Share

Smart city: Milan always first but on the environment it does worse than Rome

The ICity Index, the annual ranking drawn up by FPA, a company of the Digital360 group, which brings together 113 indicators on the quality of life in the Italian capitals, sees Milan in first place for the fourth consecutive year, but pressed by Bologna and Florence - the economic capital of the country are the environmental parameters – Rome recovers positions: it is 17th – Sale Trento, the South is bad.

Smart city: Milan always first but on the environment it does worse than Rome

Milan is the first Italian smart city, even if Rome beats it on the environment. Bologna and Florence on the podium, the "medium" cities in particular growth, in particular Bergamo and Trento, behind the South (Cagliari the best). This is what emerges from the annual report published today by FPA, a company of the Digital360 group which draws up the ICity Index bringing together 113 indicators in the fields of economy, education, air and water, energy, employment, tourism and culture, innovation, digital transformation, sustainable mobility, green, legality and security, governance.

MILAN AT THE TOP, BUT… – In almost all of these indicators, for which data from Istat, ministries, various companies providing public services and FPA surveys have been combined, Milan excels, confirming itself as the smartest Italian city: i.e. more evolved, livable, inclusive. Recognition happens for the fourth consecutive year, even if Bologna and Florence have shortened the gap taking advantage above all of the introduction of environmental variables such as soil consumption, in which Milan is only in 97th place out of the 106 capital cities analysed, and air quality, which sees the Lombard capital in 98th place.

ROME-MILAN CHALLENGE – Rome is only 17th, but recovers four positions and does better than Milan on parameters related to the environment, air and territory, even if an abyss remains between the two cities in terms of economic growth, governance and participation, legality and security. Rome does not excel in any of the categories analysed, even if it records a significant growth, which is worth the third place in the ranking of specialties, in terms of digitization: the first remains Milan, but Rome recovers thanks to the diffusion of ultra-broadband, to open data , the use of social networks and online services. In addition to digitization, Milan is also in first place in economic growth, employment (even if it is only 17th in the fight against poverty, with Parma in first place), in research and sustainable mobility, while in terms of governance and participation it is just behind Bologna.

THE PROVINCE IN COMMAND – The growth of the "medium" cities should also be noted, in particular Trento and Bergamo: the first approaches the podium by placing fifth, the second enters the top ten with sixth place after eleventh in 2016. Trento emerges, with the absolute first place, in the management of urban waste, while Bergamo is on the podium – all Lombard – of research and innovation, behind Milan and Brescia. Florence is confirmed as the capital of culture, Bologna as the capital of energy, while Veneto leads the way for education (previously Vicenza ahead of Rovigo and Padua). The trophy dedicated to urban greenery is curious: it is won by Venice, the city of the lagoon, where there are not even a single tree. In reality, the fact that the lagoon is an area protected by great biodiversity weighs heavily on the judgment (for the same reason the Sassi are worth third place in Matera).

THE SOUTH WORKS – In the development of smart cities, however, the cities of the South are clearly lagging behind: the first to appear is Cagliari, only in 47th place. The last positions are all the prerogative of southern cities, in particular of Sicily and Calabria: Naples is 82nd (better than the 89th place in 2016), Palermo 87th, Reggio Calabria 92nd, Catania 99th. The absolute worst, in place 106, is Trapani, which is the rear in the fight against poverty and in the digital world. Catania last in urban waste, Naples in soil consumption and legality. The capital less attentive to greenery in Italy is Vibo Valentia, the less innovative one is Isernia. To find the South in the top positions you need to read the rankings of: water and air, with Trapani on the podium with Viterbo and Aosta; municipal waste, with Benevento and Oristano in the top ten; urban green with Messina and Matera on the podium; soil and territory, with Ragusa being the best in Italy. For the rest, the South does not even emerge in terms of culture and tourism.

FPA: "ITALY WITHOUT COORDINATED POLICY" - "The Smart City of the future must also be sustainable, but the results of the ICity Rate 2017 report show overall a delay of the Italian urban system towards the sustainability objectives, which risks limiting the attractiveness and livability of our urban centers - notes Gianni Dominici, general manager of FPA –. The 106 capital municipalities analyzed tell of an Italy of cities without a coordinated policy and a shared reference framework to respond to major challenges such as climate change, poverty, sustainable mobility, soil consumption and security. We need coordination of all levels of government with the urban dimension at the centre, because social and economic problems are concentrated in cities, but there are also the skills and resources to solve them".

“Milan, Bologna and Florence, the three cities at the top of ICity Rate 2017, represent different models of development and urban governance capable of bringing important results – continues Dominici -. Milan, driven by economic dynamism and the ability to innovate decision-making processes and services, is the most solid 'enabling platform' for the Smart City in the country, but suffers from a misalignment in environmental and partly social sustainability. Bologna aims to keep environmental quality, welfare and territorial innovation policies together in an overall balance. Florence is solid in its vocations, tourism and culture, which are the engine of economic development but also lead it to deal with social and environmental impacts. Furthermore, we note the strengthening of the Emilia-Romagna urban system, which represents a barycentric structure for the rest of Italy, and the importance of the intermediate cities of the centre-north which are a connection between the metropolitan areas. On the other hand, the structural delay of most of the cities of the South and that of Rome is heavy, on which there are only a few weak signs of movement".

The synthesis of ICity Rate Report 2017 with all the tables can be downloaded here: http://bit.ly/2xYGOMZ

comments