Artigo - Open Access.

Idioma principal | Segundo idioma

Formação Bruta de Capital Fixo (FBCF) em Saúde: Metodologia e Resultados para o Período 2010-2018

Gross Fixed Capital Formation (GFCF) in the Health System: Methodology and Results for the 2010-2018 period

Holguin, Tassia Gazé; Miguez, Thiago; Hasenclever, Lia; Freitas, Fabio Neves Perácio de;

Artigo:

A Conta Satélite de Saúde (CSS) disponibiliza informações sobre a geração, a distribuição e o uso da renda no País e o consumo de bens e serviços de saúde do governo e das famílias.que permitem compreender a interação entre o setor saúde e o resto da economia no país durante um determinado período. No entanto, a CCS possui algumas lacunas, como por exemplo informação sobre o gasto com Formação Bruta de Capital Fixo (FBCF) no setor saúde, o que acaba por prejudicar a análise sobre o tema no Brasil. O propósito do artigo é apresentar uma metodologia para a mensuração da FBCF em saúde, segmentada pelas óticas pública e privada, e discutir os dados estimados para o período entre 2010 e 2018. Tal metodologia consiste no mapeamento e manipulação de algumas bases de dados disponibilizadas pelo Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística (IBGE), pela Secretária de Comércio Exterior do Ministério da Economia (Secex/ME) e pelo Sistema de Informações sobre Orçamentos Públicos em Saúde (SIOPS). Os resultados mostraram que a FBCF do setor é mais intensiva em “máquinas e equipamentos” do que em “construção”, tanto na esfera pública como na privada. Isso pode ser considerada uma característica “técnica” do setor, em virtude da constante necessidade de atualização tecnológica dos equipamentos. Os investimentos privados possuem maior participação durante todo período, assim como a participação dos investimentos públicos é decliante ao longo do tempo, saindo de pouco mais de 40% em 2010 e chegando a quase 20% em 2017. Ainda que parte dos serviços prestados pelo SUS ocorra na rede privada por meio da terceirização de leitos e exames, a fragilidade dos investimentos públicos em saúde pode comprometer seriamente a equidade da assistência à saúde no Brasil.

Artigo:

The Health Satellite Accounts (HSA) provides information about income generation, income distribution, and the use of income in Brazil. HSA also presents information on the final consumption of health goods and services by the institutional sector (families and government). This information allows the understanding of the interaction between the healthcare sector and the rest of the economy during a specific period of analysis. However, the HSA has some gaps, such as the information on Gross Fixed Capital Formation (GFCF) in the health sector, which undermines the analysis of the theme. This article aims to present a methodology for measuring Gross Fixed Capital Formation in the healthcare sector (in both the public and private spheres) between 2010 and 2018 and to discuss the results obtained. This methodology consists of mapping and manipulating some databases provided by the Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics (IBGE), the Secretariat of Foreign Trade (SECEX) and the Information System on Public Health Budgets (SIOPS). The results showed that the healthcare sector (both public and private) is more intensive in machines and equipment than in construction. The latter result follows from a technical characteristic of the healthcare sector, the constant technological updates of the equipment. Private investments had the highest share during the period. On the other hand, public investments decreased over time, falling from more than 40% in 2010 to almost 20 % in 2017. Although part of the public services (SUS) occurs in the private sector network through the outsourcing of beds and exams, the fragility of public investments in the healthcare sector can seriously compromise the equity of healthcare.

Palavras-chave: Sistema de Saúde; Formação Bruta de Capital Fixo; Conta Satélite de Saúde; Metodologia de Estimação,

Palavras-chave: Health Care System; Gross Fixed Capital Formation; Health Satellite Account; Estimation Methodology,

DOI: 10.5151/vi-enei-821

Referências bibliográficas
  • [1] ACS, Z. J.; ANSELIN, L.; VARGA, A. Patents and innovation counts as measures of regional production of new knowledge. Research Policy, vol. 31, no. 7, p. 1069–1085, Sep. 2002. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(01)00184-6.
  • [2] ANATAN, L. Conceptual Issues in University to Industry Knowledge Transfer Studies: A Literature Review. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, vol. 211, no. September, p. 711–717, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.11.090.
  • [3] ANTONELLI, C.; CRESPI, F.; QUATRARO, F. Knowledge complexity and the mechanisms of knowledge generation and exploitation: The European evidence. Research Policy, no. May, p. 104081, Aug. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2020.104081.
  • [4] ARAÚJO, B. C.; CAVALCANTE, L. R.; ALVEZ, P. Variáveis proxy para os gastos empresariais em inovação com base no pessoal ocupado técnico-científico disponível na Relação Anual de Informações Sociais (Rais). Radar: tecnologia, produção e comércio exterior, no. 5, p. 16–21, 2009. .
  • [5] ARAÚJO, V. de C.; GARCIA, R. Determinants and spatial dependence of innovation in Brazilian regions: evidence from a Spatial Tobit Model. Nova Economia, vol. 29, no. 2, p. 375–400, Aug. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1590/0103-6351/4456.
  • [6] ASCANI, A.; BETTARELLI, L.; RESMINI, L.; BALLAND, P.-A. Global networks, local specialisation and regional patterns of innovation. Research Policy, vol. 49, no. 8, p. 104031, Oct. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2020.104031.
  • [7] AUDRETSCH, D. B.; FELDMAN, M. P. R&D Spillovers and the Geography of Innovation and Production. American Economic Review, vol. 86, no. 3, p. 630–640, 1996. https://doi.org/10.2307/2118216.
  • [8] BALLAND, P.-A.; BOSCHMA, R.; CRESPO, J.; RIGBY, D. L. Smart specialization policy in the European Union: relatedness, knowledge complexity and regional diversification. Regional Studies, vol. 53, no. 9, p. 1252–1268, 2 Sep. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2011437900.
  • [9] BARRA, C.; MAIETTA, O. W.; ZOTTI, R. Academic excellence, local knowledge spillovers and innovation in Europe. Regional Studies, vol. 53, no. 7, p. 1058–1069, 201 DOI 10.1080/00343404.2018.1540865. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2018.1540865.
  • [10] BOSCHMA, R.; BALLAND, P.-A.; KOGLER, D. F. Relatedness and technological change in cities: the rise and fall of technological knowledge in US metropolitan areas from 1981 to 20 Industrial and Corporate Change, vol. 24, no. 1, p. 223–250, 1 Feb. 2015. https://doi.org/1093/icc/dtu012.
  • [11] CAPELLO, R. Spatial and Sectoral Characteristics of Relational Capital in Innovation Activity. European Planning Studies, vol. 10, no. 2, p. 177–200, Mar. 2002. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654310120114481.
  • [12] CARLINO, G. A.; CHATTERJEE, S.; HUNT, R. M. Urban density and the rate of invention. Journal of Urban Economics, vol. 61, no. 3, p. 389–419, May 2007. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jue.2006.08.003.
  • [13] CHARLOT, S.; CRESCENZI, R.; MUSOLESI, A. Econometric modelling of the regional knowledge production function in Europe. Journal of Economic Geography, vol. 15, no. 6, p. 1227–1259, Nov. 2015. https://doi.org/10.1093/jeg/lbu035.
  • [14] CRESCENZI, R.; JAAX, A. Innovation in Russia: The Territorial Dimension. Economic Geography, vol. 93, no. 1, p. 66–88, 3 Jan. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1080/00130095.2016.1208532.
  • [15] CRESCENZI, R.; RODRÍGUEZ-POSE, A.; STORPER, M. The territorial dynamics of innovation in China and India. Journal of Economic Geography, vol. 12, no. 5, p. 1055–1085, 2012. https://doi.org/10.1093/jeg/lbs020.
  • [16] DE MORAES SILVA, D. R.; FURTADO, A. T.; VONORTAS, N. S. University-industry R&D cooperation in Brazil: a sectoral approach. The Journal of Technology Transfer, vol. 43, no. 2, p. 285–315, 3 Apr. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-017-9566-z.
  • [17] DE NONI, I.; GANZAROLI, A.; ORSI, L. The impact of intra- and inter-regional knowledge collaboration and technological variety on the knowledge productivity of European regions. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, vol. 117, p. 108–118, Apr. 20 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2001.003.
  • [18] DIAS, A. A.; PORTO, G. S. Technology transfer management in the context of a developing country: evidence from Brazilian universities. Knowledge Management Research and Practice, vol. 16, no. 4, p. 525–536, 20 DOI 10.1080/14778238.201514288. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/14778238.201514288.
  • [19] ETZKOWITZ, H.; LEYDESDORFF, L. The dynamics of innovation: From National Systems and “mode 2” to a Triple Helix of university-industry-government relations. Research Policy, vol. 29, no. 2, p. 109–123, 2000. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(99)00055-4.
  • [20] FLEMING, L.; KING, C.; JUDA, A. I. Small Worlds and Regional Innovation. Organization Science, vol. 18, no. 6, p. 938–954, Dec. 2007. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1070.0289.
  • [21] FLORIDA, R. The role of the university: leveraging talent, not technology. Issues in science and technology, vol. 15, no. 4, p. 67–73, 1999. .
  • [22] GEUNA, A.; NESTA, L. J. J. University patenting and its effects on academic research: The emerging European evidence. Research Policy, vol. 35, no. 6, p. 790–807, 2006. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2006.04.005.
  • [23] GONÇALVES, E.; ALMEIDA, E. Innovation and Spatial Knowledge Spillovers: Evidence from Brazilian Patent Data. Regional Studies, vol. 43, no. 4, p. 513–528, 2009. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343400701874131.
  • [24] GONÇALVES, E.; DE OLIVEIRA, P. M.; ALMEIDA, E. Spatial determinants of inventive capacity in Brazil: the role of inventor networks. Spatial Economic Analysis, vol. 15, no. 2, p. 186–207, 2 Apr. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1080/17421772.2019.1637532.
  • [25] GONÇALVES, E.; FAJARDO, B. de A. G. A influência da proximidade tecnológica e geográfica sobre a inovação regional no Brasil. Revista de Economia Contemporanea, vol. 15, no. 1, p. 112–142, 2011. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1415-98482011000100005.
  • [26] GONÇALVES, E.; MATOS, C. M. de; ARAÚJO, I. F. de. Path-Dependent Dynamics and Technological Spillovers in the Brazilian Regions. Applied Spatial Analysis and Policy, vol. 12, no. 3, p. 605–629, Sep. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12061-018-9259-5.
  • [27] GONÇALVES, E.; RODRIGUEZ, R.; ARAÚJO, I. F. de; SANTOS, S. M. dos. Cidades Inventivas no Brasil: Hierarquia e Determinantes da Invenção. Análise Econômica, vol. 36, no. 71, p. 7–33, 25 Nov. 2018. https://doi.org/10.22456/2176-5456.64780.
  • [28] HE, J.; FALLAH, M. H. Dynamics of Inventor Networks and the Evolution of Technology Clusters. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, vol. 38, no. 6, p. 2174–2200, Nov. 2014. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2427.12007.
  • [29] HIGHAM, K.; DE RASSENFOSSE, G.; JAFFE, A. B. Patent Quality: Towards a Systematic Framework for Analysis and Measurement. Research Policy, vol. 50, no. 4, p. 104215, May 2021. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2021.104215.
  • [30] IBGE. Divisão regional do Brasil em regiões geográficas imediatas e regiões geográficas intermediárias. 1st ed. Rio de Janeiro: IBGE, 2017.
  • [31] JAFFE, A. B. Real Effects Of Academic Research. American Economic Review, vol. 79, no. 5, p. 957–970, 1989. .
  • [32] KANG, D.; DALL’ERBA, S. An Examination of the Role of Local and Distant Knowledge Spillovers on the US Regional Knowledge Creation. International Regional Science Review, vol. 39, no. 4, p. 355–385, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1177/0160017615572888.
  • [33] LISSONI, F. Academic patenting in Europe: An overview of recent research and new perspectives. World Patent Information, vol. 34, no. 3, p. 197–205, 2012. DOI 10.1016/j.wpi.2012.03.002. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wpi.2012.03.002.
  • [34] LISSONI, F.; PEZZONI, M.; POTÌ, B.; ROMAGNOSI, S. University Autonomy, the Professor Privilege and Academic Patenting: Italy, 1996–2007. Industry & Innovation, vol. 20, no. 5, p. 399–421, Jul. 2013. https://doi.org/10.1080/13662716.2013.824192.
  • [35] LOBO, J.; STRUMSKY, D. Metropolitan patenting, inventor agglomeration and social networks: A tale of two effects. Journal of Urban Economics, vol. 63, no. 3, p. 871–884, May 2008. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jue.2007.07.005.
  • [36] MERTON, R. K. The Sociology of Science: Theoretical and Empirical Investigations. 1st ed. London: University of Chicago Press, 1973.
  • [37] MESSENI PETRUZZELLI, A.; MURGIA, G. University–Industry collaborations and international knowledge spillovers: a joint-patent investigation. Journal of Technology Transfer, vol. 45, no. 4, p. 958–983, 2020. DOI 10.1007/s10961-019-09723-2. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-019-09723-2.
  • [38] MIGUELEZ, E.; MORENO, R. Relatedness, external linkages and regional innovation in Europe. Regional Studies, vol. 52, no. 5, p. 688–701, 4 May 2018. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2017.1360478.
  • [39] MIGUÉLEZ, E.; MORENO, R. Research Networks and Inventors’ Mobility as Drivers of Innovation: Evidence from Europe. Regional Studies, vol. 47, no. 10, p. 1668–1685, Nov. 2013a. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2011.618803.
  • [40] MIGUÉLEZ, E.; MORENO, R. Skilled labour mobility, networks and knowledge creation in regions: a panel data approach. Annals of Regional Science, vol. 51, no. 1, p. 191–212, 17 Aug. 2013b. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00168-012-0526-0.
  • [41] MORENO, R.; PACI, R.; USAI, S. Innovation Clusters in the European Regions. European Planning Studies, vol. 14, no. 9, p. 1235–1263, Oct. 2006. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654310600933330.
  • [42] MOWERY, D. C.; NELSON, R. R.; SAMPAT, B. N.; ZIEDONIS, A. A. The growth of patenting by American universities: An assessment of the Bayh-Dole Act of 1980. Research Policy, no. 30, p. 99–119, 2001. .
  • [43] Ó HUALLACHÁIN, B.; LESLIE, T. F. Rethinking the regional knowledge production function. Journal of Economic Geography, vol. 7, no. 6, p. 737–752, 17 May 2007. https://doi.org/10.1093/jeg/lbm027.
  • [44] PARTHA, D.; DAVID, P. A. Toward a new economics of science. Research Policy, vol. 23, no. 5, p. 487–521, 1994. https://doi.org/10.1016/0048-7333(94)01002-1.
  • [45] PERKMANN, M.; TARTARI, V.; MCKELVEY, M.; AUTIO, E.; BROSTRÖM, A.; D’ESTE, P.; FINI, R.; GEUNA, A.; GRIMALDI, R.; HUGHES, A.; KRABEL, S.; KITSON, M.; LLERENA, P.; LISSONI, F.; SALTER, A.; SOBRERO, M. Academic engagement and commercialisation: A review of the literature on university-industry relations. Research Policy, vol. 42, no. 2, p. 423–442, 2013. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2012.09.007.
  • [46] PÓVOA, L. M. C.; RAPINI, M. S. Technology transfer from universities and public research institutes to firms in Brazil: What is transferred and how the transfer is carried out. Science and Public Policy, vol. 37, no. 2, p. 147–159, 2010. https://doi.org/10.3152/030234210X496619.
  • [47] RODRÍGUEZ-POSE, A.; WILKIE, C. Innovating in less developed regions: What drives patenting in the lagging regions of Europe and North America. Growth and Change, vol. 50, no. 1, p. 4–37, Mar. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1111/grow.12280.
  • [48] SANTOS, U. P. dos; MENDES, P. S. Regional spillovers of knowledge in Brazil: evidence from science and technology municipal indicators. Innovation and Development, vol. 0, no. 0, p. 1–20, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1080/2157930X.2021.1978723.
  • [49] STRUMSKY, D.; THILL, J.-C. Profiling U.S. Metropolitan Regions By Their Social Research Networks and Regional Economic Perfomance. Journal of Regional Science, vol. 53, no. 5, p. 813–833, Dec. 2013. https://doi.org/10.1111/jors.12048.
  • [50] TER WAL, A. L. J. Cluster Emergence and Network Evolution: A Longitudinal Analysis of the Inventor Network in Sophia-Antipolis. Regional Studies, vol. 47, no. 5, p. 651–668, May 2013. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343401003614258.
  • [51] VARGA, A. Local Academic Knowledge Transfers and the Concentration of Economic Activity. Journal of Regional Science, vol. 40, no. 2, p. 289–309, 17 May 2000. https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-4146.00175.
  • [52] WANG, Y.; NING, L.; LI, J.; PREVEZER, M. Foreign Direct Investment Spillovers and the Geography of Innovation in Chinese Regions: The Role of Regional Industrial Specialization and Diversity. Regional Studies, vol. 50, no. 5, p. 805–822, 3 May 2016. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2014.933800.
  • [53] YING, L. G. The Shape of Ideas Production Function in Transition and Developing Economies: Evidence from China. International Regional Science Review, vol. 31, no. 2, p. 185–206, 1 Apr. 2008. https://doi.org/10.1177/0160017608314704.
  • [54] ZHANG, X.; YU, J. Spatial weights matrix selection and model averaging for spatial autoregressive models. Journal of Econometrics, vol. 203, no. 1, p. 1–18, 2018. DOI 10.1016/j.jeconom.2017.05.021. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeconom.2017.05.021.
  • [55] ZUCKER, B. L. G.; DARBY, M. R.; BREWER, M. B. Intellectual Human Capital and the Birth of U . S . Biotechnology Enterprises. American Economic Review, vol. 88, no. 1, p. 290–306, 1998. .
Como citar:

Holguin, Tassia Gazé; Miguez, Thiago; Hasenclever, Lia; Freitas, Fabio Neves Perácio de; "Formação Bruta de Capital Fixo (FBCF) em Saúde: Metodologia e Resultados para o Período 2010-2018", p. 1491-1511 . In: Anais do VI Encontro Nacional de Economia Industrial e Inovação (ENEI): “Indústria e pesquisa para Inovação: novos desafios ao desenvolvimento sustentável”. São Paulo: Blucher, 2022.
ISSN 2357-7592, DOI 10.5151/vi-enei-821

últimos 30 dias | último ano | desde a publicação


downloads


visualizações


indexações