Evaluating Innovative Entrepreneurship as Public Policy: Evidence from Brazil's Federal Education Network

Authors

  • Ana Carolina Spatti School of Applied Sciences, Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP) , Limeira, SP, Brazil. image/svg+xml https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8839-8276
  • João Paulo do Carmo Federal Institute of Education, Science and Technology of Espírito Santo, ES, Brazil.
  • Guilherme Marques Fiorot Federal Institute of Education, Science and Technology of Espírito Santo, ES, Brazil.
  • Fabio de Medeiros Souza Administrative Council for Economic Defense (CADE), Ministry of Justice and Public Security, Brasília, DF, Brazil.
  • Matheus Leite Campos University of Campinas (InSySPo), Campinas, SP, Brazil.

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.4067/s0718-2724202600025006

Keywords:

Innovative Entrepreneurship, Public Policy, Innovation Policy, Emerging Economies, brazil, Technology Transfer

Abstract

This study evaluates the outcomes of the Innovative Entrepreneurship Project (IEP), implemented by the Brazilian Ministry of Education (MEC), with the aim of assessing its effectiveness in fostering innovation and entrepreneurship within institutions of the Federal Network of Professional, Scientific, and Technological Education. A mixed-methods approach was adopted, combining survey data from all funded projects with in-depth interviews and secondary document analysis. This triangulation enabled a comprehensive assessment of the initiative across multiple dimensions, including infrastructure, competencies, innovation outputs, and entrepreneurial outcomes. The findings indicate that the IEP significantly strengthened research infrastructure, enhanced scientific and technological capabilities, and contributed to the dissemination of an entrepreneurial culture. It also promoted the development of both technical and behavioral competencies among participants. However, results related to commercialization and startup creation were limited, revealing constraints in translating research into market-oriented outcomes. The study identifies a misalignment between policy design and institutional capacity. While the policy emphasized entrepreneurship and market-oriented outcomes, participating institutions remain primarily oriented toward teaching and research. These findings highlight structural challenges in implementing innovation policies in emerging economies and suggest that future initiatives should prioritize ecosystem integration, entrepreneurship education, and stronger mechanisms for technology transfer and market engagement.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Ana Carolina Spatti, School of Applied Sciences, Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP) , Limeira, SP, Brazil.

Holds a PhD in Science and Technology Policy from the University of Campinas (UNICAMP) and completed her postdoctoral research at the School of Applied Sciences (FCA/UNICAMP). Her work focuses on monitoring and evaluation of public policies, particularly in science, technology, and innovation (STI). She has experience in quantitative and qualitative methods, indicator development, and impact assessment. Currently, she works on national innovation programs in the ICT sector, collaborating with government agencies and research institutions.

João Paulo do Carmo, Federal Institute of Education, Science and Technology of Espírito Santo, ES, Brazil.

Is a PhD candidate in Production Engineering at the Fluminense Federal University (UFF). He holds a Master’s degree in Administration from the Federal University of Espírito Santo (UFES) and degrees in Production Engineering and Mathematics. He is a Production Engineer at the Federal Institute of Espírito Santo (IFES), where he served as Director of Business Relations and Community Extension (2022–2025). He has extensive experience coordinating innovation and entrepreneurship projects within Brazil’s Federal Education Network.

Guilherme Marques Fiorot, Federal Institute of Education, Science and Technology of Espírito Santo, ES, Brazil.

Holds a Master’s degree in Engineering and Sustainable Development from the Federal University of Espírito Santo (UFES) and a degree in Production Engineering from IFES, including an academic exchange at the University of Jaén, Spain. He is a Production Engineer at the Federal Institute of Espírito Santo (IFES), working at the Planning Directorate. He has experience in project management, risk management, and strategic planning, and has coordinated innovation and entrepreneurship projects within Brazil’s Federal Education Network.

Fabio de Medeiros Souza, Administrative Council for Economic Defense (CADE), Ministry of Justice and Public Security, Brasília, DF, Brazil.

Master's student in Economics at the University of Brasília (2023-24), holds a degree in Economics from the same institution (2008), a Specialization in Project Management from the Catholic University of Brasília (2010), and an MBA in Public Management from the National School of Public Administration (2022). He is a member of the Federal Government's Foreign Trade Analyst career. He works on projects for the formulation, planning, implementation, and monitoring of public policies aimed at promoting entrepreneurship, innovation, and competitiveness.

Matheus Leite Campos, University of Campinas (InSySPo), Campinas, SP, Brazil.

Holds a PhD in Business Administration and a Master’s degree in Production and Manufacturing Engineering, both from the University of Campinas (UNICAMP). He completed a postdoctoral fellowship at the São Paulo Excellence Chair InSySPo (System Innovation: Organizational Strategy, Research and Innovation Policy Governance) at UNICAMP. He has teaching experience at the undergraduate, graduate and post-graduate levels and has completed international extension programs in the United States and the United Kingdom. His research focuses on entrepreneurship, particularly university-based entrepreneurial ecosystems, and he has prior industry experience in international business and logistics.

References

Alves, A. D. S., Quelhas, O. L. G., Da Silva, M. H. T., & Lameira, V. D. J. (2015). On the role of university in the promotion of innovation: Exploratory evidences from a university-industry cooperation experience in Brazil. International Journal of Innovation and Learning, 17(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJIL.2015.066061

Aranha, J. A. S. (2016). Mecanismos de geração de empreendimentos inovadores: Mudanças na organização e na dinâmica dos ambientes e o surgimento de novos atores [Mechanisms for generating innovative ventures: Changes in the organization and dynamics of environments and the emergence of new actors]. In ANPROTEC – Tendências [ANPROTEC – Trends]. ANPROTEC. https://www.feevale.br/Comum/midias/e46b2a7c-b1a5-4f15-b49f-b961901a2cee/anprotec-mecanismos-geracao-de-inovacao.pdf

Associação Nacional de Entidades Promotoras de Empreendimentos Inovadores [ANPROTEC]. (2016). Estudo de impacto econômico: Segmento de incubadoras de empresas do Brasil [Economic impact study: The business incubator segment in Brazil]. ANPROTEC; SEBRAE. https://anprotec.org.br/site/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/18072016-Estudo_ANPROTEC_v6.pdf

Balkienė, K., & Jagminas, J. (2010). Allusion to public policy: Innovative entrepreneurship. Public Policy and Administration, 34(1). https://doi.org/10.5755/j01.ppaa.0.34.26892

Borges, D. B., Soares, P. M., & Silva, M. S. (2021). Programs and instruments for promoting innovation with technology-based companies in Brazil. Journal of Technology Management & Innovation, 16(2), 28–40. https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-27242021000200028

Brasil. (2004). Lei nº 10.973, de 2 de dezembro de 2004: Dispõe sobre incentivos à inovação e à pesquisa científica e tecnológica no ambiente produtivo e dá outras providências [Law No. 10,973 of December 2, 2004: On incentives for innovation and scientific and technological research in the productive environment, and other provisions]. Presidência da República. https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2004-2006/2004/lei/l10.973.htm

Brasil. (2008). Lei nº 11.892, de 29 de dezembro de 2008: Institui a Rede Federal de Educação Profissional, Científica e Tecnológica, cria os Institutos Federais de Educação, Ciência e Tecnologia, e dá outras providências [Law No. 11,892 of December 29, 2008: Establishing the Federal Network of Professional, Scientific and Technological Education, creating the Federal Institutes of Education, Science and Technology, and other provisions]. Presidência da República. https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2007-2010/2008/lei/l11892.htm

Cario, S., Burger, R., Lemos, D., & Bittencourt, P. (2023). Adaptive regional innovation systems: Addressing Latin America’s challenges. Journal of Technology Management & Innovation, 18(4), 44–58. https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-27242023000400044

Carmo, J. P., & Costa, L. O. (2016). Análise da sustentabilidade econômica de um núcleo de inovação tecnológica integrado a uma incubadora de empresas [Analysis of the economic sustainability of a technology innovation office integrated with a business incubator]. In Anais do Congresso de Administração, Sociedade e Inovação [Proceedings of the Congress on Administration, Society and Innovation]. https://www.even3.com.br/anais/casi/36736-analise-da-sustentabilidade-economica-de-um-nucleo-de-inovacao-tecnologica-integrado-a-uma-incubadora-de-empresas

Centro de Gestão e Estudos Estratégicos. (2016). Relatório anual [Annual report]. https://www.cgee.org.br/documents/37878/43769/Rel_Anual_2016.pdf

Dahlstrand, A. L., & Stevenson, L. (2007). Linking Innovation and Entrepreneurship Policy. FSF.

Dahlstrand, A. L., & Stevenson, L. (2010). Innovative entrepreneurship policy: Linking innovation and entrepreneurship in a European context. Annals of Innovation & Entrepreneurship, 1(1), 5602. https://doi.org/10.3402/aie.v1i1.5845

De Negri, F., Zucoloto, G., Miranda, P., Koeller, P., Rauen, A., & Szigethy, L. (2020). Redução drástica na inovação e no investimento em P&D no Brasil: O que dizem os indicadores da pesquisa de inovação 2017 [Drastic reduction in innovation and R&D investment in Brazil: What the 2017 innovation survey indicators show] (Nota Técnica No. 60). Instituto de Pesquisa Econômica Aplicada. https://repositorio.ipea.gov.br/handle/11058/9877

Degen, R. J., & Harkiolakis, N. (2018). Reasons for the almost complete absence of high-growth ambition and innovation activity of early-stage entrepreneurs in Brazil. In Entrepreneurship and the Industry Life Cycle: The Changing Role of Human Capital and Competences (pp. 247–268). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-89336-5_11

Edler, J., & Fagerberg, J. (2017). Innovation policy: What, why, and how. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 33(1), 2–23. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxrep/grx001

Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (1995). The Triple Helix—University-industry-government relations: A laboratory for knowledge-based economic development. EASST Review, 14(1), 14–19. https://ssrn.com/abstract=2480085

Fagerberg, J., Srholec, M., & Verspagen, B. (2010). Innovation and economic development. In Handbook of the Economics of Innovation (Vol. 2, pp. 833–872). North-Holland. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-7218(10)02004-6

Fernandes, A. C., De Souza, B. C., Da Silva, A. S., Suzigan, W., Chaves, C. V., & Albuquerque, E. D. M. E. (2010). Academy–industry links in Brazil: Evidence about channels and benefits for firms and researchers. Science and Public Policy, 37(7), 485–498. https://doi.org/10.3152/030234210X512016

Freeman, C. (1987). Technology Policy and Economic Performance: Lessons from Japan. Frances Pinter.

Freeman, C., & Soete, L. (2008). A Economia da Inovação Industrial [The economics of industrial innovation]. Editora da Unicamp. (Obra original publicada en 1997)

Gianesini, G., Cubico, S., Favretto, G., & Leitão, J. (2018). Entrepreneurial competences: Comparing and contrasting models and taxonomies. In Entrepreneurship and the Industry Life Cycle: The Changing Role of Human Capital and Competences (pp. 13–32). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-89336-5_2

Gielf, G. G., Furtado, A. T., de Campos, A. S., & Tijssen, R. J. (2017). University-industry research collaboration in the Brazilian oil industry: The case of Petrobras. Revista Brasileira de Inovação, 16(2), 325–350. https://doi.org/10.20396/rbi.v16i2.8650114

Haynie, J. M., Shepherd, D. A., & Patzelt, H. (2012). Cognitive adaptability and an entrepreneurial task: The role of metacognitive ability and feedback. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 36(2), 237–265. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2010.00410.x

Herrera, A. O. (1973). Los determinantes sociales de la política científica en América Latina: Política científica explícita y política científica implícita [The social determinants of science policy in Latin America: Explicit science policy and implicit science policy]. Desarrollo Económico, 113–134. https://doi.org/10.2307/3466245

Jugend, D., Jabbour, C. J. C., Scaliza, J. A. A., Rocha, R. S., Junior, J. A. G., Latan, H., & Salgado, M. H. (2018). Relationships among open innovation, innovative performance, government support and firm size: Comparing Brazilian firms embracing different levels of radicalism in innovation. Technovation, 74, 54–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2018.02.004

Kesting, P., & Parm Ulhøi, J. (2010). Employee-driven innovation: Extending the license to foster innovation. Management Decision, 48(1), 65–84. https://doi.org/10.1108/00251741011014463

Kline, S. J., & Rosenberg, N. (1986). An overview of innovation. In The Positive Sum Strategy: Harnessing Technology for Economic Growth. https://doi.org/10.17226/612

Koeller, P. (2017). Dinâmica da inovação no Brasil em contraposição a países selecionados [Innovation dynamics in Brazil compared to selected countries]. Radar. https://repositorio.ipea.gov.br/handle/11058/7955

Kolb, D. A. (2014). Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development (2nd ed.). Pearson FT Press.

Lederman, D., Messina, J., Pienknagura, S., & Rigolini, J. (2014). Latin American Entrepreneurs: Many Firms but Little Innovation. World Bank. https://www.worldbank.org/content/dam/Worldbank/document/LAC/LatinAmericanEntrepreneurs.pdf

Librelon, D. (2014). Políticas públicas de fomento à ciência, tecnologia e inovação direcionadas para startups brasileiras de base tecnológica [Public policies to promote science, technology and innovation aimed at Brazilian technology-based startups] [Trabalho de conclusão de curso, Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina]. Repositório Institucional da UFSC. https://repositorio.ufsc.br/handle/123456789/132192

Lotufo, R. de A. (2009). A institucionalização de núcleos de inovação tecnológica e a experiência da Inova Unicamp [The institutionalization of technology innovation offices and the Inova Unicamp experience]. In M. E. R. dos Santos, P. T. M. de Toledo, & R. A. Lotufo (Eds.), Transferência de Tecnologia: Estratégias para Estruturação e Gestão de Núcleos de Inovação Tecnológica [Technology transfer: Strategies for structuring and managing technology innovation offices] (pp. 41–75). Komedi. https://www.inova.unicamp.br/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Livro-Transferencia-de-tecnologia_0.pdf

Lundström, A., & Stevenson, L. (2005). Entrepreneurship Policy: Theory and Practice (Vol. 9). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/b104813

Lundvall, B. Å. (Ed.). (2010). National Systems of Innovation: Toward a Theory of Innovation and Interactive Learning (Vol. 1). Anthem Press. https://doi.org/10.7135/UPO9781843318903

Ministério da Ciência, Tecnologia, Inovações e Comunicações [MCTIC]. (2016). Estratégia Nacional de Ciência, Tecnologia e Inovação (ENCTI) – 2016/2022 [National Strategy for Science, Technology and Innovation (ENCTI) – 2016/2022]. https://bibliotecadigital.dth.api.gov.br/handle/123456789/990

Nelson, R. R. (Ed.). (1993). National Innovation Systems: A Comparative Analysis. Oxford University Press. https://ssrn.com/abstract=1496195

Ogliastri, E., Pamplona, J. B., & Villegas, M. G. (2019). Gestão e inovação na América Latina [Management and innovation in Latin America]. Gestão & Regionalidade, 35(105), 218–244. https://doi.org/10.13037/gr.vol35n105.6109

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development [OECD]. (1992). Technology and the Economy: The Key Relationships. OECD Publishing.

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development [OECD]. (2018). Science, Technology and Innovation Outlook 2018: Adapting to Technological and Societal Disruption. OECD Publishing. https://tind.wipo.int/record/20911

Pavitt, K. (2009). Innovation processes. In J. Fagerberg, D. C. Mowery, & R. R. Nelson (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Innovation (pp. 86–114). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199286805.003.0004

Pelaez, V., Invernizzi, N., Fuck, M. P., Bagatolli, C., & Oliveira, M. R. (2017). A volatilidade da agenda de políticas de C&T no Brasil [The volatility of the S&T policy agenda in Brazil]. Revista de Administração Pública, 51(5), 788–809. https://doi.org/10.1590/0034-7612162639

Pinho, M., & Fernandes, A. C. (2015). Relevance of university–industry links for firms from developing countries: Exploring different surveys. In Developing National Systems of Innovation (pp. 145–163). Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781784711108.00014

Rapini, M. S. (2007). O Diretório dos Grupos de Pesquisa do CNPq e a interação universidade-empresa no Brasil: Uma proposta metodológica de investigação [The CNPq Research Groups Directory and university-industry interaction in Brazil: A methodological research proposal]. Revista de Economia Contemporânea, 11(1), 99–117. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1415-98482007000100004

Rauch, A., Wiklund, J., Lumpkin, G. T., & Frese, M. (2009). Entrepreneurial orientation and business performance: An assessment of past research and suggestions for the future. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 33(3), 761–787. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2009.00308.x

Ries, E. (2017). The Startup Way: How Modern Companies Use Entrepreneurial Management to Transform Culture and Drive Long-Term Growth. Currency.

Rippa, P., & Secundo, G. (2019). Digital academic entrepreneurship: The potential of digital technologies on academic entrepreneurship. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 146, 900–911. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2018.07.013

Roncaratti, L. S. (2017). Incentivos a startups no Brasil: Os casos do Startup Brasil, InovAtiva e InovApps [Incentives for startups in Brazil: The cases of Startup Brasil, InovAtiva and InovApps]. In P. Cavalcante, M. Camões, B. Cunha, & W. Severo (Eds.), Inovação no Setor Público: Teoria, Tendências e Casos no Brasil [Innovation in the public sector: Theory, trends and cases in Brazil] (pp. 215–230). Instituto de Pesquisa Econômica Aplicada. https://repositorio.ipea.gov.br/server/api/core/bitstreams/e20865d4-d3bf-44b3-ad90-723494f26ab8/content

Schumpeter, J. A. (2000). Entrepreneurship as innovation. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign’s Academy for Entrepreneurial Leadership Historical Research Reference in Entrepreneurship. https://ssrn.com/abstract=1512266

Sela, V. M., Sela, F. E. R., & Franzini, D. Q. (2006). Ensino do empreendedorismo na educação básica, voltado para o desenvolvimento econômico e social sustentável: Um estudo sobre a metodologia “Pedagogia Empreendedora” de Fernando Dolabela [Teaching entrepreneurship in basic education for sustainable economic and social development: A study of Fernando Dolabela’s “Entrepreneurial Pedagogy” methodology]. In Anais do 30º Encontro da ANPAD [Proceedings of the 30th ANPAD Meeting]. ANPAD. https://arquivo.anpad.org.br/diversos/down_zips/10/enanpad2006-esoc-2556.pdf

Sirilli, G. (1998). Conceptualising and measuring technological innovation [Conference presentation]. II Conference on Technology Policy and Innovation, Lisbon, Portugal.

Stuetzer, M., Obschonka, M., Davidsson, P., & Schmitt-Rodermund, E. (2013). Where do entrepreneurial skills come from? Applied Economics Letters, 20(12), 1183–1186. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504851.2013.797554

Szabo, Z. K., & Herman, E. (2012). Innovative entrepreneurship for economic development in EU. Procedia Economics and Finance, 3, 268–275. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(12)00151-7

Velho, L. (2011). Conceitos de ciência e a política científica, tecnológica e de inovação [Concepts of science and science, technology and innovation policy]. Sociologias, 13(26), 128–153. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1517-45222011000100006

Vonortas, N. S., & Castillo, J. C. (2022). A general assessment of policies for science, technology and innovation (STI) in highly developed economies [Report]. Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo.

Watchravesringkan, K., Hodges, N. N., Yurchisin, J., Hegland, J., Karpova, E., Marcketti, S., & Yan, R. N. (2013). Modeling entrepreneurial career intentions among undergraduates: An examination of the moderating role of entrepreneurial knowledge and skills. Family and Consumer Sciences Research Journal, 41(3), 325–342. https://doi.org/10.1111/fcsr.12014

Downloads

Published

2026-07-29

How to Cite

Spatti, A. C., do Carmo, J. P., Marques Fiorot, G., de Medeiros Souza, F., & Leite Campos, M. (2026). Evaluating Innovative Entrepreneurship as Public Policy: Evidence from Brazil’s Federal Education Network. Journal of Technology Management and Innovation, 21(2), 55–71. https://doi.org/10.4067/s0718-2724202600025006

Issue

Vol. 21 No. 2 (2026)

Section

Research Articles

License

Copyright (c) 2026 Ana Carolina Spatti, João Paulo do Carmo, Guilherme Marques Fiorot, Fabio de Medeiros Souza, Matheus Leite Campos

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

 

Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

Most read articles by the same author(s)