What drives economic specialization in Italian Regions
It is well-known that Italy has two distinguishing characteristics closely intertwined with each other and unusual for an advanced country: a persisting specialization in traditional industries and deep internal disparities. The Italian "anomaly" is rooted in the predominance of clusters of small firms producing and exporting low-skilled labour-intensive goods. Some authors have suggested that marked regional variations in manufacturing structures underpin Italy’s perpetual North-South divide, with northern regions more oriented to capital (and knowledge) intensive industries than the rest of the country. Whatever the remote causes of the Italian "anomaly" may be, we provide evidence of a new tendency whereby capital- and knowledge intensive regional structural change has occurred. The literature to date may provide some descriptive and indirect evidence on the dynamics of regional specialization in high-tech industries during the past decades, but previous studies have not addressed the issue of what determines such specialization. The aim of the article is to fill this gap. Our main research question can be summarized as follows: What are the structural characteristics that may explain the regional high-tech share in manufacturing? The methodology is based on a panel analysis (GLS with dummies to account for regional fixed effects) over the period 2004-2007. We control for panel level heteroskedasticity, autocorrelation and endogeneity. The results suggest that various factors such as labour force composition, firms borrowing capacity, accessibility, R&D, private and public expenditure and a good cultural environment significantly and positively influence regional high-tech specialization. We also find that a high prevalence of industrial districts may lock-in regional structures away from capital-intensive and high-tech manufacturing activities.
SULLE DETERMINANTI DEL MODELLO DI SPECIALIZZAZIONE INTERNAZIONALE DELL'ITALIA
L'Italia e un paese industriale ad alto reddito pro capite. Purtuttavia e largamente specializzata nei settori tradizionali intensivi in lavoro. Perche ? In questo lavoro formuliamo alcune possibili risposte a questa domanda. In particolare, vogliamo stabilire se, e in che misura, la particolare struttura dei vantaggi comparati di questo paese sia da considerare anomala rispetto alle implicazioni del teorema delle proporzioni fattoriali. Vogliamo inoltre stabilire se il modello di specializzazione internazionale dell'Italia sia riconducibile ad una caratteristica del sistema industriale di questo paese, costituita dalla prevalente organizzazione in distretti dei settori tradizionali. La principale conclusione che emerge dalla riflessione teorica e dall'analisi empirica delle tendenze recenti del modello di specializzazione del paese e che esso puo essere ragionevolmente spiegato dall'interazione congiunta tra rendimenti crescenti di scala e proporzioni fattoriali. In altre parole, le due principali teorie del commercio internazionale possono essere utilmente impiegate per inquadrare in modo sufficientemente accurato la struttura dei vantaggi comparati rivelati dell'Italia e la sua evoluzione negli ultimi decenni. Il lavoro e strutturato nel modo seguente: nella prima parte illustriamo le peculiarita del modello di specializzazione internazionale dell'Italia, e discutiamo la rilevanza delle economie esterne marshalliane nei settori tradizionali, molti dei quali sono prevalentemente organizzati in distretti industriali. Nella seconda parte del paper formuliamo un modello molto stilizzato in cui sia le economie di scala, sia le proporzioni fattoriali contribuiscono a determinare il modello di specializzazione internazionale del paese. Le implicazioni empiriche di questo modello sono analizzate nella parte finale, che illustra l'evidenza empirica sui vantaggi comparati dinamici dell'Italia dal 1965 al 1990, e riassume i principali risultati di questo lavoro.
The Liverpool Cholera Epidemic of 1832 and Anatomical Dissection--Medical Mistrust and Civil Unrest
Asiatic cholera reached Britain for the first time in late 1831, with the main epidemic occurring during 1832. The disease caused profuse diarrhea, severe dehydration, collapse, and often death. There was widespread public fear, and the political and medical response to this new disease was variable and inadequate. In the summer of 1832, a series of "cholera riots" occurred in various towns and cities throughout Britain, frequently directed against the authorities, doctors, or both. The city of Liverpool, in the northwest of England, experienced more riots than elsewhere. Between 29 May and 10 June 1832, eight major street riots occurred, with several other minor disturbances. The object of the crowd's anger was the local medical fraternity. The public perception was that cholera victims were being removed to the hospital to be killed by doctors in order to use them for anatomical dissection. "Bring out the Burkers" was one cry of the Liverpool mobs, referring to the Burke and Hare scandal four years earlier, when two men had murdered people in Edinburgh in order to sell their bodies for dissection to the local anatomy school. This issue was of special concern to the Liverpool citizenry because in 1826, thirty-three bodies had been discovered on the Liverpool docks, about to be shipped to Scotland for dissection. Two years later a local surgeon, William Gill, was tried and found guilty of running an extensive local grave-robbing system to supply corpses for his dissection rooms. The widespread cholera rioting in Liverpool was thus as much related to local anatomical issues as it was to the national epidemic. The riots ended relatively abruptly, largely in response to an appeal by the Roman Catholic clergy read from church pulpits, and also published in the local press. In addition, a respected local doctor, James Collins, published a passionate appeal for calm. The Liverpool Cholera Riots of 1832 demonstrate the complex social responses to epidemic disease, as well as the fragile interface between the public and the medical profession.