IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Avaliação dos Fundos Setoriais: CT-Transporte


  • Fabiano Mezadre Pompermayer
  • Erivelton Pires Guedes


Este Texto para Discussão faz parte da série de estudos sobre os fundos setoriais realizada pelo Ipea em parceria com o Ministério de Ciência e Tecnologia. O Fundo Setorial de Transportes Terrestres e Hidroviário (CT-Transporte) é, entre os fundos setoriais, o de menor volume de projetos e de recursos empenhados. O motivo para tão baixo desempenho foi a contenção das receitas que o Departamento Nacional de Infraestrutura de Transportes (DNIT) obteria com a exploração da infraestrutura rodoviária pelo setor de telecomunicações. Sem recursos, e com a implantação das Ações Transversais, o financiamento de projetos que seriam potenciais beneficiários do CT-Transporte passou a ocorrer por meio destas ações. Ainda assim, a oferta de recursos financeiros para os projetos em transportes era inferior à demanda. Analisando-se os projetos financiados pelos demais fundos, foi possível identificar mais de 60 projetos que estariam no escopo do CT-Transporte, contra apenas nove pelo fundo específico, evidenciando a incapacidade do fundo de fomentar a pesquisa e o desenvolvimento tecnológico no setor de transportes. A participação de empresas é baixa, apesar de ocorrer nos projetos de maior valor contratado. Considerando-se apenas os projetos diretamente financiados pelo CT-Transporte e pelas Ações Transversais de Transporte e Logística, a participação de empresas é ainda menor. Quanto aos temas estudados nos projetos, os que tiveram mais projetos financiados, bem como maior montante de recursos, foram os de intelligent transport system (ITS), transporte e logística, e transporte hidroviário interior. Poucos projetos em temas importantes para o setor de transportes foram identificados, havendo diversos temas importantes que não foram abordados nos projetos do fundo. This Discussion Paper is part of a series of studies on the Sector Funds conducted by Ipea in partnership with the Brazilian Ministry of Science and Technology. The CT-Transporte is, among sector funds, the smallest in number of projects and committed resources. The reason for such poor performance was the contention of the revenue that the DNIT would get from exploring the use of road infrastructure by the telecommunications industry. Without resources, and after the creation of the so called "Transversal Actions", the financing of projects, that would originally demand resources from the CT-Transporte, started to occur through these new actions. Still, the provision of financial resources for projects in transportation was lower than the demand. Analyzing the projects financed by other funds,we could identify more than 60 projects that would be within the scope of CT-Transporte (versus just nine by the specific fund), showing the inability of the fund to promote research and technological development in the transportation sector. Corporate participation is low, although it occurred in the bigger projects. Considering only the projects directly funded by the CT-Transporte and by the Transversal Actions for Transportation and Logistics, corporate participation is even lower. The topics studied in the projects that were granted with more projects and also more funding are: “Intelligent Transport System (ITS)”, “Transportation and Logistics” and “Inland Waterways and Transportation”. Few projects on issues important to the transportation sector were identified, with several important issues not covered in the projects of the fund.

Suggested Citation

  • Fabiano Mezadre Pompermayer & Erivelton Pires Guedes, 2012. "Avaliação dos Fundos Setoriais: CT-Transporte," Discussion Papers 1689, Instituto de Pesquisa Econômica Aplicada - IPEA.
  • Handle: RePEc:ipe:ipetds:1689

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Alex Anas & Richard Arnott & Kenneth A. Small, 1998. "Urban Spatial Structure," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, pages 1426-1464.
    2. Catherine Baumont & Cem Ertur & Julie Le Gallo, 2003. "Spatial Analysis Of Employment And Population Density: The Case Of The Agglomeration Of Dijon, 1999," Urban/Regional 0310003, EconWPA.
    3. Daniel P. McMillen, 2004. "Employment Densities, Spatial Autocorrelation, and Subcenters in Large Metropolitan Areas," Journal of Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(2), pages 225-244.
    4. Daniel Griffith & David Wong, 2007. "Modeling population density across major US cities: a polycentric spatial regression approach," Journal of Geographical Systems, Springer, pages 53-75.
    5. Tim Schwanen & Frans M. Dieleman & Martin Dijst, 2004. "The Impact of Metropolitan Structure on Commute Behavior in the Netherlands: A Multilevel Approach," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(3), pages 304-333.
    6. Giuliano, Genevieve & Small, Kenneth A., 1991. "Subcenters in the Los Angeles region," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, pages 163-182.
    7. Fujita, Masahisa & Ogawa, Hideaki, 1982. "Multiple equilibria and structural transition of non-monocentric urban configurations," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(2), pages 161-196, May.
    8. Nicholas Crafts & Abay Mulatu, 2005. "What explains the location of industry in Britain, 1871–1931?," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, pages 499-518.
    9. repec:brs:ecchap:02 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. H. Kelejian, Harry & Prucha, Ingmar R., 2001. "On the asymptotic distribution of the Moran I test statistic with applications," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 104(2), pages 219-257, September.
    11. McMillen, Daniel P., 2001. "Nonparametric Employment Subcenter Identification," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(3), pages 448-473, November.
    12. David Levinson & Ajay Kumar, 1997. "Density and the Journey to Work," Working Papers 199701, University of Minnesota: Nexus Research Group.
    13. Anderson, John E., 1982. "Cubic-spline urban-density functions," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(2), pages 155-167, September.
    14. K.H. Midelfart & H.G. Overman & S.J. Redding & A.J. Venables, 2000. "The location of European industry," European Economy - Economic Papers 2008 - 2015 142, Directorate General Economic and Financial Affairs (DG ECFIN), European Commission.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:


    Access and download statistics


    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:ipe:ipetds:1689. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Fabio Schiavinatto). General contact details of provider: .

    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.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.