How to attract companies and capital (if they flee, goodbye growth) – Corriere.it

Italian companies, those that are on the international market and are the protagonists of a 2022 with extraordinary results for exports (more than 600 billion, historical record), which have also grown in volume and not only in value, are crossed by two contrasting feelings. The first one is very satisfied for the exceptional ability to adapt to crises – especially the energy one – superior to the competition. The second is of serious concern for the risks of deindustrialization in the bitter awareness that it is almost inappropriate and dangerous to talk about it. In his book The Italian company (Treccani), Franco Amatori is optimistic about the future of Italian “animal spirits”, he notices a renewed effervescence – he calls it exactly that – of the entrepreneurial fabric, whose skin has changed more than one thinks. Unlike even the recent past, there are “three qualitative elements – writes the economic historian – which positively distinguish the most dynamic and evolved part of the universe of Italian private and public companies: internationalisation, excellence technology, independence from the founding family».

The Champions

We are talking about samples from different product sectors — chemical, pharmaceutical, mechanical, agri-food — which do not necessarily match the classic ones of Made in Italy. We no longer have big industry – and this is an insurmountable limit – but on the other hand, even better than in the past, niche world leaders are emerging, whose productivity is higher than that of their competitors. We can create unicorns ourselves, as in digital payments in spite of the political love for cash. We are leaders in the circular economy. Sustainability has long been part of the productive culture of the more developed territories.

This part of the economy finds its raison d’être in the market, in the rules and in the freedom of initiative. If it had been entangled in national logics with a high political value, such as air transport (Ita), the steel industry (formerly Ilva) or the telecommunications network (Tim and Open Fiber), it would have ended up losing opportunities for growth, ending up eaten up by its competitors . So goodbye exports, the main lever of our development that holds everything else together, even if many delude themselves about the saving virtues of public spending (increased by 31.9% since 2019). Thanks to the market, free competition and the attractiveness of Italian products in countries which fortunately are not zero-kilometre food or sovereignist in furnishings, clothing and travel.

The debate

While the internal debate focuses on the inevitability of state intervention and on the pursuit of a utopian well-being of citizens, these Made in Italy companies, and not only, are investing as never before and are increasingly detaching themselves from destinies of one’s own country, perhaps by being listed or having legal and tax offices abroad. A silent divorce. The Italian groups, perhaps no longer formally such, which by now have a large part of their activities outside the borders, including European ones, are gradually more and more indifferent to political choices. The Italian market is marginal in terms of turnover and prospects. They are not without faults, thank goodness. But not reflecting on what this trend means in terms of industrial policy is tantamount to cultural rather than economic suicide. These “evolved” companies are often protagonists of markets that will simply be disrupted by the energy and digital transition. Just think of the automotive supply chain in the transition from the endothermic engine (no more diesel and petrol since 2035) to the electric one, the effects of the Fit for 55 strategy, the recent legislation on packaging, disposable packages, and so on.

Transformations

A country that was fully aware of the impact of these transformations would shamelessly discuss the goodness of European choices. To anticipate or even counter them. But no. Entrepreneurs, but not only them, who fear the consequences of overly ideological European choices (those of the Vice-President of the European Commission, Frans Timmermans, for example) hold back, in expressing their doubts, for fear of appearing contrary to sustainability and , therefore, to pay too high a reputational price. It is forbidden to talk about technological neutrality or simply to support the hypothesis of synthetic fuels. The misunderstanding about nuclear power (essential if we want to achieve the decarbonisation objectives) is proof of this. Taboo.

Energy transition

The debate on the energy transition is at times unrealistic and naive, bearing in mind that the European Union is responsible for only 7% of greenhouse gas emissions. We risk paying too high a price in loss of European competitiveness compared to China and the United States, the latter engaged in a protectionist policy and bordering on unfair competition in fossil energy sources. Talking about it more openly does not mean failing in our commitment to the environment. On the contrary. Internationalized companies are ahead in compliance with ESG (Environmental Social and Governance) factors. They establish themselves as drivers of sustainability. If they were weakened or not helped to face the challenges of the transition, the consequences would be negative for everyone. An impoverished country is less green. And if he doesn’t sincerely discuss the inevitable social costs of the transition (job losses, decline of some districts) he will delay the achievement of environmental objectives over time. This is what is not said, in the muffled conformity of the unconditional yes to the electric. Without an advanced and competitive industry, there is no future well-being, but neither is there a cleaner environment. It is useless to delude ourselves, for example, that in Italy we can do without a large steel mill, such as the one in Taranto, which also has its environmental and aesthetic costs. Making him believe it is a simple but pernicious deception. The state cannot do everything. Nor can it be thought that protecting the smallest corporations, in the sovereignty of petty interests, in the daily criminalization of the market and competition, perverse fruits of capitalism, responsible for new inequalities, magically opens the doors to a comfortable and clean future.