Infrastructure privatization in a neoclassical economy : macroeconomic impact and welfare computation

In this paper a competitive general equilibrium model is used to investigate the welfare and long run allocation impacts of privatization. There are two types of capital in this model economy, one private and the other initially public ("infrastructure"), and a positive externality due to the latter is assumed. A benevolent government can improve upon decentralized allocation internalizing the externality, but it introduces distortions in the economy through the finance of its investments. It is shown that even making the best case for public action - maximization of individuals' welfare, no• operation inefficiency and free supply to society of infrastructure services - privatization is welfare improving for a large set of economies. Hence, arguments against privatization based solely on under-investment are incorrect, as this maybe the optimal action when the financing of public investment are considered. When operation inefficiency is introduced in the public sector, gains from privatization are much higher and positive for most reasonable combinations of parameters .

Infrastructure privatization in a neoclassical economy: macroeconomic impact and welfare computation

In this paper a competi tive general equilibrium model is used to investigate the welfare and long run allocation impacts of privatization. There are two types of capital in this model economy, one private and the other initially public ("infrastructure"), and a positive extemality due to the latter is assumed. A benevolent governrnent can improve upon decentralized allocation intemalizing the extemality, but it introduces distortions in the economy through the finance of its investments. It is shown that even making the best case for public action - maximization of individuais' welfare, no operation inefficiency and free supply to society of infrastructure services - privatization is welfare improving for a large set of economies. Hence, arguments against privatization based solely on under-investment are incorrect, as this maybe the optimal action when the financing of public investment are considered. When operation inefficiency is introduced in the public sector, gains from privatization are much higher and positive for most reasonable combinations of parameters.

Toward a venture capital-backed entrepreneurship model in Brazil

It is well documented venture capital‟s positive impact on creation and development of highly successful innovative companies worldwide. Venture capital not only provides funding to startups and SMEs (small and medium enterprises) that usually have financing gap, especially in emerging markets, but also brings a whole package of valuable resources that reduces companies‟ mortality rates. Using quantitative data obtained from an empirical survey as background, this paper discusses the role of venture capital in the success of innovative startups and SMEs, and it examines if, and to what extent, venture capitalists are supporting the entrepreneurial activity in Brazil. I focused on the portfolio companies analyzes and confirmed the hypothesis that the venture capital industry has been supporting entrepreneurship in Brazil. Second, I identified an important evidence of a venture capital‟s positive impact on economic activity, especially the capital market. Third, it became clear that venture capital-back entrepreneurship is highly concentrated in the Southeast region. And fourth, I identified that private equity expansion is also playing a key role on that dynamics. As consequence, I conclude that the venture capital (and private equity) industry has been very important to build an enormously dynamic and strong local entrepreneurial economy. Its committed capital grew 50% per year between 2005 and 2008 to achieve US$27 billion, which invested US$ 11 billion, which employs 1,400 professionals (75% with post-graduate degrees) and maintains 482 portfolio companies, mostly SMEs. In addition, venture capital-backed companies represented one third of the IPOs that occurred in Brazil between 2004 and 2008 (approximately US$15 billion).

As distintas percepções sobre o empreendedorismo social

This dissertation is a literature review with exploratory and descriptive purposes, which aims to compile the different perceptions of the term Social Entrepreneurship, but not propon-being of an epistemological analysis on the topic. The main objectives of this research were: 1) to identify the convergences and divergences in the various perceptions of the Social Entrepre-neurship, from the perspectives: American, European and Brazilian; 2) identify whether Social Entrepreneurship can be considered as a new theoretical trend, or can be understood as a sub-category of an existing theory; 3) identify whether Social Entrepreneurship can be considered as practice of Social Management; 4) identify whether the "Social Business", proposed by Yunus (2010), can be considered as a completely new type of organization, as the author says. For this research were studied literary works available in the physical environment and elec-tronic database. The main concepts studied in this research were: Entrepreneurship; Social Management; Third Sector; Business Management and Social Entrepreneurship. The conclu-sions reached by this study were: 1-a) the main theoretical convergence is the Social Entrepre-neur ability to apply methods and process typically used in for-profit companies, in business that aimed social value creation; 1-b) the main difference is the different perceptions that the United States, Europe and Brazil have about what is Social Entrepreneurship. In the American perspective, these are private sector organizations operating according to market logic and that somehow generates social value. In the European perspective, closer to the social economy, emphasizes the activities of civil society organizations with public functions. In Brazil empha-sizes market initiatives aimed at reducing poverty and transform the social conditions of mar-ginalized or excluded individuals; 2) Social Entrepreneurship is an activity that incorporates much all the practices, methods and processes of commercial entrepreneurship and, as such, should not be considered as a new theoretical trend, but a subcategory of Entrepreneurship theory. 3) Social Entrepreneurship cannot be considered as a practice of Social Management, being much closer to the commercial entrepreneurship practices; 4) the "Social Business" pro-posed by Yunus (2010), closely resembled in its modus operandi with the Social Enterprises in Western Europe, thus, not supporting the author's claim.

International civil society actors in Genetically Modificied Organisms as a field of struggle: a neo-gramscian study in Brazil and the United Kingdom

Since the international financial and food crisis that started in 2008, strong emphasis has been made on the importance of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) (or “transgenics”) under the claim that they could contribute to increase food productivity at a global level, as the world population is predicted to reach 9.1 billion in the year 2050 and food demand is predicted to increase by as much as 50% by 2030. GMOs are now at the forefront of the debates and struggles of different actors. Within civil society actors, it is possible to observe multiple, and sometime, conflicting roles. The role of international social movements and international NGOs in the GMO field of struggle is increasingly relevant. However, while many of these international civil society actors oppose this type of technological developments (alleging, for instance, environmental, health and even social harms), others have been reportedly cooperating with multinational corporations, retailers, and the biotechnology industry to promote GMOs. In this thesis research, I focus on analysing the role of “international civil society” in the GMO field of struggle by asking: “what are the organizing strategies of international civil society actors, such as NGOs and social movements, in GMO governance as a field of struggle?” To do so, I adopt a neo-Gramscian discourse approach based on the studies of Laclau and Mouffe. This theoretical approach affirms that in a particular hegemonic regime there are contingent alliances and forces that overpass the spheres of the state and the economy, while civil society actors can be seen as a “glue” to the way hegemony functions. Civil society is then the site where hegemony is consented, reproduced, sustained, channelled, but also where counter-hegemonic and emancipatory forces can emerge. Considering the importance of civil society actors in the construction of hegemony, I also discuss some important theories around them. The research combines, on the one hand, 36 in-depth interviews with a range of key civil society actors and scientists representing the GMO field of struggle in Brazil (19) and the UK (17), and, on the other hand, direct observations of two events: Rio+20 in Rio de Janeiro in 2012, and the first March Against Monsanto in London in 2013. A brief overview of the GMO field of struggle, from its beginning and especially focusing in the 1990s when the process of hegemonic formation became clearer, serves as the basis to map who are the main actors in this field, how resource mobilization works, how political opportunities (“historical contingencies”) are discovered and exploited, which are the main discourses (“science” and “sustainability” - articulated by “biodiversity preservation”, “food security” and “ecological agriculture”) articulated among the actors to construct a collective identity in order to attract new potential allies around “GMOs” (“nodal point”), and which are the institutions and international regulations within these processes that enable hegemony to emerge in meaningful and durable hegemonic links. This mapping indicates that that the main strategies applied by the international civil society actors are influenced by two central historical contingencies in the GMO field of struggle: 1) First Multi-stakeholder Historical Contingency; and 2) “Supposed” Hegemony Stability. These two types of historical contingency in the GMO field of struggle encompass deeper hegemonic articulations and, because of that, they induce international civil society actors to rethink the way they articulate and position themselves within the field. Therefore, depending on one of those moments, they will apply one specific strategy of discourse articulation, such as: introducing a new discourse in hegemony articulation to capture the attention of the public and of institutions; endorsing new plural demands; increasing collective visibility; facilitating material articulations; sharing a common enemy identity; or spreading new ideological elements among the actors in the field of struggle.