{"id":5820,"date":"2017-03-05T14:05:35","date_gmt":"2017-03-05T14:05:35","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.communitymediaresearch.it\/?p=4653"},"modified":"2026-01-19T18:48:15","modified_gmt":"2026-01-19T17:48:15","slug":"a-nordest-competizione-sinonimo-di-imprenditivita-ma-prevale-lo-statalismo","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.community.it\/en\/2017\/03\/05\/a-nordest-competizione-sinonimo-di-imprenditivita-ma-prevale-lo-statalismo\/","title":{"rendered":"In the North-East, competition is synonymous with entrepreneurship, but statism prevails"},"content":{"rendered":"

Change is the defining feature of our daily experience. It is rapid, sometimes radical, above all sudden and occasionally unexpected. Scenarios are changing at a rapid pace. In the space of just a few years, we have moved from the spread of globalisation and the opening up of international markets to the strong resurgence of centripetal forces, a trend towards protectionism and the reaffirmation of national sovereignty. This is the consequence of a process that has unfolded at an accelerated and uneven pace, without adequate regulation. Populist and sovereigntist movements, seeking a return to the old rules, have an easy time of it and are warmly welcomed by a substantial section of the population. Change is never a neutral event. When it does not generate development, but rather a more unequal distribution of wealth and opportunities, it provokes resistance. This is happening across almost the whole of the Old Continent, but in our country it is particularly acute: social mobility has essentially ground to a halt and hopes for upward mobility have been greatly diminished. Furthermore, the slow pace at which we are emerging from a long period of recession further reinforces the perception of living in a country that offers no prospects for development and growth. Consequently, some young people are choosing to move abroad, whilst some companies are relocating their decision-making centres \u2013 and sometimes their production facilities \u2013 to more dynamic parts of the world.<\/p>\n

If we add to all this the fact that Italy remains a country with a high degree of corporatisation, where the web of vested interests is so tangled that it slows down \u2013 if not blocks \u2013 any attempt at reform; where people call for change, but this must first affect others; where the culture of \u2018rights at all costs\u2019 prevails over that of \u2018responsibility\u2019, we can understand how the \u2018zero-point-something syndrome\u2019 constitutes a social and cultural mechanism, even before it is an economic one: we fear change because it might make conditions worse, rather than improve them. Therefore, it is better to make minor adjustments or even to stand still. Of course, it is misleading to pigeonhole the entire population within such a framework. Indeed, significant sections of the population are calling for renewal and a different way of envisaging the country\u2019s development prospects. Nevertheless, within the spectrum of views, positions that express resistance to change and a fear of attempting to emerge from the crisis through new approaches prevail. The research surveyed the population on the best course of action to emerge from the ongoing difficult situation: whether to rely on free enterprise (the market), on the resources of civil society (subsidiarity) or on public intervention (the state).<\/p>\n

Free competition across various sectors of society and the economy is an issue on which opinions are divided. For 58.6 per cent, it is the best way to emerge from the crisis and kick-start development, particularly in Trentino-Alto Adige (77.1 per cent) and Friuli-Venezia Giulia (67.6 per cent). However, a significant proportion (41.4 per cent) believe it would lead to increased inequality, particularly amongst people in Veneto (45.5 per cent). In the North-East, unlike in the rest of Italy, competition is seen as a legitimisation of \u2018merit\u2019 and as an expression of \u2018entrepreneurship\u2019. Perhaps it is no coincidence, then, that it is precisely employees who associate competition with an increase in inequality, whilst those who favour greater freedom of action are those outside the labour market (very young people and the over-65s, pensioners and housewives).<\/p>\n

All the official data, however, show that in Italy \u2013 unlike the rest of Europe \u2013 poverty and inequality have increased. Here too, what would be the most appropriate course of action to reduce such phenomena? From this perspective, the outlook differs from the previous one. Just over half of people in the north-east (53.6 per cent) believe the state should intervene by stepping up public policies, particularly in Friuli Venezia Giulia (58.8 per cent) and Veneto (55.6 per cent). This view is particularly strongly supported by younger people, students and the unemployed \u2013 in other words, those on the margins of the labour market. Conversely, just over two-fifths (46.4 per cent) view the mobilisation of civil society resources favourably, in a subsidiary capacity, through collaboration between citizens \u2013 particularly among entrepreneurs \u2013 and in Trentino-Alto Adige (76.2 per cent).<\/p>\n

Taken together, these responses help to identify four distinct perspectives amongst the people of the north-east regarding whether the market, the state or civil society should play the leading role in helping the country emerge from the crisis. Firstly, we can observe a polarisation pitting a \u2018liberal\u2019 view (34.8 per cent) against a \u2018statist\u2019 one (30.9 per cent). In the first case, we have those who believe that free competition and collaboration amongst citizens are the main resources for getting the country back on its feet, particularly in Trentino-Alto Adige (72.5 per cent). In the second case, we find those who believe that competition leads to inequality and that, to combat this, greater state intervention is necessary \u2013 a view most prevalent in Veneto (33.1%). Secondly, we encounter two smaller groups: the \u2018reformists\u2019 (23.1 per cent), comprising those who see increased competition as the best means of emerging from the crisis, but tempered by public intervention to curb inequalities; this group is particularly prevalent in Friuli Venezia Giulia (32.3 per cent); the \u2018subsidiarists\u2019 (11.2 per cent), who fear competition because of the inequalities it may generate, but believe that mobilising civil society is the best way to reduce them, and who are particularly prevalent in Veneto (13.5 per cent).<\/p>\n

The North-East is divided over how to overcome its difficulties. It is split between those who still believe in the potential (either wholly or in part) of autonomy and self-reliance (46.0 per cent), and those who consider public intervention to be more important (54.0 per cent). Whilst this may be understandable, given the scars left by the crisis, the question of its economic sustainability remains.<\/p>\n