Green economy, culture and cohesion policies to try to prevent industrial decline
Italian industry continues to send out warning signals. Revenues in 2024 fell by 42 billion, 2.4% less than in 2023, with particularly negative peaks in the automotive and fashion industries, but still with 10 out of 15 non-performing segments (Il Sole24Ore, 7 February). And if we look over a longer period, we see that in five years (2019-2024) we lost 59,000 manufacturing companies, mainly in the clothing, metallurgy, wood and food industries, 10.6% fewer companies.
It is too early to speak of “deindustrialisation”. But we are certainly facing a long process of crisis which, in the absence of radical and credible choices of industrial policy at national and European level, risks profoundly compromising Italy’s role as the EU’s most industrialised country after Germany.
The decline of the German economy (our main trading partner, the benchmark for supply chains that were once solid and profitable, starting with the automotive industry) is a major factor in this decline. But also the high cost of energy, rising geopolitical tensions, concerns about tariffs threatened by the Trump administration in the White House and likely to provoke further reaction from China to Brussels. And also uncertainties around the generality and lack of applicability of government support policies, for example on Industry 5.0. Investment in innovation is slowing. Entrepreneurs’ concerns are compounded by the fact that they are still unable to find the skilled workers they need to boost productivity and competitiveness.
In short, it is an alarming situation, that requires rapid answers (as we already discussed in the blog of 28 January).
Nevertheless, those who are familiar with the industrial system in the most dynamic regions, starting with Lombardy, can not only confirm the warning signs, but also highlight factors of resistance and resilience, strengths of the production system that could be used to define recovery and development policies.
What are these factors? Aptitude for the green economy, investment in culture and references to “cohesive policies”. These ideas are highlighted in a recent analysis presented last week by Symbola and the Cariplo Foundation, with three new reports from the Foundation, chaired by Ermete Realacci, on sustainability, the cultural and creative industries and cohesion.
The surveys in the Symbola and Unioncamere Report, supported by the Centro Studi Tagliacarne, document how 571,000 Italian companies have invested in the green economy and sustainability in the last five years, creating 3.1 million jobs and proving that they are “better able to cope with the crisis”, managing the ecological transition and developing products and production processes that are sustainable, innovative and competitive. Lombardy is the leading Italian region in terms of the number of companies (102,000) making green investments. And Lombardy is also home to groups (Arvedi, Feralpi) that are leaders in the production of green steel, with certification from prestigious international institutions. In a country as poor in raw materials as Italy, being a leader in the circular economy, with the highest percentage of recycling for all waste (91.6%, compared to a European average of 57.9%), is a major competitive advantage.
Sustainability, in the three aspects of environmental protection, governance mechanisms and social sustainability (from safety in the workplace to the quality of industrial facilities (also from an architectural point of view: the “beautiful factory”, i.e. well-designed, bright, welcoming and indeed safe)), has become a real competitive advantage, even for industries built abroad.
This is a considerable strength at a time when talking about sustainability seems to be a counter-trend in many European and international political and economic circles.
Even in the recent past, green ideological and bureaucratic choices have been made in Brussels (the story of the hasty decision in favour of electric cars and the restrictions on endothermic engines is a case in point), which have seriously affected the European industrial apparatus, affecting efficient production chains and thousands of jobs. However, following the indications of the Draghi report on the investments needed for the double environmental and digital transition, the EU can develop its own original industrial policy that, along the lines of technological neutrality, allows the life and revitalisation of our industry, faces up to competition from the US, China and India, and strengthens European influence (and its economic, civil and social values) in the new geopolitical and market scenarios. In short, Italian companies with an awareness of the green economy are on the right track.
The words of the President of the Republic Sergio Mattarella ring true: “For too long, we have addressed the issue of the environment and climate change inadequately, artificially pitting the needs of the present against the needs of our children and grandchildren’s future. To ensure competitiveness, Europe needs to move away from fossil fuels in the long term and make the transition, highlighting – as the Draghi report does – the link between decarbonisation and competitiveness”.
Investment in culture is an essential component of this strategy. Culture and creativity – as documented by the Symbola report “Io sono cultura” (I am culture) – generate a total added value of 296.9 billion euros. And even in this case, Lombardy is the leading region, with almost 30 billion.
The virtuous relationship between industrial and service companies and the cultural industry plays a positive role in the context of a dynamic “knowledge economy”, also strong thanks to training and research partnerships, with a Lombardy university system that is also of high international standing. The same applies to the awareness of how and how much weight “cohesive companies” (those with a strong link to their region and to the whole system of stakeholders: a dynamic positive social capital) have, with greater incentives for innovation, quality of work, export trends and, in a word, competitiveness.
For most of our companies, these is about historic values (business museums and historical archives are good examples of this). And it is also about present-day choices. It is essential that political and administrative actors, as well as social and representative organisations, become increasingly aware of this (the Lombardy region’s law on the recognition and promotion of company museums is an important example that other regions could follow).
Companies, in short, are economic players, of course. But they are also social and cultural actors. And they should be seen as such by the wider public.
An old observation by one of the best international economists, which is worth rereading today, also bears witness to this. It was made by John Kenneth Galbraith in one of his most successful books, “The Affluent Society”, published in 1958, and then repeated during his visit to Italy, in Turin, in 1983. Here it is: “Italy has emerged from a catastrophic post-war period to become a major economic power. To explain this miracle, no one can point to the superiority of Italian science and engineering or the effectiveness of administrative and political management. The real reason is that Italy has incorporated an essential component of culture into its products and that cities such as Milan, Parma, Florence, Siena, Venice, Rome, Naples and Palermo, despite having very poor infrastructure, can boast a higher standard of living in their beauty. In the future, much more than the economic GDP index, the level of aesthetics will become an increasingly decisive indicator of the progress of society”.
Industry and culture, beauty and competitiveness. The lesson always applies.
Italian industry continues to send out warning signals. Revenues in 2024 fell by 42 billion, 2.4% less than in 2023, with particularly negative peaks in the automotive and fashion industries, but still with 10 out of 15 non-performing segments (Il Sole24Ore, 7 February). And if we look over a longer period, we see that in five years (2019-2024) we lost 59,000 manufacturing companies, mainly in the clothing, metallurgy, wood and food industries, 10.6% fewer companies.
It is too early to speak of “deindustrialisation”. But we are certainly facing a long process of crisis which, in the absence of radical and credible choices of industrial policy at national and European level, risks profoundly compromising Italy’s role as the EU’s most industrialised country after Germany.
The decline of the German economy (our main trading partner, the benchmark for supply chains that were once solid and profitable, starting with the automotive industry) is a major factor in this decline. But also the high cost of energy, rising geopolitical tensions, concerns about tariffs threatened by the Trump administration in the White House and likely to provoke further reaction from China to Brussels. And also uncertainties around the generality and lack of applicability of government support policies, for example on Industry 5.0. Investment in innovation is slowing. Entrepreneurs’ concerns are compounded by the fact that they are still unable to find the skilled workers they need to boost productivity and competitiveness.
In short, it is an alarming situation, that requires rapid answers (as we already discussed in the blog of 28 January).
Nevertheless, those who are familiar with the industrial system in the most dynamic regions, starting with Lombardy, can not only confirm the warning signs, but also highlight factors of resistance and resilience, strengths of the production system that could be used to define recovery and development policies.
What are these factors? Aptitude for the green economy, investment in culture and references to “cohesive policies”. These ideas are highlighted in a recent analysis presented last week by Symbola and the Cariplo Foundation, with three new reports from the Foundation, chaired by Ermete Realacci, on sustainability, the cultural and creative industries and cohesion.
The surveys in the Symbola and Unioncamere Report, supported by the Centro Studi Tagliacarne, document how 571,000 Italian companies have invested in the green economy and sustainability in the last five years, creating 3.1 million jobs and proving that they are “better able to cope with the crisis”, managing the ecological transition and developing products and production processes that are sustainable, innovative and competitive. Lombardy is the leading Italian region in terms of the number of companies (102,000) making green investments. And Lombardy is also home to groups (Arvedi, Feralpi) that are leaders in the production of green steel, with certification from prestigious international institutions. In a country as poor in raw materials as Italy, being a leader in the circular economy, with the highest percentage of recycling for all waste (91.6%, compared to a European average of 57.9%), is a major competitive advantage.
Sustainability, in the three aspects of environmental protection, governance mechanisms and social sustainability (from safety in the workplace to the quality of industrial facilities (also from an architectural point of view: the “beautiful factory”, i.e. well-designed, bright, welcoming and indeed safe)), has become a real competitive advantage, even for industries built abroad.
This is a considerable strength at a time when talking about sustainability seems to be a counter-trend in many European and international political and economic circles.
Even in the recent past, green ideological and bureaucratic choices have been made in Brussels (the story of the hasty decision in favour of electric cars and the restrictions on endothermic engines is a case in point), which have seriously affected the European industrial apparatus, affecting efficient production chains and thousands of jobs. However, following the indications of the Draghi report on the investments needed for the double environmental and digital transition, the EU can develop its own original industrial policy that, along the lines of technological neutrality, allows the life and revitalisation of our industry, faces up to competition from the US, China and India, and strengthens European influence (and its economic, civil and social values) in the new geopolitical and market scenarios. In short, Italian companies with an awareness of the green economy are on the right track.
The words of the President of the Republic Sergio Mattarella ring true: “For too long, we have addressed the issue of the environment and climate change inadequately, artificially pitting the needs of the present against the needs of our children and grandchildren’s future. To ensure competitiveness, Europe needs to move away from fossil fuels in the long term and make the transition, highlighting – as the Draghi report does – the link between decarbonisation and competitiveness”.
Investment in culture is an essential component of this strategy. Culture and creativity – as documented by the Symbola report “Io sono cultura” (I am culture) – generate a total added value of 296.9 billion euros. And even in this case, Lombardy is the leading region, with almost 30 billion.
The virtuous relationship between industrial and service companies and the cultural industry plays a positive role in the context of a dynamic “knowledge economy”, also strong thanks to training and research partnerships, with a Lombardy university system that is also of high international standing. The same applies to the awareness of how and how much weight “cohesive companies” (those with a strong link to their region and to the whole system of stakeholders: a dynamic positive social capital) have, with greater incentives for innovation, quality of work, export trends and, in a word, competitiveness.
For most of our companies, these is about historic values (business museums and historical archives are good examples of this). And it is also about present-day choices. It is essential that political and administrative actors, as well as social and representative organisations, become increasingly aware of this (the Lombardy region’s law on the recognition and promotion of company museums is an important example that other regions could follow).
Companies, in short, are economic players, of course. But they are also social and cultural actors. And they should be seen as such by the wider public.
An old observation by one of the best international economists, which is worth rereading today, also bears witness to this. It was made by John Kenneth Galbraith in one of his most successful books, “The Affluent Society”, published in 1958, and then repeated during his visit to Italy, in Turin, in 1983. Here it is: “Italy has emerged from a catastrophic post-war period to become a major economic power. To explain this miracle, no one can point to the superiority of Italian science and engineering or the effectiveness of administrative and political management. The real reason is that Italy has incorporated an essential component of culture into its products and that cities such as Milan, Parma, Florence, Siena, Venice, Rome, Naples and Palermo, despite having very poor infrastructure, can boast a higher standard of living in their beauty. In the future, much more than the economic GDP index, the level of aesthetics will become an increasingly decisive indicator of the progress of society”.
Industry and culture, beauty and competitiveness. The lesson always applies.