Artigo - Open Access.

Idioma principal | Segundo idioma

Inovação tecnológica ambiental: uma análise sobre o desempenho das firmas brasileiras

Environmental technological innovation: an analysis of the performance of Brazilian firms

Souza, Vitória Laboury Rodrigues de; Montenegro, Rosa Lívia Gonçalves;

Artigo:

O desenvolvimento econômico sustentável vem sendo pauta de discussão relevante nas últimas décadas. Questões relacionadas ao meio ambiente, especialmente sobre como as firmas se mantém competitivas mediante às restrições de impactos ambientais se tornaram relevantes no âmbito das inovações. Nesse contexto, observa-se o esforço das firmas brasileiras quanto ao desenvolvimento de tecnologias verdes (ecoinovações) como forma de solução para os possíveis impactos ambientais gerados. Dessa forma, a presente pesquisa analisou os determinantes de ecoinovações nas firmas brasileiras. Em outras palavras, quais setores estariam mais envolvidos no desenvolvimento de tecnologias verdes e os principais fatores e obstáculos apontados pelas firmas inovadoras. Para isso, foi realizada a análise de componentes principais (ACP) com base em 66 setores industriais presentes na Pesquisa de Inovação (PINTEC) para o ano de 2017. Os resultados identificaram que fatores como a reputação da firma e existência de normas ambientais contribuem para a implementação de inovação ambiental. Além disso, foram apontados como obstáculos para a implementação de tecnologia elevados custos de inovação, dificuldade de financiamento e riscos econômicos. Assim, foi possível observar que o papel do Governo brasileiro é fundamental na promoção de regulamentações que favoreçam a adesão das firmas ao desenvolvimento de ecoinovações. Mais especificamente, o apoio governamental viabiliza, desde a disponibilidade de recursos voltados para o desenvolvimento de tecnologias ambientais, à criação de legislações ambientais que incentivem o uso destas tecnologias, proporcionando também o maior desenvolvimento de pesquisas em busca de novas soluções para os problemas enfrentados pelas empresas brasileiras.

Artigo:

Sustainable economic development has been a relevant agenda of discussion in the last decades. Issues related to the environment, especially about how companies remain competitive in the face of restrictions on environmental impacts, have become relevant in the context of innovations. In this context, it has been observed that Brazilian companies are committed to the development of green technologies (eco-innovations) as a solution to the possible environmental impacts generated. Thus, this paper analyzed the determinants of ecoinnovations in Brazilian firms. In other words, which sectors are more involved in the development of green technologies and the main factors and obstacles identified by innovative firms. To this purpose, principal component analysis (PCA) will be performed based on the 66 industrial sectors present in the Pesquisa de Informação (PINTEC) for the year of 2017. The results showed that factors such as the firm’s reputation and existence of environmental standards contribute to the implementation of innovation. In addition, high innovation costs, difficulty in financing, and economic risks were pointed out as obstacles to technology implementation. Thus, it was possible to observe that the role of the Brazilian government is fundamental in promoting regulations that favor the adherence of firms to the development of eco-innovations. More specifically, government support makes feasible, from the availability of resources directed to the area, to the creation of environmental legislation that encourage the use of these technologies, also providing greater development of research in search of new solutions to the problems faced by Brazilian companies.

Palavras-chave: Economia da tecnologia; Ecoinovação; Tecnologia ambiental; Desenvolvimento econômico; PINTEC,

Palavras-chave: Technology economics; Eco-innovations; Environmental technology; Economic development; PINTEC,

DOI: 10.5151/vi-enei-879

Referências bibliográficas
  • [1] AHMAD, N. Improving the accounting frameworks for analyses of global value chains. GLOBAL VALUE CHAIN DEVELOPMENT REPORT 2019, p. 155, 2019.
  • [2] CETTE, G.; LOPEZ, J.; PRESIDENTE, G.; SPIEZIA, V. Measuring ‘indirect’investments in ICT in OECD countries. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, v. 28, n. 4, p. 348–364, 2019. Taylor & Francis.
  • [3] CHEN, Y. Intra-industry fragmentation: Bilateral value added in electronics exports. Economics Letters, v. 138, p. 22–25, 2016. Elsevier B.V.
  • [4] EDWARDS, L.; LAWRENCE, R. Z. Do Developed and Developing Countries Compete Head to Head? RISING TIDE: IS GROWTH IN EMERGING ECONOMIES GOOD FOR THE UNITED STATES? p.91–131, 2013. Washington DC: Peterson Institute for International Economics, PIEE Press.
  • [5] FAN, J.-L.; ZHANG, X.; WANG, J.-D.; WANG, Q. Measuring the Impacts of International Trade on Carbon Emissions Intensity: A Global Value Chain Perspective. Emerging Markets Finance and Trade, p. 1–17, 2019. Taylor & Francis.
  • [6] GALINDO-RUEDA, F.; VERGER, F. OECD taxonomy of economic activities based on R&D intensity. , 201 OECD.
  • [7] HELPER, S.; MARTINS, R.; SEAMANS, R. Who Profits from Industry 4.0? Theory and Evidence from the Automotive Industry. Theory and Evidence from the Automotive Industry (January 31, 2019), 2019.
  • [8] JOHNSON, R. C. Measuring global value chains. Annual Review of Economics, , n. 0, 201 Annual Reviews 4139 El Camino Way, PO Box 10139, Palo Alto, California 94303~….
  • [9] JOHNSON, R. C.; NOGUERA, G. Accounting for intermediates: Production sharing and trade in value added. Journal of international Economics, v. 86, n. 2, p. 224–236, 2012. Elsevier.
  • [10] KOOPMAN, R.; WANG, Z.; WEI, S.-J. Tracing value-added and double counting in gross exports. American Economic Review, v. 104, n. 2, p. 459–494, 2014.
  • [11] LAZAROVA, M.; TARIQUE, I. Knowledge transfer upon repatriation. Journal of World Business, v. 40, n. 4, p. 361–373, 2005.
  • [12] LEE, M.; YUN, J.; PYKA, A.; et al. How to respond to the Fourth Industrial Revolution, or the Second Information Technology Revolution? Dynamic new combinations between technology, market, and society through open innovation. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, v. 4, n. 3, p. 21, 2018. Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute.
  • [13] LOS, B.; TIMMER, M. P. Measuring Bilateral Exports of Value Added: A Unified Framework. 2018.
  • [14] MATTIOLI, E.; LAMONICA, G. R. The ICT role in the world economy: an input-output analysis. Journal of World Economic Research, v. 2, n. 2, p. 20–25, 2013.
  • [15] MAYER, J. Digitalization and industrialization: friends or foes? 2018.
  • [16] MILLER, R. E.; BLAIR, P. D. Input-output analysis: foundations and extensions. Cambridge university press, 2009.
  • [17] MIROUDOT, S. Services and Manufacturing in Global Value Chains: Is the Distinction Obsolete? , 2019. ADBI Working Paper 927.
  • [18] NAGENGAST, A. J.; STEHRER, R. The great collapse in value added trade. Review of International Economics, v. 24, n. 2, p. 392–421, 2016. Wiley Online Library.
  • [19] OECD. Digital Economy Outlook 2017. 2017.
  • [20] PORTER, M. E.; HEPPELMANN, J. E. How smart, connected products are transforming competition. Harvard business review, v. 92, n. 11, p. 64–88, 2014.
  • [21] VAN REENEN, J. Increasing differences between firms: market power and the macro-economy. , 2018. Centre for Economic Performance, London School of Economics and Political~….
  • [22] STANLEY, T. D.; DOUCOULIAGOS, H.; STEEL, P. Does ICT Generate Economic Growth? A Meta-Regression Analysis. Journal of economic surveys, v. 32, n. 3, p. 705–726, 2018. Wiley Online Library.
  • [23] STROHMAIER, R.; RAINER, A. Studying general purpose technologies in a multi-sector framework: The case of ICT in Denmark. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, v. 36, p. 34–49, 2016. Elsevier.
  • [24] THOMPSON, N.; SPANUTH, S. The Decline of Computers As a General Purpose Technology: Why Deep Learning and the End of Moore’s Law are Fragmenting Computing. Available at SSRN 3287769, 2018.
  • [25] TIMMER, M. P.; DIETZENBACHER, E.; LOS, B.; STEHRER, R.; VRIES, G. J. An Illustrated User Guide to the World Input–Output Database: the Case of Global Automotive Production. Review of International Economics, v. 23, n. 3, p. 575–605, 2015. Wiley Online Library.
  • [26] TIMMER, M. P.; LOS, B.; STEHRER, R.; DE VRIES, G. J.; OTHERS. An anatomy of the global trade slowdown based on the WIOD 2016 release. Groningen, NL, 2016.
  • [27] UNCTAD. Digital Economy Report. Geneva: United Nations Geneva, 2019.
  • [28] XU, Y.; DIETZENBACHER, E. A structural decomposition analysis of the emissions embodied in trade. Ecological Economics, v. 101, p. 10–20, 2014. Elsevier.
  • [29] AHMAD, N. Improving the accounting frameworks for analyses of global value chains. GLOBAL VALUE CHAIN DEVELOPMENT REPORT 2019, p. 155, 2019.
  • [30] CETTE, G.; LOPEZ, J.; PRESIDENTE, G.; SPIEZIA, V. Measuring ‘indirect’investments in ICT in OECD countries. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, v. 28, n. 4, p. 348–364, 2019. Taylor & Francis.
  • [31] CHEN, Y. Intra-industry fragmentation: Bilateral value added in electronics exports. Economics Letters, v. 138, p. 22–25, 2016. Elsevier B.V.
  • [32] EDWARDS, L.; LAWRENCE, R. Z. Do Developed and Developing Countries Compete Head to Head? RISING TIDE: IS GROWTH IN EMERGING ECONOMIES GOOD FOR THE UNITED STATES? p.91–131, 2013. Washington DC: Peterson Institute for International Economics, PIEE Press.
  • [33] FAN, J.-L.; ZHANG, X.; WANG, J.-D.; WANG, Q. Measuring the Impacts of International Trade on Carbon Emissions Intensity: A Global Value Chain Perspective. Emerging Markets Finance and Trade, p. 1–17, 2019. Taylor & Francis.
  • [34] GALINDO-RUEDA, F.; VERGER, F. OECD taxonomy of economic activities based on R&D intensity. , 2016. OECD.
  • [35] HELPER, S.; MARTINS, R.; SEAMANS, R. Who Profits from Industry 4.0? Theory and Evidence from the Automotive Industry. Theory and Evidence from the Automotive Industry (January 31, 2019), 2019.
  • [36] JOHNSON, R. C. Measuring global value chains. Annual Review of Economics, , n. 0, 2018. Annual Reviews 4139 El Camino Way, PO Box 10139, Palo Alto, California 94303~….
  • [37] JOHNSON, R. C.; NOGUERA, G. Accounting for intermediates: Production sharing and trade in value added. Journal of international Economics, v. 86, n. 2, p. 224–236, 2012. Elsevier.
  • [38] KOOPMAN, R.; WANG, Z.; WEI, S.-J. Tracing value-added and double counting in gross exports. American Economic Review, v. 104, n. 2, p. 459–494, 2014.
  • [39] LAZAROVA, M.; TARIQUE, I. Knowledge transfer upon repatriation. Journal of World Business, v. 40, n. 4, p. 361–373, 2005.
  • [40] LEE, M.; YUN, J.; PYKA, A.; et al. How to respond to the Fourth Industrial Revolution, or the Second Information Technology Revolution? Dynamic new combinations between technology, market, and society through open innovation. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, v. 4, n. 3, p. 21, 2018. Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute.
  • [41] LOS, B.; TIMMER, M. P. Measuring Bilateral Exports of Value Added: A Unified Framework. 2018.
  • [42] MATTIOLI, E.; LAMONICA, G. R. The ICT role in the world economy: an input-output analysis. Journal of World Economic Research, v. 2, n. 2, p. 20–25, 2013.
  • [43] MAYER, J. Digitalization and industrialization: friends or foes? 2018.
  • [44] MILLER, R. E.; BLAIR, P. D. Input-output analysis: foundations and extensions. Cambridge university press, 2009.
  • [45] MIROUDOT, S. Services and Manufacturing in Global Value Chains: Is the Distinction Obsolete? , 2019. ADBI Working Paper 927.
  • [46] NAGENGAST, A. J.; STEHRER, R. The great collapse in value added trade. Review of International Economics, v. 24, n. 2, p. 392–421, 2016. Wiley Online Library.
  • [47] OECD. Digital Economy Outlook 2017. 2017.
  • [48] PORTER, M. E.; HEPPELMANN, J. E. How smart, connected products are transforming competition. Harvard business review, v. 92, n. 11, p. 64–88, 2014.
  • [49] VAN REENEN, J. Increasing differences between firms: market power and the macro-economy. , 2018. Centre for Economic Performance, London School of Economics and Political~….
  • [50] STANLEY, T. D.; DOUCOULIAGOS, H.; STEEL, P. Does ICT Generate Economic Growth? A Meta-Regression Analysis. Journal of economic surveys, v. 32, n. 3, p. 705–726, 2018. Wiley Online Library.
  • [51] STROHMAIER, R.; RAINER, A. Studying general purpose technologies in a multi-sector framework: The case of ICT in Denmark. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, v. 36, p. 34–49, 2016. Elsevier.
  • [52] THOMPSON, N.; SPANUTH, S. The Decline of Computers As a General Purpose Technology: Why Deep Learning and the End of Moore’s Law are Fragmenting Computing. Available at SSRN 3287769, 2018.
  • [53] TIMMER, M. P.; DIETZENBACHER, E.; LOS, B.; STEHRER, R.; VRIES, G. J. An Illustrated User Guide to the World Input–Output Database: the Case of Global Automotive Production. Review of International Economics, v. 23, n. 3, p. 575–605, 2015. Wiley Online Library.
  • [54] TIMMER, M. P.; LOS, B.; STEHRER, R.; DE VRIES, G. J.; OTHERS. An anatomy of the global trade slowdown based on the WIOD 2016 release. Groningen, NL, 2016.
  • [55] UNCTAD. Digital Economy Report. Geneva: United Nations Geneva, 2019.
  • [56] XU, Y.; DIETZENBACHER, E. A structural decomposition analysis of the emissions embodied in trade. Ecological Economics, v. 101, p. 10–20, 2014. Elsevier.
Como citar:

Souza, Vitória Laboury Rodrigues de; Montenegro, Rosa Lívia Gonçalves; "Inovação tecnológica ambiental: uma análise sobre o desempenho das firmas brasileiras", p. 1413-1433 . 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-879

últimos 30 dias | último ano | desde a publicação


downloads


visualizações


indexações