Abstract
The Brazilian pesticide industry evolution has been supported by agriculture and industrial policies. Their main objective has been the stimulus of pesticide consumption. The policies aiming to create production facilities in Brazil were insufficient due to: import substitution policies limitations; and the logic of factories location by the multinational companies, which control the world pesticide market. The creation of a stricter regulation on pesticides has been a focus of tension and disarticulation of policies as the consumption and demand of registration applications have increased. The objective of this article is to discuss the insufficiency or lack of coordination of different policies that fall upon the Brazilian pesticide industry. It is proposed then a coordination strategy aiming at promoting and combining sustainability and competitiveness conditions, through the stimulus of technological innovation.References
AENDA – Associação Brasileira dos Defensivos Genéricos. Alto custo para registrar defensivos genéricos. Editoriais. São Paulo. Seção Associadas, n. 4, 2008. Disponível em: http://www.aenda.com.br/informativo_004.htm. Acesso em: 10 jan. 2008.
AMBEC, S.; COHEN, M.; STEWART, E.; LANOIE, P. The Porter hypothesis at 20: can environmental regulation enhance innovation and competitiveness? Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, v. 7, n. 1, p. 2-22, 2013.
ANVISA. Situação de pleitos de registro. 2014. Disponível em: http://portal.anvisa.gov.br/wps/content/Anvisa+Portal/Anvisa/Inicio/Agrotoxicos+e+Toxicologia/Assuntos+de+Interesse/Situacao+de+Pleitos+de+Registro. Acesso em: 02 jul. 2014.
BAIN, J. Barriers to new competition. Cambridge: Harvard U.P., 1956.
BERGMAN, A.; HEINDEL, J.; JOBLING, S.; KIDD, K.; ZOELLER, T. State of the science of endocrine disrupting chemicals – 2012. World Health Organization; United Nations Environment Programme, 2012.
BORRÁS, S. The widening and deepening of innovation policy: what conditions provide for effective governance? Copenhagen: Lund University, 2009 (Paper n. 2009/02. CIRCLE).
BRASIL. Ministério do Desenvolvimento, Indústria e Comércio Exterior. Nota Técnica no 61/07/CGTP/DESIT/SDP de 24/08/2007. Fórum de Competitividade de Agroquímicos, proposição de novo enfoque de desenvolvimento de agroquímicos no Brasil. Diálogo para o Desenvolvimento. Brasília, 2007.
BRASIL. Câmara dos Deputados. PEC 491/2010. Disponível em: http://www.camara.gov.br/proposicoesWeb/fichadetramitacao?idProposicao=480716. Acesso em: 09 dez. 2014.
BULL, D.; HATHAWAY, D. Pragas e venenos: agrotóxicos no Brasil e no terceiro mundo. Petrópolis: Vozes, 1986.
CHEMINOVA INDIA LTD. Acephate 75% SP. 2014. Disponível em: http://www.cheminovaindia.in/docs/insecticides/acephate%20%28lucid-75%29/index.html. Acesso em 14/07/2014.
COMTRADE. Metadata & Reference: commodities list. 2014. Disponível em: http:// comtrade.un.org/db/mr/rfCommoditiesList.aspx?px=H3&cc=3808. Acesso em 06 mar. 2014.
COMTRADE. United Nations Comtrade Database. 2014. Disponível em: http://comtrade.un.org/data/. Acesso em: 03 jul. 2014.
CONSTANTINI, V.; MAZZANTI, M. On the green and innovative side of trade competitiveness? The impact of environmental policies and innovation on EU exports. Research Policy, v. 4, n.1, p. 132-153, 2012.
CTA. Memória da Segunda Reunião Extraordinária do Comitê Técnico para Assessoramento de Agrotóxicos de 2013. Brasília, 13/03/2013.
DUNNING, J.; LUNDAN, S. Multinational enterprises and the global economy. Northampton: Edward Elgar Publishers, 2008.
EC – European Commission. Priority List. Annex 1. Candidate list of 553 substances. Disponível em: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/chemicals/endocrine/strategy/being_en.htm. Acesso em: 05 maio 2014.
EISNER, M. Regulatory politics in transition. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins U.P., 2000.
FAO. International Code of Conduct on the Distribution and Use of Pesticides. Disponível em: http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/templates/agphome/documents/Pests_Pesticides/Code/Code2013.pdf. Acesso em: 12 jul. 2013.
FLANAGAN, K.; UYARRA, E.; LARANJA, M. Reconcetualizing the ‘policy mix’ for innovation. Research Policy, v. 40, p. 702-713, 2011.
FRANCO, C. A formulação da política de agrotóxicos no Brasil. Dissertação (Mestrado em Políticas Públicas). Curitiba: Universidade Federal do Paraná, 2014.
HSE – Health and Safe Executive. Extended impact assessment study of the human health and environmental criteria for endocrine disrupting substances proposed by HSE, CRD. March 2013 (Report n. Defra9088.02). Disponível em: http://randd.defra.gov.uk/Document.aspx?Document=11345_PS2812finalreportfull.pdf. Acesso em: 05 maio 2014.
IPEA. Programa Nacional de Defensivos Agrícolas. Documento Básico. Brasília, 1975.
KAGEYAMA, A. O novo padrão agrícola brasileiro: do complexo rural aos complexos agroindustriais. In: DELGADO, G. et al. (Orgs.). Agricultura e políticas públicas. Brasília: Ipea, 1990.
KEMI. Interpretation in Sweden of the impact of the ‘cut-off” criteria adopted in common position of the Council concerning the Regulation of placing plant protection products on the market. September 2008 (Document n. 11.119/08). Disponível em: http://www.kemi.se/Documents/Bekampningsmedel/Docs_eng/SE_positionpapper_annenII_sep08.pdf. Acesso em: 05 maio 2014.
KUPFER, D.; FERRAZ, J. C.; MARQUES, F. The return of industrial policy in Brazil. In: STIGLITZ, J.; YIFU, J .L. (Eds.). The industrial policy revolution I. Hampshire: Palgrave McMillan, 2013.
LANKOSKI, L. Linkages between environmental policy and competitiveness. OECD Environment Working Papers, n. 13, 2010.
LANOIE, P. et al. Environmental policy, innovation and performance: new insights on the Porter hypothesis. Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, v. 20, n. 3, p. 803-842, 2011.
LENGRAND, L. et al. Innovation tomorrow: innovation policy and the regulatory framework. European Commission. Directorate-General for Enterprise. EUR 17052. Luxembourg, 2002 (Innovation papers, n. 28).
MAGRO, E.; WILSON, J. Complex innovation policy systems: towards an evaluation mix. Research Policy, v. 42, p. 1647-1656, 2013.
MAJONE, G. The rise of statutory regulation in Europe. In: MAJONE, G. (Org.). Regulating Europe. London: Routledge, 1996.
MARCO, G.; HOLLINGWORTH, R.; PLIMMER, J. Regulation of agrochemicals: a driving force in their evolution. Washington D.C.: American Chemical Sociey, 1991.
MENDES, L. H. Restrição a suco brasileiro nos EUA causaria perdas de US$ 100 milhões. Valor Econômico, 31/01/12.
MOREIRA, A. Bug brilha em lista de “startups” inovadoras. Valor Econômico, 02/09/2013.
NAIDIN, L. C. Crescimento e competição na indústria de defensivos agrícolas no Brasil. Dissertação (Mestrado em Desenvolvimento Agrícola). Rio de Janeiro: Universidade Federal Rural do Rio de Janeiro, 1985.
O ESTADO DE S. PAULO. Parlamentares fazem lobby da indústria na ANVISA. 22/05/2012. Disponível em: http://www.estadao.com.br/noticias/geral,parlamentares-fazem-lobby-da--industria-na-anvisa,876231. Acesso em: 06 jun. 2014.
PELAEZ, V; TERRA, F.; SILVA, L. R. A regulamentação dos agrotóxicos no Brasil: entre o poder de mercado e a defesa da saúde e do meio ambiente. Revista de Economia, v. 36, n. 1, p. 27-48, 2010.
PELAEZ, V.; SILVA, L.; BORGES, E. Regulation of pesticides: a comparative analysis. Science & Public Policy, v. 40, n. 5, p. 644-656, 2013.
PHILLIPS McDOUGALL. The cost of new agrochemical product discovery, development & registration and research & development predictions for the future. A Consultancy Study for Crop Life America and the European Crop Protection Association. United Kingdom, January 2010.
PORTER, M. E. America’s green strategy. Scientific American, v. 264, n. 4, p. 96, 1991.
PORTER, M. E.; VAN DER LINDE, C. Green and competitive: ending the stalemate. Harvard Business Review, v. 73, n. 5, p. 119-134, 1995a.
PORTER, M. E. Toward a new conception of the environment-competitiveness relationship. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, v. 9, n. 4, p. 97-118, 1995b.
SILVEIRA, J. M. Estudos sobre a competitividade industrial brasileira: competitividade da indústria de defensivos agrícolas. Campinas: Ecib/Unicamp/MCT, 1993.
SILVEIRA, J. M.; FUTINO, A. M. O plano nacional de defensivos agrícolas e a criação da indústria brasileira de defensivos. Boletim Técnico do Instituto de Economia Agrícola, v. 37, n. 3, p. 129-146, 1990.
SCHUMPETER, J. Capitalism, socialism and democracy. New York: Harper & Row, 1975.
SINDIVEG – Sindicato Nacional da Indústria de Produtos para Defesa Vegetal. Sindiveg registra crescimento no setor de defensivos em 2013. São Paulo, 23/06/2014. Disponível em: http://www.sindiveg.org.br/docs/RELEASE_SINDIVEG_RESULTADOS_2013.pdf. Acesso em: 04 jul. 2014.
SYNGENTA CROP PROTECTION INC. ATTrex. Restricted use pesticide. Disponível em: http://www.syngentacropprotection.com/pdf/labels/SCP497AL38SS0509.pdf. Acesso em: 14 jul. 2014.
USDA – United States Department of Agriculture. Farm income and wealth statistics. Disponível em: http://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/farm-income-and-wealth-statistics/production-expenses.aspx#.Uq9bdo2dGy0. Acesso em: 12 dez. 2013.
UYARRA, E. What is evolutionary about ‘regional systems of innovation’? Implications for regional policy. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, v. 20, p. 115-137, 2010.
The content of the articles and reviews published in RBI are of absolute and exclusive responsibility of their authors.
Downloads
