"The Recovery Fund for the Regions" headlined many newspapers a few weeks ago to account for the position expressed by Stefano Bonaccini in his role as president of the Conference of Italian Regions. Who argued thus: “As Regions we will ask for quotas to have direct management of the funds. It would help to be faster." We are talking about the now famous 209 billion euros assigned by the European Council of 17-21 July to Italy, of which 82 non-repayable and 127 loans.
Marcellus Messori, in a beautiful analysis of his, defined this European agreement as "historic" for a first fundamental reason: because - we quote - "the agreement could be remembered in the future as the first step (albeit still sketchy) towards a European fiscal union" (July 22nd). He then underlined, for our country, that "the challenges for Italy" are "unprecedented".
In this broader context, I will try - here - to develop the proposal made by President Bonaccini, resuming some considerations I originally made on Emilia-Romagna (see the editorial “The German example of Baden”, in newspaper of Bologna, 6 August), in the awareness that at least a part of them may concern the Italy of the regions as a whole.
Here and now, therefore, the question becomes: it is good that there is a role for the Regions in the management of the Recovery Fund? And if so, to do what? To attempt an answer it is necessary to take a step back; actually two.
First: from the Council Conclusions we learn that in the "Next Generation US” (this is the official name of the 750 billion euro fund) the most important instrument is the “Recovery and resilience device”; it follows that the Member States have to prepare “National Plans” which defines the reform and investment program for the period 2021-2023. In turn, investments must strengthen "the potential for growth and job creation", first of all by following the two strategic guidelines of environmental sustainability and digital.
Ma there is a second step back to take: Emilia-Romagna, to stay with our first example, can boast a long and consolidated tradition of efficient use of Community funds (just think of the European Social Fund). Other regions, especially in the centre-north, are moving in the same direction, while the situation in the southern regions is more problematic. If the Government will follow up on the request from the Italian Regions - as is desirable in a country where the role of regional communities and all territorial autonomies is vital, as highlighted by the President of the Republic, Sergio Mattarella, in his meeting with the Presidents of the Region (Quirinale, 4 August) -, for all it will not be an absolute novelty. But it is good to keep in mind that the scope of this challenge is, for our Regions, decidedly different from all those of the past.
The fundamental question on the regional use of part of the Recovery Fund remains the following: to do what? Among the multiple types of investments (tangible and intangible) worthy of attention, there are certainly investments in knowledge (R&D, human capital, information technology), with particular regard to the two networks that have greatly contributed to building the excellence of the industry German: the Fachhochschule (University of Applied Sciences) for technical training; the Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft for applied research. On the coherence of these educational and research institutions with an economy with a strong manufacturing vocation – such as the Italian one – there has long been a broad consensus among both scholars and entrepreneurs.
The Higher Technical Institutes (ITS) that have been launched on an experimental level in recent years, thanks to the establishment of ad hoc public-private foundations, are now a reality in many regions, starting from those of the new Industrial Triangle but not only in these, as shown by the Corriere della Sera speaking primarily of the Lombardy Mechatronics Foundation chaired by Monica Poggio (“Employment, the ITS formula: 83% of young people immediately get to work”, 13 August). On the other hand, in no Italian region is there anything comparable to the Fraunhofer institutes. The moment appears propitious – perhaps even unrepeatable – for the definitive leap in quality under both profiles.
A comparison between our main manufacturing regions and Baden-Württemberg in terms of investment in R&D tells us of the distance that still separates us from Country German: the R&D/GDP ratio fluctuates, depending on the case, between 1,3% and 2% in Italy, while it jumps to 5% in Germany. The presence on that territory of both the Universities of Applied Sciences and Fraunhofer is impressive. From official documents we learn that there are more than twenty such universities (which offer a tertiary education path to about a third of enrolled university students) and 17 organizations attributable to Fraunhofer (of which 13 are Institutes).
But beyond their number, there are two other relevant characteristics. First of all, both institutions, in their field of action, are part of a system where there is a rational division of tasks with other institutions such as, for example, in higher education with the "Research Universities" and in industrial research with the ”Innovation Alliance Baden-Württemberg (innBW)”. It is then the mission of these institutions to project their activity towards the future. The study subjects of the Universities of Applied Sciences – born in the XNUMXs – have evolved and today include, alongside the more traditional technical-engineering disciplines, also computer science, mathematics and natural sciences. For their part, the Fraunhofer Institutes – founded in 1949 – operating in Baden-Württemberg cover many of the most promising technology trajectories: physics in many of its applications (think of lasers and sensors), biotechnology, solar energy, and the list goes on much longer.
In short, the "Rhenish capitalism" once again confirms itself as a valid source of inspiration. Now, it is not a question of replicating tout court some of its main educational and research institutions (those mentioned here), but of implementing them with the adaptations suggested both by our different institutional set-up (we are not a federal state like Germany), and by the most brilliant experiences gained in the many territories in which Italian manufacturing is located.
All without forgetting that this gigantic "German-style" program on investments in knowledge (Fachhochschule and Fraunhofer) should in turn be part of a more general industrial policy plan. That "new" or "modern" industrial policy with a European footprint which, to remain in Germany, is firmly in the hands of the Federal Government in Berlin and has its eyes fixed on 2030. And that industrial policy which, instead, has been lacking in Italy for too many years, not to say decades, and that – how on these columns I have already had the opportunity to write – it has arrived time to bring back to the top of the agenda of country policy.
