Master's – An evaluation of motion pictures industry public policy in Brazil during the period 1995-2016
Advisor: Profª Drª Paula Carvalho Pereda
Comission: Profs. Drs. Rafael de Vasconcelos Xavier Ferreira, João Luiz Passador and Ana Flávia Machado
Class: 217, FEA-5
Brazilian motion pictures industry is highly dependent on governmental incentives, as institutional change in state actions over the sector shown. The main examples are the state company producing and distributing movies in the country (Embrafilme) and, after its extinction, fiscal incentives and the creation of Ancine and Audio-visual Sectoral Fund (FSA). Between 1995 and 2016, 930 movies from a total of 1,370 national movies exhibited in Brazil were financed through fiscal incentive mechanisms, where this financial promotion reached R$ 5.3 billions. Given the scarcity of resources allocated in culture (0.3% of public expenditure in 2010), it is even more relevant to evaluate the efficacy of public policy over cinema (approximately 3% of public expenditure on culture in 2010). The main declared objective consists on increasing Brazilian consumption of national movies, which guided the definition of a proper empirical strategy to impact evaluation. Then, given the novel database constructed, it was found that Ancine, the main institutional change over the period of analysis, did not affect the share of Brazilian movies exhibited in the country. The difference-in-differences model showed that the regulation agency operations increased the expected share in annual total attendance of Brazilian movies in 0.5 percentage point as compared to the expected share of comparable international movies, which represents an expected increase in attendance of 150,000 people. The instrumental variables estimation strategy presented a low box office elasticity with respect to fiscal incentive, which is equal to 0.05. All results found were confirmed by robustness analysis. The research has shown that cinema policy in Brazil has limited economic impacts and that inefficiencies they want to correct have not been unequivocally defined, which negatively affects implemented programs evaluation and, therefore, public policy management and accountability.
*Abstract provided by the author