Caso se interesse por maiores informações sobre essa temática, sugerimos algumas referências:
- Akst, J (2010). When is self-plagiarism ok?The Scientist, Sep 2010.
- Butler, D (2010). Journals step up plagiarism policing. Nature, 466: 167-167.
- Errami, M; Sun, Z; Long , TC; George, AC; Garner, HR (2009). Deja vu: a database of highly similar citations in the scientific literature. Nucleic Acids Res 37: D921-D924.
- Godlee F (2007). Plagiarism and punishment. BMJ, 335: 7627.
- Grant, B (2010). Plagiarism retracts review. The Scientist, Apr 2010.
- Johnsson, C (2006). Repetitive, duplicate, and redundant publications: A Review for authors and readers. J Manipulative Physiol Ther, 29: 505-509.
- Long , TC; Errami, M; George, AC; Sun, Z; Garner, HR (2009). Responding to possible plagiarism. Science, 323, 5919: 1293-1294.
- Martinson, BC; Anderson, MS; De Vries, R (2005). Scientists behaving badly. Nature, 435: 737-738.
- OSTP (Office of Science and Technology Policy) (2000). Research misconduct: a new definition and guidelines for federal research agencies. Federal Research Misconduct Policy 65: 76260-76264.
- Roig, M (2009). Roig M. Plagiarism: Consider the context (letter to the editor). Science, 325: 813-4.
- Steneck, N; Anderson, MS (2011). The problem of plagiarism. Urol Oncol Semin Ori, 29, 1: 90-94.
- Vasconcelos, SMR; Leta, J; Costa, LOO; Pinto AL; Sorenson, MM (2009). Discussing plagiarism in Latin American science. EMBO Rep, 10: 677-82.
- Yank,V; Barnes, D (2003). Consensus and contention regarding redundant publications in clinical research: cross-sectional survey of editors and authors. J Med Ethics, 29: 109-114.
- Yilmaz I (2007). Plagiarism? No, we’re just borrowing better English. Nature, 449: 658.
This paper describes some classifications of ephemeral spaces, in order to define the terminology. It will be seen that the notion of an ephemeral place is more related to a communication process that defines space instead the action of a subject over space.
The notion that a space of significance can exist for a very limited time is contrary to the predominant concept of architecture. Buildings are understood as being relatively permanent or stable; there is a strong correlation between longevity and literal or symbolic importance, and ‘temporary’ somehow implies ‘less than ideal.’
Occasionally buildings and places are torn down and new ones built, but cycles of change within an architectural context are long, relative to the age of its inhabitants. As a result, most of us are unaware of our architectural environment, walking or driving around assuming correctly that our surroundings are more or less the same today as they were yesterday, not really seeing anything at all.
An ephemeral place is intended to have a short life, does not strive to be permanent, and recognizes its own impermanence as a potentially positive or even essential quality. Be the action a installation, light weight structures or only the links between elements in a transient order, it transforms the existing primarily through implication: implying containment without building it completely, implying its use ambiguously rather than describing it literally.
About WHO Centre for Health Development
WHO Kobe Centre building
Health for all in urban environments.
Promoting and leading urban health research to assess trends and build evidence for policy-makers to achieve urban health equity.
More about us
The WHO Centre for Health Development (also known as the “WHO Kobe Centre – WKC”) conducts research on the consequences of social, economic, and environmental change and its implications for health policies. The research focus is on urban settings and includes programmes on urban health metrics; urban health governance; emergency preparedness and urban health. The Centre, established in 1995, supports technical cooperation, capacity building and the exchange of information on science and best practices with a focus on urbanization as a key driver of health outcomes.
The Urban Settings Knowledge Network focused on broad policy interventions related to “healthy urbanization”, and closely examined slum upgrading as an entry point among other possible interventions. The upstream determinants of healthy urbanization include: stimulation of job creation, land tenure and land use policy, transportation, sustainable urban development, social protection, settlement policies and strategies, community empowerment, vulnerability reduction and better security among others.
via WHO | Urbanization.