Demétrio Toledo University of São Paulo, Brazil Smart G Colloquium: Science, Technology and Innovations Systems in Africa and Brazil Helsinki 9-12 August, 2010
A New Developmental Path for Brazil? Development and STI in Brazil, 1945-2010. The 4th Conference on Science, Technology, and Innovation. STI Roadmap Brazil 2010-2020.
For the first time in decades a global crisis did not translate into a macroeconomic crisis in Brazil; Brazilian GDP Real Growth Rate (%), 2002-2010 2010 10 8 6 4 2 0-2 8 5.71 6.09 5.14 3.96 2.66 3.16 1.15-0.19 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Foreign Reserves (thousands USD), Brazil, 1990-2010 300,000.00 250,000.00 200,000.00 150,000.00 100,000.00 50,000.00 0.00 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Gini Index, Brazil, 1995-2007 0.62 0.6 0.58 0.599 0.6 0.6 0.598 0.592 0.5925 0.593 0.587 0.581 0.56 0.569 0.566 0.54 0.543 0.52 0.52 0.5 0.48 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Brazil is reducing poverty and inequality, and expanding innovative social safety networks. And, simultaneously, government is playing a more active role in the making of overall policies oriented toward investment, innovation and competitiveness.
State-led tradition (1940-80): development would be achieved through industrialization and growth. Technology and innovation expected to emerge from modernization, through MNEs spillovers, imitation and learning. 1990s: Partial dismantling of developmental state. Technology and innovation expected to come out from liberalized and deregulated markets. 2002: In search of development through investment and innovation.
Applied science: late 19th century; Intense institutionl building from 1950 onwards: industrialization and basic science (with some home-grown technology); 2000s: Development through innovation
Instituto Butantã (São Paulo Vaccines Research and Development Institute): 1901; CNPq (National Research Council): 1951; Fapesp (State of São Paulo Research Foundation): 1962; National graduate programs: 1960s and 70s; Finep (Research and Projects Funding Agency): 1967; MCT (Science and Technology Ministry): 1985; ABDI (Brazilian Agency for Industrial Development): 2004.
ISI and Inward orientation; Extensive industrialization was the way to absorb technological capacity from MNEs and abroad; S&T policies aimed at fostering R&D infrastructure, and improving human resources; Technology was believed to be the outcome of industrialization and growth.
Efficiency brought about by liberalization was a natural path towards development; Industrial policies were abandoned; The agenda stressed new reforms: privatization, deregulation, reduction of subsidies and tariffs; The opening up of the economy was considered to promote growth and development.
The idea of building a national development plan gained momentum; 2007: Growth Acceleration Program (PAC); Investment: US$ 300 bn until 2014; Brazilian S&T policy is gradually shifting towards the productive and services sectors, keeping its focus on enterprises; New institutions, programs and tools.
1999-2003: Sector Funds; 2 nd National STI Conference: 2001 3 rd National STI Conference: 2005 PITCE (Industrial, Technological and Foreign Trade Policy): 2004; PDP (Productive Development Policy): 2008; National Science and Technology Plan: 2007-2010; 4 th National STI Conference: 2010.
Innovation Policies New Regulatory Rules 1990s 2003-2009 2009 None Competition Protection Law (1994) New Institutions Regulatory Agencies(9) ABDIe BNDES & FINEP main targets Sectoral Funds (14) CGEE Privatization, Exports Pronex PITCE 2004a PDP 2008 b S&T Plan - 2008 c Innovation Law (2004) Good Law (Lei do Bem, 2005)d Biotechnology security law (2005) Computer and Software Tech Law CNDIf Technology Initiative Business Entrepreneurship Fund Criatec Pro-Innovation Grants Program - non refundable Firms Internationalization Program INCT - National Inst for S&T (119) New Sectoral Tools New Automotive Regime Informatics Law Prominp (Petrobras) ProSoft (enlarged) Pro-Pharmaceuticals Sibratec National Tech. Networks
Brazil remains competitive in standardized agricultural and industrial goods; However a small but important group of Brazilian firms are participating in international markets via exports of medium and high-technology goods; This group of highly competitive Brazilian firms generates positive spillovers in terms of wage and productivity; BNDES supports firms internationalization move.
Mexico 2.2% Russia 2.2% Chile 1.9% Middle East 0.3% Belgium and Luxembourg 2.3% Others 10.9% China 15.1% South Korea 2.4% Spain 2.4% France UK 2.5% Italy 2.9% Venezuela 3.0% 3.0% Others Asia 3.2% Other Euro Zone Japan Countries 3.6% 4.4% Germany 4.5% USA 13.2% Argentina 8.2% Netherland Other Latin 6.6% American Countries 5.1%
Pulp and Paper 3% Suger 3% Electronic Equipment 4% Mechanical Equipments 5% Chemicals 7% Meats 8% Others 10% Soybean 10% Autos and Parts 15% Oil and Fuel 13% Iron Ore 11% Metalurgical 11%
Graduate Degrees (Masters and Ph.D.), Brazil, 1987-2009 40,000 35,000 30,000 25,000 20,000 15,000 10,000 5,000 0 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Masters Ph.D.
2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2006 Masters Programs Ph.D. Programs
USA South Korea Japan Germany France Russia Spain Brazil Argentina 3.4 7.1 4.8 6.6 13.3 15.2 25.6 14.8 24.3 12.4 32.7 11.8 15.2 33.3 18.4 32.4 26.3 53.2 51.2 49 41.7 44.6 60.9 68.3 65.9 79.2 76.6 0 20 40 60 80 100 Enterprise Government University
Computer Science Psychology and Psychiatry Social 2% 2% Sciences 3% Engeneering 3% Materials Science 4% Geology 4% Economics and Business Education 1% 1% Agrarian Sciences 10% Law 0% Animal and Plant Sciences 8% Multidisciplinary 4% Medicine 4% Molecular Biology and Genomics 4% Neuro and Behavioral Sciences Chemistry 4% 4% Mathematics Ecology and 4% Environmental Sciences 5% Physics 5% Microbiology 6% Farmacology 6% Biology and Biochemistry 6% Immunology 5% Space Science 5%
3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
South Korea (2007) Finland (2008) Japan (2007) 3.47 3.46 3.44 USA (2007) 2.68 Germany (2007) 2.54 France (2007) 2.08 Canada (2008) 1.82 China (2007) 1.49 Spain (2007) 1.27 Brazil (2009) Italy (2006) Russian Federation (2007) 1.13 1.13 1.12 South Africa (2005) 0.92 Chile (2004) India (2005) Argentina (2007) Mexico (2005) 0.68 0.61 0.51 0.46 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4
1.2 1 1.02 1.04 0.98 0.96 0.97 1 1.07 1.09 1.13 0.9 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.57 0.55 0.53 0.52 0.47 0.47 0.46 0.44 0.57 0.48 0.48 0.49 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.42 0.59 0.6 0.53 0.2 0 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Total Government Private Sector
Axis I: The national STI system; Axis II: Innovation in society and companies; Axis III: Research, development and innovation in strategic areas; Axis IV: STI for social development.
Axis I: The national STI system: Diplomas cannot have primacy over competence; Few masters and Ph.D.s are engaged by companies in R&D. Collaboration among government levels and with social segments demands clarity about each agent's role. Legislation that made relationships less rigid in STI could advance; Sector Funds need new revenue sources; Reduce costs in the innovation process; Fully utilize the government's purchasing power.
Axis II: innovation in society and companies: Innovation is key to a competitive, prosperous and sustainable economy; STI integrated to companies' industrial policies increases capacity for competition; The risk of innovation should not be mistaken by bad use of resources.
Axis III: research, development and innovation in strategic areas: Space, Defense and Public Safety, traditional areas with renewed challenges; Territorial issues; Traditional strategic areas (space, defense and public safety); Competitive advantages in agribusiness and the idea of an emerging pattern for sustainable agriculture; Health; Preservation of an exceptionally clean energy matrix and, in particular, the promising competence associated to bioenergies.
Axis IV : social development: Construction of a scientific culture: through a more intense and qualified presence in the media; STI and education: widening high school access and reducing dropout rates and failure in basic education; Private and public actors: the roles of after-college learning, municipalities, social movements and entrepreneurial initiatives; Social Technologies and technologic extension; Demands from the neediest sectors: food, energy, housing, health, the environment; Democratization and citizenship; the right to the city and improvement of conditions in rural areas.
The outlook is good for the next decade. But to reach those goals, Brazil must engage in a more intense process of creation of a new generation of public policies and social institutions, which have already appeared in a number of policies and institutions for the STI sector since 1999, but need to expand and become more articulate with development policies.
Brazilian National Innovation Agency Who knows...?
Obrigado! Thank you! demetriotoledo@usp.br demetriotoledo@yahoo.com