"Manifesto" dos reitores - uma simples reacao individual (Paulo R Almeida)

Segue abaixo minha carta ao Jornal da Ciência (SBPC), a propósito do chamado "manifesto dos reitores em favor da edução", na verdade um péssimo panfleto político-partidário, de caráter sectário e divisionista. Esclareço que o Jornal da Ciência, "comprado", ao que parece, pelo poder atual, se eximiu de publicar minha carta, motivo pelo qual eu a divulgo aqui.

Sobre o item:
"Reitores de Ifes divulgam manifesto em favor das ações em educação"
acredito que tanto o título quanto o conteúdo desse manifesto estejam essencialmente equivocados, talvez deliberadamente equivocados.

Não se trata de um manifesto em favor de ações, quaisquer que sejam elas, relativas à educação brasileira, mas de uma tomada de posição claramente partidária em favor de uma das candidaturas à cadeira presidencial.
Dispenso-me de comentar o conteúdo, os termos e os posicionamentos desse "manifesto", diretamente vinculados a uma dessas candidaturas, que revelam, todos eles, a adoção de uma postura maniqueista, divisionista e, no limite, sectária, de autoridades universitárias que deveriam manter-se independentes, embora não alheias, às escolhas político-eleitorais a que toda a comunidade acadêmica e o povo brasileiros são chamados a fazer neste mês de outubro.
Os reitores sabem muito bem que os universitários, em geral, e os professores em particular, possuem discernimento suficiente para fazer suas próprias opções eleitorais, com base num julgamento autônomo das posturas e propostas eleitorais de cada candidato, e não precisam ser induzidos, em nome de suas instituições, a tomar esta ou aquela atitude. Que esses reitores -- e não todos -- o tenham feito é revelador do ambiente de divisionismo político, e de arregimentação partidária, que tende a fraturar instituições que deveriam estar abertas a todas as propostas políticas de modo tolerante e democrático.
Mais ainda: como autoridades de instituições públicas, estatais em sua maior parte, os reitores deveriam dar o exemplo e se manterem neutros, ou apartidários, nesta conjuntura eleitoral. O fato de que tenham feito uma opção deliberada -- o que é o seu pleno direito no plano cidadão e individual, mas não como reitores -- por uma dessas candidaturas, de modo tão servil quanto ridiculamente publicitário, em favor da candidata oficial do governo Lula, é não apenas lamentável no plano da ética pública, como deplorável no plano da simples relação republicana -- para usar um termo da moda -- que deveria comandar pelo menos isenção quanto às escolhas que a comunidade acadêmica deverá novamente fazer em 31 de outubro.
Trata-se de mais um péssimo exemplo de mobilização de instituições públicas em favor de uma postura político-partidária. Meus cumprimentos aos reitores que não aderiram a esse panfleto eleitoral e meus pêsames, acadêmicos, aos que servilmente o fizeram.
------------------------------
Paulo Roberto Almeida (7 de outubro de 2010)
www.pralmeida.org


On Oct 7, 2010, at 6:29 AM, Jornal da Ciência wrote:

Jornal da Ciência (JC E-Mail)
=============================
Edição 4111 - Notícias de C&T - Serviço da SBPC
=============================

Você vai ler nesta edição:

5. Reitores de Ifes divulgam manifesto em favor das ações em educação

==============================
5. Reitores de Ifes divulgam manifesto em favor das ações em educação

Intitulado "Educação - O Brasil no rumo certo", manifesto ressalta que educação seja prioridade central dos governos estaduais e municipais
O texto reconhece os principais feitos do governo na área de educação, como a criação de consolidação de 14 novas universidades federais; a instituição da Universidade Aberta do Brasil; a construção de mais de 100 campi universitários pelo interior do país; e a criação e ampliação, sem precedentes históricos, de escolas técnicas e institutos federais.

Os reitores destacam ainda os programas Prouni, que possibilitou acesso ao ensino superior a mais de 700 mil jovens, e Reuni, que recuperou as universidades e propiciou a criação de novos cursos.

"Essas políticas devem continuar para consolidar os programas atuais e, inclusive, serem ampliadas no plano federal, exigindo-se que os estados e municípios também cumpram com as suas responsabilidades sociais e constitucionais, colocando a educação como uma prioridade central de seus governos", destaca o documento.

Os reitores completam: "Devemos continuar lutando e exigindo dos próximos governantes a continuidade das políticas e investimentos na educação em todos os níveis, assim como na ciência, na tecnologia e na inovação, de que o Brasil tanto precisa para se inserir, de uma forma ainda mais decisiva, neste mundo contemporâneo em constantes transformações."

A íntegra do manifesto está disponível no seguinte link:
http://www.andifes.org.br/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4221:grupo-de-reitores-de-universidades-federais-fazem-manifesto&catid=58&Itemid=100012

================================
JC e-mail
Edição diária enviada por e-mail a todos os interessados, com clippings de notícias de C&T, informações da SBPC, artigos, eventos e outros assuntos.

Expediente:
Editora executiva: Daniela Oliveira
Redatores: Vinicius Neder e Marcelo Medeiros

O ocaso do chavismo? - Susane Gratius, Foreign Policy en Espanol

Especial Web
¿EL OCASO DEL CHAVISMO?
Susanne Gratius
Foreign Policy en Español, Agosto-Septiembre 2010

Los resultados de las elecciones parlamentarias muestran la pérdida de apoyo popular del presidente venezolano. ¿El principio del fin de Chávez? Quizá sí, pero el proceso será lento.

Las elecciones parlamentarias han señalado una vez más el declive del chavismo. Todos los trucos y tejemanejes jurídicos no han servido para tapar la lenta pero irrefrenable disminución del apoyo popular. El presidente venezolano no cantó victoria ni salió al balcón a saludar a sus adeptos. Fracasó su meta de crear una “Asamblea roja, rojita”. La oposición ha resultado fortalecida y de no haber existido una nueva ley electoral que distorsiona los resultados, habría ganado la mayoría de votos. De hecho, chavismo y oficialismo empataron en Caracas y en la elección del Parlamento Latinoamericano.

El lema “reconciliación y unidad” de la oposición ha contrastado con el discurso belicista y polarizante de Chávez, que pronosticó un knock out de los “escuálidos”. Una vez más, su Revolución Bolivariana prometió pero no cumplió. El Gobierno obtiene las peores notas en seguridad ciudadana. Un 90% de los venezolanos considera la violencia como el principal problema del país. Sólo Ciudad Juárez es más peligrosa que Caracas y la tasa de homicidios en Venezuela supera con creces las de Colombia y México. También hay un suspenso en política económica: la inflación llega a un récord regional, Venezuela es el único país latinoamericano que no crece este año y la comida podrida simboliza la ineficacia de un Gobierno que importa un 80% de los alimentos. A medio y largo plazo, ello terminará por eliminar los logros sociales.

¿Estamos viendo el ocaso del chavismo? Probablemente sí, pero salvo sorpresas, será un proceso lento. Encuestas recientes confirman la pérdida de apoyo popular del Presidente que fue mayoritario en 2009 y se redujo al 42% actual. Según la empresa Hinterlaces, un 64% de los encuestados está a favor de que Chávez deje el poder en 2012. Como estos comicios han sido la última gran consulta electoral antes de las presidenciales, Chávez la ha convertido en un nuevo plebiscito. No le salieron las cuentas: a partir de ahora tendrá que compartir la Asamblea con 67 diputados de la oposición y discutir con ellos la aprobación de leyes habilitantes y leyes orgánicas.

El verdadero desafío de oficialismo y oposición consiste en recuperar este centro político que representan los “ni-ni”

Sin embargo, es poco probable que el Parlamento se convierta en un foro de debate y reconciliación. Hasta ahora, ninguno de los dos grupos ha sido demasiado proclive al diálogo y Chávez ha hecho todo para debilitar a la oposición. Esta vez, le quedan dos opciones: o inhabilitar a la Asamblea a través de la creación de un Parlamento Comunal o convocar una Constituyente para reformar las instituciones. Aunque los adversarios de Chávez han recuperado espacio político, esto no significa necesariamente más democracia. El verdadero desafío de oficialismo y oposición consiste en recuperar este centro político que representan los “ni-ni”, hartos de la polarización y politización de su vida cotidiana. Otro desafío a los que se enfrenta tanto el Gobierno como la oposición es ofrecer soluciones económicas y de seguridad pública para evitar un desenlace fatal del conflicto político venezolano.

Artículos relacionados:
* Venezuela, en manos de los 'ni-ni'. Ibsern Martínez
* Magia contra delincuencia. Beatriz Lecumberri
* Santos, a solas con Chávez. Ibsen Martínez
* Latinoamérica gira hacia el centro. Michael Shifter
* América Latina, dentro del péndulo. Carlos Mesa Gisbert
* La mancomunidad latinoamericana. Fernando Gualdoni

Como os investidores veem o Brasil - Economist Intelligence Unit

Este serviço de pesquisa do mesmo grupo que edita a revista (a melhor do mundo, há mais ou menos 150 anos, em minha modesta opinião) The Economist já tinha realizado um estudo sobre investimentos no Brasil, mas creio que eu nunca havia postado a matéria e o link para o relatório completo.
Em todo caso, nunca é tarde para um tema importante como este.
Segue agora.
Paulo Roberto de Almeida

Brazil unbound: How investors see Brazil and Brazil sees the world
The Economist Editor, July 27th 2010

FROM THE ECONOMIST INTELLIGENCE UNIT
Sponsored by HSBC

Executive summary
Brazil has never been so popular among investors as it is now. Interest has risen steadily over the past 15 years as the country has managed to overcome one political, macroeconomic and business challenge after another. Privatisation, liberalisation, a new stable currency, the smooth handover of political power, to name but a few achievements, coupled with a boom in global demand for Brazil’s copious supplies of commodities, have boosted foreign currency earnings and fired up consumer spending. Brazil has been transformed from “country of tomorrow” to “once-in-a-lifetime opportunity”. The transition is, of course, far from over: education, bureaucracy, corruption, infrastructure and fractious politics, to list just a few deep-seated problems, will take years to address. But its new-found economic and political stability – which helped the economy withstand recent global financial shocks – allows policymakers to make a serious start on addressing these issues. Moreover, the country’s natural riches in agriculture and mining – and potentially offshore oil too – will, if used wisely, provide the cash needed for vital investments for years to come.

This report, based on interviews and a survey of 536 senior executives worldwide, largely endorses the general optimism about Brazil’s prospects. Part one of the report sets Brazil’s recent transition into its political, macroeconomic and industry context. Part two focuses on three essential areas of the business operating environment: the market for talent; the state of innovation; and the dilemmas facing Brazilian companies as they expand abroad. Some of the key conclusions of this report and the main challenges facing Brazil include the following:

Poor infrastructure takes a heavy toll on business.
Although something of a truism, the parlous state of the infrastructure tops the list of obstacles faced by investors in Brazil. In our survey, nearly one half of respondents (49%) point to “low standard or costly infrastructure” as the main operating obstacle. In spite of some improvement in logistics, freight depends on costly road haulage; there are few railroads; the potential for waterways remains largely unexplored; and ports and airports are congested. These conditions can add one quarter or more to the cost of getting goods to market, say investors. Logistics experts call for better co-ordination between different layers of government and the private sector.

Weaknesses in the education system impair the supply of relevant workplace skills.
While many of the graduates of Brazil’s universities are viewed as top class, there are too few of them. Poor teaching and resourcing in secondary education means that school leavers are among the world’s least educated. Companies find they must fill the skills gaps themselves with their own training. At least one third of investors surveyed say skills shortages represent one of the biggest operating problems, with almost one half (47%) of US-based companies reporting this as their greatest challenge. Educationalists call for a more relevant curriculum, better teacher training, and a shift in state funding from tertiary to secondary education.

Investors praise the abilities of their Brazilian managers.
Education standards may be higher in most parts of Asia, but, say investors, the quality of management is “probably worse in China and India”. Indeed, Brazilian managers are deemed to be on a par with their peers in developed markets, and superior to those from other emerging markets, according to 42% of survey respondents. In particular, investors laud the flexibility and maturity of their Brazilian staff, a facet that may derive from learning to cope with economic upheaval. However, this flexibility does not translate adequately into innovation.

Brazil lags in innovation; investors could help more.
Brazil scores poorly on most innovation rankings, and deeper analysis suggests that even the meagre investments into innovation could produce better results. Some 57% of surveyed executives do not have a dedicated R&D facility, or even plan to have one in the short term in Brazil. Over one half of respondents (51%) say that, at present, less than 10% of products and services sold by their companies have actually been developed there, and at least one quarter of respondents expect no progress on that score over the next three years. Yet almost half (49%) of survey respondents describe the capacity of Brazilian-based businesses to integrate the latest international technology into their operations as either “very good” or “excellent”, and only 6% say it is “poor”. This indicates that better education, improved infrastructure, greater investment in R&D and closer relations between companies and universities would have a disproportionately positive impact on innovation. That said, business has broken new ground in environmental and agricultural technologies, which are being exported worldwide.

Co-operation with universities works well.
One way to promote innovation is through business co-operation with academic institutions. Experience seems relatively limited, but positive. Of survey respondents whose Brazil-based operations already work with local universities, 60% say the relationship has been “positive” and 12% “very positive”, compared with less than one quarter (23%) who say that such co-operation “failed to live up to expectations” or was “very unsuccessful” (5%). Brazilian-based companies would appear to get the rough end of such deals (or perhaps are too optimistic about their potential), as almost one third (32%) report that such co-operation “failed to live up to expectations”.

Brazil focuses on “South-South” trade relations, especially with China.
As part of a general policy of trade diversification, one of the biggest changes in Brazilian trade policy under President Lula has been the expansion of trade and investment with China. China has become Brazil’s largest export and import partner, and provides investment and finance to secure supplies of key minerals. Brazil has also expanded its share of trade with the rest of Latin America, other Asian countries, the Middle East and Africa, especially in agriculture.

Brazilian firms still suffer from poor brand recognition abroad.
Beyond the charmed circle of a few high-profile companies, Brazilian brands still lack the global draw of their Western counterparts. This is reflected in our survey, in which 84% of respondents say that Brazilian brand names are not well recognised or not highly regarded abroad. Only 3% of US-based respondents believe that Brazilian brands are both recognised and highly regarded. However, the perception of Brazilian brands changes somewhat among China-based executives, with almost one quarter of those respondents (24%) giving a warm reception to Brazilian products.

PDF Download the full report.

Economist Intelligence Unit
Source: Economist Intelligence Unit white paper

Declaracao de voto: relembrando um posicionamento pre-eleitoral

Gostaria de registrar aqui um posicionamento (palavra feia essa) puramente pessoal a respeito de escolhas eleitorais.
Gostaria também, imediatamente, de deixar claro que não estou me "posicionando" (continuo a achar essa palavra feia) a respeito de nenhuma candidatura, e não recomendo votar em ninguém.
Apenas que, como cidadão brasileiro, consciente e (espero) participante, gosto de deixar claro, pessoal e individualmente, meus valores e princípios, em função dos quais, justamente, tomo minhas decisões sociais, societais (e, no caso do voto, obrigatórias) no sentido de contribuir para fazer do Brasil um país melhor do que é.
O registro se refere a este trabalho já publicado:

Declaração de voto: dez pequenas regras contrarianistas
Espaço Acadêmico (ano 10, n. 112, setembro 2010, p. 80-87).

Esclareço que o original foi escrito de 24 a 26 de agosto de 2010 e tinha, em sua primeira versão 14 páginas. Depois, para fins de publicação, ele foi amputado de diversas partes e publicado em formato menor.
Em todo caso, reproduzo aqui meus princípios resumidos:

1. Sou contra os simplismos eleitorais
2. Sou contrário aos reducionismos políticos
3. Sou contra populismos e demagogias
4. Sou contra os exercícios de mistificação política
5. Sou contra os imitadores e falsificadores de todo tipo
6. Sou contra a lei dos benefícios imediatos, sem pesar os custos no futuro
7. Sou contra a embromação, a mentira, a propaganda enganosa
8. Sou contra paternalismos e pretensas familiaridades
9. Sou contra políticos de duas faces e que praticam ambiguidades
10. Sou contra a utilização de símbolos populares para fins de exploração política, inclusive a religião, supostos artistas populares, santos do passado, etc.

O texto completo, escrito inicialmente sob o título de "Declaração de voto: um manifesto quase marxista", foi postado em formato integral no blog Textos PRA, neste link.

A parte final do artigo original foi destacada e reelaborada sob o título de “Mercado político e mercados econômicos: Marx e as eleições brasileiras”, tendo sido divulgada nos seguintes blogs:

1) Diplomatizzando (29.08.2010)

2) Libertatum (29.08.2010)

3) Via Política (29.08.2010)

4) Dom Total (02.09.2010).

Palavras finais: eu teria muito mais a acrescentar sobre o que já disse, e sobre princípios e valores, mas talvez me limite a dizer (no que sou levado a me repetir) apenas mais isto:

Sou contra mentiras, fraudes, tentativas de mistificações e de enganações.
Sou profundamente contrário a demagogias e tenho horror de desonestidade intelectual, embora acredite, sinceramente, que o adjetivo "intelectual" JAMAIS se aplicaria à situação atual.
O que temos, simplesmente, é um baixíssimo nivel mental, uma extrema vulgaridade sob a forma de jogo político, que só me deixa triste, apenas isto...

Paulo Roberto de Almeida (7.10.2010)

Governanca global e reformas institucionais (2): uma sintese de minhas respostas

Transcrevo agora, no imediato seguimento do post anterior (ver abaixo) sobre o mesmo tema, um resumo de uma página tratando dos mesmos temas colocados num documento de planejamento de um encontro sobre o assunto, que recebi para comentário pessoal.
O que elaborei, muito rapidamente, a respeito dos temas levantados está no post anterior. A síntese possível segue agora neste.

[Next post: one page outline of this paper]

Global Governance and Institutional Reform: a personal view
Paulo Roberto de Almeida

One page outline

1) Lessons of the crisis and structural changes of the world economy
One small lesson: the origin of the crisis is in the bad monetary policies of the main countries, not in the “deregulation of the financial markets”. A second small lesson: coordination of macroeconomic policies is an impossible dream, as each government is clearly focused in its own national objectives and narrow interests.
A big lesson: the crisis was not serious enough to stimulate a complete reform of governance rules at world level; previous redrafts of international order were the consequence of cataclysmic changes in power relationships. We had none of this now. We have just a recession to administer, with a new emerging power-house: China.
World economy is already transformed, and advanced countries are slowly giving terrain to the dynamic emerging economies, with China at the forehead. Pity that decision-making mechanisms were not reformed accordingly this new reality.

2) Concepts, strategies and institutional features for managing the world economy
Managing the world economy is an elusive goal; the G7 never went beyond ad hoc arrangements for dealing with currency volatility. The only single strategy for today’s world would be to integrate less-developed countries into the world economy, through real trade liberalization, not official development assistance (that’s passé).

3) Existing institutional challenges for intelligent regulation and better governance
G-7/G-8 has no more legitimacy, for being too restrict; G-20 is too large to reach real consensus; solution is an upgrade to a G-13, with new dynamic economies.

4) Interaction between international bodies and between private and public interests
Regular meetings of this new G-13 should give clear guideline to sherpas, who would discuss trade matters, environmental affairs, human rights protection, UN peace-keeping missions, etc., with specific mandates to deliver feasible solutions.

5) International governance: can it be implemented?
It is difficult to implement anything through the UN, too large and chaotic a body; better to rely of the coordination of agendas of the three more important agencies for globalization: IMF, World Bank and WTO. This has to be achieved by means of a more harmonious G-13, but the Europeans have to accept reform in their representation at the first two organizations, ceding voting rights to emerging economies and establish their rotating representation.
A “global new deal” would exchange reinforced protection for proprietary technology by developing countries against access to markets and large investments by advanced economies. Assistance to development should be concentrated on education, human capital and improvement of governance, on technical grounds, as democracy and human rights are difficult to implement even for some of the new emerging powers of the world economy.

[Shanghai, 27.09.2010]

Governanca global e reformas institucionais (1): minhas respostas a perguntas

Recentemente fui contatado por um ex-funcionário de uma organização internacional, a quem conheci justamente em função de meu trabalho profissional junto a essa organização nos temas da agenda internacional que à época -- digamos, uns dez anos atrás -- ocupavam-me institucionalmente em nome do Brasil.
Não vem ao caso, agora, detalhar quem, qual, onde, como, pois o referido ex-funcionário, um amigo pessoal, contatou-me em sua nova qualidade de consultor privado em "temas globais" e gostaria de ter sugestões de nomes brasileiros para participar de um evento que trataria exatamente dos temas que figuram no título deste post. Indiquei vários nomes e não perguntei se foram ou não contatados diretamente.
Em todo caso, ele mandou-me o documento de planejamento desse evento, feito em colaboração entre essa organização internacional (sempre acho que eles gastam dinheiro com "palavras soltas") e uma fundação privada (como sempre é de tradição nos países latinos, sustentada com recursos públicos, em grande medida), e solicitou meu posicionamento sobre os temas enfocados.
Como estava em forma de perguntas, foi-me fácil reagir (ainda que muito rapidamente, e sem maiores elaborações) às questões colocadas.
Esta é a origem do texto que segue abaixo, primeiro em sua versão completa (ainda que provisória), depois, num segundo post, em sua versão curta, como "outline" de uma página.
Como esse texto não será aproveitado, a não ser para compor um novo texto, mais curto, de 3 páginas apenas, sobre os mesmos temas, permito-me reproduzi-lo aqui, tão somente como um "registro" de reações minhas a questões colocadas por outros.
Se eu estivesse escrevendo ab initio um texto meu, faria de outra forma, claro, pois o que vai abaixo são apenas reações a questões colocadas externamente.
O que está em itálico são as perguntas colocadas no documento de planejamento do evento em questão, sem a parte de elaboração a respeito delas, pois isto tornaria muito extenso um texto (meu), que já tem seis páginas.
Paulo Roberto de Almeida (7.10.2010)

Global Governance and Institutional Reform: a personal view
Paulo Roberto de Almeida
[(dados de expediente, suprimidos)]

1) What are the lessons to be drawn from the crisis and the structural changes in the world economy?
There are small and big lessons to be drawn from the present crisis. I will start with the small ones.
I’m not among those who proclaim that the current financial crisis was created by the deregulation of the financial markets, although low regulation can indeed have facilitated the expansion of already existing bubbles in some markets. The main culprit for the bubble, though, is the low level of interest rates established by central banks during too long a period. In fact, in the same manner, but in very different ways, that the old Lords of Finance created the crisis of the 1930s, by their action and inaction, the present crisis is the result of misguided policies by the new Lords of Finance, to use the title of Liaquat Ahamed book. If one apply the “Taylor rule” to the interest rates settled by the Fed from 2002 to 2005, the diagnostics could not be more incriminating of the insouciance of the Fed with the mounting bubble.
So, the first small lesson to be drawn from the crisis, in terms of its impact in the world economy, is that in a so integrated a world, especially in the financial sector, central banks are not allowed any more to deviate from the economic fundamentals set by the markets, in which interest rates play a crucial role. Interest rates too far apart from normal market rates are prone to stimulate bubbles and disequilibria. But that was already very well known.
A second lesson, to be drawn from institutional arrangements after the crisis – in the financial G-20, for instance –, is that coordination of macroeconomic policies among major actors, even among blocs, such as European Union, is an almost pipe dream, almost a pious desire. At least, the European Commission will start to have a right to look over the fiscal plans and budgetary proposals of its member countries, which is an indispensable move on the way to have a real common currency. But all that is the “business as usual” of the aftermath of “normal” crises.
And, what are the big lessons to be drawn from this crisis?
We are not at all in a post-major crisis arrangement, a sort of diplomatic complete reordering of the world after a cataclysmic seism, touching all and every major actor of the international scene. We are very far from that.
We are not in Wesphalia-1648. We are not in Vienna-1815. We are not in Paris or Versailles-1919. And we are not in Bretton-Woods-1944, or San Francisco-1945. We are not in any major re-founding of the international economic order.
We simply are, nowadays, in the middle of our 1930s, trying to manage a big crisis by national responses, each one fitted to the specific circumstances of each country, and delinked from a major disaster affecting everyone and all countries.
To be more precise, we are somewhere between 1931 and 1933, still in the middle of a recession, but not yet in a depression. Sure, a bad thing is the level of unemployment in the world’s major economy, not as high as in 1933, but still unacceptably higher for our welfare state social patterns of our days. World trade and financial flows are not as disrupted as in the 1930s, but economic liberalization has regressed in the world, as revealed in 2010 report on Economic Freedom in the World, of the Cato Institute. This is the old protectionism, déjà vu all over again.
There are no structural changes in the world economy derived from the current crisis. The structural changes were already on the move since the 1980s, at least, when socialism started to fail and went completely down the drain. At the same time, developing countries ceased to implement national, inward-looking, projects for national development and started to open to foreign direct investments. Since then, the world economy has been transformed irrevocably, suffice is to point to the case of China becoming the second major economic power in the world.
But not everything, of course, has changed. The major decision-making institutions that are supposed to lead countries in their mutual relationships are still the same, with their same division of voting rights. IMF and World Bank are in the middle of their travails to find a new distribution of quotas. The collective voting power of China, India and Brazil is 20% less than that of Belgium, Netherlands and Italy, despite the fact that their GDP is four times greater the size of the European counterparts, and they have a population 29 times greater.

2) What are the concepts, strategies and institutional features for managing the world economy?
To manage the world economy is a pretension that even the G-7 never reached to attain in its glorious days. It is a fact that developed countries, and among them the big seven economies, controlled a respectable proportion of the world’s GDP, trade and financial flows, together with technological innovation and mass-market cultural products. But they were never capable of coordinating their macroeconomic policies among themselves; never mind establishing rules and goals for the rest of the world.
But, they settled the framework for acceptable arrangements regarding the most important matters whenever there was a need to act, such as in the big monetary turmoil of the 1970s and the 1980s. Short of agreeing on new standards for the world monetary system, they managed at least to have ad hoc arrangements to avoid too many ups and downs in the currency and exchange markets.
Nowadays, with a painful free-fall in advanced economies, it is difficult to see what could be done to restore growth rates from their stagnating levels. Besides the cyclical problems affecting major economies, with the exception of China, we still have global challenges ahead, like poverty in less developed countries, decisions to be made regarding environmental matters, human rights violations in non-democratic countries, and many other relevant issues like those.
One single strategy would be the establishing of just one big goal for the world community: that has to be the promotion of global development, not exactly through assistance (the traditional Official Development Assistance), but primarily through real trade liberalization, especially in the farm sector, the only real possibility for the less-developed countries to become integrated into the world economy. The United States and European Union have a main responsibility in this domain.

3) Main existing institutional challenges for intelligent regulation and better governance.
It is difficult to see any credible solution for the impasse in the Doha Round coming out from current G-7/G-8. But it is also unlikely that consensual proposals could be arising from such a large body as the financial G20, too heterogeneous to reach common positions. Perhaps, the best hope would be an evolution from the current G-8 to a new G-13. That means joining the leaders of the G-8 together with the 5 “outreach” countries, namely Brazil, China, India, Mexico and South Africa.
Experience shows that informal bodies are more likely to deliver something meaningful than large institutionalized groups that get involved in bureaucratic foot-dragging and political entanglements. The biggest problem in this approach is acquiring the legitimacy that involves the act of speaking for the whole world community from the starting point of only 13 countries. To solve this quandary implies that the political leaders of these 13 countries would have to find a terrain of reciprocal confidence between them that has to be compatible with the representation at large they would be pretending to have from the whole community of nations.

4) How can interaction between established international bodies be improved, and public and private interests better aligned?
That’s is a hard task to achieve. I don’t think it is possible, or feasible, to have a perfect coordination of agendas between international bodies and multilateral organizations. The world is simply not as globalized as required to attain this kind of interaction. Disparities of interests, differences of levels of development, huge imbalances between countries and regions, many factors collude to render almost impossible this exercise of coordination.
A more modest approach could be a more frequent interaction – once a year – between the leaders of the new G-13. Sherpas could then be mobilized to discuss trade matters, environmental affairs, human rights protection, UN peace-keeping missions and the like, with specific mandates from their political leaders.

5) There is such a thing as international governance; can it be implemented?
Plainly not, but there are attempts into this direction. Don’t look at the UN for that, but we should work with the three main agencies for globalization: IMF, World Bank and the WTO. Some organizational work should be implemented, with institutional changes here and there, and their agendas should be made compatible with consensual decisions reached through the new G13. To start with, Europeans, that is, the EU, should have permanent, but rotating, seats among them, opening the way for more decisional power in favor of emerging powers.
The main focus here is on international economic coordination around relevant issues for the global community. A possible suggestion would be to try to establish a “global new deal”, exchanging extensive protection to investments and proprietary riches (patents and the like) and other governance (microeconomic) conditions for productive activity, by developing countries or recipients of FDI, against extensive licensing and effective investments and trade liberalization by rich countries and investors alike; this would imply an extension and the strengthening of trade, investment and intellectual property rights treaties, giving a little boost to globalization.
Traditional assistance for development, because ineffective, should be essentially replaced by a focus on educational improvements, that is, a focused program for human resources qualification. Assistance as such should be limited to the implementation of a consistent program for eradicating most of infectious diseases in African countries and in some other developing countries. The main reason for the persistence of poverty in those countries is not the lack of resources, but the absence of governance and their non-integration into the world economy through trade links, not financial aid.
Assuming that the questions of democratic governance and human rights protection can be a conundrum four countries like China, or perhaps even Russia, the main target for the agenda of the new G13 could be the adoption of high standards for public governance in the technical meaning of this expression. It is a little too early to make democratic governance and respect for the human rights the decisive criteria for bilateral and/or multilateral cooperation. But these should be the ultimate goals of any kind of global governance.

Paulo Roberto de Almeida
Professor of International Political Economy at the Post-Graduate Program in Law of the University Center of Brasilia (Uniceub).
[Shanghai, October 26, 2010]

Terrorismo eleitoral dos mercados financeiros

As voltas que o mundo dá:

Em 2002, a bolsa paulista recuou 33,23%, por receio de desatinos que poderiam ser praticados por uma administração de Lula.

Atualmente, os "mercados" -- como diriam esses inimigos do capitalismo que são os petistas -- apostam na candidata petista.
Qualquer outro candidato não dá a banqueiros e investidores estrangeiros tanta segurança e confiança quanto a continuidade de um governo supostamente de esquerda no Brasil.

Pois é, para quem gostava de acusar os mercados de praticar terrorismo eleitoral, parece até que a boa vontade das altas cúpulas financeiras é algo tão natural quanto tomar um cafezinho...