In the public research sector, Italy invests less than the European average. However, if compared to the resources involved and the researchers, the output is high and its average quality, carried out at universities and research institutions, is not very far from neighboring countries such as France, despite presenting difficulties of affirmation in the more advanced peaks . This was revealed by a survey carried out by the Bank of Italy.
The Italian system, rather articulated and fragmented in terms of the subjects who operate in it and in the sources of financing, suffers from a poor application of the results and a weak collaboration with businesses, which in turn invest little and encounter difficulties in linking their research with public research centres. The system also suffers from the lack of a clear strategy that establishes the objectives to be achieved, the organizational models of the research structures and defines the resources necessary to achieve them. The motivation can be traced to a certain resistance of Italian public research to adopt new organizational models and new incentive mechanisms, as happens in other countries, and in the limited investment of companies in research and development activities.
According to Istat and OECD data, on average in the five-year period 2006-2010 there were 97 researchers working in Italy (including public and private ones), equal to 4,2 for every 1.000 employed; they were 3,3 in the previous five-year period. In the other major European countries, the presence of researchers is more numerous and widespread: 224 in France (8,7 researchers per 1.000 employed); 304 in Germany (7,9 per 1.000 employed); 250 in the United Kingdom (8,6 per 1.000 employed); 128 in Spain (6,5 per 1.000 employed). Compared to France and Germany, the incidence of researchers is particularly low in the private sector. According to OECD data, expenditure per researcher - expressed in constant values and in purchasing power parity - was equal, in the five-year period 2006-2010, to an average of 209 dollars per year, down on the previous five-year period and lower only to that of Germany.
Spending on public research is destined for two major areas of reference: basic research and applied research. For both the former and the latter, funding supports projects defined as "strategic at national level" and specific research projects conducted by research institutions, universities, consortia or consortium companies, companies, foundations, etc.
But where do public resources for research come from? Public funds for research are primarily of national origin, through loans granted by Ministries to support both public institutions responsible for research (Universities and public research bodies), and companies and other private entities that carry out research projects. Currently, the main funds or programs managed by the MIUR are the FFO (Ordinary Fund for Universities), intended for the overall functioning of the Universities; the FOE (Fund for Public Research Bodies), intended for the overall financing of Public Research Bodies supervised by the MIUR; the PRIN (Research Projects of Relevant National Interest), intended for Universities; the FIRB (Integrative Fund for Basic Research), intended for Universities and Research Institutions that collaborate with companies; the FAR (Research Facility Fund), which finances industrial research.
The pressing need to relaunch the country's innovative capacity cannot be separated from an adequately financed and efficiently governed public research system. However, it is evident that, given the difficulties of the public budget, it is not easy to find additional resources for research. Above all, the country must conduct a serious reflection on the strengths and weaknesses of the system and on the long-term goals that it intends to pursue. At the moment the cuts made to the ordinary funding of universities (about 750 million in nominal terms between 2008 and 2013) do not appear, for example, to be consistent with the commitments made in the context of Europe 2020 for an expansion of the share of young graduates nor do they seem to be based on a clear strategy in the field of research and innovation.
Overall, it is difficult to identify a strategy in research funding and governance, in planning, monitoring and evaluating projects, in identifying synergies within the national level and between regional, national and European policies. Given the importance of the sector, reflection on the objectives to be pursued, on the resources to be allocated to research and to the university and on the governance of the system struggles to find space in the national political and economic context and to fuel a real public debate on the choices to be made. However, no evaluation activity can replace the definition of clear objectives on the basis of which to build a long-term strategy, even if it is true that no credible strategy can be built without a clear vision of the state of the system and its strengths and weaknesses .
