In 2008, Kirsten Bound wrote the Natural Knowledge Economy.
The report was published by UK think tank Demos as part of the Atlas of Ideas, a project that mapped the defining characteristics of emerging economies. The objective was to explore the science and innovation systems in each country, looking not only for potential models of economic development but also opportunities for mutual benefit.
The project was based on the assumption that new models of economic development were appearing.
This thinking believes that the pathways to growth are different for each nation. What works well in one place is unlikely to be replicated easily in another. Each country needs to uncover and exploit its comparative advantage, based on its own set of resources, skills and other factors. When combined in the right way, these elements can create a unique position for the country on the world stage.
In Brazil, what were the defining characteristics of its emerging economy? Was there the potential to do science and innovation differently? Ultimately, how would Brazil develop?
Extensive field research was completed in 2007, including interviews with over 100 policy makers and visits to seven states. This was a year of pre-crisis Brazilian optimism. Many believed real progress was happening and the country’s potential was starting to be realised.
Meanwhile in the UK and other developed countries, amidst a mix of hype and cynicism towards the BRICs, there was an underlying awareness in the policy communities that it was necessary to understand these new economies.
Over the course of these visits and interviews across the country, a narrative started to emerge.
The key idea was that Brazil didn’t seem to be following a traditional, linear model of development.
That is, one that starts as an agricultural economy utilising its natural resources, moving up to being a manufacturing-based industrial economy, before progressing to a knowledge economy, focused on science, innovation and entrepreneurship.
Instead of seeing natural resources and knowledge as two extremes on the axis of economic development, Bound described Brazil as a hybrid.
A ‘natural knowledge economy’.
The uniqueness of the country’s innovation system — the key that could potentially lead to sustainable economic development — was to be found precisely in the combination of knowledge and natural resources:
“From oil and hydropower to biofuels and agriculture, from biodiversity development to the climate change properties of the Amazon rainforest, Brazilian innovation is at its best when applying the ingenuity of its people to its natural assets.”
In support of this vision, there were numerous positive indicators in science and innovation.
The number of postgraduate students in Brazil’s universities had increased tenfold over the previous twenty years. The number of science PhDs had grown at an average of 12% per year over the previous decade. The country was producing scientific research at a rate never seen before in its recent history.
In addition to all this, there was a sense of propitious timing. Brazil was starting to build its capabilities in these areas at a time of increased global interest on issues such as energy, climate change and the environment.
Could it really be that the innovation that Brazil was specialising in was exactly what the rest of the world was looking for?
It seemed like a perfect fit.
Fast forward a decade.
Looking back in 2018, Bound acknowledges that the Natural Knowledge Economy was written at a period of “extreme optimism”.
Even for a country with a historical precedent for boom and bust cycles, the intervening years have been particularly tough.
Anyone with half an eye on Brazil knows the story.
The end of the commodities boom, the country’s worst ever recession, record highs in unemployment, corruption scandals and investigations on the largest possible scale, an impeached president, drastic reductions to education and R&D budgets, escalating violence and public security concerns, and the rise in support for populist, far-right politics.
In a hurting, divided country, there’s something that most Brazilians can agree on: this last decade has been an extended crisis.
Within this context, who is still talking about innovation? Who is thinking about it? Who is taking care of it?
It’s a reflection of the severity of basic problems in Brazil that a conversation on innovation can feel almost peripheral or superfluous. The 2018 presidential election campaign agenda was dominated by public security and other pressing subjects. No president was ever elected based on the strength of their science and innovation policy.
Put crudely: with increasing violence and people fearing their own safety, shouldn’t we put our attention there, rather than on the number of scientific papers we are publishing?
It is tempting to see the Natural Knowledge Economy as a failed opportunity. A sliding-doors glimpse of an alternative path not taken. A vision of what might have been.
It is painful to reflect that some of the basic premises for optimism found in the report — such as steady growth and a stable democracy — are no longer the country’s reality.
However, re-reading the text, I was struck that it it remains a useful narrative for how Brazil can move forward. It contains important messages that should resonate for anyone working with innovation in Brazil, either directly or indirectly.
It emphasises how innovation is fundamental for economic growth and competitiveness. Sometimes this message gets lost amongst the noise of other social and economic indicators. It shouldn’t. Innovation — and by this I mean real innovation, that necessarily generates wider value for society — is a central driver to improve the country’s future.
It also highlights how Brazil isn’t on a straight line of development. Progress isn’t linear. Sometimes steps back happen as well as steps forward, and this is to be expected. What’s important is to not lose sight of the larger vision showing where longer-term growth can come from.
Finally, it’s a reminder that making a country competitive is something different from simply making it attractive to foreign investors. Competitiveness stems not only from its natural resources. It must also be grounded in its history and culture, its values and its people.
It is in the unique combinations of these elements that a country creates its advantages and discovers a path of sustainable progress.
| by Tom Moore, Mandalah São Paulo.
