White paper on creativity - ebla center

Chapter 99.3 The Italian caseA profound ongoing process ofstructural change and the rapidtransition towards the knowledgeeconomy along the lines of the USmodel have come at a time when theItalian system is experiencing aparticular weak phase. In the secondhalf of the 20th century Italy can bedescribed as paradigmatic case of pathdependentgrowth, albeit at timesoriginal and interesting. For a longtime Italy made remarkable progress indeveloping its manufacturing base bycombining elements of extensivegrowth, also in geographical terms,and extraordinary intensive growth,clearly based on the model of creativeadoption (Antonelli and Barbiellini,2007).Italian economic growth in the secondhalf of the 20th century was mainly theresult of the spread of processtechnologies developed thanks toparticularly virtuous user-producerinteractions which benefited bothusers and producers: the users hadtimely access to intermediate andcapital goods incorporating advancedtechnologies; and the producersenjoyed the benefits of rapidlyexpanding derived demand. This led toaccelerated processes of systemicspecialisation in the division of labour,de facto well co-ordinated, also thanksto trends of clustering, enabling manysectors and regions to encouragevirtuous processes in the supply chainby fuelling the growth of verytechnological-intense specialisation inall sectors from consumer good tocapital goods production, and tooccupy highly qualified niches in theluxury product markets.An intersectoral comparison of theoverall productivity of factors atregional level reveals that Italianeconomy is lagging behind on theinternational scene mainly because of acontinuing industrial and geographicaldivide: in the Northeast and Centrethe main contribution to productivitycomes from manufacturing, whereas inthe Northwest it comes from theservice sectors (Quatraro, 2007).Several factors undermine theefficiency of creative reactionprocesses in companies: the weaknessof the scientific and technologicalsystem; a lack of structured relationsbetween businesses and universities;the mainly tacit nature of availabletechnological knowledge; the lack ofsystematic procedures for exploitinglearning processes; the low level offormally educated human capitalavailable; and shortcomings in internalorganisational structures. Italiancompanies thus seem unable to tacklethe great inconsistencies in the uses ofthe new information technologysystems. Here, too, considerablegeographical and sectoral polarisationled to a very asymmetric developmentand diffusion of innovative capabilitiesby companies still basically associatedwith the manufacturing sectors(Quatraro, 2008).The Italian system thus appears to bestalled: it is still too closely bound toWHITE PAPER ON CREATIVITY 215