You are here: Home / NEWS / Proposals for a new management of the IEA

Proposals for a new management of the IEA

by Richard Meckien - published Feb 01, 2016 07:30 PM - - last modified Feb 04, 2016 05:31 PM
Rights: Original version in Portuguese by Mauro Bellesa

The period for registering slates for the Institutional elections of director and deputy director of the IEA ended on January 29 (read more about it). Paulo Saldiva (running for director) and Guilherme Ary Plonski (running for deputy director) have registered the single slate. The election will take place on February 18.

The electoral college is made up of current and former members of the IEA's Board, the president of the Institute's Research Committee, former directors and deputy directors of the IEA, directors of faculties and research units at USP, and representatives of their congregations in the University Council.

The management project (in Portuguese) for the term of four years presented by Saldiva and Plonski mentions that "one of the great challenges of any new direction is to find an appropriate balance between continuity and innovation."

They highlight the involvement of the IEA in the UBIAS (University-Based Institutes for Advanced Study) network as an indicator of the "concern of the Institute to promote the discussion of global issues and to collaborate with the process of USP's internationalization" and point out the successful dedication of the Institute to debate on topics of interest to Brazilian society.

New themes

Alongside the continuity of the successfully developed activities, the candidates propose three new guidelines:

  1. the creation of an Advanced School of Leadership Formation;
  2. studies on urbanity and quality of life;
  3. the transformation of the University into a transformative University.


Regarding the first item, Saldiva and Plonski propose that the IEA should shelter people who wish for an "immersion in the full range of variables related to managing complex and important issues for the development of pubic policies, taking advantage of the wealth of knowledge available at USP in all its units."

As for urbanity and quality of life, the professors present the proposal to create a space for dialogue and convergence of all stakeholders in proposing scientific studies and research aimed at improving the living of the inhabitants of metropolitan areas.

With regard to the third item, they propose two actions:

  1. to make the IEA a reference center that consolidates initiatives aimed at the deep understanding of the processes and prospects for transformation of the University that thrive in the Institute itself or elsewhere at USP;
  2. to turn the IEA into the link between USP and the legislative branch (Congress, Legislative Assembly of the State of São Paulo and city councils of the municipalities where there is a USP campus), in order to contribute to the improvement of legislation on capital issues such as health, education, generation of employment and income, sanitation, environment, energy, transport, public safety and food security.



In the proposal, the professors consider that the increase of the number of researchers (such as those on sabbatical and the ones joining the new postdocs) requires the adequacy of the physical area of the Institute: "We believe that the quality of the projects to be developed will be the best way to attract institutional and external resources so that the IEA can follow its path of enganging talents and providing them with adequate physical structure of work."