In 2017 we celebrated his ninetieth birthday with our Gregotti Tour through the streets of the district in Milan that owes so much to his passionate vision of urban planning and architecture. To give the people of Milan an idea of the historical significance of the Bicocca Project, the Pirelli Foundation, together with the University of Milano-Bicocca, organised a series of thematic tours of the places that, based on the architect’s projects, have been transformed into symbols of a new way of understanding the urban fabric of the third millennium. This “urban tale” thus wound its way through the Pirelli Headquarters, built around the historic cooling tower, and the former Pirelli Pneumatici industrial buildings numbers 45 and 66, transformed into the U6 and U7 towers of the University, giving an insider’s view of a city undergoing constant change.

Two highly symbolic places – the Headquarters and the University – capture the full meaning of a project, strongly backed by the then-president Leopoldo Pirelli and later by Marco Tronchetti Provera, that over thirty years ago heralded the birth of a new concept of modern urban planning. The Pirelli Headquarters is now the icon of the Bicocca Project: a huge glass and concrete cube that incorporates a tower built in 1950, originally used for cooling the water needed for the vulcanising machines. Just as it was a powerful symbol of twentieth-century industry, the tower has continued to act as the emblem of a new industry, taking us into the third millennium. Measuring fifty metres per side, the glass wall that takes up the entire western facade of the Headquarters acts as a sort of opening onto this place of work, where new and old – or rather, the truly ancient, since it includes the fifteenth-century Bicocca degli Arcimboldi, now the official reception venue of the Pirelli Group – come together in the Bicocca district, which was so totally reshaped by the hand of Gregotti. Just a few metres – the width of Viale Piero e Alberto Pirelli – separate the Pirelli administrative centre from the U6 and U7 buildings, and from the Residenza delle Fontane (U12) of the University of Milano-Bicocca. The buildings are in a classic red-brick colour, which in the architect’s words “intends to recall the industrial origins of the area, giving a sense of continuity with the idea of the university as a place of work, even more than one of preparation”. Joined by flying footbridges and looking out over the great Piazza dell’Ateneo Nuovo, they are themselves at the forefront of the Bicocca Project, which aims to create an innovative cultural network in the northern area of the Metropolitan City of Milan: a university campus at the centre of a wide-ranging project that brings together education, research, culture and business.

Vittorio Gregotti left us yesterday, in a surreal, deserted Milan, so far removed from his ideal of a city to be lived in, practical, with symbols and places of memories brought back to life. But a city that is ready to start up again and rebuild itself, taking inspiration also from the lessons taught by the architect Gregotti.

If you have not yet had a chance to visit the Pirelli Foundation, you can explore our spaces by going on the fondazionepirelliexperience virtual tour, which will take you from the Historical Archive, with thousands of visual communication photographs and sketches, to the reading room, where you can admire the famous Scientific Research mosaic by Renato Guttuso and, lastly, you can explore our open space, which tells the story of “Advertising with a Capital P” – auteur communication from the 1970s to the present day, in multimedia installations.

Our “stories from the world of Pirelli” will become podcasts, so you can listen to stories of races, products, and champions but also of technology, innovation, welfare, art, graphics, and design.

For information about our activities or to help you find out about our website, just ask the chatbot! Our virtual assistant is there to help you in all your searches.

And lastly, if you want to search our online Historical Archive or our libraries, or request materials for loans, exhibitions, or publications, you’ll find all the service tools you need, as well as “Enter the Foundation”. Even from afar.

To stay updated on all the news, subscribe to our newsletter by entering your email in the dedicated field at the bottom of this page.

Rereading Keynes, in these difficult days of crisis, virus infections, fragility, fear, radical changes to the way we live and work, alarming recession data and rumours of the “Capitalism’s lent“. Rereading Keynes, to return to the “classics” of the twentieth century (Max Weber, Thomas Mann, Hans Kelsen, Emmanuel Mounier and Italians like Gramsci, Croce, Spinelli, Calamandrei, to name some of the essential ones), to get to the root of good political, economic and moral ideas that led to one of the brightest and most balanced periods of economic and social growth in our Western twentieth century. Rereading it, not because there aren’t any authoritative contemporary voices who have long insisted on the need to create a better link between economic development and social equilibrium (Sen, Nussbaum, Stiglitz, Krugman, Fitoussi, Judt, etc.). But to rewind. To go back to the root of the best economic thoughts, analyses and perspectives. To come up with answers that are full of meaning and perspective as opposed to a profound, unexpected and dramatic upheaval, fraught with consequences for the economy, even after the health emergency is over.

Back to Keynes: “I think that Capitalism, wisely managed, can probably be made more efficient for attaining economic ends than any alternative system yet in sight, but that in itself is in many ways extremely objectionable: our problem is to work out a social organisation which shall be as efficient as possible without offending our notions of a satisfactory way of life.”.

The words are from “The End of Laissez-Faire“, an essay from 1926, which was recently republished by Meridiani Mondadori in a volume dedicated to the great English economist and edited by Giorgio La Malfa (who wrote its brilliant introduction, rightly titled “Saggezza nuova per una nuova èra”, “New Wisdom for a New Era”). He was clear that the path would lead to the Welfare State, the strong wave of public investment in the European economy (with the US Marshall Plan funds) to restart Europe (and also the US creditors) after the disasters of the Second World War. Macro-economic strategies for the European Common Market and measures to improve wages, workers’ rights, security, consumption, quality of life and work. A liberal and democratic thought. A “mixed economy”, a “social market economy” in the German sense. A constant search for balance between public intervention in the economy, the market and the dynamism of private enterprise.

Let’s get back to today and reflect on what Keynes meant. Let’s think about the various possible forms of balance between the public and private sectors.

As the numbers of both the infected and the dead increase dramatically, the coronavirus pandemic has brought up the issue of health as a public good, as a common good, as the primary value of the person, as a right. It has become clear that the logic relating to it can’t only be linked to the close relationship between expenditure and financial efficiency. The link between public and private investment and long-term effectiveness must also be addressed. Quality healthcare, with the collaboration of subsidiarity between public structures and private companies. In fact, this is a Keynesian vision.

The Italian healthcare system, which is predominantly public, is strengthened by close collaboration in research and care with the private sector. This is proving exemplary in these dramatic days. It is being seen as a positive reference by other European healthcare systems. Envied by attentive observers in the US, who are terrified about what could cause a huge expansion in infections in a country where healthcare is linked to the insurance system and deeply selective, based on income. We now know that more needs to be invested in healthcare. Above all, it must be done in a better way. The so-called “life sciences” that overall look at people’s health as a precursor for effective healthcare, need to keep prevention, care, research and training together. The Italian pharmaceutical industry, which has extraordinary economic success on the European market (with record positions), is still confirming its excellence, even in these hectic times looking for a coronavirus vaccine.

The debate about healthcare extends to the value of the common good, the essentials. Education. Environment. Safety. In a process where companies progressively revaluate stakeholder value, a process seen not only as a key economic topic, but also where companies are responsible social players.

Competitiveness and social inclusion, productivity and solidarity go hand in hand (as we have said many times in this blog). It could be useful to remember, once again, the statements of two key players in the Italian industry of the second half of the twentieth century, Adriano Olivetti and Leopoldo Pirelli. Here is one of Olivetti’s best-known quotes, which was also posted on social media to mark the 60th anniversary of his death: “The factory can’t just look at the profit index. It must distribute wealth, culture, services and democracy… I think the factory is for man, not man for the factory”. Social and civil responsibility. That also resonates in an opinion from Leopoldo Pirelli in 1986: “Our credibility, our authority, and I would say our legitimisation in the eyes of the public conscience are directly proportional to the role which we play in contributing to overcoming the social and economic inequalities of the countries where we operate”.

Keynes’s indications and the values of the entrepreneurs call into question the player who must ensure harmony between the public purse and the market: those that govern, the world of politics. It is important to give guidance on the fundamental choices, the use of the public budget and tax levers. Whether the current political class (not only in Italy) is up to this task is open to debate, with controversial views. In Rome, Brussels, the offices of the ECB in Frankfurt, they are willing (despite a highly criticised blunder by President Christine Lagarde on the institution’s inability to curb spreads, resulting in a stock market crash) to do all that is necessary to avoid financial shocks and to empower the EU system and its businesses.

We are entering into a recession that will almost certainly be long and severe. In the EU offices, hypothesis of developing anti-crisis instruments like “Eurobonds” are being discussed, and maybe the “stability pact” is being talked about again. The whole world is in flux. The outcomes are uncertain. It’s exactly in times of uncertainty, movement, cracks and change that an essential lesson from the great Italian economist, Federico Caffè, comes to the rescue: “We have to rediscover the economy of affection, not of rules”, of what holds people together and determines development, participation and sharing. Today we would say sustainable development. Caffè, who taught Mario Draghi, was one of the best interpreters of Keynes.

Like all infections, crises and tragedies of life and history, the coronavirus will pass. Sooner or later it will pass, with its load of victims and physical and mental pain. However, it’s essential not to miss the lesson that by now we should have started learning. If crisis means danger but also opportunity, risk and choice, then it is worth stopping and reflect on the values and significance of a real turning point in our social history. The main focus of this article is Italy, although we know full well that we are facing a global phenomenon.

The first aspect to deal with is fragility. The increasingly articulate and complex societies we live in are very fragile. It’s true that advances in science and technology and on all fronts of innovation provide extraordinary growth opportunities. But they are extremely sensitive to cracks, changes and unexpected effects. They exist on sophisticated digital ties, sophisticated relationship systems and fast physical and virtual interconnections. They suffer from the radical and controversial consequences of the increasing impact that Artificial Intelligence has on many aspects of the economy, work and everyday life. They show strong growth potential. But they lack management and control mechanisms.

The synergies between globalisation and digital technologies have been enhanced by the strength, the success, the exceptional nature of processes of change and a disruptive economic dynamism. But the complexities, contradictions, imbalances and inequalities that determine them have been neglected. Their fragility, to be precise. Now the global coronavirus crisis takes its toll.

Our lives, economic balances and social habits can be disrupted by a “black swan“, an unexpected and disruptive event, to use the title of a 2007 book by Nissim N. Taleb, scholar of epistemology and finance (the subtitle is “The impact of the highly improbable”). Our lives are fragile in the face of new rampant pandemics, fostered by geographical and social interconnections. Social relationships, including those within families, are fragile. The governing systems for all production processes and services are fragile, under attack from obscure cybercriminals. Communication and information mechanisms are fragile, as a result of the spread of fake news on social media, with unqualified, unsubstantiated views and judgements. Economic systems are also fragile, due to the international integration of new value chains: Italian companies have been successful players, enjoying positive outcomes so far, but now they face very difficult consequences, which will bring our industries, one of our most precious assets, to their knees. They need to be safeguarded and restored, with essential political choices that put them in a position to start growing again.

After years marked by a kind of delusion of grandeur about “the magnificent and progressive fates” of humanity (it’s worth rereading Leopardi, to reinforce our critical consciousness), we are now discovering our fragility. With dismay, with sorrow. With fear. But overall, this is a positive discovery. The awareness of fragility is in itself a strength and a lever for a potential revival.

“Power is nothing without control” was a successful slogan from Pirelli’s advertising in the early 1990s. Apart from its direct meaning, the slogan was ahead of its time in grasping the spirit of those long periods that were in the making, the transition from hard to soft power (this was well theorised by the political scientist Joseph Nye at the beginning of the 2000s). Its focus was not only on power (speed, technology, success, record-breaking performances) but above all on control, balance and responsibility. The slogan is again relevant today, as a general summary of a world that, having discovered its own fragility, looks for better, more balanced and sustainable development conditions.

During these rough times, there is another positive aspect we can focus on: the widespread emergence of trust in science, knowledge of healthcare and social mechanisms, and the competence of doctors and nurses. After years of reckless “no vax,” anti-scientific prejudices, praise for the “one is worth one” notion and arrogant displays of ignorance and incompetence (until it became the anti-elite movement’s political flag and a tool to further personal careers). Now, when faced with real life and death issues, we finally return to listening to the words of those who know, who have studied, who understand what to do and how to do it. The enemies of knowledge are left in a corner.

A few other considerations emerge from this regained trust in science. Science is not the place of undisputed and indisputable truth. The scientific process is one of trial and error, research, experimentation, errors and resumption. The advancing expertise builds on prior knowledge. Relativity is a fundamental principle in the processes of discovery, towards uncertain horizons, to be confirmed, verified and then to be overcome once again. Scientists aren’t magicians (we’ve had too many displays of magical thought, even during these confused years) or miracle workers. Rediscovering science, restoring its value and putting it back at the centre of public and private interests, with all its burden of doubts and its structural condition as a research world, also means knowing how to make responsible public choices.

Thinking of science as a “common good” requires large-scale, long-term public investment in training, research, innovation and technology transfer. This would mean sending a substantial part of public, national and European expenditure in this direction, as well as calling for private investments. Just the opposite of what has been done so far.

Research as a common good. Like schools. Like healthcare. Essential aspects of a cohesive and responsible society.

In the face of these very difficult trials, the national health service is showing its good side, thanks in part to the sense of duty and culture of selflessness of doctors and nurses. These are social assets that must be safeguarded and strengthened. In Lombardy, Veneto and Emilia Romagna they are also based on a close public and private relationship which plays a role in an original synthesis of competition and collaboration, widespread assistance and subsidiarity. This is a path that we must continue to follow.

If coronavirus is our “black swan” (we wrote about this in last week’s blog), we must acknowledge that we can overcome our uncertainties and fragilities. We can even rediscover a strong community spirit, one of cohesion and national solidarity.

An exemplary quote is currently widely shared on the internet: “Our first duty is to fight with all our strength for solidarity and national reconstruction.”. It’s a quote from Alcide De Gasperi, prime minister of post-war Italy, an Italy ready to rise from the material and moral rubble of war and fascism and start living again. It should be treasured.

A new book revisits Adriano Olivetti’s story with a different approach

All-round culture, even in factories. Adriano Olivetti’s Olivetti is certainly the most classic example of this. A legendary factory and company that almost assumes a different guise depending on who is describing it. It’s an experience worth knowing about in depth, not to judge but to understand it, without distortion. That’s why you should read Memoria imperfetta. La comunità Olivetti e il mondo nuovo (Imperfect Memory. The Olivetti community and the new world), written with passion by Antonella Tarpino. She’s a historian and essayist, but in this case, above all, she’s “an Olivetti child,” the daughter of a company employee who experienced the Olivetti environment directly. During the company’s prime years in Ivrea, this left varying impressions on workers, intellectuals, employees and people of culture, as well as on those who were just children at the time. In the two hundred or so pages written by Tarpino, we see an unprecedented, complex and certainly not easy interpretation of Olivettian corporate culture, which was later propagated throughout the industrial world.

The author writes with a style that requires great attention. She combines memories (not only from her childhood) with first-hand accounts from the protagonists of those times and other information found in the immense Olivettian literature. The result is a book which seamlessly combines the distant past, the near past and the present. The protagonists are many, from Adriano Olivetti to Paolo Volponi, Ludovico Zorzi to Ottiero Ottieri, Geno Pampaloni, Giorgio Soavi and many others, as well as teams of architects and urban planners. There are also places, like Via Jervis, the H Workshop and the white Olivetti houses, the design furniture in those houses as well as in the offices (not to mention work objects/tools such as Divisumma, Program 101 and Lettera 32).

The book begins with a “portrait of a group of children”, continues with an “anthropological” examination of the Olivettian community culture and then goes on to take a deeper look at the period by means of some novels and short stories, followed by a reasoned argument about the Olivetti-style and two experiences far from Ivrea (Matera and Pozzuoli). Everything revolves around the concept of New (capitalised on purpose), which “survived because it continues to ask us questions, rather than giving real answers”, writes Antonella Tarpino in the last pages; she then sums everything up in a sentence: “Living with technology in ways that don’t neglect the human element.”.

Antonella Tarpino’s book is not an easy one, but certainly worth reading to the end.

Memoria imperfetta. La comunità Olivetti e il mondo nuovo (Imperfect memory. The Olivetti community and the new world)

Antonella Tarpino

Einaudi, 2020

A thesis discussed at the Università Cattolica di Milano takes an in-depth look at school-work alternation and the need to offer a new environmental sensitivity

Work and school. An important combination that’s not always properly put into practice, although in Italy “learning and working” has been widely incorporated in school and business programmes and activities for some years now. There have been challenges, for sure. However, this seems to be the correct (albeit improvable) road to follow.

As part of her Ph.D. in Personal Sciences and Educational Training (area of Pedagogy) at the Università Cattolica, Serena Mazzoli’s thesis explores topics in and around this issue. The title of the thesis is La sostenibilità per una nuova cultura dell’alternanza scuola-lavoro (Sustainability for a new culture of school-work alternation). The aim is to take stock of the implementation of school-work alternation (ASL in Italian) and the pathways for transversal competences and career orientation (PCTO in Italian) which in Italy are offered to all pupils during their last three years of secondary school.

After exploring the general theme, the research takes a deeper look at the educational value of work and then goes on to analyse what is being accomplished in terms of career orientation in Italy. At this point, Mazzoli adds a third element to the research: the theme of sustainability, seen on the one hand as necessary, but also as an “addition” arising from the environmental and cultural awareness that must be cultivated and developed within companies.  The thesis goes on to look at the case of the Loccioni Group (a company based in Le Marche, active in the design and implementation of measurement and control systems), and concludes by explaining that: “School-work alternation and the pathways for transversal competences and career orientation can be important forms of active learning, training young people in knowing how to learn, to do, to be and to live together.  […]

Proactive synergies between school, work and sustainability can promote people’s full development and generate a shared hope for the future”.

Serena Mazzoli’s work is not a foundation text in the debate on school and work, but it is certainly a useful read to acquire an accurate notion on a brand-new approach to personal growth and work that is becoming every day more important.

La sostenibilità per una nuova cultura dell’alternanza scuola-lavoro (Sustainability for a new culture of school-work alternation)

Serena Mazzoli

Thesis, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Ph.D. in Personal Sciences and Educational Training (Education), 2019.

On 12 March 1947, engineer Enzo Ferrari fired up the 12-cylinder engine on his Ferrari 125 S: the first model built by “his” car manufacturing company. That unique road sports car – bright red, with a “barchetta” body – was in practice the Ferrari company’s official birth certificate, paving the way for a history of motor racing that, over and over again, would cross paths with Pirelli and its “victory tyres”. The first 125 S roadster was indeed immediately followed by the racing version, and the path towards the racing circuits of the world had now been traced out. The drivers Franco Cortese and Nino Farina took the 125 out onto the track for the first time on the Piacenza circuit on 11 May 1947 – and this was immediately followed by the Caracalla circuit for the Rome Grand Prix. This brought he first victory, with Cortese at the wheel. In July that year, it was the legendary Tazio Nuvolari who took the Ferrari 125 S to victory, paradoxically bringing about its end, for it was soon replaced by the 125 F1, which in 1948 ushered Ferrari into the elevated spheres of the Formula Grand Prix, which is to say what a couple of years later, in 1950, would become known as Formula 1. With Raymond Sommer at the helm, the 125 F1 posted an excellent result in the 19th Italian Grand Prix on 5 September at the Parco del Valentino in Turin: the great pre-war antagonists, Alfa Romeo and Maserati, were now within striking distance.

These were the glorious years of Pirelli Stella Bianca tyres, which for over two decades had placed Italian cars on podiums around the world, from Europe to South America. These were the “victory tyres” that would naturally accompany Ferraris, Alfa Romeos, and Maseratis in the new world of Formula 1. In 1950, the Ferrari 125 F1 racing cars came with a trio of drivers – the veterans Gigi Villoresi and Raymond Sommer, accompanied by a promising thirty-two-year-old named Alberto Ascari. It was Ascari who took the “Maranello Red” to second place that year in the Monaco Grand Prix: it was beginning to become quite clear that the history of Pirelli in motorcar racing would still have many chapters to write. Another success, a second place behind Juan Manuel Fangio in an Alfa Romeo, gave Ascari and Ferrari a place on the podium that naturally left room for more to come. The 1950 season brought to an end the Ferrari 125 project: the car was sold to a private individual, Peter Whitehead, who remained faithful to its Pirelli Stella Bianca tyres and continued to race in F1 also in the following season. Ingegner Enzo Ferrari was already looking to the future when Ascari came in second in Monte Carlo: his mind was on a brand-new 12-cylinder model with an engine of more than 3 litres. This was to be the 275 F1, which made its debut in Belgium in 1950, again with Alberto Ascari at the wheel. A fifth place at Francorchamps – with the drivers Fangio, Fagioli and Farina, the “three Fs”, always in the top three places in their Alfas – was in any case encouraging. The career of a Ferrari, the first Ferrari of all, came to an end and that of another scion of the Prancing Horse was about to begin. For Pirelli, yet more cups to put on a shelf already stacked with trophies.

The new Pirelli P7 is much more than just a commercial item: it is the reaffirmation of a long tradition of the number “7” in the history of Pirelli. Today’s P7 recalls the name of a tyre that changed the face of sports car racing over forty years ago, putting into practice the concept of technological transition from track to road.

The Lancia Stratos entered the arena of the World Rally Championship in 1974: it was a paragon of pure power and in many ways a revolutionary car. For the Stratos, Pirelli created an equally innovative tyre – an ultra-low-profile with its sidewall only half the width of the tread: its contact patch was practically square, giving total grip in lateral acceleration and maximum stability in any road condition. Fitted with Pirelli P7 tyres, the Lancia Stratos won everything that could be won in rallying, paving the way for a P7 racing tradition that lasted over twenty years. But true to the Pirelli philosophy, which takes solutions developed for the track and adapts them to series production, at the very moment when the tyre for the Lancia Stratos was approved for rallying, the Pirelli P7 began its history as a super-tyre for road use. The Porsche 911 Carrera Turbo was the first to adopt it, in the version with a tread design consisting of a tight-knit network of blocks and grooves to prevent aquaplaning. The structure was the one that came together in the new generations of the Cinturato: a radial ply casing and metal belts surmounted by a zero-degree band of nylon – in other words, arranged in the direction of travel. And especially, for the first time, an ultra-low-profile Series 50 ready to take on everyday roads: the sportscar industry had found a new benchmark.

The history of the Pirelli P7 thus joined that of the cars that had written the history of motor racing: the first was the Fiat 131 Abarth, which took the rallying throne from the Stratos and naturally chose the P7 also for its road model. The ultra-low-profile Pirelli tyre was also adopted by the Lamborghini Countach, with a rear size that went down to the 35 Series. This was the one that was fitted on the De Tomaso Pantera, coupled with a Series 40 for the front – tyres that now extended beyond the 35 cm width threshold. The Pirelli P7 was also chosen by Ferrari, for the 308 GTB, and it was fitted on BMW Alpina sports models, as well as on the Opel Manta and Volkswagen Scirocco. In other words, it took the OEM sports sectors by storm in the 1970s and 1980s, writing a chapter in the history of twentieth-century sports cars.

The Pirelli P7, with its later evolutions in the P700 and P7000, became original equipment across the world until the 1990s, when once again it was the racing track that opened a new chapter in the history of Pirelli tyres. This time, the name was P Zero. And now the P7 is born again. This is a modern, environmentally friendly Cinturato with its sights on the future of mobility. The benchmark parameters have changed since the “old” P7, but the approach to an ever-changing, ever-evolving world of automobiles remains the same. A new threshold of high performance is being crossed.

Politics as a vocation”, wrote Max Weber a century ago. A lofty, ambitious profession, built on “intellectual work“, with all the weight of knowledge, skills and a sense of responsibility, as well as the necessary passion for civil values. In these difficult and controversial times, Weber’s book becomes relevant again. And beyond the obvious question of how many of today’s politicians are – in direct opposition of Weber’s teachings – both incompetent and irresponsible (not just in Italy, of course), it is worth going back to those pages, now that we are faced with a variety of phenomena that are upsetting the order of our daily lives and our plans for a better future. Phenomena like epidemics (including the latest, the coronavirus) and environmental disasters, but also mass migrations (we only need to think of the new dramatic tensions on the borders between Turkey and Greece, with thousands of refugees clamouring to enter Europe), major demographic issues and the signs of economic crises which – beyond the much-feared and highly probable recession – reveal how essential a real “paradigm shift” is, in order to attempt to break down the gross distortions of globalisation and drive growth in the direction of sustainable, environmental and social development. Some real political challenges, then, which call for a capable, competent and accountable ruling class.

What are we seeing instead? Another apt quote – this time taken from the writings of one of Europe’s greatest philosophers, Søren Kierkegaard – sums it up: “The ship is in the hands of the ship’s cook, and the captain’s loudspeaker is broadcasting not the course, but what we shall eat tomorrow.” These words contain Kierkegaard’s sense of unease in the face of a modernity confronted without the instruments of a new philosophy or school of thought that could counterbalance “the decline of the West”, but we can also detect his dismay in the face of the extraordinary developments determined by the progress of science and the economy (again, from Kierkegaard: “There is nothing with which every man is so afraid as getting to know how enormously much he is capable of doing and becoming.”)

Today, rereading those pages – and moving beyond the irritation felt towards the incongruous demagogues who have taken the place of the competent captain of our ship – we must embrace the painful yet thrilling recognition of the possible directions in which our crisis could lead, remembering the semantic ambivalence of the word: crisis as danger, but also as opportunity.

Many commentators have stated that we are currently facing a “black swan“: an unforeseen event that turns economic and social structures on their head. A “black swan” that takes the form of the coronavirus. But also that of the 50,000 Syrian, Afghan and Iraqi refugees on the borders between Turkey and Greece, who Turkish leader Erdogan wants to drive into Europe through Greece, playing an unscrupulous political game to obtain another 3 billion euros in EU funds (in addition to the 6 already pocketed over the last four years), and strengthen his anti-European presence within the Mediterranean.

But are these really “black swans”? Or rather issues that politics – and first and foremost, the politics of the EU and the major European countries – has not known how to address? “Two crises, same failure”, declares Andrea Bonanni (La Repubblica, 2 March), referring to “Europe, a land of viruses and migrants”. And indeed, the political decisions made with regard to the governance of migration and those in response to climate change in Europe – issues that are linked to a certain extent – have no doubt fallen short, as have the health care facilities required to promptly respond to the looming pandemic, and the coordination of national and European decisions.

Nuriel Roubini, the economist who single-handedly predicted the global financial crisis of 2007-2008, refers to it as a “white swan”, if anything: a predictable but underestimated risk (Il Sole24Ore, 27 February).

When it comes to the dimensions and breadth of the health crisis, no one can estimate or responsibly predict how long it will last.

Today, we are beginning to see the sheer scale of the initial economic impact of these events: since February 20, when the consequences of the spread of the virus on the world’s economies became apparent, the global stock markets have plummeted, “burning” 6 trillion dollars. And in the past week alone, they have all dropped by well over 10%, with London’s FTSE 100 down 11.2% and the Dax in Frankfurt down 12.84%: the worst downturn since the autumn of 2008, the height of the financial crisis.

The nerviness of the financial markets accurately reflects the fragility and the difficulties faced by international supply chains, particularly in light of the partial industrial paralysis of China, the “factory of the world“, which has had a knock-on effect on many manufacturing sectors in the USA and Europe, as well as in the Far East, beginning with Japan. “This is the crisis of globalisation, China is losing its central position,” predicts Giulio Tremonti, former Minister of the Economy and President of the Aspen Institute Italia (Corriere della Sera, 2 April). But it is also a crisis for the world of transport, from international air travel to sea freight and road haulage. In addition, tourism and trade, hospitality and the restaurant industry and the culture and entertainment businesses have also been hit hard.

How long will it last? We don’t know. Concerns are widespread. “A world crisis”, Moody’s fears, with a 0.4% reduction in the global growth rate (La Stampa, 27 February). And in the Economic Outlook 2019, the OECD refers to the coronavirus as “the greatest danger” since the financial crisis, exposing the world economy to “an unprecedented threat”.

What about Italy? Our economy, which was already in a state of stagnation due to the sharp fall in industrial production, is now on the threshold of another recession, the fourth in ten years (as discussed in last week’s blog). The Red research centre leans towards the worst case, estimating a loss of 1% to 3% from the 2020 GDP, which would equate to anything from 9 to 27 billion euros. Goldman Sachs is more cautious, anticipating a drop of 0.8% in GDP, while the OECD forecasts “zero growth”. Whatever the case, the situation is dire.

The government is preparing a plan: “Aid to the tune of 3.6 billion”, announced the Minister of the Economy Roberto Gualtieri (La Repubblica, 1 March), with a focus not only on businesses in the “red zones” suffering from the greatest numbers of infections in Lombardy and Veneto, but on those in all areas and sectors brought to their knees by the consequences of the epidemic (trade, tourism, transport, leisure). In addition, shared European choices are also on the table, if the crisis lasts and the recession hits other EU countries as hard as it has Italy, as is quite likely to be the case: once again, Goldman Sachs forecasts a growth of 0.3% in the EU for 2020, compared to 1% before the virus exploded onto the scene.

But away from the emergency measures, it is also worth turning our minds not only to the individual Italian measures but also to the need for a bona fide EU strategy for industrial and economic recovery; an extraordinary effort is required in order to put long term development projects in place, rebuilding the confidence of those who invest, produce and consume. The Green New Deal of EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen represents an important decision, provided it is supported by strong European resources, a concrete investment policy and financial and fiscal measures from Brussels and the individual EU countries.

More generally, the theme is one of an attentive, competent and responsible culture and governing style; a relaunch of the economy that finally gives due consideration to the “paradigm shift” towards sustainability and a new balance with regard to the quality of development.

In the depths of this emergency – or more specifically, in order to make it through to the other side – the motto of Winston Churchill, a man who knew plenty about ambition and the rules of politics, even in the darkest of times, becomes relevant once more: “Keep Calm and Carry On.” Quite the opposite of the scenes of frenzy and chaos that we have seen in recent weeks in Italy and elsewhere within political and governmental circles, both national and local, where alarm, proclamations and “shouting” have facilitated the descent into panic of people all over Europe. And, with regard to the media, it is certainly worth insisting on the need for genuine information, without recourse to scaremongering (Corriere della Sera, 2 March).

Indeed, it is up to us to confront “our uncertainties” with a sense of awareness, in a globalised and very fragile world (Maurizio Ferrera in Corriere della Sera, 1 March), with the knowledge that the crisis we are facing will likely last a long time. A coronavirus vaccine will probably be found soon, but an effective vaccine for uncertainty does not exist, and never will. Neither local closures, hunting for scapegoats, creating “enemies” to hate and introducing bans will serve to resolve the situation, regardless of the level of propaganda spread by the rhetoricians of fear.

We’d do better to focus on science, knowledge, community values and a sense of responsibility. And so we come back round to Weber. And we begin to understand that it is essential to rely not on the ship’s cook, but rather on a captain and a crew capable of steering us safely into port.

An article in the journal L’Industria investigates the social impact of research

Research and innovation for everyone. Even for those who – whether business or individual – are apparently far removed from the goals of new technologies and science. It is of course a question of organisation, but also of possessing the cultural capacity that can enable us to take full advantage of innovation and new technologies.

Alessandro Sterlacchini’s work, which was recently published in the journal L’Industria, is founded upon the premise that advances in science and technology are not inevitable, but can in any case be focused on improving the well-being of society as a whole. However, we need to be able to make full use of these advances, and exploit them appropriately.

“L’impatto sociale della ricerca e dell’innovazione. Ipotesi di intervento per una sua valorizzazione nel contesto europeo e italiano” (“The Social Impact of Research and Innovation: Policy Suggestions for its Enhancement in Europe and Italy” discusses a number of the measures that could be implemented by means of public intervention, and which could extend the benefits of research and innovation to wider portions of society, traditionally either partially or totally excluded. Sterlacchini dedicates particular attention to the evaluation criteria of scientific research that is primarily financed by public resources and conducted above all by universities; he also examines the types of public incentives that exist for innovative activities carried out by private companies and the use of public tenders for the supply of innovative goods and services.

The general notion derived from Sterlacchini’s analysis is that the social impact of research and innovation activities should be of major “concern” for all public policy interventions. This also applies to companies that carry out research and innovation, and which must reconcile balancing the books with the balance of the Italian territory as a whole.

Alessandro Sterlacchini’s article makes a number of valuable contributions to the existing knowledge of a complex issue – namely the social impact of research – as well as shedding light on the role that companies can have both as protagonists in the creation of innovation and as agents with a responsibility for development at territorial level.

L’impatto sociale della ricerca e dell’innovazione. Ipotesi di intervento per una sua valorizzazione nel contesto europeo e italiano
(“The social impact of research and innovation: Policy Suggestions for its Enhancement in Europe and Italy”)
Alessandro Sterlacchini
L’Industria, 4/2019, October-Dicember

Read the abstract online