Why Brazil Doesn’t Innovate: A Comparison Among Nations

Abstract

In this paper, we analyze the relevance of innovation concerning the emergence of important changes in the society. In order to verify which are the most relevant factors when it comes to the allocation of countries in an innovation ranking (Global Innovation Index), we accomplished a quantitative study, in which the procedure of multiple linear regression was used. The sample of our study comprised 33 countries and the analysis of the theoretical framework was carried out conducive to the creation of six independent variables. As result, the variables "GDP per capita", "Public expenditures on R&D", "Exports of high-tech goods", "Public expenditures on education", "Number of large companies" and "Number of patents" are in descending order the ones most related to the innovation level reached by some countries. The only variable negatively correlated to innovation is the number of patents registered in a determined country; in other words, one may conclude that patents are not the most relevant indicator linked with the development of innovation. We also emphasize the role played by the government when providing a favorable institutional environment in order to encourage and support innovation.

Innovation performance and its determinants: what does it take to succeed?

“…Bakhtiar et al (2021), in turn, assess the efficiency and effectiveness of the performances of NISs, reinforcing how heterogeneous they are in these dimensions. Esteves and Feldmann (2016) also analyzed the correlation between economic variables and the Global Innovation Index. They found that the government's role in providing and enabling a supportive institutional environment is vital to encouraging and supporting innovation.…”

“…Thus, by providing original and relevant insights into the innovation and management debate, the article's findings complement recent studies that contribute to understanding how countries structure their NIS and innovate. Part of the current literature also uses the GII, focusing on innovation system typology (Cavalcante, 2022), the roles of government (Esteves and Feldmann, 2016) and efficiency and effectiveness (Bakhtiar, Ghazinoory, Aslani, & Mafi, 2021). Concurrently, others employ different data sources and methodological approaches to compare a more restricted group of countries (Choi and Zo, 2019;Kudryavtseva et al, 2016;Yesilay and Halac, 2020).…”

Brazilian Scientific and Technological Production on Carbon Materials: an Exploratory Study (2010–2022)

“…A positive relationship between GDP per capita and public spending on research and innovation with the scientific and technological development of countries has already been observed. Therefore, a higher GDP per capita may indicate a greater willingness to invest in research and innovation (Esteves and Feldmann 2016). In addition, historical factors must be considered since the first Brazilian chemistry laboratories were installed in the Southeast region and much later were disseminated to other regions (Santos 2004).…”

Corporate social responsibility in Brazilian multinationals

“…According to Esteves and Feldmann (2016) It is not uncommon to find references on family-owned company when it comes to Latin America. The influence of family businesses in these countries are very important (Fleury & Fleury, 2014) and most Latin American companies belong to family-owned groups (Fleury & Fleury, 2012).…”

“…Even though Fleury and Fleury (2014) affirm that the import substitution model was exhausted, Esteves and Feldmann (2016) emphasize that this model was not successful because there was no proper policy to ensure the continuity of the scientific and technological progress in the country; entrepreneurs were not given enough time to prepare to the new market and competitive conditions they would have to deal with. As result, there was a deficient integration between national and international markets and domestic companies were limited to develop new processes and products.…”