The document discusses the ongoing debate about underfunding of research in Italy compared to other European nations. While Italy produces a high volume of quality research publications, its financial investment in research is below the European average and GDP targets. This is referred to as the "Italian paradox". The author argues that rather than just increasing funding, Italy needs a long-term strategic plan and to strengthen partnerships between public research and private industry to foster innovation and technological transfer. This could help boost the economy without relying solely on raising public funds for research.

1. eLetters response to “ Plans for new research hub get critical reception” by Laura Margottini . Science 11 Mar 2016: Vol. 351, Issue 6278, pp. 1127
DOI: 10.1126/science.351.6278.112 7
Domenico De Martinis domenico.demartinis@enea.it
ITALY
The Italian Paradox in research continues (but, does it really exist?)
Italian research and the challenge of technological transfer
By Domenico De Martinis, in Rome
The Italian scientific community always complains
about an evident lack of investments in research by
the government. This is evident in terms of budget
and human resource which are below the average of
European states and in general below all top science
and technology-performing countries.
The discussion about the lack of research funds
continues for years in major Italian newspapers 1
but
became very hectic recently2
in the main
international science magazines3
. In February 2016,
the Italian scientific and academic community called
“the European Union to push governments into
keeping their research funding above subsistence
level”, and claimed that Italy seriously neglects its
research base4
. More polemics were raised at the
announcement of the plans for the creation of a
Human Technopole in the former EXPO 2015
pavilion area5
initiative that was criticized and
labeled as too dispersive, not focused on the real
needs of Italian research and lacking
transparency6,7,8
. Yet, Italian prime minister Matteo
Renzi often stated,
beside the Human
Technopole
initiative, that Italy
shall and will invest
in Education,
Research and
Innovation9,10,11,12,13
.
This flare up of
discussion that
involves now both
the scientific
community and
politicians is also
biased by the so-
called “Italian
Paradox”14
, as that
reveals a striking
contradiction, infact,
while the country's
R&D resources
significantly lag
behind those of
other major
economies, its output, in terms of scientific
publications, is not only one of the most prolific in
the world, but also highly recognized. Analysts,
observing the Italian scientific performance over the
period 1980 to 2009, suggested that this virtuous
loop may not continue indefinitely15
. Yet, to date,
the scientific performance of the belpaese is still in
the world’s top 10 according to various indexing
bodies such as SCIMAGO16
or Nature Index17
. Thus
the Italian paradox continues and so does the
controversies such as a shortage of funding which
represents a “sword of Damocles” that at any time
may crash on Italy’s research community.
Thus, beside the commitments taken within the
European Union18
, it is legitimate to wonder if
pouring more public money into science in Italy
would result in a better scientific performance; it is
generally acknowledged that to invest part of one
country’s GDP in science and education results in a
wealthier society19
, and surely a reliable national
science planning would increase the quality of life of
the scientists in Italy and buffer the so-called “brain
drain”20
, but could Italy ever overtake Japan, or
other European nations of similar or larger size (i.e.
France, Germany), or even giant sub-continental
ones as USA, China, India?
So, the skepticism about the Italian scientific
system cannot be associated neither to the lack of
quantity nor quality, but is probably derived by
the great uncertainties of the medium to long term
outlook. It is true that over the years Italy lacked
national programs that would guarantee the
smooth investment of the available budget,
although little, for the building of its infrastructure
and the harmonization of the hiring and
employment system. Even so, to increase state
support to grow Italy’s scientific research
community may not be the solution, without an
appropriate multiannual strategic plan that must be
continuously monitored and fine-tuned.
The other side of the coin that is often untold is
the relation of Italian science with industry. This is
another crucial aspect that should be evaluated. As
it is difficult in any case to foresee a solid raise in
the public budget for research in these years of
economic crisis, technological transfer to industry
could be the alternative driver. To enable private
funding of public research would lower
investment risks for innovation of industry and
provide direct returns to the scientific community,
with a targeted feed to research. That would also
somehow give a pace and direction to research
planning.
To do this it is necessary to build the capacity to
absorb scientific innovation and turn it into market
opportunities. That would become the real
investment that Italy could use to increase the
percentage of funding for research without
dipping into public resources. The result would be
very efficient if possibly paired with national
policies and EU policies.
Surely this aspect of co-financing has always been
very sensitive in Italy, fearing that the interference
of industry in academy may corrupt the activity of
the scientists21
. However, such loathing for the blend
of research and industrial funding has not been
always present in Italian history; since the end of the
nineteenth century, for about one hundred years,
Italy has been the protagonist of a successful process
of modernization and economic growth. Today,
however, at the start of the twenty-first century, the
country has lost its drive for growth and finds it
difficult to revive it22
.
The scenario of Italian firms to date consist mainly
of small, family-run firms and enterprises, in
contrast with some major businesses that
characterized the Italian economy a few decades ago
(FIAT, Pirelli, Olivetti, Montecatini and the so
called white industries, to mention a few). Firms in
advanced economies can escape the
periodical competitive pressures by
increasing their R&D expenditure,
improving their products’ quality,
hiring high-skilled workers, but while
the large Italian firms can invest in
such cutting edge initiatives, the huge
number of small enterprises that
currently populate Italian enterprise
portfolio can’t take that risk, and
don’t23
. Thus we cannot think of
renovating Italy by repeating strategies
of the past, but a change in paradigm is
needed; public research should take
the risks of exploring innovative
processes and set a knowledge based
platform that would help the Italian
industry to innovate. Obviously such
approach should come with the right
tools to implement the idea
(governance and dialogue among the
actors), in order to build the capacity
to absorb the innovation opportunity as
already mentioned.
The real Italian paradox, the conundrum, apparently
relies in the matching of state policies with public
research and industry interests, a combination that
may appear incompatible; but it is indeed a “golden
triangle” best practice that already proves to be
successful24
elsewhere.
Some recent indicators suggest that the path to a
scientific and technological recovery may already
have started despite all odds; according to the
European Patent Office25
, Italy reversed the negative
trend of the past four years (with +9.0% more patent
applications in 2015 than in 2014), and the 2016
Startup Nation Scoreboard26
indicates Italy among
those EU states doing most to help startups.
If Italy will openly overcome the fear of combining
science and education with business opportunities, a
new path will be opened, that will match together all
those aspects with positive effect on society.

2. eLetters response to “ Plans for new research hub get critical reception” by Laura Margottini . Science 11 Mar 2016: Vol. 351, Issue 6278, pp. 1127
DOI: 10.1126/science.351.6278.112 7
Domenico De Martinis domenico.demartinis@enea.it
References
1
Ricerca&Sviluppo, dall'Europa investimenti scarsi. L'Italia spende meno della Slovenia La Repubblica 17 Nov 2014
2
Ricerca, l'Italia è ancora nella top 10. Ma perde talenti il Sole24ore 7 January 2016
3
Cartlidge E., (2016) Italian scientists protest ’serious neglect’ of research Science DOI: 10.1126/science.aaf4123. The letter was accompanied by
an online petition (https://www.change.org/p/salviamo-la-ricerca-italiana), arguing that the European Union should require member states to spend at
least 3% of gross domestic product on research and development—as stipulated in the Lisbon strategy of 2000—just as it requires them to limit
budget deficits. Currently, Italy spends just 1.25% of its GDP on research.
4
Parisi, G. (2016) Governments: Balance research funds across Europe Nature 530, 33 (04 February 2016) doi:10.1038/530033d
5
Dopo Expo: presentato il progetto di ricerca "Human technopole, Italy 2040" Italian Government communication following the Ministry of Agriculture
Press release
6
Cattaneo E., Human Technopole, la scienza all'Expo e la favola del pifferaio. La Repubblica 25 Feb. 2016
7
Margottini, L. Plans for new research hub get critical reception SCIENCE 11 Mar 2016: Vol. 351, Issue 6278, pp. 1127
DOI: 10.1126/science.351.6278.1127
8
Assad J. Instituting recruiting meritocracy in Italy Science 22 Apr 2016: Vol. 352, Issue 6284, pp. 422 DOI: 10.1126/science.352.6284.422-a
9
Remarks by President Obama and Prime Minister Renzi of Italy in Joint Press . Conference The White House. Office of the Press Secretary April
17, 2015
10
RENZI: "FINALMENTE TORNIAMO AD INVESTIRE, PRONTO PIANO PER LA RICERCA DA 2,5 MILIARDI". RaiNews 2nd
March 2016
11
Renzi: l'Italia deve investire su un proprio sistema di ricerca. Askanews 31st
March 2016
12
Renzi in Usa: "Italia è pronta ad attrarre investimenti, accordo con Ibm". Ansa.it, 1st
APril 2016
13
Ricerca, Renzi: "Il 1° maggio stanziamo 2,5 miliardi" La Repubblica, 27 Aprile 2016
14
Brown J.(2009)“The Italian paradox” CNRS International magazine,No.15 - October 2009 – Chemistry
15
Daraio, C., Moed, H.F., (2011) “Is Italian science declining?”. Research Policy, 40 (10), 1380-1392
16
SJR — SCImago Journal & Country Rank
17
Nature Index, 2016 tables: Countries
18
The 3% objective: brief history http://ec.europa.eu/invest-in-research/action/history_en.htm
19
De Martinis et al. (2016) “Policy Considerations on EU-Brazil Future Scientific Cooperation”. American Journal of Economics, Finance and
Management, Vol.2, No.2
20
Sylos Labini F. Science and the Economy of Crisis- pp 158 chapt: the Sacrifice of Young Generations pp 158 ISBN 978-3-319-29527-5e-ISBN
978-3-319-29528-2
21
Just to mention a relevant episode, the “pantera movement” university occupation that occurred in 1990 in Italy was triggered by the decision of
the Italian Ministry of education and research to increase financial autonomy of the university administrations and hence an increased dependence
from private funding. Hajek A. 2013 Negotiating Memories of Protest in Western Europe: The Case of Italy ISBN: 9780230238510
22
Felice and Vecchi (2015) Italy’s Modern Economic Growth, 1861–2011 Enterprise & Society / Volume 16 / Issue 02 / June 2015, pp 225 – 248
DOI: 10.1017/eso.2014.23
23
Amatori F., Bugamelli M., Colli A. Italian Firms in History: Size, Technology and Entrepreneurship Number 13 – October 2011 ISSN 2281-6088
24
OECD Food and Agricultural Reviews Innovation, Agricultural Productivity and Sustainability in the Netherlands pp 136 ISBN: 9789264238459
25
EPO Newsletters: “Demand for European patents continues to grow” 3 March 2016
26
“The 2016 Startup Nation Scoreboard” edited by the European Digital Forum, funded by European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation
programme under grant agreement No 645099