Liberal versus neo-developmental convention to growth: why has Brazil shown a poor performance since the 1980s?

The main goal of our paper is to provide analytical arguments to explain why Brazil has not been able to restore its long-term capacity for economic growth, especially compared with its economy in the 1950-1979 period (7.3 per cent per year on average) or even with a select number of emerging economies in the 1980-2010 period(6.7 per cent per year on average, against 2.3 per cent per year on average in Brazil in the same period). We build our idea of convention to growth based on the Keynesian concept of convention. For our purposes, this concept could be briefly summarized as the way in which the set of public and private economic decisions related to different objectives, such as how much to produce and invest, how much to charge for products and services, how to finance public and private debt, how to finance research and development, and so on, are indefinitely - or at least until there is no change- carried out by the political, economic and social institutions. This analytical reference can be connected to the Neo-Schumpeterian National Innovation System (NIS) concept, which emphasizes not only institutions associated with science and technology per se, but also the complex interaction among them and other institutions. In this paper we identify two conventions to long-term growth in the last three decades in Brazil: the liberal and the neo-developmental. We show that the poor performance in the Brazilian economy in terms of real GDP growth from the 1980s on can be explained by a weak coordination between short-term macroeconomic policies and long-term industrial and technological policies. This weak coordination, in turn, can be associated with the prevalence of the liberal convention from the 1990s on, which has emphasized price stabilization to the detriment of a neo-developmental strategy whose primary goal is to sustain higher rates of growth and full employment in Brazil.

Revelações da crise: moeda fiduciária e as relações Tesouro/Banco Central

The current crisis shed a new light on issues that, previously, were not perceived as serious or important. It highlighted the close ties between fiat currency and government bonds denominated in it or, in other words, the relationship between Treasury and Central Bank. Two ill-conceived views of the "new consensus" on money that had turned into taboos were put in evidence. The first, derived from the quantitative theory, concerns the rejection of unsterilized monetary expansion; the second, directly related to the neoliberal ideology, prohibits or imposes strict limits on the role of central banks in the financing of public debts.

Vulnerabilidade externa e composição da posição internacional de investimentos: Brasil 2001-2010

The aim of this paper is to indicate that there was a significant change in the composition of the Brazilian International Investment Position in the period 2001-2010: international reserves became higher than the external debt and decreased the share of foreign liabilities denominated in foreign currency, getting smaller that the participation of the external liabilities denominated in domestic currency. These tend to suffer a double devaluation (prices and exchange rates) in times of crisis, thus characterizing the reduction of the external vulnerability in the financial sphere as evidenced in the global crisis hatched in 2008.

The Brazilian deindustrialization: financialization is not guilty

The financialization of the Brazilian economy is often criticized as being responsible of the slowdown of capital accumulation in this country. Indeed, very high interest rates are maintained in order to finance the public debt, and this fosters capitalists to get more Treasury bonds rather than to invest in the productive area. Nevertheless, the evolution of the profit rate in this area also explains the particular relation existing between capitalists, finance and productive investment, as Marx showed it more than a century ago.