Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T06:41:42.542Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The North-South Differential In Italian Economic Development*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 February 2011

Richard S. Eckaus
Richard S. Eckaus
Affiliation:
Brandeis University and Center for International Studies, M. I. T.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Though the economy of Italy has been transformed in the one hundred years since its uninfication, the various regions have experienced quite different degrees of development. Southern Italy, including Sicily and Sardinia, all of which comprises 40 per cent of the land area and, today, about 37 per cent of the population, has lagged far behind the North.

Type
Articles
Information
The Journal of Economic History , Volume 21 , Issue 3 , September 1961 , pp. 285 - 317
Copyright
Copyright © The Economic History Association 1961

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Perrone, Francesco, Il Problemo del Mezzogiorno (Naples, 1913)Google Scholar, discusses a long list of theories of lack of economic development in the South.

2 For example, Nitti, F. S., Nord e Sud (Turin, 1900)Google Scholar, and, currently, Vochting, F., “Industrialization or Pre-Industrialization of Southern Italy,” Lavoro, Banca Nazionale di, Quarterly Review, No. 21 (1952), p. 67Google Scholar.

3 Vochting, F., “Industrialization or Pre-Industrialization,” p. 67Google Scholar, and a , Molinari, “Southern Italy,” Lavoro, Banca Nazionale di, Quarterly Review, No. 8 (1949), p. 27Google ScholarPubMed.

4 Cenzato, G. and Guidotti, S., Il Problema Industriale del'Mezzagiorno, Ministero dell'In-dustria e Commercio.Google Scholar

5 Barbagallo, C., La Questione Meridionale (1948), Chapters 2 and 4Google Scholar; Demarco, D., “Nord e sud nell'economie Italians preunitaria,” Rassegna Economica, No. 1 (07-03 1956), p. 34Google Scholar.

6 See Haavelmo, T., A Study in the Theory of Economic Evolution (Amsterdam, 1961)Google Scholar, for a discussion of growth models which demonstrate this point

7 Obviously a model is implicit in this analysis which assumes that labor is used in quite different intensities in artisan and factory establishment. This difference is at least one source of cost, and, therefore, returns differentials which may persist over long periods because of market imperfections but which break down during rapid industrialization.

8 Rosenstein-Rodan reports that investigations in countries of southeastern Europe showed that the percentage of workers in handicraft industries varied first inversely and then directly with higher per capital income.

8 It is worth noting that the results of the 1861 census were greeted with surprise at the time. Apparently it was quite generally felt that these results overstated the importance of industry in Italy as a whole and particularly in the South. Other investigators failed to indicate anywhere near the levels of industrial employment shown by the national censuses. There is no doubt that the census methods, putting major responsibility for reporting on the municipal governments, admitted the possibility of gross errors. See Tremelloni, R., “Le Condizione dell'industria italiana al mometo della prima unita,” L'lndustria, 2–3 (1946), 11Google Scholar, and Ellena, V., “La Statistica di alcune Industrie italiane,” Annali di Statistica, ser. 2, Vol. 13 (Rome, 1880)Google Scholar.

10 There was a concentration of artisans around Rome attracted by and serving the Papal court.

11 Rosenstein-Rodan, P. N., “Notes on the Theory of the ‘Big Push,’” Center for International Studies, M.I.T., 03 1957Google Scholar.

12 The substantial differences within the North and Center regions suggest that the North-South comparisons may often be distorted by inclusion of the Center within the North.

13 SVIMEZ, Statistiche, pp. 770–72Google Scholar.

14 In general in Europe higher per capital incomes are associated with lower per capita cereal consumption. As incomes increase, consumption patterns shift to other foods.

15 Correnti, C. and Maestri, P., Annuario statistico itatiano, 1864 (Turin, 1864), p. 231.Google Scholar

16 Giordano, F., Industria del Ferro in Italia (Turin, 1864), p. 11Google Scholar.

17 Maestri, P., L'ltalia Economica nel 1868, p. 270Google Scholar.

18 Annali di Statistica, Anno 86, Serie VIII, Vol. 9 (Rome, 1957)Google Scholar. This is, by far, the richest single source of historical economic information now available for Italy.

19 Golzio, S., Sulla misura delle variazioni del reddito nazionale Italiano (Turin, 1951)Google Scholar.

20 Gerschenkron, A., “Notes on the Rate of Industrial Growth in Italy, 1881–1913,” The Journal of Economic History, XV, No. 4 (12 1955), 360–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and “Description of an Index of Italian Industrial Output, 1881–1913,” unpublished manuscriptGoogle Scholar.

21 Dessirier, Jean, Bulletin de la Statislique Generate de la Trance, XVIII: 1 (10-12 1928), 65–110Google Scholar, and Tagliacarne, G. in Rapporto della Commissionc Economica presentato all'Assemblea Costituente, L'Industria, I. Relazione, Vol. 2 (Rome, 1947), Ministero per la CostituenteGoogle Scholar.

22 See d'Anna, F. Coppola, Popolazione, reddito e finanze publiche dell'ltalia, dal 1860 ad oggi (Rome, 1946)Google Scholar.

23 Neither Golzio nor the ISTAT survey furnishes basic data for the separate industries used to construct the indices, while all such information is provided by Gerschenkron. For this reason, and because of their intrinsic merit, Gerschenkron's calculations are used here as the reference against which other series are compared.

24 This sector includes both ferrous and non-ferrous metals production.

25 Since the ISTAT series contradicts results of previous studies, it is particularly unfortunate that ISTAT did not assemble and publish basic price and production data. A compilation of such data would have provided a much-needed tool for students of Italian economic history.

26 Wheat production, which averaged almost 36 million hectoliters from 1885 to 1860, rose to an average of 51 million hectoliters for the period 1870–1874 and averaged 45.5 million hectoliters from 1879 to 1883. Corn production, on the other hand, almost doubled from 1855–1860 to 1870–1874; the average output then fell about 5 per cent to the 1879–1883 average. Rice production grew rapidly over these years: from a 1.4 million-hectoliter average in 1855–1860 to a 3.8 million-hectoliter average from 1870–1874 and a 7.3 million average from 1879–1883. Measured in hundreds of pieces of fruit, the citrus crop increased by almost 50 per cent from the average output of 1870–1875 to die average for the period from 1879 to 1883. Wine production grew from an average 24.3 million hectoliters in 1855–1860 to a 27.6 million average for 1870–1874 and a 36.8 million-hectoliter average for the period 1879–1883. Olive oil output rose from a 1.6 million-hectoliter average over the period 1855–1860 to a 3.3 million-liter average from 1870–1875 with no further change in the average output for 1879–1883. In livestock raising from an average of 3.6 million during 1855–1860, the number of cows grew to a 4.8 million in 1881. For the 1855–1860 period see Correnti, C. and Maestri, P., Annuario Statistico ltaliano, 1864 (Turin, 1865), pp. 407–8Google Scholar; for the 1870–1875 and 1879–1883 periods, Annuario Statistico ltaliano for 1889 and 1890.

27 Corbino, E., Annali dell'Economia ltaliana, 1861-1870, p. 72Google Scholar.

28 Corbino, E., Annali dell'Economia ltaliana, 1861-1870, p. 74Google Scholar;Maestri, P., L'ltalia Economica nel 1868, p. 225Google Scholar; Annuario Statistico ltaliano (Rome, 1900), p. 478Google Scholar; Ellena, V., La Statistica di alcune industrie italiane, Annali di Statistica, ser. 2, Vol. 13 (Rome, 1880), 136Google Scholar.

29 Statistica Industrial, Rassunto delle notizie sulle condizioni industriale del Regno, forte 1 (Rome, 1906)Google Scholar.

30 Annuario Statistico ltaliano (Rome, 1886), pp. dxxxviii, 327Google Scholar.

31 Annuario Statistico Italiano (Rome, 1897), p. 217Google Scholar.

32 Annuario Statistico Italiano (Rome, 1878), Parte II, 86a–89aGoogle Scholar; Annuario Statistico Italiano (Rome, 1884), p. 654Google Scholar; Annuario Statistico Italiano (Rome, 1886), pp. 408–9Google Scholar; Annuario Statistico Italiano (Rome, 1911), p. 185Google Scholar.

83 Correnti, C. and Maestri, P., Annuario Statistico Italiano, p. 231Google Scholar;Annuario Statistico Italiano (Rome, 1911), p. 102Google Scholar;Annuario Statistico Italiano (Rome, 1889), Pp. 631–33Google Scholar;Annuario Statistico Italiano (Rome, 1900), p. 396Google Scholar;Annuario Statistico Italiano (Rome, 1905-1907), Vol. 1, 400–2Google Scholar.

84 Annuario Statistico Italiano (Rome, 1881), pp. 623–24Google Scholar;Annuario Statistico Italiano (Rome, 1884), p. 95Google Scholar;Annuario Statistico Italiano (Rome, 1886), pp. 826–27Google Scholar;Statistica Industrials (1906), pp. 5–9Google Scholar;Annuario Statistico Italiano (Rome, 1912), pp. 112–13Google Scholar.

35 Maestri, P., L'ltalia Economica nel 1868 (Florence, 1868), p. 270Google Scholar;Ultalia Economica nel 1869 (Florence, 1870), p. 262Google Scholar;L'ltalia Economica nel 1870 (Florence, 1871), p. 250Google Scholar;Annuario Statistico Italiano (Rome, 1886), pp. clxxxviii, 327Google Scholar;Annuario Statistico Haliano (Rome, 1889), p. 514Google Scholar;Annuario Statistico Italiano (Rome, 1905-1907), p. 636Google Scholar;Annuario Statistico Italiano (Rome, 1912), p. 172Google Scholar; Statistico Industrials, pp. 14–15.

36 Maestri, P., L'ltalia Economica nel 1867 (Florence, 1868), p. 199Google Scholar;L'ltalia Economica nel 1868 (Florence, 1869), p. 192Google Scholar;Ellena, V., “La Statistica di Alcune Industria Italiana,” p. 41Google Scholar; Riassunto delle Notizie sulle Condizione Industriali del Regno, pp. 72–75, 77–79; Annuario Statistico Italiano (Rome, 1881), p. 612Google Scholar;Annuario Statistico Italiano (Rome, 1905-1907), P. 453Google Scholar;Annuario Statistico Italiano (Rome, 1913), pp. 156–61Google Scholar.

87 The distribution of investment has two somewhat surprising features. One is the fact that amortization is a larger part of the total than is usual in advanced countries. The other is the high rate which inventory accumulation reached in the fifteen years after unification, a rate achieved only once again in the fifty-year period.

88 Industrial Growth in Italy, p. 368.

38 Annuario Statistico Italiano (Rome, 1881), p. 46Google Scholar;Annuario Statistico Italiano (Rome, 1905-1907), p. 499Google Scholar;Annuario Statistico Italiano (Rome, 1911), p. 144Google Scholar.

40 Gerschenkron, A., “Industrial Growth in Italy,” p. 369Google Scholar.

41 Bodio, L., l'ltalia Economica nel 1873, pp. 120–33Google Scholar. Other data which would make it possible to check further the significance of the regional allocation of funds by the national government and the regional development of social overhead capital are not available.

42 The sharp increases in domestic production at the turn of the century are easily associated with the very large increase in the use of fertilizers which took place at that time.

43 It is true that other sectors of southern agriculture did better than wheat producers. Wine output grew substantially; the citrus fruit crop seems also to have grown considerably. But olive oil, and other products like corn showed little or no improvement.

44 Maestri, P., Italia Economica nel 1870 (Florence, 1871), pp. 97–103Google Scholar, gives some indirect evidence.