Discussion
This item contains two complementary analyses, one from the viewpoint of production networks and the other addressing the university–industry–government (UIG) relationship. In the first case, it is possible to comprehend the changes in the global steel production chain, shifting the focus from a mere comparison between models of state, national and transnational enterprises to observe the organization of a global network. In the process of CSN’s constitution and development, formal and informal networks were shaped in the MPR-RJ. The company attracted suppliers to surrounding areas, making a significant portion of purchases in the region and generating economic and social development. The workforce was mainly trained locally at all levels. After privatization in 1994, there was a review of workforce needs and localsourcing of inputs. In the ensuing years, CSN let go of two-thirds of the workers. Procurement, previously concentrated in local suppliers, was redirected to global suppliers. The result for the MPR-RJ was a break in the pace of economic development during the nineties. However, the new millennium has been marked by a revival of the city of Volta Redonda, fostered by civil construction and services (medical and higher education sectors), less dependent on the company (Lima, 2013). From a business standpoint, CSN formed new networks. The previous state-owned company with focus on the domestic market becomes a competitive global player with business in four continents. Since 2002, CSN has purchased companies abroad and expanded its business into mining, cement and production ofspecial steels(Amaral et al., 2016).
