat noise and noise pollution in the streets. After all, there is no environmental quality without sound environmental quality around the  streets.

Ericson M. Scorsim . Lawyer and Consultant in State Law. PhD in Law from USP. Founder of the Anti-Noise Environmental Monitor Association . Author of the Ebooks Anti-noise Movements for Smart, Healthy and Sustainable Cities and Smart, Healthy and Sustainable Condominiums, Amazon , 2023.