Inequalities and territorial disparities in Italy
HPV vaccine and cancer prevention
4 July 2025
The University of Messina launches Sibilla, a chatbot that helps students.
19 July 2025
Le inequalities and territorial disparities represent one of the most persistent challenges of contemporary Italy, overcoming the traditional North-South dichotomy to configure itself as a complex and multidimensional phenomenon. The recent study conducted by Prota and Cicatiello (2025) for the Friedrich Ebert Stiftung offers a updated scenario on Italian socioeconomic inequalities, identifying five distinct territorial typologies through an innovative analysis that considers multiple dimensions of the territorial well-being.
This research fits into the European scientific debate on territorial cohesion policies, of particular importance since regional disparities in income and employment within the European Union have already proven to be profound and persistent (European Commission, 2023). The Italian case is emblematic, as over the last two decades, all regions have experienced per capita GDP growth rates below the EU27 average, regardless of their starting position.
Inequalities and territorial disparities in Italy: analysis methodology
The study by Prota and Cicatiello (2025) adopts a multidimensional approach which goes beyond traditional single-indicator economic analyses by incorporating six fundamental dimensions of the territorial development:
- economy and labor market
- human capital
- demography
- services
- quality of life
- civic capital.
This methodological approach reflects the evolution of regional studies towards more holistic approaches in measuring territorial well-being (Rodríguez-Pose & Ezcurra, 2010).
Analysis and sampling units
The analysis is based on the 107 Italian provinces as an observation unit, in a strategic choice that allows us to capture spatial heterogeneity even within the same regions.
This analytical granularity represents an innovation compared to previous studies that were limited to the regional level, allowing us to identify territorial dynamics more complex and nuanced.
Statistical aggregation
The process of statistical aggregation followed a rigorous procedure divided into three phases:
- standardization of variables (through z-score transformation), to eliminate the effect of different units of measurement;
- application of Ward's method (hierarchical agglomeration), to minimize the increase in variance within clusters;
- selection of the optimal number of cluster (i.e. socioeconomic groups), through the analysis of the resulting hierarchy.
This methodology allowed us to identify five socioeconomic groups and four administrative capacity groups, optimizing the trade-off between informative synthesis and accurate representation of territorial diversity.
Main results: the five Italies
Group 1: consolidated innovation with risks of social exclusion
The first cluster includes the metropolitan provinces of the Centre-North (Bologna, Florence, Milan, Rome, Turin) and the industrial centres with a consolidated tradition (Modena, Parma, Pisa, Pordenone, Reggio Emilia, Rimini). These territories present the best performance socioeconomic national, with employment rates close to 70%, high wages and a strong propensity for innovation (223,25 patents per million inhabitants against a national average of 85,09).
However, a paradox of social exclusionThe attractiveness of these areas puts pressure on real estate markets (average prices of €3.395/m2020) and public services, creating risks of marginalization for low-income earners. This phenomenon mirrors dynamics observed in other European metropolises, where economic growth can coexist with rising intra-urban inequalities (Dijkstra et al., XNUMX).
Group 2: areas with strategic industrial vocation
The second one cluster mainly includes northern provinces (Lombardy, Veneto, Trentino-Alto Adige) characterized by a strong manufacturing vocation. Despite solid economic performance (employment rate at 69,36%), these territories show cultural and social weaknesses: lowest number of libraries among all cluster (5,45 per 100.000 inhabitants) and high gender wage gaps (33,14% versus 31,61% national average).
This configuration suggests a production-focused development model which could present vulnerabilities in the long term, particularly in relation to digital transition processes and social sustainability challenges.
Group 3: balance between well-being and livability
The third cluster represents a balanced model of territorial development, including the provinces of Liguria, Umbria, Marche, some areas of Romagna, Piedmont and Tuscany, as well as Aosta, Pescara and Cagliari. These territories combine economic performances close to the national average with high quality of life and strong civic capital.
Il employment rate (67,62%) and the availability of childcare services (22,85% versus 17,37% nationally) show a good balance between economic competitiveness and social cohesion. The high demographic dependency (61,99%) however, signals potential challenges related to the aging population.
Group 4: Areas of fragility and transition
Fourth cluster includes mainly central-southern provinces which act as geographic bridge between areas with different levels of development. It includes the provinces of Lazio (excluding Rome), Abruzzo (excluding Pescara), Molise, Basilicata, and several provinces in Puglia, Campania, and Sardinia.
These territories present limited economic opportunities (employment rate at 56,65%, average wages of 12,64 euros/hour) despite a rich historical and cultural heritage that is often underutilized. poor propensity for innovation (24,33 patents per million) and the inadequate museum offering (0,32 museums per 100 km²) indicate the need for targeted policies to enhance territorial potential.
Group 5: Structural obstacles to development
The last cluster includes territories with persistent structural delays: provinces of Caserta, Naples, Salerno, Barletta-Andria-Trani, Foggia, Taranto, Calabrian provinces (except Catanzaro), Sicilian provinces (except Ragusa) and Southern Sardinia.
Il employment rate extremely low (44,48%) and the high incidence of NEET (Not in Education, Employment, or Training. 27,27%) highlight profound socioeconomic challenges.
Paradoxically, these territories maintain a significant museum heritage (2,53 museums per 100 km²) and a good availability of general practitioners, suggesting untapped potential that requires systemic interventions to be enhanced.
Administrative capacity and territorial governance
Administrative capacity analysis
The European value-chain analysis administrative capacity This represents a crucial methodological innovation, considering that the effectiveness of public policies depends significantly on the skills and organization of local authorities (Andrews & Brewer, 2013). The study examines some specific indicators:
- collection capacity
- presence of young and female mayors
- participation in PNRR projects
- personnel qualification
- generational change.
Administrative capacity models
The analysis identifies four cluster administrative distinguished:
- high professionalism. Territories with qualified personnel but traditional governance;
- young dynamismAdministrations with young staff and good PNRR planning skills;
- contrast between planning and structural weaknessSouthern provinces with strong adherence to the PNRR but shortcomings in human resources;
- Sicily's untapped potentialInnovative leadership but serious structural shortcomings.
Correlation between development and administrative capacity
The combined analysis reveals a strong correlation between performance socioeconomic and administrative capacity. Of the 11 provinces of cluster better socioeconomic, 10 also belong to the cluster more effective administrative system. This association supports the thesis that territorial development requires not only economic investments but also institutional strengthening (Rodríguez-Pose et al., 2024).
Discussion and implications
Overcoming the North-South paradigm
The results of the study in question challenge the traditional narrative of the North-South dichotomy, highlighting instead a complex geography of inequalities. This territorial fragmentation reflects broader processes of spatial reconfiguration of the European economy, where the geographical concentration of high value-added activities generates new forms of polarization (Viesti, 2021).
Implications for differentiated territorial policies
The identified territorial heterogeneity supports the adoption of place-based policies differentiated rather than uniform approaches. As highlighted by Bailey et al. (2023), effective territorial strategies must consider local specificities, comparative advantages, and the networks of actors present in each context.
Multiple dimensions of territorial well-being
The study confirms the inadequacy of the purely economic indicators in measuring territorial well-being. The inclusion of cultural, environmental, and social dimensions reveals complex trade-offs that require integrated approaches in development policies, aligning with the international debate on indicators beyond gross domestic product (Marques Santos et al., 2024).
Policy recommendations
Strategy for relaunching public investments
The study recommends a coordinated strategy of public investments focused on two crucial dimensions: Health e education. For the healthcare sector, the need to review the distribution criteria of the national fund to consider the greater socioeconomic needs of disadvantaged areas (Bianchi et al., 2024).
In the educational sector, particular attention must be paid to strengthening the university system in peripheral areas, considering the documented positive impact of the university presence on regional economic and social development.
Place-based industrial policies
Le territorial industrial policies They must move beyond the traditional approach focused exclusively on economic growth, integrating social and environmental objectives.
The introduction of social conditionality for public subsidies can guide corporate behavior towards more inclusive and sustainable practices (Aiginger & Rodrik, 2020).
Administrative 'Capacity building'
For territories with low administrative capacity, the study recommends combined interventions of 'capacity building' (strengthening of capacities and development of skills) and external support from higher-level structures.
This approach can ensure effective policy implementation even in contexts with institutional constraints.
Conclusions and future directions
The study by Prota and Cicatiello (2025) contributes significantly to the understanding of the Italian territorial disparities, offering an innovative analysis that integrates multiple dimensions of territorial well-being. The identification of the "Five Italies" transcends the simplifications of the North-South dichotomy, revealing a complex geography that requires differentiated and informed policy approaches.
The findings highlight the urgency of rethinking the territorial cohesion strategies, adopting 'place-based' approaches that simultaneously consider local specificities and the need to strengthen the administrative capacity of local authorities. Only through this dual strategy it will be possible to effectively address the persistent territorial inequalities that characterize the country.
for future research, there is a need to delve deeper into the causal mechanisms that generate and perpetuate territorial disparities, as well as to develop continuous monitoring systems that allow for the evaluation of the effectiveness of implemented policies. Furthermore, the integration of personal data real-time and innovative technologies could further improve the understanding of contemporary territorial dynamics.
#Égalité, #PaceTerraDignità
Dario Dongo
Bibliography
- Aiginger, K., & Rodrik, D. (2020). Rebirth of industrial policy and an agenda for the twenty-first century. Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, 20 (2), 189-207.
- Andrews, R., & Brewer, G. A. (2013). Social capital, management capacity and public service performance: Evidence from the US states. Public Management Review, 15 (1), 19-42.
- Bailey, D., Pitelis, C. N., & Tomlinson, P. R. (2023). Place-based industrial and regional strategy: Leveling the playing field. Regional Studies, 57 (6), 977-983.
- Bianchi, L., Caravella, S., & Petraglia, C. (2024). One Country, Two Cures. North-South Gaps in the Right to Health. SVIMEZ Information, February 2024.
- Dijkstra, L., Poelman, H., & Rodríguez-Pose, A. (2020). The geography of EU discontent. Regional Studies, 54 (6), 737-753.
- European Commission. (2023). Regional Trends for Growth and Convergence in the European Union. SWD(2023) 173 final. Brussels.
- Marques Santos, A., Molica, F., & Conte, A. (2024). Assessing economic divide across EU regions between 2000 and 2021. Territorial Development Insights Series, JRC136779, European Commission.
- Prota, F., & Cicatiello, L. (2025). Italy (still) unequal: Extent and persistence of territorial socioeconomic disparities in Italy. Friedrich Ebert Foundation.
- Rodríguez-Pose, A., & Ezcurra, R. (2010). Does decentralization matter for regional disparities? A cross-country analysis. Journal of Economic Geography, 10 (5), 619-644.
- Rodríguez-Pose, A., Dijkstra, L., & Poelman, H. (2024). The Geography of EU Discontent and the Regional Development Trap. Economic Geography, 100 (3), 213-245.
- Viesti, G. (2021). Centers and Peripheries: Europe, Italy, and Southern Italy from the 20th to the 21st Century. Laterza.
Dario Dongo, lawyer and journalist, PhD in international food law, founder of WIISE (FARE - GIFT - Food Times) and Égalité.
