Conclusions and policy implications
In this study, we propose an alternative analysis to a classical North-South problem characterizing two Italian macro-areas with a focus on the period of the prolonged recession that occurred after the international crisis of 2007. The lack of income convergence is a recognized fact. It is well-known that the Italian North-South gap increased during the Great Recession (Lagravinese, 2015), and the regional dualism has grown ever stronger, despite decades of efforts by the central government and the European Union to promote regional economic and social cohesion (Monfort, 2008). Convergence is present only within macro-areas (Brida et al., 2014), and the northern and southern areas of the country are going through dissimilar paths of economic development (von Lyncker and Thoennessen, 2017). These paths lead the richest area (Center-North) to overcome the average European income despite the prolonged recession period and the poorest area (South) to have an income that is approximately half that of the northern regions. Despite recent studies that claim that the distinction between macro-areas is irrelevant considering the interconnected smaller contexts (González, 2011, for the UK and Italy), we note an evident North-South distinction by considering the GDP per capita (as shown in Fig. 1) and several socioeconomic aspects (Tab. 2), which are added to the absence of recent convergence (Fig. 2). The post-crisis dynamics deserve detailed investigations. In this circumstance, particular attention is paid to human capital embodied in the labor force, which is considered a relevant economic resource in the knowledge economy era and a possible strength for the less-wealthy area in the post-crisis period. The North-South differences in the relationships between human capital and economic development show the ambiguous role of education in Italy (observed by Di Liberto, 2008, in the pre-crisis years), influenced by low-tech specialization, the poor Italian ability to gain returns from education and the barriers to productivity growth due to, e.g., recent legislative changes (such as the increased flexibility; see Lucidi and Kleinknecht, 2010). The lack of attention to innovation and scientific research in Italy during its recent economic development has indeed made it a unique example of development, and at the same time its economy is “fragile” when compared to other advanced economies (Nuvolari and Vasta, 2015). This also implies a marginal role of human capital, at least during the recession, even in the area of labor productivity enhancement, which is was expected to promote.
