IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ecr/col039/5755.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Expenditures, investment and financing for sustainable development in Brazil

Author

Listed:
  • Young, Carlos Eduardo
  • Roncisvalle, Carlos A.

Abstract

The objective of this study is to examine the evolution and characteristics of the financing for the nvironment in Brazil, in order to identify the advances and retreats after the Rio 92 Conference. Brazil has a very decentralized administration, composed of three independent levels of public administration: the federal government, 27 state governments, and more than 5000 municipios," or municipalities; all of them with specific environmental institutions. However, at the time of the completion of this report, there were no indicators that aggregate information from these different institutional levels for the 1992-2001 period.(1) Thus, this study was a first effort to generate this kind of figures. Given the very short time for its completion, the main priority was to identify the resource flows from the federal government and some selected states. Efforts to estimate spending on pollution control and other environmental activities by the private sector were also made. In addition, the issue of funding sources is also discussed. Despite many methodological problems involved in the elaboration of these indicators, it was possible to identify trends and conclusions for environmental spending. At the federal government level, it was estimated that environmental expenditures were between 0.4% and 1% of the federal spending. Another important finding was that, although there was an official commitment to increase efforts in this area after the Rio 92 Conference, the overall federal government expenditures in environmental issues did not increase during the 1993-2000 period. Moreover, a matter of concern was the declining quality of this spending, with fewer resources directed to end-activities and more money diverted to means-expenditures. An important cause of this was the increasing share of debt related expenditures (interests and amortization) in the total budget. On the other hand, investments suffered cutbacks, particularly in the more recent period, and the expenditures in personnel fell systematically by 25% in constant prices during the second half of the nineties. Environmental projects are the most important single element in international cooperation agreements. However, the flow of foreign resources presented a declining trend since 1994, oscillating between 6% and 17% of total expenditures. Most of these resources come from external credit operations (loans), which means that in the long term, they represent an extra pressure of financial expenses in the budget. The proportion of international donations/total expenditures in 2000 fell to the lowest level in the series (2.0%), clearly indicating the decline of international support for environmental projects in Brazil. Results for the 1996-98 period show that, if sanitation costs are included (an overestimate since it also considers water supply), environmental expenditures are relatively more important for local governments: around 9% of the total public spending in the sample of municipios considered. State governments are in the second position, spending around 1.5% of their budget on environmental issues, in contrast to the less than 1% of the federal government. For this reason, there remains a clear need to generate better aggregate figures for the states and municipios for the whole period. The methodologies used for public budgeting and expenditure control vary widely, making it very hard to supply compatible aggregate numbers. In the three states where longer time series were estimated (São Paulo, Paraná and Rio Grande do Sul), there was no consistent trend of increasing expenditures on environmental objectives. Another gap that needs to be fulfilled refers to the private sector environmental spending. There were positive signals which indicated that the private sector is getting more concerned with the environmental issues, particularly those agents that have interests/responsibilities at the international level. It was calculated that the environmental spending of the industry sector was around R$ 160 million per year, slightly less than 1% of its value added. Although it is expected that this number will increase in the future, it is considerably lower than the public sector spending on environmental issues. It is very difficult to aggregate all these figures, but assuming for the year 2000 that the public spending on environmental issues was of 1.5% of the total, the public environmental spending would be of 0.33% of GDP, and an annual expenditure per capita of R$ 22.9 per capita (US$ 9.2 per capita). If the estimated industrial environmental spending (R$ 160 million) is added, the total spending becomes R$ 4.1 billion (0.34% of GDP), or R$ 23.9 per capita (US$ 9.6 per capita). Most of the funding for environmental projects comes from the government (mainly federal, through BNDES), international development agencies, or from companies' own resources. The private financial sector has a minor role on the financing of environmental expenditures but, gain, there are signals of positive changes, with the creation of innovative private funds specialized in environmentally friendly projects that combine financial and "green" interests as an example. The consolidation of economic instruments in international environmental agreements, particularly the Kyoto Protocol on greenhouse gases emissions, may accelerate this new financial market. Another potential source of funding for environmental projects is connected to the implementation of economic instruments in the environmental management system. Command-andcontrol procedures, such as licensing and emission standards, largely dominate the environmental regulation in Brazil. However, some interesting experiences, such as the "green" tax rebound (ICMS verde) and the recent changes in the water resources policy adopting the user/polluter-pays principle, indicate that the role of economic instruments will increase and, consequently, that there is potential for developing self-sustained financial mechanisms to sponsor environmental expenditures. (1) After the completion of this research, the Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics (IBGE) published estimates of public spending for the 1996-98 period (IBGE 2001). Whenever relevant, these figures were also added to the analysis, but with an alert that they were obtained using different methodological procedures."

Suggested Citation

  • Young, Carlos Eduardo & Roncisvalle, Carlos A., 2002. "Expenditures, investment and financing for sustainable development in Brazil," Medio Ambiente y Desarrollo 5755, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL).
  • Handle: RePEc:ecr:col039:5755
    Note: Includes bibliography
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://repositorio.cepal.org/handle/11362/5755
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ronaldo Seroa da Motta & Claudio Abramovay Ferraz do Amaral, 2001. "Regulação, Mercado ou Pressão Social? Os Determinantes do Investimento Ambiental na Indústria," Anais do XXIX Encontro Nacional de Economia [Proceedings of the 29th Brazilian Economics Meeting] 088, ANPEC - Associação Nacional dos Centros de Pós-Graduação em Economia [Brazilian Association of Graduate Programs in Economics].
    2. Motta, Ronaldo Seroa da, 2001. "Tributación ambiental, macroeconomía y medio ambiente en América Latina: aspectos conceptuales y el caso de Brasil," Macroeconomía del Desarrollo 5416, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL).
    3. Mohan Munasinghe & Osvaldo Sunkel & Carlos de Miguel (ed.), 2001. "The Sustainability of Long-term Growth," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2206.
    4. Young, Carlos Eduardo Frickmann, 1998. "Industrial Pollution and Export-oriented Policies in Brazil," Revista Brasileira de Economia - RBE, EPGE Brazilian School of Economics and Finance - FGV EPGE (Brazil), vol. 52(4), October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Winchester, Lucy, 2005. "Sustainable human settlements development in Latin America and the Caribbean," Medio Ambiente y Desarrollo 5635, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL).
    2. -, 2002. "Globalização e desenvolvimento," Libros y Documentos Institucionales, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL), number 2727 edited by Cepal.
    3. Rajack, Robin & Barhate, Shrikant, 2004. "Urban poverty and habitat precariousness in the Caribbean," Medio Ambiente y Desarrollo 5622, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL).
    4. Winchester, Lucy, 2006. "El desarrollo sostenible de los asentamientos humanos en América Latina y el Caribe," Medio Ambiente y Desarrollo 5671, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL).
    5. Coutinho, Marília, 2004. "Technological evaluation of biotechnology capability in Amazon institutions," Medio Ambiente y Desarrollo 5619, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL).
    6. -, 2002. "Globalização e desenvolvimento," Documentos de posición del período de sesiones de la Comisión 2727, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. O’RYAN Raul & DE MIGUEL Carlos & MILLER Sebastián & MUNASINGHE Mohan, 2010. "General Equilibrium Analysis of Cross Effects in Social and Environmental Policies: Case Study of Chile," EcoMod2003 330700114, EcoMod.
    2. Friedrich Hinterberger & Ines Omann & Andrea Stocker, 2002. "Employment and Environment in a Sustainable Europe," Empirica, Springer;Austrian Institute for Economic Research;Austrian Economic Association, vol. 29(2), pages 113-130, June.
    3. Elizabeth Stanton, 2011. "Negishi welfare weights in integrated assessment models: the mathematics of global inequality," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 107(3), pages 417-432, August.
    4. Mohan Munasinghe, 2001. "Sustainomics, Sustainable Development and Climate Change," Energy & Environment, , vol. 12(5-6), pages 393-414, November.
    5. M. del Mar Rubio Varas, 2005. "Value and depreciation of mineral resources over the very long run: An empirical contrast of different methods," Economics Working Papers 867, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
    6. Plöger, Peter & Lang, Eva (ed.), 2004. "Ökologische Ökonomie: Eine neue Wissenschaft?," Beiträge & Berichte, Vereinigung für Ökologische Ökonomie e.V. (VÖÖ), volume 5, number 5.
    7. Ferraz, Claudio & Young, Carlos Eduardo, 1999. "Trade liberalization and industrial pollution in Brazil," Medio Ambiente y Desarrollo 5726, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL).
    8. Jenkins, Rhys Owen, 2003. "Has trade liberalization created pollution havens in Latin America?," Revista CEPAL, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL), August.
    9. Melnikas Borisas, 2016. "Networking Society, Network-Based Economy and the Processes of Global Social, Economic, and Technological Changes," Ekonomika (Economics), Sciendo, vol. 95(1), pages 22-42, January.
    10. von Moltke, Konrad & Ryan, Daniel E. & Abed de Zavala, Sheila & Escuder Leira, Diego & Frickmann Young, Carlos Eduardo & Galperín, Carlos & Leis, Héctor Ricardo & Vásquez, Patricia I. & Viola, Eduardo, 2001. "Medio ambiente y comercio: El caso de Mercosur y los principios de Winnipeg," IDB Publications (Working Papers) 2975, Inter-American Development Bank.
    11. Islam, Sardar M. N. & Munasinghe, Mohan & Clarke, Matthew, 2003. "Making long-term economic growth more sustainable: evaluating the costs and benefits," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(2-3), pages 149-166, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ecr:col039:5755. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Biblioteca CEPAL (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/eclaccl.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.