Search

The natural gas industry in Brazil has undergone three waves of reforms since the late 1990s regarding liberalization and market opening. The gas law approved in 2021 reinforces the unbundling between transport and commercialization of natural gas and guarantees third-party access to essential infrastructure. The new legal framework achieves the vertical separation of upstream and midstream segments but does not reach the downstream segment subject to state regulations. The exit of the incumbent (Petrobras) from the network segments opens space for new entrants, but may remain with a high commercialization share. Vertical and horizontal integration in the distribution segment can compromise this industry's restructuring. This article identifies three possible scenarios for the evolution of liberalization after the last reform. A successful path will depend on the implementation and enforcement of the new gas law, on adequate economic signals for network and consumption expansion, on harmonization of state regulations, and on the effective opening for the construction of a national gas market. The role of natural gas in Brazil's energy transition is still an open issue that will affect the industry's evolution in the coming years. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study assesses growth determinants in the Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa and Mexico, Indonesia, Nigeria, and Turkey nations the period 2001-11. Particular emphasis is laid on the bundling and unbundling of ten governance dynamics. Contemporary and noncontemporary fixed- and random-effects regressions are employed. The following are some findings. First, governance is more positively significant in noncontemporary specifications as opposed to contemporary regressions. Second, there is some interesting evidence on the heterogeneity of political governance as a driver. Political governance and its constituents (political stability and voice and accountability) are significantly positive in gross domestic product (GDP) growth but insignificant in real GDP output regressions. Third, the other governance dynamics are more significant determinants of real GDP output, as opposed to GDP growth. Accordingly, they are insignificant in contemporary regressions and negatively significant in noncontemporary regressions for GDP growth. Fourth, the constituents of economic governance have the highest magnitude in the positive effects of governance dynamics on real GDP output. Related Articles [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]