The developmental state in Brazil: comparative and historical perspectives

Abstract

RESUmO: O registro de estados desenvolvimentistas bem-sucedidos na Ásia Oriental e os sucessos parciais de estados desenvolvimentistas na América Latina sugerem várias pré-condições comuns para a intervenção estatal eficaz, incluindo uma burocracia weberiana, acompanhamento da execução, reciprocidade (subsídios em troca de desempenho), e relações de colaboração entre o governo e empresários. Embora o Brasil não tenha conseguido desenvolver uma manufatureira de alta tecnologia e exportações que alimentaram o crescimento sustentado da Ásia Oriental, seu estado desenvolvimentista teve um número de êxitos importantes, e muitas vezes negligenciados, especialmente em aço, automóveis, mineração, etanol e fabricação de aeronaves. Onde o Estado desenvolvimentista do Brasil teve menos sucesso foi na promoção de setores como a tecnologia da informação e a energia nuclear, bem como a igualdade social e regional. Além disso, algumas iniciativas isoladas de governos estaduais também foram capazes de promover determinados segmentos locais da indústria e da agricultura. Comparações com a Ásia Oriental reaçam o papel central das empresas estatais no Brasil que, com efeito internalizaram o monitoramento e a reciprocidade, e evitaram a colaboração entre empresas e governo (que foi em geral mais rara no Brasil). PALVARS-CHAVE: Estado desenvolvimentista; política industrial; empresas estatais; Brasil.ABSTRACT: The record of successful developmental states in East Asia and the partial successes of developmental states in Latin America suggest several common preconditions for effective state intervention including a weberian bureaucracy, monitoring of implementation, reciprocity (subsidies in exchange for performance), and collaborative relations between government and business. Although Brazil failed to develop the high technology manufacturing industry and exports that have fueled sustained growth in East Asia, its developmental state had a number of important, and often neglected, successes, especially in steel, automobiles, mining, ethanol, and aircraft manufacturing. where Brazil's developmental state was less successful was in promoting sectors like information technology and nuclear energy, as well as overall social and regional equality. In addition, some isolated initiatives by state governments were also effective in promoting particular local segments * mIT -massachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Political Science, e-mail: brs@mit.edu.Submetido: 14/Janeiro/2014; Aprovado: 12/março/2014. Política, vol 35, nº 1 (138), pp 114-132 janeiro-março/2015 of industry and agriculture. Comparisons with East Asia, highlight the central role of state enterprises in Brazil that in effect internalized monitoring and reciprocity and bypassed collaboration between business and government (that was overall rarer in Brazil). Revista de Economia

Co-evolution of Industry Strategies and Government Policies: The Case of the Brazilian Automotive Industry

“…In some developmental states in East Asia and Latin America, the state played an active role in fostering the development of chosen industries. The development of these industries, such as the automotive in Brazil, was marked by certain features: reciprocity (subsidies in exchange for improved performance) and collaborative relations between government and business (Schneider, 2015). As co-evolution theory suggest, these relationships create path dependence, setting the basis for the type of interdependence governments and industry develop.…”

“…This interdependence, which is well illustrated by the Brazilian automotive industry (Schapiro, 2017), may have effects on how the rules of the game are defined and change over time. Institution-building is thus path dependent, reflecting reciprocity and collaborative relations between business and government (Schneider, 2015) or the lock-in suggested by North (1990). It also reflects more circumstantial interdependences, which vary according to economic and political contexts.…”

“…Industrialization in emerging markets in Asia and Latin America followed a model of development in which relationships between the state and private firms were central. Local governments defined policies that shaped their countries' relationships to the global economy and affected the domestic allocation of resources in industries and major social groups (Gereffi, 1990;Schneider, 2015). In order to leverage industrialization, emerging economy governments used several strategies to attract foreign capital in order to subsidize the development of more technologically sophisticated industries.…”

“…Ethanol was viewed as a way to reduce vulnerability and, thus, in 1975 the National Ethanol Program (Programa Nacional do Álcool [Próalcool]) was created. Heavily subsidized by the government and never particularly efficient or cost effective (Schneider, 2015), the program involved ministries, public research institutes, and institutions, such as ANFAVEA; the Cane, Sugar, and Ethanol Cooperative of São Paulo (Cooperativa de Cana, Acúcar e Álcool de São Paulo [Copersucar]); domestic sugar producers; and MNEs (mainly Volkswagen and Fiat). As a result of these concerted efforts, in 1979 less than 1% of new registered vehicles were fueled by ethanol, but in 1985 this proportion amounted to almost 85% (ANFAVEA, 2016).…”

“…Third, in some emerging economies such as Brazil, the state played a critical role in fostering the development of several industrial sectors, with business and governments maintaining close relationships. This closeness translates into large government subsidies and protection (Schneider, 2015). Fourth, the interaction between industry and successive governments of developmental states over time brings to the fore an issue that contributes to our understanding of the process of institution-building -that is, the interdependence between industry and a country's economy -and, more precisely, between industry outcomes and a country's economic performance.…”