Using a newly-developed data set for Portugal, we analyze the industry-level effects of infrastructure investment. Focusing on the divide between traded and non-traded industries, we find that infrastructure investments have a non-traded bias, as these shift the industry mix towards private and public services. We also find that the industries that benefit the most in relative terms are all non-traded: construction, trade, and real estate, among the private services, and education and health, among the public services. Similarly, emerging trading sectors, such as hospitality and professional services, stand to gain. The positive impacts on traded industries are too small to make a difference. These results highlight that infrastructure-based strategies are not neutral in terms of the industry mix. Moreover, with most of the benefits accruing to non-traded industries, such a development model that is heavily based on domestic demand may be unsustainable in light of Portugal’s current foreign account position. 

This study updates Pereira and Pereira by revisiting the macroeconomic and budgetary effects of infrastructure investment in Portugal using a dataset from the Portuguese Ministry of the Economy covering 1980–2019, thereby capturing a period of austerity and decreased investment in the 2010s. A vector-autoregressive approach re-estimates the elasticity and marginal product of twelve infrastructure types on private investment, employment, and output. The most significant long-term accumulated effects on output accrue from investments in airports, ports, health, highways, water, and railroads. In contrast, those in municipal roads, electricity and gas, and refineries are statistically insignificant. All statistically significant infrastructure investments pay for themselves over time through additional tax revenues. Compared to the previous study, highways, water, and ports have more than doubled their estimated marginal products due to a significant increase in relative scarcity over the last decade. In addition, our analysis reveals an important shift in the impacts of infrastructure investment, now producing more substantial immediate effects but weaker long-term impacts. This change offers policymakers a powerful tool for short-term economic stimulus and is particularly useful in addressing immediate economic challenges.

The high demand for quality healthcare services in Portugal is generating concerns about meeting the optimum number of healthcare professionals in the private sector, such as doctors and clinicians. Critical interventions are currently in progress, aiming to provide quality healthcare that will be accessible and sustainable through actionable retention strategies such as investing and developing human capital, introducing better conditions of service to attract and retain talent in the private healthcare sector, and prioritizing the needs of patients. The objective of this study is to understand which factors promote the migration of physicians from the public to the private sector according to the theoretical assumptions of incentives. In this context, a phenomenological study was carried out, using semi-structured interviews with fifteen physicians working in the private health network. Content analysis was done using NVivo 12. The results indicate that performance evaluation in the private sector exists but has no alignment with incentives. The condition makes the private healthcare sector unattractive, however, other policies of remuneration remain promising. Current proposals that could revive the image of the sector include collective decision-making and strong labour relations advocacy for physicians in the private sector.

Amid the relentless grip of the COVID-19 pandemic, sustainability has emerged as a paramount concern across global economies. As businesses grapple with unprecedented challenges, the imperative for sustainable practices in corporate finance becomes increasingly evident. Throughout this crisis, companies have faced staggering financial strains, with diminished turnovers and escalating operational costs pushing many to the brink of collapse. In response, governments worldwide have provided vital support, albeit often insufficient, underscoring the necessity for sustainable mechanisms of intervention. Central to this discourse is an examination of how companies have adapted their financing policies amidst the pandemic’s tumult. Government-backed credit facilities have served as a critical lifeline for numerous businesses, emphasizing the need for sustainable financial instruments readily deployable in times of crisis. Concurrently, moratoriums on existing credit obligations have offered temporary relief, albeit with looming concerns regarding heightened corporate indebtedness. Moreover, the pandemic’s aftermath has witnessed a pronounced uptick in corporate borrowing, compounded by surging interest rates. This confluence underscores the exigency for companies to adopt sustainable financial strategies, mindful not only of short-term exigencies but also the enduring ramifications on financial stability. In navigating these challenges, a holistic approach to sustainability is imperative. Governments must ensure robust support mechanisms, while companies must proactively seek sustainable financing solutions. Concurrently, stakeholders must meticulously weigh the long-term repercussions of financial policy adjustments, thereby fortifying corporate resilience against future crises while safeguarding the stability of the global economy. In essence, the COVID-19 pandemic has underscored the critical imperative for sustainability in corporate finance. By heeding this call and embracing sustainable practices, businesses can navigate crises with greater resilience, ensuring not only their survival but also the enduring stability of the economic landscape.