Performance and Risks in the European Economy
realized that western progress was partly denied to the South, this turned out to be unworthy or
undesirable. As efficaciously noted, these meridionalists looked like such a husband who, having been
betrayed by his wife, would go around speaking against all the women in the world.
This paper assumes that (western) progress – here called ‘modernization’ – is worthy and, after all,
desirable; thus the lack of convergence in per capita Gdp should be regarded for what it is, a
disappointing (and not at all inescapable) conclusion. But things are a bit more complicated and here
we propose a more articulated picture to account for the inequality pattern in Italy’s regions. First,
progress or modernization has many facets and surely it should not be measured only in terms of per
capita Gdp. Secondly, the South’s performance could not be so gloomy, when considering other
measures such as life expectancy or human development. Not least, so far very few research has been
made in order to relate the different facets of modernization, and even less to build an interpretative
framework which would allow for their different paths: scarce empirical work for southern Italy, few
historical analysis for other regions and countries too.
The article aims to move some steps toward this goal, via reviewing and testing the hypothesis of
‘passive modernization’ first advanced by Luciano Cafagna more than twenty years ago, and thus by
presenting and discussing the pattern of social indicators in Italy’s regions over the long run (1871-
2001) in view of this possible interpretative framework. In the following paragraph the basic concepts
about active and passive modernization will be exposed and partly re-formulated with regard to
regional analysis. The second, third, and fourth paragraph will focus on the historical evidence for
Italy’s regions, by examining the regional figures for life expectancy, education, and income and
human development respectively, and by discussing their convergence and determinants. The last
paragraph will propose a synthesis and a draft scheme to account for state intervention and passive
modernization in Italy’s regions, to be possibly tested in other contexts.
2. On Modernization
We define modernization in a way more inclusive than the strict economic approach. This latter is
focused on technological progress, whose result – broadly speaking – is the rise in productivity and
thus in per capita income: accordingly, per capita (or per worker) Gdp should be taken as the prime
measure of modernization. To Gdp (or ‘resources’), we add two more ‘dimensions’,
capability and human development approach as defined among the others by Sen.
One dimension is
life expectancy, or ‘longevity’, which reflects a broad range of social characteristic and dynamics,
such as the health systems and conditions, the spread of basic hygienic infrastructures, as well as in
part the demographic transition. Many would agree that these are crucial aspects of modernity, not
entirely neither properly incorporated in Gdp measures; moreover, we should assume that to live a
long and healthy life is by itself a positive goal of every human being. The third dimension is
‘knowledge’, here measured through education (literacy, school attendance, per capita years of
schooling): again, the spread of mass education, primary and later secondary and tertiary, is another
remarkable feature of modernity, not directly included in Gdp accounts.
Resources, longevity, and knowledge are often correlated: education may be a determinant of Gdp
growth – literature would be huge, from the early remarks by Cipolla
up to the
– but indeed it has been argued that longevity too may favour a rise in per capita
Gdp, for example via increasing productivity, i.e. human capital accumulation.
In turn, per capita Gdp
E.g. Cassano, Il pensiero.
Cafagna, “Modernizzazione,” p. 240.
As the components of the human development index are usually referred to in theoretical literature.
Sen, Commodities and Capabilities; Anand and Sen, “Human Development Index.”
Cipolla, Literacy and Development.
Abramovitz, “Catching up.”
Sala-i-Martin et al., “Determinants.”
Acemoglu and Johnson, “Disease and Development,” are proba bly the last ones; Barro and Lee, “Sources,” the first ones, at
least via econometric testing.