OS DIFERENTES POSICIONAMENTOS CRÍTICOS DIANTE DAS AÇÕES NECESSÁRIAS PARA IMPULSIONAR A INDÚSTRIA DE BENS DE INFORMÁTICA NAS DÉCADAS DE 70 E 80

Abstract

The 1970s marked the end of the Economic Miracle and the beginning of the Second National Development Plan. During this period, the Brazilian government launched a variety of initiatives aimed at containing a foreign debt crisis that had a drastic impact on the national accounts (Lacerda, 2010). As for the industrial sector, production bottlenecks still persisted, hindering the computerization process in Brazil. Until then, the country lacked an industrial base—comprising manufacturers of computers and peripherals—capable of meeting domestic demand. Consequently, the computerization process would rely on imported equipment, against the backdrop of a trade deficit crisis (Cardi, 2002). During this period, government authorities opted to implement a series of measures to boost the IT hardware industry in Brazil, including the controversial market reserve policy. It should be noted that the decisions made were not limited to the group of technocrats within government circles, as they involved the participation of various institutional actors (Iachan, 2015). Given this context, the aim was to identify the different critical positions taken by relevant actors who may have influenced the drafting of the First National Information Technology Policy. To this end, this study sought to identify, in newspaper and magazine articles published between 1978 and 1984, the arguments for and against import restriction measures, as well as other actions necessary to boost the computer hardware sector. Among the findings was the support for market reserve policies expressed by computer hardware manufacturers, in contrast to the criticisms raised by multinational corporations and organizations representing technology users. On the other hand, convergent and complementary positions were observed regarding the other actions necessary to ensure technological innovation capacity, such as: (1) availability of public funding for research and development activities; (2) technological cooperation between companies and universities; (3) training of human resources; and others.