Experiencia Brasileña en el Desarollo de Sistemas Regionales de Innovación

1. Experiencia Brasileña en el Desarollo de Sistemas Regionales de Innovación José E Cassiolato IE/UFRJ RedeSist (Research Network on Local Production and Innovation Systems) International Seminar on Policies of Science, Technology and Innovation Bogotá, abril/2008

2. The National Innovation System of Brazil is a complex animal ... • Heterogeneity and diversity but not only • Apart from some few cases (oil, airplanes) it does not make any sense talk about sectoral innovation systems • But it is totally correct to have a territorial dimension of innovation systems

3. Brazil X Europe (with 6 biomes !!!) Portugal Spain France UNited Kingdom Belgium Germany Poland Czech Republic Austria Switzerland Italy Population=185 million

4. Heritage of Diversity

5. THE HERITAGE OF INEQUALITY % of population of 25 years or more with less than 4 years of study – 2000

6. 1.204,1 - 3.849,4 3.849,4 - 6.358,6 6.358,6 - 9.166,6 9.166,6 - 13.017,0 13.017,0 - 18.533,9 18.533,9 - 27.576,6 27.576,6 - 43.392,5 43.392,5 - 67.084,9 67.084,9 - 10.6502,7 10.6502,7 - 28.9838,3 Source: IBGE- PIB Municipal PER CAPITA GDP

7. Understanding the Brazilian National Innovation System through the understanding of Local and Regional Innovation Systems • The setting up of RedeSist • 26 universities in 22 states • Analysis of approximately 90 local innovation systems from aircraft (Embraer) to subsistance agriculture to cultural activities (Carnival) • Attempt to understand interactive processes of learning and capacity building (the need for apropriate indicators) • Mingling research with policy

8. Example 0f Heterogeneity - Wearing apparel local innovation systemsbig differences in innovation and cooperation rates

9. Structure of Presentation • What System (Regional) of Inovation? • Brazil – Regional & Social Development • The Decentralization of S&T (and I) policies • The different regional innovation systems in Brazil • Conclusions

10. What System (Regional) of Inovation? Two different versions of “(National, Regional, Local, etc.) Sistems of Inovation” Fonte: Cassiolato e Lastres (2008)

11. Often policy makers and scholars have applied a narrow understanding of the concept (of Innovation System) and this has given rise to so-called ‘innovation paradoxes’ which leave significant elements of innovation-based economic performance unexplained. Such a bias is reflected in studies of innovation that focus on science-based innovation and on the formal technological infrastructure and in policies aiming almost exclusively at stimulating R&D efforts in high-technology sectors. Without a broad definition of the national innovation system encompassing individual, organizational and inter-organizational learning, it is impossible to establish the link from innovation to economic growth. (Lundvall, 2007, p. 1-2) In Lundvall, B.-Å. (ed.) (2007), National Innovation Systems: Towards a Theory of Innovation and Interactive Learning, London, Pinter Publishers (2nd edition of the 1992 book).

12. What System (Regional) of Inovation? • In underdeveloped countries there is a need to understand the (national, regional, local) innovation system in a BROAD perspective • The Social dimension of innovation • Culture and History • That are manifested in different capabilities and knowledge forms that are localized • The importance of traditional knowledge (see China and India) • A BROAD perspective on Innovation • (Innovation is MUCH MORE than R&D) • What is R&D???? • Differences: Social and Regional Heterogeneities

13. Some characteristics of the Brazilian National Inovation System • High variety of productive (and innovative) structures • Heterogeneity of production systems produtivos • Heterogeneity of demand (income distribution, social demand, etc.) • Important regional differences • Important social differences • Traditional indicators not very much significant (The Bogotá manual) • Several implications (particularly in terms of policy)

14. Brazil – Regional & Social DevelopmentHuge Differences … that are gradually changing Share of Regions in GDP 1985 2004 • North 3,8% 5,3% • Northeast 14,1% 14,1% • Southeast 60,2% 55,0% • South 17,1% 18,3% • Center-West 4,8% 7,5% Source: IBGE

15. But that in S&T continues to be large Number of Graduates by region - 1988-2002

16. Brazil – Higher Education by Region - 2001 * Enrolled students ** São Paulo and R de Janeiro cities with 15.5 % and 11.7% Of MScs and 27.0% and 12.3% of PhDs respectively

17. Brazil – Post-grad (MSc & PhD) students by region and scientific areas (– 1999 (%)

18. Brazil – Regional & Social DevelopmentA huge social debt that for the first time is being addressed

19. GINI

20. Brazil – Regional & Social Development BRAZIL DISCOVERS THE BASE OF THE SOCIAL PYRAMID ... With important implications for innovation polícies ANNUAL GROWTH of PER CAPITA INCOME BY CLASS 2001-2005 Source: BARROS ET ALI , IPEA, 2006

21. Growth of Sales in Commerce 2003-2007 (out) POOR AREAS LEAD CONSUMPTION GROWTH ... With important implications for innovation polícies NO e NE FONTE: IBGE, PMC,OUT. 2007

22. Regional and Social differences should be adressed together

23. Two different versions of “(National, Regional, Local, etc.) Sistems of Inovation” Fonte: Cassiolato e Lastres (2008)

24. The Decentralization of STI policies

25. A caveat: the importance of some federal institutions for regional S&T development • The Federal Public University System • Even in poorest States – importance of qualified human resources • EMBRAPA’s regional officies • Spread innovation in all agro areas • (rice and beans and soya beans...) • SEBRAE and the support of SMES • Technology diffusion, technology consulting, management practices, etc

26. Decentralized Innovation Policies in Brazil • The beginning • São Paulo • Fapesp in the early 1960s • The São Paulo State Council of Technology in the early 1970s • Gradual generalization on the 1980s • The role of CNPq • The Forum of S&T Secretaries • Crisis in the late 1980s • The hard resistance in the 1990s • Structural change and the abandonment of industrial and S&T policy at fedral level • States need to act in a “policy emptiness space • The end of SUDENEand SUDAM) • Institutional building and adressing state problems and projects • THe present period • National policies and decentralization are back • Several advances and problems

27. INCREASE OF STATE RESOURCESResources of State Governments in S&T , 2000-2004(current R$)

28. Two (not excluding) models – Emphasis on R&D (narrow vision) or in broader S&T&I activities Northeast Region

29. The State experiences • Different models – different results • Emphasis on R&D X emphasis on innovation

30. Some general features of State policies • Selecting strategic areas mostly related to local patterns of specialization; • Support of R&D by private sector; • Emphasis on training human resources • Targetting non-R&D activities – design, trade mark, etc • Development of institutions and local arrangements for innovation and diffusion • Foundation to support research (the Fapesp model) • Reengineering State technological research institutes • Non-governmental organizations for mediation and integration.

31. The example of Ceará • Ceará digital; • E-jovem, Technology agents and Ceará Technology Network; • Technology colleges; • Institute of Research, Desenvolvimento e Inovação do Ceará (IPDI).

32. Regional innovation systems in Brazil: the positive results • Several examples of successful innovations adressing local social problems ... and also productive problems • Using local knowledge (in the Amazon but not only) • And NOT low tech • Cooperative behaviour between local actors (firms and others) and local universities (a positive by-product of the effort in human resources) • Institutional building (including policy capabilities) • Adressing more precisely human capacity building related to the knowledge society • Training, local nteworks, etc. • AND MORE IMPORTANT – INCLUDING OTHER ACTORS BESIDES THOSE OF THE NARROW APPROACH TO IS

33. New Federal Iniciatives with huge Regional impact • MCT • Finep • Decentralization (particularly Grants to Innovation) • Two VERY GOOD general principal • Different match funding by states • States choose local institutions rto implement policies • BNDES • Regional Actions and local production and innovation systems (focus on innovation in SMEs)

34. But problems remain • “(...) the format of public tender and the pre-condition of existing infra-structure for project qualification has resulted in a rsource alocation that acentuates concentration (...)”. Document of the Forum of State S&T Secretaries, 2007

35. CONCLUSIONS • A Country still being occupied (development) : • THE IMPORTANCE OF NATIONAL POLICIES • A country where inequality is reproduced in all scales: • POLICIES IN DIFFERENT SCALES • A country with distinct regional realities: • POLICIES WITH VARIOUS OBJECTIVES AND AGENTS (importance of local policies)