AI as Research Assistant: Upscaling Content Analysis to Identify Patterns of ...
Tito Bianchi - Social capital and upgrading of small enterprise networks
1. Seminario CoCap Porto Alegre 28 09 2012
Social capital and upgrading of
Small enterprise networks:
what have we learned?
Tito Bianchi
Evaluation Unit
Department of Development and Cohesion
Italy
2. INDEX
• Social capital, regional
development and upgrading of
enterprise networks
• Italian policy measures and their
trajectory
• What have we learned from
positive experiences
3. Social Capital in social science
• Measures of social capital are being
assessed -> their relationships with
development proven
• Indicators used are unsatisfactory proxies;
• Social network analyses are increasingly
popular -> assess intensity of relations,
internal hierarchy, openness of networks;
4. Social capital and regional development
policy in Italy
Italian literature on Industrial districts of the 1980s-
90s has identified identity bonds and trust as an
ingredient of localized small firm development.
Sociological literature on (Putnam 1993) identifies
civicness as an ingredient of regional development
Can cooperative attitude be induced through
policy intervention?
5. From positive to normative
Districts, filières, firm cooperation, from
spontaneous phenomena become
categories of policy intervention
Firms, associations, branches of government
are awarded resources and benefits in
exchange for commitment to cooperate
6. Several Policy instruments that aim at
inducing social capital in networks of
firms have been active in Italy
1997 – 2004 Patti Territoriali
2003 – 2010 Progetti Integrati Territoriali
2005 – today Distretti Tecnologici
2010 - today Reti d’Impresa
… all attempts at reproducing the
collaborative conditions that make groups of
firms collectively more competitive
7. Patti Territoriali to promote local
development in Italy
financial incentives awarded to a of locally
financial incentives to a group group of
locally-based firms: integrated investment by
based and integrated projects designed
plan designed by a coalition of local actors
a coalition of local actors
“Patto” consisted of a package of grants to
firms’ investment and of (up to a max of 30%)
infrastructure operations
230 Patti funded, after bidding process, in
subsequent generations between 1997/8 and
2001 – total value of 5.5 Billion (current) Euro
8. 1990- Territorial Pacts for industrial
development
I PATTI TERRITORIALI APPROVATI: DATI DI SINTESI RICAVATI DAI
PROGETTI
N° TOTALE
N° Investimenti Agevolazioni Occupazion
iniziative 000 euro 000 euro e a regime
Patti con procedura Nazionale
Patti 1° generazione 12 434 513.507 371.179 6.984
Patti 2° generazione 39 2.000 3.019.079 1.277.708 21.703
Patti 10-10-99 28 1.021 1.589.236 1.002.745 10.959
Patti 31-12-99 7 254 405.762 164.952 2.217
Agricoli 91 4.977 2.188.395 1.385.765 19.860
Calamità naturali 32 2.178 2.825.677 901.973 14.064
TOTALE Patti Territoriali Nazionali 209 10.864 10.541.656 5.104.322 75.787
PATTI EUROPEI (PTO) 10 2.025 745.710 380.764 8.434
TOTALE Patti Territoriali 219 12.889 11.287.366 5.485.086 84.221
14. 2000-2006 EU regional development Plan
introduced in Italy….
Progetti Integrati Territoriali
“Composite project for the development of an area,
which includes a set of different operations that all
contribute, in interaction with each other, to a common
development strategy, devised by local actors in
response to concrete needs and opportunities.”
15. ITP distribution by Italian Region, and incidence on
total EU Regional Funds available
Obj. 1 Number Total Public Funding ITP % of Total
Regions of ITP for ITP (millions of €) Regional Program
Basilicata 8 330 26,3%
Calabria 23 423 11,3%
Campania 51 1.576 22,9%
Molise 7 63 15,0%
Puglia 10 1.102 23,5%
Sardegna 13 265 6,8%
Sicilia 27 990 13,0%
TOTAL 139 4750 16,7%
17. A new generation of policy tools does
not award incentives directly to firms
- Lighter policy tools start by
identifying-legitimizing an institution
- «State-recognized» institutions act as
intermediaries of different policy
incentives, national and regional
18. Distretti Tecnologici
GOALS
• To induce collaboration within a public-
private network of firms, regional
administrations and research centers
• To facilitate che application and
valorization of results of scientific
research
• Develop regional innovation systems
promoting regional specialization
19. Distretti Tecnologici
• Refer to a specific regional area
• Have a sectoral focus
• are managed by a ltd. Company:
consortium
• Have also proliferated with many
sectoral duplicates in different
regions
20. I 34 distretti tecnologici
ict, Edilizia sostenibile (Trento),
materiali avanzati, Edilizia sostenibile (Bolzano)
Biotecnologie,
agroalimentare biomedicina molecolare
Navale e nautico
nanotech
ict - torino wireless
hi-mech - alta tecnologia meccanica
Tecnologie marine
Qualità della vita e sicurezza nell’abitare
Sistemi intelligenti integrati
Materiali speciali metallurgici
ict & security
innovazione sicurezza e qualità degli alimenti
innovazione agroindustriale
aerospazio e difesa agroalimentare
bioscienze
meccatronica
Beni culturali
high-tech
Tecnologie per la tutela
ingegneria dei materiali polimerici Rischi idrogeologici
e compositi e strutture energia
Biomedicina e tecnologie
della salute
logistica e trasformazione Logistica della trasformazione
restauro dei beni culturali
micro e nanosistemi agrobio e pesca eco-compatibile
Energia petrolchimica
tecnologico trasporti navali commerciali e da
e ambiente
diporto
21. Recent Policy - Reti d’impresa
/ Contratto di rete
• National business union requested more
simple and inexpensive forms of
collaboration for firms to pursue activities
together
• L.122/2010 introduced enterprise networks
established through a contract
• Firms sign “Contratti di rete” to take
reciprocal commitments and saying who
does what;
• Public authorities recognize the validity of
this agreement when they award benefits
of different kinds
22. In July 2012 ,412 Contratti di rete could be
counted in Italy
24. Summing up: Policy Trajectory over time
Policy evolves:
• from promoting more formalized to
“lighter” forms of collaboration
• from clearly delimited territorial
areas, to non-spatial firm networks
• New emphasis research and
development activities;
• Time horizon of becomes less clearly
delimited, and the activities more
open-flexible
25. What have we learned about producer
groups-coalitions?
• Within specific territories, supposedly endowed with
same level of social capital, different groups of agents
can establish different levels/forms of cooperation;
• Economic agents can establish cooperative
arrangements or institutions with anti-development
results
• the degree of openness to external markets and
knowledge through «developmental intermediaries»
and other external supporters is key
26. What have we learned about producer groups?
Findings more specific to Agri-Food-
Processing
• Controlling the entire agriculture-processing chain is
useful to promote and establish product quality (wine,
cheese)
• Leverage lead-farmers who possess external contacts:
local small firms lack the wider perspective to perceive
the possible value of local products on external
markets --> often benefits extend to small firms;
• An export oriented strategy has to be gradual:
reputation for product quality has to be established first
locally.
27. What we have learned on the
effectiveness of policies promoting
productive coalitions-groups
• Repeated policy experience of firm coalitions
strengthens trust through positive
expectations
• When public resources are at stake, formal
coalitions of producers can be
developmental or rent-seeking
• The leader roles within «Recognized» or
formalized producer groups has to be
contendible