TERI – Technology, Employment, and Regional Inequality

Very little detail is known about how investments and industrial policy options exercised by the national and regional State within large economies such as Brazil and India are affecting industrial employment and regional socio-economic development. The TCLab “Employment and Regional Inequality (TERI)” project is a comparative analysis of technological and industrial policy choices and their impact on intersectoral and regional employment inequalities observed both in India and Brazil.

The TERI program contrasting Sao Paulo and Karnataka regions in Brazil and India, uses quantitative and qualitative techniques to study the nature of industrial change in the two regions, their political economy, and the employment, income, and health changes that they have sustained.

We investigate if and how investments in mid- and high-tech sectors - a variable perceived as important in explaining economic growth- might be related to socio- economic inequality and regional indicators. We study how the industrial policy- employment-inequality link might be influenced by institutions for education, training, and health. These include capturing through industrial sector analyses the changing role(s) of the State and pressures on public institutions in both countries. The outcomes of the project will determine if and under what conditions the approaches developed here can be utilized to study other country contexts.

Related Content

TCLab's new postdoctoral scholar Jose Ribiero and Smita Srinivas are building a program on how technological learning is manifested in three countries. We know that economic growth and concerns of employment are both linked to technological learning, but we have some hunches about why economic theory doesn't take us far enough in appreciating why the links between industry and agriculture manifest in particular ways.

Abstract Industrial welfare history presents important challenges to developmental state theories in “late” industrialization. This article expands the debate by examining how nation-states create statutory welfare by addressing institutional variety beyond markets. It is simplistic to argue linear growth of national welfare or of states autonomously regulating markets to achieve risk-mitigation. I contend that welfare institutions emerge from the state’s essential conflict and collaboration with various alternate institutions in cities and regions.

Countries are unlikely to solve a particular problem unless they have some level of research invested in the effort. The approach in this paper is to use malaria research as a proxy for effective exploitation of local scientific knowledge. We study the malaria-related research output in two countries, Brazil and India, with among the most advanced science and pharmaceutical capabilities in the developing world. We assess local relevance of science and also its integration with international research by looking at almost 60 years of scientific publications on malaria between 1945-2003.

This is a controversial and troubling question for nations and citizens (especially if they are feeling insecure). But daily reality brings more important questions than this: the need to find food, shelter, and preserve or improve one’s health. “Development” in the abstract is a little distracting if it doesn’t speak directly to these essential concerns. Are developed societies those with healthy citizens and residents?

The discussion elaborated on themes from Smita Srinivas's Market Menagerie: Health and Development in Late Industrial States—a far-reaching analysis of technological advance and market regulation of the biotech and pharmaceutical industries in India, Brazil, China, Nigeria, and South Africa—as a springboard into the difficult responsibilities of reporting across media and cultural divides.