Search

Begin New Search Topic Political Economy Political Geography Brazil

11. Do Structural Reforms always Succeed? Lessons from Brazil

Author:
Jorge Saba Arbache
Publication Date:
09-2004
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
United Nations University
Abstract:
In the last twenty years, Brazil has undergone several attempts of improving sustainable growth through stabilization programmes, and more recently, structural reforms in line with the Washington Consensus Agenda. The results, however, have been disappointing, as the per capita output growth has remained below its historic trend, and poverty and inequality remain at high levels. This paper investigates why marketoriented reforms such as trade and capital account liberalization, privatization, deregulation and stabilization failed to boost growth in Brazil. We conclude that structural reforms may contribute to growth if accompanied by microeconomic policies tailor-made to address the country's needs, and by appropriate macroeconomic, institutional and political environments.
Topic:
Development, Human Welfare, and Political Economy
Political Geography:
Washington, Brazil, and Latin America

12. Brazil: The End of a Honeymoon

Author:
Mark Falcoff
Publication Date:
07-2004
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research
Abstract:
When Luiz Inácio "Lula" da Silva was elected president of Brazil in October 2002, popular expectations nearly across the political spectrum were so enormous that he was bound to disappoint someone. Indeed, what is remarkable about the present situation in Brazil is just how popular Lula remains (60 percent approval rating) in spite of a conservative fiscal policy, a modest uptick in the unemployment figures, a willingness to expend valuable political capital on pension and tax reforms, a financial scandal involving his chief of staff, and an embarrassing threat to expel a New York Times journalist.
Topic:
International Relations, International Trade and Finance, and Political Economy
Political Geography:
New York, Brazil, South America, and Central America

13. Natural Resources, Human Capital, and Growth

Author:
Nancy Birdsall, Thomas Pinckney, and Richard Sabot
Publication Date:
02-2000
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Abstract:
In this paper, we present evidence that among developing countries, those that are resource-abundant invest less in education. We then discuss the economic processes behind this evidence. We describe a virtuous circle in which rising private returns to human capital and other assets lead to increased work effort and higher rates of private investment immediately, including among the poor, and generate higher productivity and lower inequality in the future. With resource abundance, however, governments are tempted to move away from the policies that generate this virtuous circle. Dutch Disease and related effects tend to lower the rate of return to the agricultural and human capital investments available to the poor. Resource rents accumulate in the hands of the government, and/or a small number of businessmen, further reducing incentives to invest. Staple-trap effects lead to the subsidization of capital, thereby taxing labor. The labor market in the resulting capital-intensive economy offers little benefit for moderate levels of education. The government may try to assuage the poor by directing some proportion of resource rents to populist programs that create new fiscal burdens but that do not enhance productivity. In short, resource abundance tends to break the virtuous circle linking education, growth and inequality in several places: the choice of development strategy, the level of inequality, the lack of incentives for investment in education, and the creation of a welfare state. We illustrate this breakdown by contrasting the cases of Korea and Brazil, and, since resource abundance need not be destiny, we conclude with policy lessons for resource-abundant developing economies.
Topic:
Economics, Education, Emerging Markets, Government, Political Economy, and Third World
Political Geography:
Brazil and Korea

14. Hazards and Precautions: Tales of International Finance

Author:
Gary Clyde Hufbauer and Erika Wada
Publication Date:
09-1999
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Peterson Institute for International Economics
Abstract:
In the wake of financial crises in Mexico (1994-95), Asia (1997-98), Russia (1998) and Brazil (1998-99), respected observers have questioned the benefits of wide-open international capital markets (Bhagwati, 1998; Krugman, 1998; Rodrik, 1998; Eichengreen, 1999). Our purpose is to identify true hazards and suggest appropriate precautions.
Topic:
Economics, International Trade and Finance, and Political Economy
Political Geography:
Russia, Asia, Brazil, and Mexico

15. U.S. Trade Negotiations: Lessons Learned, Lessons Applied

Author:
Mickey Kantor
Publication Date:
11-1997
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Council on Foreign Relations
Abstract:
The challenges of the era of interdependence will constitute the greatest foreign policy test of the 21st century. The war over globalization and interdependence is at an end. Only the battles are yet to be fought. Those who cower behind walls of fear and fail to accept responsibility do so at their own peril, and will not turn containment into engagement, or mutual assured destruction into mutual assured prosperity. The approach of the new millennium finds us at the intersection of three epochal events: in politics, the end of the Cold War; in economics, the emergence of a global economy; and in technology, the rise of the Information Age. The intersection of economics, strategic issues, and political concerns is creating the glue which will bind together an updated U.S. foreign policy. Vast opportunities lie before us, and more than a few pitfalls. We face fewer serious military threats but an increasing number of competitors. The rise of competition, the need to create new opportunities, and the confluence of major economic and political changes create a need to intensely focus on U.S. priorities and goals. Despite this urgency, we have yet to fully articulate a foreign policy that matches the era in which we now live, especially the appropriate role of international economics. We need to direct our focus toward the lessons we have learned over the past five years. Seekers of universal truths or simple catch phrases should prepare in advance for disappointment. U.S. leadership in both the public and private sectors must accept the challenges represented by these enormous changes. Our willingness to take responsibility, clearly define our goals, and recognize our limitations but pursue U.S. leadership at every opportunity will dictate the success or failure of promoting a stronger United States and a less dangerous world. The goals and objectives are clear: U.S. leadership must pursue peace, stability, economic progress, basic human rights, and sustainable development. In order to address these goals we need to create foreign-policy tools and institutions that are pragmatic, practical, and resilient reflecting the speed with which events, opportunities, and challenges now confront us as a nation. There is no question that global economics has fundamentally changed the nature of foreign policy. Today, economics and foreign policy are no longer separable, and economic security and national security have become synonymous. We live in an interdependent, globalized world. No longer are we self-contained, nor is it in our interest to be so. We can no longer take for granted our global economic dominance and turn our back on foreign markets. It is self-defeating in the short run and impossible in the long run to ignore the problems which occur across the border or across the world, and we cannot overlook our responsibility as the world's remaining superpower. Driven by technological change, freed of Cold War conflicts and connected by economic and strategic interests, the era of interdependence demands negotiation, engagement, and leadership. Interdependence dictates that our foreign policy and economic future are increasingly connected to international trade. Interdependence dictates that terrorism, weapons proliferation, environmental concerns, the drug trade, and economic opportunity are now cross-border issues. These issues profoundly affect the everyday lives of people around the globe. Cross-border issues directly influence policies, laws, and regulations of the countries in question, raising issues such as the rule of and respect for law, regulation and deregulation, privatization, and other concerns heretofore thought to be strictly internal. This new era requires a redefinition of global leadership. Being the only remaining superpower does not simply mean that we are the strongest military power, nor does it mean only that we are the most economically competitive nation on earth. Both of those statements are true, of course. But holding the position of the world's only remaining superpower in the era of interdependence means that we have the opportunity to take advantage of the vast economic potential which is being created around the globe to the benefit of all Americans, and we have a corresponding obligation to rally other nations to pursue common long-term interests, such as strategic and political stability, economic progress, and sustainable development. There are other examples which support the notion of new multidimensional international relations. Brazil has dramatically increased its international standing and influence using its potential economic strategic position. During the Cold War and prior to the dramatic growth of economic power and industrialization, Brazil's strategic position would have been defined and dictated by its ability or inability to have an influence over strategic and political issues especially those concerning East-West relations. But today, and in the foreseeable future, not only do countries increase their influence based on economic potential and achievement, but economic considerations and relationships tend to bring entities together which in other circumstances could not or would not cooperate. The recent Middle East Economic Conferences and the participation of China, Taiwan, and Hong Kong in the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) are obvious examples.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Cold War, Diplomacy, and Political Economy
Political Geography:
United States, China, America, Taiwan, Asia, Brazil, and Democratic Republic of the Congo