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.

The control of hypertension in men and women: a comparative analysis

Abstract OBJECTIVE To compare men and women who have hypertension with reference to the following: high blood pressure, biosocial variables, habits and life styles, mental disorders, and social support networks. METHOD 290 hypertensive patients (women, 62.1%) were evaluated. The assessments involved the following: measuring blood pressure with an automatic measuring device, evaluating social status through the Social Support Scale, and the use of a Self-Report Questionnaire (SRQ-20) to identify common mental disorders. A value of p<0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS Women were found to be different to men (p<0.05) in the following areas having: better control of their blood pressure (64.4% vs 52.7%), less salary incomes, less diabetes, higher total cholesterol, higher body mass index and wider abdominal circumferences. They also had lower systolic blood pressure, lower levels of alcohol consumption and a greater prevalence for mental disorders. The social support assessment revealed that hypertensive women received less help with preparing meals but had more company from people which allowed them to engage in enjoyable activities. CONCLUSION Women had more control over their blood pressure than men, despite the presence of negative biopsychosocial factors that may have influenced their adherence to the treatments.

Fiscal policy and private investment: latin america in a comparative perspective

The main objective of the paper is to assess the impact of fiscal variables on private investment comparing some Latin-American economies to other advanced ones. For such purposes, the authors carry out an econometric analysis for the period 1990-2008. They make use of two dynamic panel models in which they group countries with similar characteristics and development levels. In one of them, they include Mexico, Brazil, Chile, Colombia and Uruguay; whereas in the second one the countries accounted for are the U.S., Canada, Spain, Korea, Ireland and Japan. They specify in both models an investment function using as arguments a wide range of variables, including those related with fiscal policy. From their results the authors infer that governments can, with higher spending, boost up the economy even when they finance spending with higher taxes. In Latin America, where income concentration is enormous, a proposal to boost up the economy through higher government expenditure financed with a progressive income tax, is even more justified.