You are on page 1of 16

Kaylen Guzzi

Term Paper
Professor Seth Binder
Economic Development 243B
12 December 2013
Brazilian Economic Development: Their History and Their Future
Background:
Brazil is an industrialized country with an abundance of natural capital, and it currently
has a thriving economy. Its economy is ranked number eight worldwide based on gross domestic
product (GDP) as of 2012 (World Factbook Data). This place holding has Brazil in a favorable
spot when looking into how its economy has developed and when looking at future projections
of its growth. Past cycles of economic development began with export-led growth and slavery,
leading to import substitution industrialization, and to its current semi-liberal economic policy;
all in all, Brazil’s end result is a fragmented social and human capital stock. With economic
history and current economic policy in conjunction with global standings, Brazil would greatly
benefit from implementation of programs that focus on building up social and human capital in
an effort to develop the existing urban and rural slums. By implementing programs with the end
goal of developing the slums, Brazil could expect to see a rise in these areas hindering more full
development: income equality, human capabilities, and social capital. These variables are not
accounted for in GDP or in the Solow Model, but they do have substantial indirect effects on
GDP.
Starting in the early sixteenth century, Brazil’s economic development took root and
began to grow, initiating the start of some of the largest economic setbacks currently facing
Brazil. Brazil has been dependent on the cultivation and export of primary products as far back
as records are provided. Brazilwood, sugar, gold, and coffee, but especially the latter three
goods, have had the most significant impact on the export-led economic development that
surrounded these primary products. The first recorded export product from Brazil was
brazilwood, and it is how the country’s name originated (Baer 11). The Europeans used the bark
from the brazilwood tree as a dyestuff; although the collection of this wood was important for the
Europeans, no permanent settlements or industries were formed around its collection. The start
of export-led growth began around the year 1520 with the cultivation of sugarcane, which was
introduced to Brazil’s landscape by the Portuguese (Baer 11).

1

Sugarcane was the first primary product to have lasting economic impacts for Brazil. It
was grown near the northeastern coast of Brazil and was able to thrive in this area for many
reasons. The two primary advantages of this region included a favorable humid climate for
growth and port accessibility for shipping out products and receiving slave labor from Africa, for
the typical plantation had 80 to 100 slaves. Slave labor was used in the country until it was
abolished in 1888; it was predicted that over one-third of the population were newly liberated
citizens at this time (Brazilian Economy). For this large sector of the population consisting of
former slaves, there was no potential for developing their human capital in areas other than labor,
to gain the skills necessary for further economic development. Although the start of the sugar
industry provides minor details compared to the other large industries surrounding primary
products, it is feasible to say that this was the beginning of export-led growth because of large
scale production and massive export of sugarcane. Brazil held the natural comparative
advantage in the production of sugar, and it was an extremely profitable venture for the owners
of the plantations. The sugar market was a small industry for the economy because of the high
concentration of plantations along the coastline, and all of the income was held by these owners,
making for the start of high-income inequality across Brazil (Baer 12-14). Overall, development
was able to occur on a small scale in the areas surrounding the coastline, with investment in
plantations and large volume exports that directly impacted GDP. The sugar industry began to
decline with the third wave of exports, namely gold.
A new cycle of growth began in the 1690’s with the discovery of gold in the state of
Minas Gerais. There was migration experienced from all over Brazil and a wave of Portuguese
immigrants to this state. Small towns, complex occupational structures, artesian firms, and a
private banking group emerged for the first time surrounding the mining districts. There was a
new demand for food, hauling animals, and the import of consumer goods as a result of mining.
With a demand for food in the mining towns, there was an incentive to kick start agricultural
production in the areas surrounding the mines. Also, shipment of gold to the ports was
performed by pack animals integrating the South’s agricultural products to aid new demand.
There was a large increase in the value of the Brazilian colony following the gold rush; it is
estimated that half of the world’s gold output came from Brazil in the eighteenth century. With
this monetary increase added to their colony, the Portuguese demanded that one-fifth of the
payment go to the crown. There was a strict regulation in this industry to ensure that there were

2

no private ships sailing and that goods for the metropolitan areas could not be produced in
Brazil. These strict regulations would ensure the continued dependency on Portugal. The gold
cycle aided in the investment in capital as well as the start of small financial institutions, and
diversifying the economy proved to be crucial to development. The gold cycle came to an end in
1760 when the extremely profitable mines dried up (Baer 14-16). In turn with the gold industry

Figure 1
Coffee Exports 1821-1890
60,000
50,000
40,000
30,000
20,000
10,000
0
1821-1830

1831-1840

1841-1850

1851-1860

1861-1870

1871-1880

1881-1890

dying,

many reverted back to agricultural practices, leading to the fourth wave of exports, that being
coffee.
The coffee industry experienced rapid growth from the years 1820 to 1890. The decade
beginning with 1820 showed coffee was around 19 percent of aggregate export revenues, and it
climbed up to 63 percent of the aggregate export revenues by 1891 (Haber 35). [It is important
to note and directly relevant to development that Brazil gained independence in 1822
(Brazil.org). At this time, Great Britain was the center of the world economy, and Brazil’s flow
of international capital was primarily in and out of Great Britain. Also intertwined within the

Vertical axis data in 1000’s of 60 kg bags
[3,178 – 10,430 – 18,367 – 27,339 – 29,103 – 32,509 – 51,631]
(Data from Baer 17)

3

coffee cycle was the gain of independence, and at this time the population was 3.9 million with
1.2 million of those being slaves (Baer 16).] This industry dominated the Brazilian economy
because they had the higher comparative advantage in production as opposed to their other
primary products. The industry aided to shift Brazil’s economic center to São Paulo where the
large coffee estates were established; São Paulo remains the location of Brazil’s economic center
today. Coffee was shipped to the port Rio de Janeiro by mule, until the building of the British
railways in the 1860’s. In 1870, four British companies owned 72 percent of Brazil’s railroad
lines. The main policy surrounding the promotion of railroad construction contained subsidies
and guaranteed high rates of return. This aided further growth and promotion of the coffee
market moving into the twentieth century when coffee grew to 71 percent of aggregate exports
(Haber 35). In addition to the new coffee economy, there were additional benefits for Brazilian
development: investment in infrastructure, a new job market for immigrant workers, and capital
accumulation.
Brazil’s abundant supply of natural resources provided a natural comparative advantage
for the production and export of primary products. The production, cultivation, and export of
these natural resources had a direct impact on Brazil’s GDP from the sixteenth century and
beyond. Overall, in the scope of economic development, beneficial occurrences in the realm of
agriculture promoted development of urbanized infrastructure, investment in capital settlements,
and successful export-led growth. On the contrary, slave labor was used until 1888; with onethird of Brazil’s population consisting of slaves, there was no potential for development in
human or social capital among this population, and thus began the fragmentation. The forms of
human (ideas and abilities) and social (cooperation) capital were not maximized to complement
the high resource endowment. Also, less labor-intensive technologies were not introduced and
other non-agriculture industries were not promoted, because there was no incentive to reform
these industries. In short, the need for human capital development was crowded out by the
resource abundance causing the need for slave labor. Warner and Sachs hypothesize that
countries with high natural resource endowment grow more slowly than those without, and this
aligns with Brazil’s experience. During this time with growth heavily focused on the export of
natural capital, Brazil did suffer from this curse of natural resources. Immigrants were always a
small sector of the Brazilian population with small waves coming from Europe and Asia, yet

4

Brazil was ready to endogenize their labor supply to promote the development of a lasting
agricultural industry.
Brazil subsidized the transportation costs for immigrating and the response in supply was
large. In combination with agricultural growth in the coffee industry, immigrants brought in
ideas to develop urban infrastructure. Between the years of 1885 to 1909, around 2.8 million
European immigrants entered Brazil. The labor supply was extremely inelastic overseas, thus
that is
the

Year

Total
Exports
(in 000 £
Sterling)

GB (%)

1842

4,584

27.9

1852

8,418

1862
1872

USA (%)

Germ.

France

Port. (%)

Total (%)

(%)

(%)

16.6

11.8

6.0

7.5

69.7

33.5

31.5

4.8

5.9

4.1

79.8

13,424

37.8

12.5

4.1

12.6

6.3

73.2

22,392

37.1

29.4

7.7

8.8

6.2

89.1

why

supply was so high; with this high inelasticity, there was no need for an increase in real wages to
meet this new cost of living for immigrants, furthering the income inequality between the rich
and poor (Haber 38-39).
Immigration had a positive effect on the economic development of Brazil, especially in
the

Figure 2
Exports to Trading Partners

south,
since it

provided the country with a large number of economically ambitious people… ‘The
public subsidization of immigration was, for the short-run, a reasonably effective
substitute for investment in education as a means of building up the quality of human
resources in the economy’ (Baer 20).
A large consequence of the natural resource abundance and agricultural industry was that
additional factors furthering development, such as human capital, were crowded out by the
resource abundance. Human capital development was not a top priority of the government; it
became apparent that strong human capital did not coincide with the new population growth.

5

(Data from Haber 251)

Close to
the end of the nineteenth century, Brazil’s government was actively trying to protect their large
export of the above-listed primary products, which amounted to about 90% of total exports until
the 1930’s. The largest volumes of exports were shipped to the central industrial economies at
the time, which were Great Britain during the nineteenth century and the United States during the
twentieth century; also Germany, Portugal, and France were smaller economic centers as well for
their exports. Brazil began to become economically dependent on these nations, with prices and
the established aggregate revenue coming from the demand of these foreign economies. Thus
what happened to one large economic center elsewhere affected Brazil, being tied one-way to
those overseas economies. Whenever a foreign recession struck or when international price
levels fell, Brazil felt the detrimental effects to their export sector of revenue because of their
foreign dependency.
The government used price supports and import tariff exemptions to promote heavily
capitalized sugar mills. Coffee production ensued as well; during the first decades of the
twentieth century, coffee production heavily outweighed world demand, creating a massive
excess supply due to the rapid growth of this industry. This led to a five-year ban on planting
new coffee trees to attempt a slowdown in the growth of this once booming industry. In 1907,
São Paulo began the first valorization scheme, Convênio de Taubaté, in which the proceeds from
the export taxes and foreign loans used to purchase coffee were withheld from the market to
make prices stable once again (Baer 20-21). These schemes continued to prove effective,
enabling the coffee market to still remain present in the economy. With time, a number of
internal social changes occurred creating a need for a different market structure that would allow
for greater economic development potential. Yet the same export-dependent growth was to

6

change in the long run as a consequence of worldwide and social changes within Brazil, with
labor reforms which would affect the entire structure of the economy.
Many influential economists were advocating for change in the Brazilian economic
structure, whether it be complete reform of structure or diversification of products. One attempt
at direct economic reform came from the Cooke Mission. Beginning in 1942, a team of
Brazilian and American technicians determined how Brazil could be helpful in the war efforts
with potential to increase industrial production. The Cooke Mission pointed to many obstacles
with development of industry that Brazil was experiencing: “an inadequate transportation
system, a backward system for distributing fuels, lack of funds for industrial investments,
restrictions on foreign capital, and inadequate technical training facilities” (Baer 42). Brazil had
the potential to develop, but they were just going about it the wrong way with dependency on
exports. Also, Raul Prebisch began directing the Economic Commission for Latin America in
1948, and he presented many ideas and structure reforms that would be extremely conducive to
development. Prebisch deduced that countries which were heavily reliant on the export of
primary products, namely Brazil and its neighbors, needed to shift away from this dependency
for growth. This idea arose due to the fact that during the Great Depression, although all prices
fell, the prices of primary products fell even more. Insofar Brazil needed to shift away from their
dependency on the specialization in the export of primary products, and they needed to diversify
their economy with exports and production. Brazil took all of these strategies into account when
restructuring their new economic system.
Import Substitution Industrialization:
Brazil’s new economic system reformed to import substitution industrialization that
began around the end of World War II. It is the only policy of its kind that is a state-led model of
development which reflects internal decision-making (Neumann 1). The end result of import
substitution industrialization was successful in achieving high economic growth, a self-sufficient
industrial system, and economic independence, all seemingly conducive to high levels of
economic development. Policy makers used control over foreign exchange as the main means
for promoting import substitution industrialization. The first of these policies was called
exchange control, which existed from June 1947 until January 1953. Foreign exchange was
made available based on a five-category system of priorities, which were determined by the
Export-Import Department of the Banco do Brazil. Also, this same group was in charge of

7

import licensing in order to keep demand in check. Essential goods were permitted to cross
borders freely, but other goods determined to be superfluous were put in a long line for license
approvals. This ultimately created problems with the inflow and outflow of capital because there
was not sufficient inflow of capital to meet the needs of the wanted industrialization system,
resulting in a large deficit. Specifically between the year 1949 and 1952, $173 million (USD)
were exported while $13 million (USD) were imported. The foreign exchange system underwent
four large changes of system between the years of 1953 through 1963 with the ultimate goal in
mind to promote industry. The second change related to foreign exchange was a policy called
the multiple exchange rate system.
The multiple exchange rate system was introduced in January 1953; this policy was used
to steer toward a freer exchange rate system. The introduction of Law 1807 limited a free
exchange market, which would then allow the inflow and outflow of capital and its earnings, in
addition to enabling the buying and selling of foreign exchange for tourism. Also, the
government made a ‘special circumstance’ free exchange on the export goods in which they
wanted to use to stimulate growth. Controls were kept on capital earnings so that they would not
exceed eight to ten percent per year. Exports were divided into three categories under this policy,
as well between the exchange capabilities on the free market of 15, 30, and 50 percent.
Traditional primary product exports were put on a ‘minimum list;’ these exports were supposed
to sell in the official market by only exchanging with certain corresponding minimum prices, and
anything above was allowed to enter the market. Werner Baer claims that this policy was put
into place to “increase and diversify exports… and was done for political and psychological
reasons” (55). This policy created an incentive to generate tourism and profit remittances, and it
minimized the stimulus to exports and capital inflows. Although this was a more liberated
import system as opposed to a tariff system, this was heavily outweighed by the increase in
devaluation of the currency and continued to help raise inflation (Baer 54-56). This policy ended
in the year 1957 and gave way to a new foreign exchange policy with further changes in
exchange controls.
In the year of 1957, the exchange system underwent another elementary change with the
passage of Law 3244. Two large structural changes came to foreign exchange; the first being ad
valoerm tariffs which were as high as 150 percent, and also the categories of exchange priorities
went from five down to two. The first of two new categories included a generalized grouping

8

which included raw materials, capital goods, and certain essential consumer goods. The second
boiled-down category was more specific and fully encompassed all goods which were not
considered essential. “The Brazilian policymakers were convinced that high rates of economic
growth and modernization could be obtained only through the type of structural changes that
industrialization could bring about” (Baer 56). The large tariff law which ranged generally from
60, 80, and 150 percent was to give way for the protection of new domestic industries. These
goods that were already being produced in large enough quantities had a price change of two to
three times international prices levels, yet goods that were favorable for production, such as the
raw materials, were put in the general category and were subsidized at a high rate. Eventually
the market began to open up to the free trade of exports in the year 1959. During the time of the
changes with exchange controls policy, the dollar in the free market was constantly below the
rate in the general category. This caused foreign enterprises that remitted profits and Brazilians
traveling abroad to receive a more favorable rate than the importers of essential goods. Due to
this fact, the government extracted forced loans on both importers and exporters. Importers had
to pay the exchange rate to the auction market, while exporters received a small portion of the
exchange rate; the remaining balance was put toward six-month bills in the Banco do Brazil
(Baer 56-58). The fourth and final foreign exchange policy was the exchange reform.
In the year 1961, this exchange reform policy was implemented with the SUMOC
Instruction 204. The reform included the categories of imports and exports, where all imports
and exports were placed on the free market, except coffee. Coffee was surrounded with further
government mandates requiring exporters to provide $22 (USD) per bag, so then the government
could finance the supply of excess production. The years of 1962 and 1963 were dominated by
political crisis, as was implemented by nationalists, resulting in the passage of a high profit
remittance act. What followed were a decline of foreign exchange earnings from exports and an
acceleration of the rate of inflation.
The foreign exchange policy was used as a tool, and it was perhaps the most important
choice to drive import substitution industrialization throughout the 1950’s and 1960’s. These
above-listed policies were applied with the Law of Similars. This law was a base for tariff
protection and contained the capability to register for production of a good that had a high
foreign exchange rate. For this, a Brazilian producer had to receive approval by law for
“sufficient quality and quantity” (Baer 58-59), yet this was mandated by the government with the

9

discretion of the reviewer. The end goal of the Law of Similars was to promote vertical
integration alongside industrialization. One American company manufacturing in Brazil quotes:
The Operation of the Law of Similars has been a most powerful incentive for foreign
investors to move from importing into assembly, or from assembly to full-fledged
manufacturing. The essential feature of the incentive has been fear of outright exclusion
from the market rather than hope for preferential treatment in relation to competitors…
the critical factor impelling U.S. companies to move to preserve their market position by
building local plants (Baer 59).
This law gave sufficient incentive to local groups to become supplying firms, which promoted
the capital goods industry. Essentially this completely closed Brazil’s economy with the move of
multinational corporations into Brazil, with all of the added value happening within Brazilian
borders.
The import substitution industrialization method of growth certainly benefitted GDP and
advanced Brazil’s economic standings in comparison to its neighboring countries. In total,
during the bulk years of this policy from 1956 through 1962, the growth rate of the economy was
7.8 percent. Agricultural real product increased by 87 percent, and industrial growth increased
by 262 percent. In measurement of GDP, agriculture was responsible for 18 percent, and heavy
industry made up the other 82 percent. The most dynamic sector of the economy during this
time was industry with high growth rates and exchange policy directly incentivizing this growth
(Baer 48-66). Import substitution industrialization certainly achieved the goals it sought: high
economic growth, a self-sufficient industrial system, and economic independence. With all of
these things happening due to import substitution industrialization, it was expected that there
would be high levels of economic development. Overall Brazil was able to develop in certain
areas: there was addition of new industry to the economy, they were able to diversify their
exports to not be reliant on export of the primary products, and there was investment in capital.
Import substitution industrialization as a means of economic development certainly had
beneficial short-term effects for the economy, until policymakers could no longer sustain
economic growth from this system. Contrary to popular belief of the ‘failure theorists,’ import
substitution industrialization was not a complete flop; an extremely successful worldwide
competitive car company came from this area and is still very successful today.

10

Figure 3
GDP Real Percentage Change Per Year

Percentage Change Per Year

Data adapted from Quandl.com
As it always goes, there is something wrong to be found with policy implementation.
There was a rise in GDP upon analyzing the benefits of the policy change, but there are many
things for which GDP and the Solow Model do not account. In the case of Brazil, the largest
thing that import substitution industrialization failed to capture was the large income inequality.
The Gini Index was and remains extremely high compared to the rest of the world. According to
The World Factbook as of 2012, Brazil has the seventeenth highest Gini Index in the world,
breaking down to 21.4 percent of the population below the poverty line, with the highest ten
percent of the population containing 42.9 percent of the country’s income. Although the high
Gini Index did not solely come from import substitution industrialization, it certainly was
responsible for part of the growth of this index, aiding to further income disparity and expand
impoverished areas. During this time, economic development was solely reliant on industry,
which was emphasized more by means of government spending in this area. Fewer funds were
given to other areas necessary for development, such as targeted social welfare programs aiding
the poor, which would have promoted the development of human and social capital. Just like the

11

effects of the curse of natural resources, social and human capital were crowded out by industrial
growth, and the effects are still felt today as measured with their high Gini Index.

Figure 4 - Gini Coefficient
66
64
62
60
58
56
54
52
50
48

Data adapted from Quandl.com

Alongside the new capital industry, there was a large rural-to-urban migration. About 80
percent of Brazil’s population moved to the urban areas which were experiencing economic
growth as a result of import substitution industrialization. The population growth per year in
urban areas was around six percent during this time, while the growth of the job market was
about 2.5 percent (Baer 63). There was no possible way that the urban areas could absorb this
grand migration into the cities. This led to the development of the slums in large urban areas,
and it gave way to greater disparity among income and high rates of unemployment. In the same
vein, capital-intensive industry was improving efficiencies resulting in a declining need for
workers, yet it was overall economically beneficial due to the lowering of prices. Brazil was in
essence a completely self-sufficient country that did not need to compete in industry worldwide,
thus there was not large emphasis placed on other efficiencies because there was no ‘real’ intermarket competition. This caused economists like Simon Teitel and Francisco Thoumi to
question the export-led growth strategy that was implemented by Brazil. They concluded that a
combined high natural resource endowment, a large domestic market, and a highly skilled labor
force is likely not conducive to high exports or sustained development coming from its

12

implementation. Also, it was not probable for high levels of economic development to result
from the growth of capitalized industry.
Figure 5
Population Change 1961-2012

Change in size

100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%

Rural

Urban

Data adapted from Quandl.com

In order to combat the high level of import substitution industrialization and bankruptcy
that followed, Brazil transformed its economy by implementing neoliberal policies that are based
from neoclassic theory. Neoclassical theory states that market policies should have little-to-no
government involvement in order to have economic success. The concept that “foreign trade and
international prices should become the engine for growth… Strict neoclassical theorists see a
minimalist role for the state as a guarantor of rules and property rights and a provider of a limited
array of public goods” (Neumann 14). The market is to be commanded by the invisible hand,
allowing market forces to drive the market quantity and demand. With the almost 30-year long
cycle of import substitution industrialization combined with the sugar, gold, and coffee cycles,
government intervention and rule of market was key for the large increase in GDP growth. Yet
as this success in GDP growth was occurring, so was the growth of income disparity among
urban centers and rural areas. The slums are continuously growing all over Brazil, in both rural
areas and urban centers, as a direct result of the large income disparity that has been high since
the start of the sugar cycle. There has been little government support to aid the families that are
in the lowest ten percent income bracket who were receiving 0.8 percent of national income in

13

the year 2012 (World Factbook Data). The breakdown of Brazil’s income brackets is extremely
shocking and is clearly hindering economic prosperity, by creating substantial differences
between top and bottom income brackets leading to further fragmented human capital.
Proposed Change:
Neoliberal policies have proven to be most effective for Brazil to this day for sustaining
long-term economic growth, especially with the recent Brazilian miracle of growth. With the
ending of import substitution industrialization and tight foreign exchange policy, Brazil was able
to open up its economy. This allowed competition from markets abroad to enter, which caused
the Brazilian market to be more efficient in its means of production and also to improve the
quality of produced goods. Also, by privatizing the economy and shifting away from state-led
enterprises, the system would be less corrupt by making it independent from the government’s
control, following the ideas surrounding the development of The Washington Consensus. These
policies have proven to be effective for promoting sustained development, and Brazil should
continue on with full implementation of neoliberal policies. If this were to occur with further
expansion, there would be an increase in Solow’s residual or total factor productivity. With the
economy opening up, there would be more room for human capital to flow through the economy.
The areas of technological innovation would continue to rise allowing the population and
technology to grow with exogenous factors. With the rise of total factor productivity, there
would also be indirect yet substantial effects on the development and growth of human capital,
because the economy would be more efficient.
Reiterating the 2012 data from The World Factbook, Brazil has the seventeenth highest
Gini Index in the world at 51.9. Brazil’s population is just over 201 million, having 21.4 percent
of the population below the poverty line. As far as income dispersion, the highest ten percent of
the population has 42.9 percent of the country’s income. These figures tell of an extremely high
income inequality. Although the Gini Index has decreased marginally over time, it is still one of
the highest in the world. Brazil would benefit from more programs to try and redistribute
income, because of the long history of income inequality. From high levels of income inequality
and the slum areas, Brazil has large fragmented social and human capital. This entire
fragmentation comes from the above-listed factors, woven in with Brazil’s history of
development, and the crowding out of these two important forms of non-measurable capital. If
programs were implemented with the end goal in mind to redistribute income, Brazil would

14

perhaps see growth in social capital across all income brackets, equaling out overall the large
disparity created through history. The program Bolsa Familia is a conditional cash transfer
program that allows low-income families to receive a large sum of income for sending their
children to school. This program has created incentive to not only educate children to build
human capital for long-term benefit, but it has also creatively tied in a payment granted for
certain terms. Creating more programs to transfer income, and possibly promote development of
human capital, would yield the same effects as Bolsa Familia with increased human and social
capital. Poverty is an extremely prevalent problem among Brazil’s population with 21.4 percent
living below the poverty line; if this large percentage of the population was given the same
opportunity to prosper as its wealthier citizens, Brazil’s economy would develop in the areas of
human capital.
Brazil is an industrialized country with abundant natural resources, and it currently has a
thriving economy. Its economy is ranked number eight worldwide based on GDP as of 2012
(World Fact Book Data). Economic development began with export-led growth, leading to
import substitution industrialization, to a current semi-liberal economic policy, all ending in a
high level of economic inequality across the entire population. If Brazil were to continue with
implementation of further neoliberal policy and have more programs aiming at developing the
slums for ultimately building social and human capital, the economy would flourish even more.
For certain Brazil currently has a good industrial system and has been deemed a miracle country
as of late for its growth; although currently the growth is being hindered by poor human and
social capital, as well as high economic inequality. Brazil could command the world economy if
it was able to overcome these fixable problems.
Works Cited:
Baer, Werner. The Brazilian Economy: Growth and Development. 5th ed. Westport, Connecticut,
London: Praeger, 2001. Print.
"Brazil Data." Quandl.com. N.p., 1 Dec. 2013. Web. 15 Nov. 2013.
<http://www.quandl.com/economics/brazil-all-economic-indicators>.
"Brazilian Economy." A Study Of The Country. N.p., n.d. Web. 21 Nov. 2013.
<http://www.brazil.org.nz/page/brazilian-economy.aspx>.

15

Cardoso, Eliana, and Vladimir Teles. "A Brief History of Brazil’s Growth." Organisation for
Economic Cooperation and Development. OECD, 24 Sept. 2009. Web. 5 Nov. 2013.
<http://www.oecd.org/economy/growth/43823436.pdf>.
"Central Intelligence Agency -The World Factbook." South America - Brazil. N.p., 2012. Web.
10 Nov. 2013. <https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-worldfactbook/geos/iv.html>.
Estevadeordal, Antoni, and Alan M. Taylor. "Is the Washington Consensus Dead? Growth,
Openness, and The Great Liberlization." National Bureau of Economic Research (2008):
1-46. Web.
Haber, Stephen H. How Latin America Fell Behind: Essays on the Economic Histories of Brazil
and Mexico, 1800-1914. Stanford, CA: Stanford University, 1997. Print.
"Inequality and Economic Development in Brazil." The World Bank. The International Bank for
Reconstruction and Development, 2004. Web. 01 Nov. 2013. <http://wwwwds.worldbank.org/>.
"Inequality in Brazil." GlobalSecurity.org. N.p., 15 Sept. 2013. Web. 01 Dec. 2013.
<http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/brazil/inequality.htm>.
Neumann, Steven. "Import Substitution Industrialization and its Conditionalities for Economic
Development: A Comparative Analysis of Brazil and South Korea." Ed. Dr. Thomas
Fetzer. Central European University (n.d.): I-55. Web. 10 Nov. 2013.
Sachs, Jeffrey D., and Andrew M. Warner. "Natural Resources and Economic Development The
Curse of Natural Resources." European Economic Review(2001): 827-38. Print.

16