What's Gone Wrong with the Third Italy
Msc BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS
CONTENT
Introduction p. 3
Early glitches of the SMEs within the industrial districts p. 5
Analysis of two of the regional clusters at stake p.6
What went wrong? p. 7
Concluding remarks p. 9
References p. 10
Introduction
The purpose of this paper is to determine to which extent the economic areas known as ’Third Italy’ have not managed to achieve the well-desired status. The local development model has been presented as the perfect small-scale flexible capitalist type that has adopted a post-Fordist mode of production (Grancelli, 2007).
The economic cluster referred to as Third Italy, was founded in the post-war period (1950s and 1960s) when the global economy was going through hard times of recovery. In the north-east part of Italy a new type of firms was developed. The question may be put why didn’t the other two important industrialized districts known as First Italy (the industrial heartland of the North) and the Second Italy (the backward South) have become the regions of wealth and economic growth. The answer lies primarily in the cultural values: the local culture of entrepreneurship and cooperation (Boschma, 1998) that to some extent doesn’t apply for other Italian regions. The following figure displays accurately the industrial zone of Italy:
According to Bagnasco (1977) from a economic point of view Italy was divided into the ’Three Italies’: the North-west, the big companies, was tagged as ’central economy’, the shallow regions of the South seen as ’marginal economy’ and the central-North-eastern regions- known as Third Italy- characterized by the presence of small firms that are defined as ’peripheral economy’. Nonetheless, the way in which the Third Italy region was defined didn’t hide the real facts; when compared to the North-west typology, productivity per worker
CONTENT
Introduction p. 3
Early glitches of the SMEs within the industrial districts p. 5
Analysis of two of the regional clusters at stake p.6
What went wrong? p. 7
Concluding remarks p. 9
References p. 10
Introduction
The purpose of this paper is to determine to which extent the economic areas known as ’Third Italy’ have not managed to achieve the well-desired status. The local development model has been presented as the perfect small-scale flexible capitalist type that has adopted a post-Fordist mode of production (Grancelli, 2007).
The economic cluster referred to as Third Italy, was founded in the post-war period (1950s and 1960s) when the global economy was going through hard times of recovery. In the north-east part of Italy a new type of firms was developed. The question may be put why didn’t the other two important industrialized districts known as First Italy (the industrial heartland of the North) and the Second Italy (the backward South) have become the regions of wealth and economic growth. The answer lies primarily in the cultural values: the local culture of entrepreneurship and cooperation (Boschma, 1998) that to some extent doesn’t apply for other Italian regions. The following figure displays accurately the industrial zone of Italy:
According to Bagnasco (1977) from a economic point of view Italy was divided into the ’Three Italies’: the North-west, the big companies, was tagged as ’central economy’, the shallow regions of the South seen as ’marginal economy’ and the central-North-eastern regions- known as Third Italy- characterized by the presence of small firms that are defined as ’peripheral economy’. Nonetheless, the way in which the Third Italy region was defined didn’t hide the real facts; when compared to the North-west typology, productivity per worker
References: Asheim B. (1999), “ Interactive learning and localized knowledge in globalising learning economies”. Geojournal 49(4):345–352 Bagnasco, A.,Trigilia, C caso di Bassano, Venezia: Arsenale Editrice.agnasco”, A.,Trigilia, C. (eds) (1984), Società e politica nelle aree di piccola impresa: Il caso di Bassano, Venezia: Arsenale Editrice. Becattini G., (1990) “The Marchallian industrial district as a socio-economic notion. In F Pyke, G Becattini and W Sengerberger (eds) Industrial Districts and the Interfirm Co-operation in Italy” (pp 132–142). Geneva: ILO Bianchi, G Biggero, L. (2006), “Industrial and knowledge delocation strategies under the challenges of globalization and digitalization: the move of small and medium enterprises among Boschma, Ron A., Kloosterman R.C. (1998), “Learning from Clusters: A Critical Assessment”, © 2005 Springer. Printed in the Netherlands.139–168. Cooke P., (1988) “ Flexible integration, scope economies and strategic alliances: Social and spatial mediation”. Society and Space 6:281–300 Cooke P., Morgan, K Dastoli, P. V. and Viclla, G. 1992“ La Nuova Europa. Dalla Comunita all ' Unione (Bologna: II Mulino) ” Dei Ottati, G Fuà, G. and C. Zacchia (1983) (a cura di), “ Industrializzazione senza fratture, Bologna: Il Mulino”. Granato, J., Inglehart, R., and Leblang, D. (1996). “The effect of cultural values on economic development. Theory, hypotheses, and some empirical tests“. American Journal of Political Sciences 40 (3): 607-631 Grancelli, B., Chiesi A.M Holland, S. (1987), “The Market Economy, From Micro- To Meso-Economics” ( London: Weidenfeld & Nicholson). Hadjimichalis, C. (2006), “The End of Third Italy as we knew it ? “, Editorial Board of Antipode.Published by Blackwell Publishing, 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA Heidenreich, M Makdisi S., Casarino C., Karl R.E., "Marxism Beyond Marxism” Routledge, London, 1996, pg. 155 Provasi, G Regini, M. and Sabel”, C. 1989 Strategic di riaggiustamento industriale (Bologna: II Mulino). Schiavone ,F. , Dezi L. (2004), “Managerial Styles within an Italian Industrial District:Two different successful stories“ Scott A and Storper M (1988) “The geographical foundations and social regulation offlexible production complexes” Storper M (1997) “The Regional World: Territorial Development in a Global Economy”.New York: Guilford Tappi, D Walcott, Susan M.(2007) “Wenzhou and the Third Italy: Entrepreneurial Model Regions”, Journal of Asia-Pacific Business, 8: 3, 23 — 35 Whitford, J [ 5 ]. (Casarino, 1996) - After the Industrial Revolution, a mechanical engineer called Frederick W. Taylor proposed a new way to organize factories and shop floors with what he called the "Scientific Management".