Public incentives in support of R+D and innovation in the Federal State of Espirito Santo, Brazil

6.2.3.1 The sensitization of potential entrepreneurs The objective of this program is to stimulate the entrepreneurship of the students visiting technical and secondary schools. In this connection, TecVitoria gives lectures at those schools to inform the students about the chances and risks for young entrepreneurs and about existing opportunities in the information technology sector. Besides, it explains the main activities of TecVitoria and in which way it supports promising business ideas. Apart from the lectures it also invites the technical and secondary schools to participate in discussions and events about the information technology industry. This includes lectures of entrepreneurs presenting cases of success and cases of failure as well as events that are supposed to promote the co-operation 70 [...]

The core of the innovation policy Espirito Santo’s is a fund called FUNCITEC. The resources for almost all the public incentives in support of R&D and innovation momentary available to IPES are allocated according to the regulations of this fund. Compared to the number of instruments discussed throughout this paper, however, it is responsible for comparatively few tools, namely only for public funding of R&D projects, human resource development, and the promotion of an innovative infrastructure. In total, the number of incentives used in Espirito Santo is not very much higher as IPES employs only one additional instrument not included in the area of responsibility of FUNCITEC, namely the promotion of co-operations. At least, the government of Espirito Santo is thinking about offering fiscal incentives to firms carrying out R&D projects. When they will come into effect and how they should look like, however, is not clear yet (IPES, 2003). 6.2.1.1 FUNCITEC The financial resources to support R&D and innovation in Espirito Santo, IPES takes from a fund already created in 1993, the "Fundo Estadual de Ciência e Tecnologia" (FUNCITEC). In the beginning it was administered by the CONCITEC, a council which was founded in the same year and which was under control of the Secretariat of Planning. In the end of 1999 the Secretariat of Planning transfered all the activities connected to the control of the R&D projects subsidized by FUNCITEC to IPES. In the end of 2002 IPES also took charge of the administration of the fund. Finally, in the beginning of 2003 the responsibility for the fund was transferred to the newly founded COECT. However, as already mentioned, up to now COECT only exists on the paper. It has almost no public servants and uses the infrastructure of IPES as it does not operate an own office. In reality, this means that FUNCITEC is still managed by IPES. In how far this situation will change after the Secretariat of Science and Technology will have been founded (the draft statute for the foundation of this secretariat was already brought in this summer) is still unclear (IPES, 2003; IPES, 2003c). The general objective of FUNCITEC is to grant financial support to projects and programs important for the scientific and technological development of Espirito Santo. It is aimed at natural persons as well as at private and public legal persons. FUNCITEC covers three major programs, which are the funding of technological research and development program, the developement of human resources and the extension of their capacities program, and the program to promote an innovative infrastructure. Each program will be discussed in greater detail in the next subchapters (IPES, 2001; IPES, 2003). 62 [...]

It has to be noted, that the Capixabian Innovation System is still in its infancy and that it is not clear yet if and how it will develop in the future. The best proof for this is IPES that rather has to be seen as a kind of provisional solution on the way to an Secratariat of Science and Technology. This leads to quite a serious problem, as long-term or coordinated planning becomes difficult which makes it impossible to define goals and objectives. All this leads to a weak confidence in the public innovation policy tools and to weak incentives to innovate. [...]