Opening discussions at this Aspen Junior Fellows event was the observation that the increase in the speed of progression of events and the shift towards a multipolar and networked world have led to a transformation in capitalism, with the advent of techno-finance representing one of the most obvious low points of this phenomenon. Alternatives to the Smithian conception of capitalism were also acknowledged as emerging, a case in point being Wen Jiabao’s prescription to consider, in the allocation of resources, “the importance of the visible hand of the government as much as the invisible hand of the market.”[1]
Italy – it was recalled – is the second largest manufacturing country in Europe, with one of the highest rates of entrepreneurship in the world. It was noted, however, that the current crisis is wreaking a Darwinian-style natural selection on the country’s production and business ownership structure. On the one hand, the pervasive “molecular-level” capitalism of small firms has run into problems of undercapitalization and a lack of access to credit. On the other, the long season of relational capitalism that shaped the governance of many large firms in the postwar period has come to an end. This was credited, in part, to shareholders’ agreements, a tool which although aimed at ensuring the system’s stability, was not viewed as promoting efficiency, openness, contestability, or renewal of leadership. Moreover, many key players of that era – both businesses and individuals – have faded, but market capitalism on a major scale has yet to take root. With a view to cultivating such a transition, there have however been revisions since 1999 to the governance principles applicable to listed companies through the “Italian Corporate Governance Code”, placing Italy in a leading position within Europe in this regard.
The participants stressed that the perception of Italy as “a country of capitalists without capital”, underscored by the acquisition of leading Italian brands by foreign investors, should prompt efforts to challenge the rhetoric of the country’s industrial decline. It was felt that the situation instead calls for the pursuit of a strategy that builds on the strengths of Italian firms, to equip them to take on the new international competition. The answer – it was suggested – does not lie entirely, or at least not so much, with increasing their size (even small firms can be successful in their domestic market), but rather with boosting their market competitiveness. Efforts should focus on innovation, excellence in quality and service, and openness to foreign markets (especially as export firms are least affected by the drop in domestic demand). In this regard, the participants cited European Commissioner for Research Philippe Busquin’s observation that innovation policy is about identifying and supporting excellence, not about achieving social cohesion. By way of closing, it was emphasized that innovation has all too often been confused with hi-tech in Italy, and that a renewed awareness is instead needed of the concepts of organizational, process and product innovation, and of the central role that firms play in generating value as well as a spirit of enterprise as a resource for democracy.