The consensus which emerged from this Aspen Seminars for Leaders session was that an innovative approach to the issue of infrastructure in Italy requires the notion itself to be redefined and its boundaries redrawn. Indeed, if the term “infrastructure” is considered to extend to that which is useful to the development and competitiveness of the country, then it would seem unavoidable for any analysis to be expanded to include all those systems that enable individuals and businesses to live and operate as best as possible. In this regard, digital networks, universities, and the banking and financial system were held up as just some examples of an ongoing “virtualization” of the concept of infrastructure, a phenomenon which requires a multidisciplinary approach in order for it to be effectively analyzed and properly assessed.
Seen from this perspective, it was suggested that infrastructure is neither a good nor bad thing in and of itself – it can be one or the other according to the extent it proves useful in facilitating the good of the community, business competitiveness, and boosting local-area development. It is precisely this element of discretion that informs the appropriateness of any given infrastructure choice, and is the defining feature of political action. In other words, in setting infrastructure priorities, responsible leaders should have a clear-cut vision of development and a coherent programmatic framework to pursue in a transparent manner.
It was highlighted that infrastructure works that have genuine utility are inevitably also sustainable at an economic, environmental, social, and financial level. While on the one hand it was conceded that finding resources and investment for infrastructure does present problems, it was acknowledged on the other that bankability cannot be the sole criterion for choosing whether to proceed with such works. Project quality, productive public-private partnerships, and negotiation with stakeholders were singled out as the necessary ingredients for achieving a truly useful and sustainable infrastructure system. The participants stressed the urgent need to foster a culture which allows infrastructure works designed through consensus to progress to the building of service infrastructure, with the former being a marker of a political system that is mindful of self-preservation, while the latter is a necessary condition for the construction of a modern country.
In terms of governance, there was open recognition of age-old problems such as overlapping responsibilities between various institutional levels, delays in the completion of works, costs that often spiral out of control, and a long litany of unfinished works. It was noted that the New Procurement Code, recently enacted, addresses unresolved issues such as a decision-making process fraught with obstacles and an endless array of rules, the cause on one hand of disputes and excessive litigation, and, on the other, the proliferation of unacceptable pockets of non-transparent practice. In this regard, it was remarked that the new era ushered in by the Ministry of Infrastructure and Transport has the ambitious aim of refocusing on long-term planning (30 years) and three-yearly programming (to be revised on a continuous basis), with a special emphasis on maintaining existing infrastructure. It represents a complete overhaul of procedures for awarding positions and of planning methodology, introducing greater flexibility and simplification in regulation, all in the name of achieving greater certainty and stability, and with a clear line drawn between political responsibility and the penalization of any misconduct.
This was hailed as a welcome step forward, which, in order to be fruitful, will however require an independent public administration that is competent and up to the complexity of the task, contracting authorities that can administer tender procedures transparently, and, above all, a market-friendly regulatory/legal environment. In short, what was seen as necessary is an optimistic outlook that appreciates the need to overcome the ineffective mindsets of recent decades, in the knowledge that a country cannot be truly livable and competitive without an efficient infrastructure system.