IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ipe/ipetds/0117.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Labor Productivity in Brazil during the 1990s

Author

Listed:
  • Regis Bonelli

Abstract

The Brazilian economy was characterized in the 1990s by marked changes from previous decades, many of which induced by economic policy: trade and financial liberalization, privatization, other State reform measures and the beginnings of economic stabilization with the implementation of the Real Plan in the 1990s. Although Gross Domestic Product (GDP) growth rates for the decade as a whole have been below long-term averages, several indicators of macroeconomic and microeconomic performance turned for the better, especially between 1992 and 1997-1998. But few were so well succeeded as productivity change, both in the aggregate and at the sector level. This paper explores the general issue of labor productivity growth in Brazil in the 1990s following a series of steps: first, adopting a long term view, by examining to what extent overall labor productivity in the 1990s progressed at rates different from those attained in all decades since the 1940s; second, by investigating productivity growth in the manufacturing industry in the long term as well; third, by concentrating the analysis on the 1990s to cover all sectors in the economy, not just the manufacturing industries; fourth, by exploring the issue of who benefited from productivity growth in the past decade; fifth, by evaluating the role of trade liberalization and rising import penetration and its association with productivity increases. In interpreting the data assembled for the research I find that some theoretical ideas and hypothesis are not fully confirmed by the empirical results. The many qualifications and conclusions allow us to reach a better understanding of the causes and effects of productivity change in Brazil during the 1990s. A década de 1990 foi um período caracterizado por mudanças fundamentais na economia brasileira, muitas das quais induzidas pela política econômica governamental. À liberalização comercial e financeira seguiram-se medidas visando à reforma do Estado, como a privatização, e a bem-sucedida tentativa de estabilização econômica com o Plano Real. Essas mudanças tiveram importantes implicações em relação a diversos aspectos do desempenho macroeconômico. Mas poucos desses aspectos foram tão bem-sucedidos quanto o que se refere ao aumento da produtividade. Este estudo analisa esse tema. Entre seus resultados destacam-se: a) na década de 1990 rompeu-se a trajetória de taxas decrescentes de aumento da produtividade; o ganho de produtividade havia chegado, inclusive, a ser negativo na década de 1980; b) o crescimento da produtividade agregada representou uma elevada parcela do crescimento do PIB real, invertendo tendência anterior; c) o sacrifício em termos de emprego foi aparentemente menor do que se supunha até a recente divulgação de resultados preliminares do Censo Demográfico de 2000; d) quanto à incidência setorial dos ganhos de produtividade, a indústria foi o destaque — mas taxas muito elevadas de crescimento da produtividade caracterizaram também os setores de comunicações e serviços industriais de utilidade pública; e) nesses últimos casos, como também em setores industriais como a siderurgia e a petroquímica, o desempenho esteve fortemente associado à privatização; f) os retardatários foram os setores de serviços, transportes e comércio, também caracterizados por elevadas proporções do emprego total; g) isso coloca um problema para a melhoria da produtividade agregada no futuro, caso não se consiga elevar a produtividade desses setores de elevado volume de emprego e baixa produtividade; h) o estudo explorou a questão de quem se beneficiou dos ganhos de produtividade; não foi possível obter respostas abrangentes, mas foram qualificadas diversas possibilidades; e i) finalmente, examinou-se a relação entre liberalização comercial e aumento da produtividade. Como no item anterior, não há uma resposta única para a associação esperada: diversos padrões foram identificados a partir da base de dados construída para a pesquisa.

Suggested Citation

  • Regis Bonelli, 2015. "Labor Productivity in Brazil during the 1990s," Discussion Papers 0117, Instituto de Pesquisa Econômica Aplicada - IPEA.
    • Handle: RePEc:ipe:ipetds:0117
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.ipea.gov.br/portal/images/stories/PDFs/TDs/ingles/dp_117.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stephen D. Oliner & Daniel E. Sichel, 2000. "The Resurgence of Growth in the Late 1990s: Is Information Technology the Story?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 14(4), pages 3-22, Fall.
    2. Robert J. Gordon, 2000. "Does the "New Economy" Measure Up to the Great Inventions of the Past?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 14(4), pages 49-74, Fall.
    3. Moreira, Mauricio Mesquita & Correa, Paulo Guilherme, 1998. "A first look at the impacts of trade liberalization on Brazilian manufacturing industry," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 26(10), pages 1859-1874, October.
    4. Kevin J. Stiroh & Dale W. Jorgenson, 2000. "U.S. Economic Growth at the Industry Level," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(2), pages 161-167, May.
    5. Dale W. Jorgenson & Kevin J. Stiroh, 2000. "Raising the Speed Limit: U.S. Economic Growth in the Information Age," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 31(1), pages 125-236.
    6. Susanto Basu & John Fernald, 2001. "Why Is Productivity Procyclical? Why Do We Care?," NBER Chapters, in: New Developments in Productivity Analysis, pages 225-302, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Basu, Susanto & Fernald, John G. & Shapiro, Matthew D., 2001. "Productivity growth in the 1990s: technology, utilization, or adjustment?," Carnegie-Rochester Conference Series on Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 55(1), pages 117-165, December.
    2. Oulton, Nicholas, 2012. "Long term implications of the ICT revolution: Applying the lessons of growth theory and growth accounting," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 29(5), pages 1722-1736.
    3. Jonathan Temple, 2002. "The Assessment: The New Economy," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 18(3), pages 241-264.
    4. Kiley, Michael T., 2001. "Computers and growth with frictions: aggregate and disaggregate evidence," Carnegie-Rochester Conference Series on Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 55(1), pages 171-215, December.
    5. J. Bradford DeLong, 2002. "Do We Have a "New" Macroeconomy?," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 2, pages 163-184, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Francesco Venturini, 2009. "The long-run impact of ICT," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 37(3), pages 497-515, December.
    7. Tiff Macklemr & James Yetman, 2001. "Productivity growth and prices in Canada: what can we learn from the US experience?," BIS Papers chapters, in: Bank for International Settlements (ed.), Empirical studies of structural changes and inflation, volume 3, pages 29-48, Bank for International Settlements.
    8. Henry van der Wiel, 2001. "Does ICT boost Dutch productivity growth?," CPB Document 16.rdf, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    9. Robert C. Feenstra & Christopher R. Knittel, 2009. "Reassessing the US Quality Adjustment to Computer Prices: The Role of Durability and Changing Software," NBER Chapters, in: Price Index Concepts and Measurement, pages 129-160, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Harald Edquist & Magnus Henrekson, 2006. "Technological Breakthroughs and Productivity Growth," Research in Economic History, in: Research in Economic History, pages 1-53, Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
    11. Oliner, Stephen D. & Sichel, Daniel E. & Stiroh, Kevin J., 2008. "Explaining a productive decade," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 633-673.
    12. Dean Parham, 2002. "Productivity Gains: Importance of ICTs," Agenda - A Journal of Policy Analysis and Reform, Australian National University, College of Business and Economics, School of Economics, vol. 9(3), pages 195-210.
    13. Hung, Juann & Salomon, Matt & Sowerby, Stacia, 2004. "International trade and US productivity," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 1-25, April.
    14. John G. Fernald, 2015. "Productivity and Potential Output before, during, and after the Great Recession," NBER Macroeconomics Annual, University of Chicago Press, vol. 29(1), pages 1-51.
    15. Lach, Saul & Trajtenberg, Manuel & Shiff, Gil, 2008. "Together but Apart: ICT and Productivity Growth in Israel," CEPR Discussion Papers 6732, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    16. Cigan, Heidi, 2002. "The internet's contribution to progress and growth in Germany: The economic impact of the internet and the price structure of access," HWWA Reports 216, Hamburg Institute of International Economics (HWWA).
    17. Sebastian de RAMON, 2010. "ICT in a Model of Technology Embedded in Investment," EcoMod2004 330600041, EcoMod.
    18. Erich Gundlach, 2005. "Solow vs. Solow: Notes on Identification and Interpretation in the Empirics of Growth and Development," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 141(3), pages 541-556, October.
    19. Raquel Ortega‐Argilés & Mariacristina Piva & Marco Vivarelli, 2014. "The transatlantic productivity gap: Is R&D the main culprit?," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 47(4), pages 1342-1371, November.
    20. Francesco Daveri, 2002. "The New Economy in Europe, 1992--2001," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 18(3), pages 345-362.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ipe:ipetds:0117. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Fabio Schiavinatto (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ipeaabr.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.