Enpresari-estatua

Merkatua. Estatua. Finantzak. Makroekonomia. Mikroekonomia. Teknologia. Berrikuntza…

Hasteko, hona hemen Mariana Mazzucato-ren The Entrepreneurial State lan interesgarria:

http://www.demos.co.uk/files/Entrepreneurial_State_-_web.pdf

Mazzucato-k izenburu berberarekin liburu berri bat plazaratu du:

http://www.marianamazzucato.com/projects/entrepreneurial-state/

Segituan Mazzucato-ren zenbait artikuluri begirada bat emango diogu.

 

1. Estatua eta sektore pribatua

 

Tesi nagusia: Estatuak ez du behar sektore pribatua enpresaria izateko[1].

Onartua izan da sektore pribatua dinamikoagoa dela, baina, izatez, estatua, sektore publikoa, funtsezkoa da berrikuntzarako.

Egun, gobernuaren estrategia ekonomikoak ez du funtzionatzen. Krisian gauden egoera honetan ez da ikusten ekonomiaren inongo suspertzerik.

Zer dela eta?

Egungo politika ekonomikoak premisa faltsuan oinarritzen da: berrikuntzak gidaturiko hazkundeak  bi baldintza behar ditu: estatuaren rola gutxitzea eta sektore pribatuan enpresarien ahalmena askatzea.

Atzean ondoko leloa dago: sektore pribatua lehiakorra, dinamikoa eta  berriztatzailea da sektore publikoa burokratikoa, geldi eta esku sartzailea den bitartean[2]

Hala ere, historian kontrakoa adierazten duten kontaezinezko etsenpluak daude, hots,  estatuak askoz gehiago arriskatzen dituelako etsenpluak[3].

Ez da soilik oinarrizko ikerketa finantzatzea edo eta merkatuen hutsak konpontzea baizik eta merkatu berriak sortzea ere[4].

Noski, sektore pribatuan enpresarien eragina aintzakotzat hartzeko da, baina kontua da maiz soilik sektore hori aipatzen dela[5].

Hauxe ez da sektore publikoa murrizteko aroa, alderantziz baizik: orain, inoiz baino gehiago, enpresari-estatu bat behar dugu, hazkunde berrirako arloak seinalatuz eta estrategiazko berrikuntza berrietan inbertituz[6].

2. Enpresari-estatua eratuz

Politika ekonomikoak austeritatea eskatzen duen bitartean, berrikuntzaren aldeko espaziorik gabe, ez dago inolako biderik inbertsio berria egiteko, produktibitatea eta giza kapitala handitzearren.

Britainia Handirako Mazzucato-k ondoko bost estrategia aipatzen ditu[7].

i)                 Ezberdina den zerbait egitea[8], Keynes-i segituz[9].

ii)                Itxaropena inbertsioetan jartzea[10].

iii)               Merkatua egitea, ez merkatuak konpontzea[11].

iv)               Jokaeraren adierazleak birpentsatzea[12].

v)                Lehena izatea[13].

3. Estatuaren gastua

Estatuaren gastua nonahi azaltzen da[14]: Google-n, GlaxoSmithKline-n, …

Estatuaren gasturik gabe enpresa asko ez ziratekeen existituko[15].

Iraultza berdea[16] dugu etorkizun hurbilean.

Berrikuntzaren sistema[17] kolektiboa da[18].

Hona berrikuntzaren ezaugarri batzuk: kolektiboa, zalantzazkoa eta metagarria[19].

4. Mitoa

Estatuaren eskusartze-mitoa[20].

 

Oro har pentsatu ohi da AEBko eredua Europakoa baino arrakastatsuagoa dela merkatuak gidatzen duelako[21]. AEBko Kongresua sektore publikoaren defizitaren handitzearen aurka dago[22].

 

Ekonomialariak ere, oro har, ados daude jarrera horrekin[23].

 

Baina, irudi hori faltsua baldin bada? Kapitalismoan egon diren aldaketarik funtsezkoenak ez badira etortzen merkatuaren esku ikusezinagatik, estatuaren esku ikusiagatik baizik?

Izatez, Silicon Valley-ren atzean dagoen benetako historian estatua azaltzen da, garbi[24]. Estatuak oinarrizko ikerketa, ikerketa aplikatua eta enpresak ere finantzatu ditu[25].

Gauza bertsua Txinan, Singaporen, Alemanian, Finlandian eta Danimarkan[26].

Hona hemen, hala ere, disfuntzionaltasuna: arriskuak sozialdu dira, mozkinak pribatizatu[27].

Hortaz, hona hemen irteera: mekanismo berri bat behar dugu zerbait ‘berrikuntza publikoaren’ fondora edo funtsera atzera itzultzeko[28], berriz erabiltzeko hurrengo finantzaketan.

Izatez, euskal esaerak dioenez, nori berea da zuzenbidea[29].

(Honaino Mazzucato-ren artikuluak.)

 

5. Liburua (Enpresari-estatua)

Esan bezala, Mazzucato-ren liburua azaldu berri da[30].

Bertan erakusten denez, eta berrikuntzari dagokionez, estatua ez da erakunde burokratikoa, zeinak egin dezakeen gauzarik hoberena sektore pribatuari berrikuntzaren sormena uztea baita.  Alderantzizkoa da liburuaren ondorioa: sektore pribatuak soilik inbertitzen du baldin eta aurretik estatuak arrisku handiko inbertsioak egin baditu.

Mazzucato-k dioenez,

“…in the history of modern capitalism, the State has generated economic activity that would not otherwise have happened, and has actively opened up new technologies and markets that private investors can later move into.

Ignoring this reality only serves ideological ends…

Bukaera gisa, liburuak honelako mezua luzatzen du:

If the State is so important to investments in high-risk innovation, why does it capture so little direct return?

 

6. Etorkizuna

 

Etorkizun hurbilean fokapen berri bat izango dugu[31] aztertzeko: Diru Teoria Modernoa eta Mikroekonomia, hobeto esanda, Berrikuntza…

 

Alde batetik DTMko Randall Wray-ek eta bestetik berrikuntzan luze aritu den Mariana Mazzucato-k batera jardungo dute ikerketa berrian.

 

Zain gaude.


[2]Mazzucato-k dioenez, “…The Economist, which often refers to the government as a Hobbesian Leviathan, recently argued that government should take the back seat and focus on creating freer markets and the right conditions for new ideas to prosper, rather than taking a more activist approach. In painting this contrast, it is assumed that the private sector is inherently more innovative, able to think “out of the box” and lead a country towards long-run, innovation-led growth.

[3]  Mazzucato-ren hitzak: “…one of a risk-taking innovative state — especially in the most uncertain phases of technological development and/or in the most risky sectors — versus a more inertial private sector which only enters and invests once the state has absorbed most of the uncertainty, before walking off with all the gains. (…) From the development of aviation, nuclear energy, computers, the internet, the biotechnology revolution, nanotechnology and green technology today, it has been the state, not the private sector, that has often engaged with the most high-risk entrepreneurial activities, kick-starting and developing the engine of growth.”

[4] Mazzucato-k: “…formulating a vision of a new area, investing in the earliest-stage research and development, identifying new pathways to market and adjusting rules to promote them, creating networks that bring together business, academia and finance, and being constantly ahead of the game in areas that will drive the next decades of growth.”

[5] Mazzucato-k: “Silicon Valley or the biotech revolution are usually attributed to the geniuses behind small, high tech firms like Facebook or the plethora of small biotech companies in Boston or Cambridge. How many people know that the algorithm that led to Google’s success was funded by a public sector National Science Foundation grant? Or that many of the most innovative, young companies in the US were funded not by private venture capital but by public venture capital (Small Business Innovation Research, SBIR)?

[6] Mazzucato-k: “Making the right investments means a new philosophy about what the state’s role is in the economy. It is not about just creating the right conditions for innovation, but also having the courage to make direct investments that are subject to high failure rates, which the private sector notoriously shies away from.”

[8] Mazzucato-k: “… private business investment is volatile and pro-cyclical: too much during booms and too little during busts. To avoid recessions turning into depressions, government needs to focus on counter-cyclical policies — the opposite of what is happening today. But the focus on “doing something different” is not just about counter-cyclical measures. It is also about the need for government to focus on policies that cause types of economic activity that would not have happened otherwise.”

[9] Mazzucato-k : “As Keynes wrote in 1926 in The End of Laissez Faire, “The important thing for government is not to do things which individuals are doing already, and to do them a little better or a little worse; but to do those things which at present are not done at all.”.”

[10] Mazzucato-k: “… a key role of government is to get that investment moving. (…) Government-led investments that open up new technological and market opportunities will. This includes not only properly funding education and research infrastructures but also providing early financing for innovative firms, and new key technologies, which private venture capital has proven too risk averse to fund.”

[11] Mazzucato-k: “A more entrepreneurial role for government extends beyond procuring innovative products to making them directly in public labs when the private sector is reluctant to step in. Indeed, 75 per cent of the New Molecular Entities with priority rating in the pharmaceutical industry have originated in public sector labs, because private pharma is more interested in the low risk “me too” drugs.”

[12] Mazzucato-k: “Creating markets is also about shaping the indicators that are used to measure economic performance so they reward rather than penalise the most innovative companies. In this sense, “rebalancing” is not necessarily about sectors. It is more about redirecting “indicators of performance” away from short run financial towards long run “real economy” measures. Firms investing in expensive R&D and human capital will have a higher risk profile, since innovation is so costly and uncertain.”

[13] Mazzucato-k: “China recently announced that it is spending $1.5 trillion over the next five years in seven new key industries (including environmentally friendly technologies and new generation IT). Its industrial policy is its growth policy — its economic strategy. (…) The money… can be directed through a National Investment Bank into productive investment in key new sectors. The time is now not only because it is the right way out of the crisis (fiscal stimulus has been shown to be stronger when directed to new technologies rather than “shovel ready” projects), but also because the history of innovation tells us that being first matters.”