Index: Page 3 Sustainable innovations: forging partnerships, knowledge exchange, and reciprocity Cristina Chiara Orsatti Page 5 The “Macrolotto 0” in the city of Prato as a zone of transition Massimo Bressan page 8 The role of innovation in the development of mountain areas Ilaria Goio, Geremia Gios page 11 Environmental And Socioeconomic Practices Between “Tradition” And “Innovation” In A Changing Alpine Valley Cristina Chiara Orsatti, Alessandro Gretter, Rocco Scolozzi page 15 Integrated management of water resources: the role of social capital, partnership and reciprocity in sustaining environmental conservation in the Alps Beatrice Marelli, Maria Cristina Bruno, Mauro Carolli, Bruno Maiolini, Elisa Varolo In http://issuu.com/fondazionebassetti/docs/jeffinnovation-aaa-2010-2 Responsible Innovation / Sustainable Innovation Jeff Ubois
Sustainable innovations: forging partnerships, knowledge exchange, and reciprocity Organizer: Cristina Orsatti Center for Innovation, Italy Sustainable development implies social, environmental, and economic change in the ways in which the natural, the social and the economic environments are perceived, valued, preserved, constructed and managed. The economic paradigm of growth cannot prevail on one of sustainable development. The ways in which human, social, environmental and economic development relate to each other should be analyzed in relation to diverse views and practices of development in specific sites of interest and in relation to expert and indigenous knowledge. Responsible innovation depends on grounded knowledge. This panel focuses on the role of partnership, knowledge exchange and reciprocity in ecological, economic and social sustainability. In particular, the speakers highlight the relationship between the circulation of commodities and service, values and people, and information - and how this reverberates on territorial, ecological and indigenous resilience. Several of the panelists will discuss how highland communities adapt to the environment in an era of climate change, resource scarcity and socio-economic and political constraints. Which adaptation strategies are "sustainable", and for whom? How do specific territorial practices mingle and mix, to survive in the global scenario? We are interested in analyzing contexts and looking at how they adapt and react differently to global challenges. Identity and culture are not always recognized as practically valued resources, to promote development strategies. But,
if grounded in territorial contexts, identity and culture can highlight sustainable and unsustainable ways of adapting to the environment. Within a comparative framework, the unfolding relations between humans and their environments outline what needs to be changed, what needs to be implemented or maintained in a specific context. The crystallization of beliefs and practices of the past do not necessarily promote the sustainability of social, ecological and economic environments. Nor is the circulation of beliefs and practices per se fruitful to community sustainability (let us think of the impact of "expert management" and of the plundering of local resources from indigenous communities). Flows of knowledge, people and capitals may constrain, disrupt or stop other types of flows. We wish to find examples of good practices, where the circulation of knowledge, commodities and relations is sustainable and respectful of culture and identity. We will examine the institutional and economic models behind specific development practices, and compare the opposite tendencies towards "crystallization" (closed social circuits) or "flow" with a view to the sustainability of specific natural, social, and economic resources. Another issue of interest here is that of boundaries and constraints. Which skills within and across disciplines can help us analyze highland contexts from different points of view (cultural, economic and ecologic) but with methodological rigor and within a common language? Several of the panelists present papers about the Alps, which have seen dramatic environmental changes and demographic decline in the last fifty years and where ecological, economic, social and demographic sustainability are absolutely crucial to development and innovation.
The “Macrolotto 0” in the city of Prato as a zone of transition Massimo Bressan (IRIS – Prato; Università di Firenze)
Immigration, industry and the changing of the city One of the most characteristic features of the city of Prato (Italy), that contributes to make it a typical example of “industrial district”, is the diversity of the population which, from the post-war period on, has involved groups originating from increasingly distant places. Between 1951 and 1971 the number of residents almost doubled, rising from 77,631 to 143,232 (+ 84%). Over half the present population of Prato (56.3%) has immigrated to the city since the 1950s. The migratory flows to Prato correspond to the rise of the industrial district. The demand for labour is the principal reason for the intensity of the phenomenon. The first and most consistent immigration flow was regional, involving families originating primarily from the sharecropping areas of the countryside. This is a component that still accounts for 30% of the residents. This first phase of immigration was family based and came from villages which were geographically close. Subsequently, there was a boost in domestic migration, and the first groups of immigrants from the southern regions arrived, in particular from Campania, Puglia and Sicilia. This component of the population accounts for 12% of current residents, with peaks of over 15%. Then (late 80’s) we come to the foreign immigration which, in 2008 and considering only the residents listed at the registry office, accounts for 12% of the population (25.000), including over 10,000 Chinese, with a distribution over the territory that features distinct
areas of concentration. There are four major groups of migrants (Chinese, Albanians, Rumanians and Pakistanis) who represent approximately 80% of the resident foreign population, and feature a growth rate that is constant over time. In two districts of the city, the old city centre and the bordering area that extends westwards (comprising the socalled “Macrolotto 0”), the migrants – mostly Chinese – represent 20% of the official residents, with peaks of over 50 and 755 in compact clusters of census tracts. A recurrent element in the words of the informants was what we might define as the rapid rate at which the Chinese marked out their presence in the urban space. The Chinese took over abandoned workshops and warehouses; they set to work in sectors closely connected with textiles, but in which Prato had invested in a marginal manner – clothing, knitwear – and then they began to purchase property and subcontracting activities. Over recent years, however, there have emerged clear signals of hostility towards Chinese enterprises, deemed to be facilitated by the superficiality of controls imposed by local authorities. The factual basis for this sentiment is controversial, and it figures largely as a stigma triggered by an awareness of the limited competitive capacity of a large part of local Italian companies. However, the concentration of physical and cultural presence of the Chinese in the Macrolotto “0”, makes public intervention – already meagre – still more difficult, perpetuating the situation of laissez-fare. The arrival of new rural (Chinese) populations in the district maintained the validity of some of the conditions proper to a zone of transition, and – compared to the former Italian immigration - even made it more evident and rich in global connotations. In such contexts, public intervention should move in the direction of a greater awareness of the value of cultural difference for the development of a territory – like Prato and Tuscany - that has always been economically and socially linked with numerous markets and localities of the world.
This is why it becomes important to provide these neighbourhoods with a greater quantity of collective goods that the inhabitants can continually use and re-invent. Public spaces are not in themselves modes of emancipation or liberation. They are, however, spaces which can be linked to the emergence of new structures of social relations capable of dealing with new needs of the residents. These are therefore spaces where the social conflict becomes manifest and the parties that confront each other take up a clear position, favouring, and at times speeding up the search for solutions. However, in order for this to be truly an advantage the diversity must also be able to participate in the processes of city-change.
The role of innovation in the development of mountain areas Ilaria Goio research assistant at the Department of Economics, University of Trento Geremia Gios full professor of Environmental Economics, Department of Economics, University of Trent
ABSTRACT The theme of innovation and competitiveness keeps on stimulating discussions and reflections in relation to possible adaptation strategies, effects and impacts on territorial development systems. Innovation is defined by Nelson and Rosenberg (1993) as a grouping of activities through which an organization produces innovative goods and production processes in contrast or relation to past experiences and past forms of knowledge. Innovation is the positive answer to socio-economic changes which are problematic when dealing with "marginal" areas and sectors. It should be noted that, it is not the innovation itself that is important but, rather, the availability of the set of complementary assets and capabilities necessary to enable its successful adoption. It is, therefore, essential to shift "the attention from the technology itself, to the social and economic conditions that foster the creation of new technological and financial capabilities� (Heertje, 1988). Without such broad social goals, an investment policy will be ineffective. In order to examine the main elements which hinders the introduction of innovation and technologies, mountain areas contexts are particularly significant. They are characterized by a differentiated development. However, they have a
common element: the idea of limit. This represents “the essence” of the life in mountain. In fact, “in the valleys the horizon is limited, the crops have different altitude limits, there’s a physical limit to the possibility of trade even between areas that are extremely close, and so on” (Gios G., 2005). Effectively, the limit acts in different way according to if the same is an absolute or partial constraint. In the case in which the limits were transformed in opportunities there has been development, while in the case in which they have been transformed in absolute constraints there has been decline. One of the reasons why marginal areas present delays in development is due to lack of adaptation strategies to technological progress for the absence of specific solutions relevant to local conditions and major difficulties in communicating with potential sources of technological innovation. Identifying ways and methodologies which facilitate the diffusion and adaption of pertinent technologies represents a challenge to revitalize the economic development process of such areas. In order to operate in proficient ways it is necessary to adopt analytical instruments of theoretical analysis and a deep understanding and knowledge of specific local situations. In this framework, the aim of this paper is to contribute and individuate methodologies to facilitate the diffusion of innovation in mountain areas. Through the examination of technical progress spread we will try and emphasize critical elements which have a determinant role in relation with marginal areas. It is essential, at the local level, to ensure sufficient flexibility so that, while respecting the general rules, there will be a specific adaptation to local conditions. This kind of flexibility can lead to different solutions in different areas and requires the effective application of the subsidiary principle in the distribution of powers between different levels and different government actors. The future of the weak mountain areas and also of the Alps in general, depends largely on the ability to involve local stakeholders in environmental protection and promotion processes. But
to make this involvement real, local actors should be able to direct the management of natural resource towards their own interests and needs and also to control the management options adopted. Focusing on local resources appears, then, the only way to avoid that the technological innovation for these regions turns into a dependent condition from metropolitan areas, or large enterprises that, generally, are the driving force of these processes. INDEX of the PAPER 1 INTRODUCTION 2 MOUNTAIN AREAS: THE IDEA OF LIMIT 3 THE DEVELOPMENT OF MOUNTAIN AREAS 3.1 THE IMPROVEMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES AND THE PARTICIPATION OF LOCAL POPULATION 3.2 SOME EFFECTS OF THE PROCESS OF GLOBALISATION 3.3 PUBLIC SUPPORT 4 NOTES ON INNOVATION 4.1 THE ROLE OF TECHNOLOGICAL INNOVATION 5 PROVISIONAL CONCLUSIONS
Environmental and socioeconomic practices between “Tradition” and “Innovation” in a changing alpine valley Cristina Chiara Orsatti (Iasma R&I Fem) Alessandro Gretter (Iasma R&I Fem) Rocco Scolozzi (Iasma R&I Fem) Introduction In the last 40/50 years Alpine communities have been endangered and went through an economic down turn with a decline of many assets (Batzing 2005, Salsa, 2007, Sibilla 1995, Zucca, 2007, Arnoldi 2009). In contrast with demographic decline in the Alpine context, in particular in the Southern part (Bätzing 2005; Zucca 2007) Val di Ledro’s demographic dynamics presented an increase in the valley’s population, with a considerable quota of foreign immigrants mainly working in the wood industry (now estimated the 8%). As well the valley presented great biodiversity for botanical reasons and a quite thriving community and administration trying to revive tourism and primary development sectors. The presence of relevant natural assets enforced the research criteria for selecting the valley to do field work. In this context we looked at Val di Ledro engines of development: tourism, the wood sector, diary production and its unique administration the Council of Ledro, with the objective of exploring “community” local and “global” ways of adapting to changes. As a research team, within the project Openloc (www.openloc.eu) we aimed at finding ways in which social and natural capitals could be recognized and valued in alpine contexts. We aimed at understanding the role of the territory with regard to global change, connections between use, production, distribution of local resources, finding interdisciplinary ways of assessing the “sustainability” of communities. Our argument is that only when development models are clear and practices are
mapped out in the horizon of choices can inhabitants strategically and responsibly decide of their future. Context, literature review and research question Valle di Ledro is located in the South-West part of Trentino, an alpine province of Italy. It is extended on about 155 sq. Km and a population of about 5.500 inhabitants with a density of about 35 inh/ sq. Km. It is situated in the Alps and in the Autonomous region of Trentino where authoritative ethnographies had been carried out in the past. We refer here to a specific ethnography which had dealt with problems of socioeconomic development, ecology and alpine communities adaptation to change. The questions raised by the Hidden Frontier are still very relevant today for Val di Ledro and other alpine communities. The Hidden Frontier discussed the microcosmos of the community and the macro-cosmos of the market before big socio-economic changes happened in the Alps in the 60s. It explored the theme of material subsistence, the relationship between alpine communities, the natural environment, and survival in Trentino. The Hidden Frontier boundaries were political, economic and ethnic They facilitated the conservation or the fragmentation and segmentation of the land (e.g. through hereditary systems etc) and shaped the landscape where people lived, constructed and administered. What are the boundaries today? How can we establish relations with the place we live and the rest of the world? How can we establish relations and frame or reframe the above. Links between innovation, tradition and sustainability The landscape is linked to its socioeconomic context so are landscape resources. The ways in which we preserve resources, manage, use and produce them, depend on models of development that are practiced on the ground. And relate to how people identify with “tradition or modernity (innovation?). “Tradition�' is used and understood here as the replication of embodied skills and collective
history. We refer to “innovation” as creating something new. Popular representations tend to treat “innovation” as the result of universally relevant acts of individual genius, while paying little attention to particular places and culturally-specific practices of transformative change. At the same time, recent theorizing in the social sciences and humanities suggest new directions for research “innovation”, is considered as situated material practices enacted within distinctive socio-cultural and geographical locations. Focus and Method In the valley, we have focused our research and analysis on development models behind practices. Development models have consequences for social, ecological and economic sustainability and the carrying capacity of systems. As well, Identification with tradition or innovation facilitate or hinder different types of “developments”. Ecological, social and cultural processes including how inhabitants identify with “tradition” and “innovation” have been linked together and considered as macro variables of development processes. In this context the role of the territory and its identity, how the territory and the environment are perceived by their inhabitants, is central to the social, ecological, economic sustainability of the alpine communities dwelling in those mountain areas. Research tools mix from Ecology, Anthropology, Sociology. Methodologically, we have focused on how alpine communities adapt to climate, economic and global change in novel and interdisciplinary ways considering field work as correspondent to an “other” logic than the case study run by sociologists and economists, which is that of looking at macro phenomena in the micro-occurrence of their unfolding. Preliminary Results With regard to “tradition” Cole and Wolf adviced avoiding using an artificial schematic sociology which counter-oppose the 2 dimensions of “tradition” and modernity (not
innovation). However what is innovative? It is difficult to individuate “tradition” in Val di Ledro as a practiced standard. What we found in Val di Ledro corresponds to very complex developments driven by outputs and contradictions, potentials and tensions in the historical and political-economic process of adaptation to change. Mountain valleys are embedded in greater historical processes of transformation, modernization and super modernization. Val di Ledro context might be similar to other alpine context in Trentino and elsewhere. At the same time it is specific to that community, that history, those contingent conditions and that territory and environment inhabitants related to. Discussing concrete opportunities on the ground, future prospects and possibilities for the governance of socio-ecological-economic relations (systems) should be seriously considered in relation to the past, the recognition of the present (through its synchronic verification) in the perspective of a shared and “sustainable” future. INDEX 1. Introduction 2. A Lens in Val di Ledro: general data and context 3. An interdisciplinary mixed methods approach 4. Development practices 4.1. Tourism between tradition and innovation 4.2 Wood between “tradition” and “innovation” 4.3 Malghe grasslands between “tradition” and “innovation” 5. Results: development drives and landscape resources 5.1. Sketching territorial identities behind practices 5.2. Tensions and contradictions 6. Discussion: Past present, hidden, cultural and global frontiers /globalization identity and sustainability 7. Future challenges
Integrated management of water resources: the role of social capital, partnership and reciprocity in sustaining environmental conservation in the Alps Beatrice Marelli, Maria Cristina Bruno, Mauro Carolli, Bruno Maiolini, Elisa Varolo Common-pool resources are natural or man-made resources shared among different users, a condition that produces a competition for their utilization (Hardin, 1968). A vast number of valuable natural resources falls in this category and shows today chronic problems of overuse. Examples are the world forests, fisheries, water resources, biodiversity and even the atmosphere. As broad bodies of literature and empirical evidence (Ostrom 1990, 2005; Cardenas, 2000) have demonstrated, management of common pool resources implies an institutional construction that would be able to take into account not only physical attributes of the resources, but also attributes of the communities called to protect them. According to Ostrom and Ahn (2008) among these attributes generally accepted by the community, there are the values of behaviour, which are a vehicle of shared learning and explanations about foundations of social order, and are crucial variables of relevance for the institutional analysis encompassed in the concept of social capital. It often happens that individual requests bring the institutions, under certain conditions, to substitute the search for collective benefits derived from the resolution of common dilemmas with the pursuit of individual demands. This could lead to an erosion of the collective meaning of the institution itself, nullifying the realization of broader
community outcomes. In contrast, under different conditions as suggested by Ostrom and Ahn (2008), internal values can be extremely useful in increasing the institutional performance and in controlling opportunistic behaviours. The issue has been addressed investigating how two small farm communities in Northern Italy have managed water over time, focusing on the values they applied in this selfgovernance process. This research stressed that the existence of a common set of values is extremely useful in increasing the institutional performance and in controlling opportunistic behaviours. Trust is the most powerful instrument of connection between institutional arrangements and values, since it profitably coordinates multiple interests and needs for the resource in use. It is enhanced when individuals are trustworthy, networked with one another and acting within institutions that reward honest behaviours (Marshall 2005). The present results also support Ostrom’s (1998, 1999) idea of a core relationship existing among trust, reputation and reciprocity. It has been determinate, indeed, that those factors are dependent on the community’s past experiences and on the capacity of their members to recognize a major common interest in coordinating with each other for preserving the resources. Once in place, those factors enhance the capacity of a community to govern its environment and, in particular, to foster the process of institutional adaptation that is necessary for a long term management of water resources. Further, the pivotal role of the community as instrument for driving preferences and irrigating practices appears as been stressed by the existence of a strong cultural heritage, able to retrieve ancient traditions as a way for contemporary/ modern social innovation. The theoretical purpose has been achieved with a qualitative method of investigation to focus on internal values and emotional feelings among the actors involved in the resource management. For collecting the data, in-depth
semi-structured interviews were conducted with half of the members of each community. Among institutional adaptations existing in local selfgoverning communities, it has to be recognized that some attempts exist to export this multi-level participatory approach to similar geographical contexts in order to assess a broader spectrum of ecosystem benefits for alpine communities. At this purpose, a project has been prepared and submitted to the Alpine Space Programme, a EU transnational cooperation programme for the Alps where partners from the seven Alpine countries work together to promote regional development in a sustainable way. One of the priorities of this programme is to protect, manage and enhance the natural and cultural assets for sustainable development, among which water resources are particularly relevant. In fact, water is a characteristic and valuable Alpine resource that needs to be preserved and sustainably managed as basis for providing appropriate living conditions, supporting many economic sectors, as well as fostering a comprehensive and positive social environment. The Alps represent the Water Towers of Europe, in fact Alpine glaciers, snowfields, lakes and ground waters generate the headwaters of many important rivers that flow to European floodplains. To host such a strategic reserve is a privilege but also a responsibility for the local populations. At the international scale, the ecology of mountain streams is of great importance, given the role of all mountain regions in Europe and worldwide as natural reserves of good quality freshwaters for the more populated lowlands. This is particularly true in a future scenario of probable water scarcity or flooding, following predicted extreme meteorological events and the general trends of climate change. Because impacts, land and water uses differ among Alpine states, it is necessary to identify a range of remediation and management options suitable for the Alpine environmental mosaic. As a consequence, the proposed experimental activities will be later exported to different
watersheds in different Alpine countries, to experiment different possible modalities of the “slow down� process, and the resulting ecosystem benefits within alpine communities. This project will contribute to sustainable territorial development through the analysis and implementation of the environmental, social and economic aspects of the ecological management of artificial systems by reusing excess water from hydropeaking lowland rivers. The best practices proposed by the project will promote rural tourism and create new job opportunities for workers with ecological expertise (e.g., in drainage companies and water management agencies). The reuse of the pulsating discharges released by hydropower plants will increase the baseflow of these heavily modified water bodies for the benefit of multiple users The interdisciplinary approach selected for combining the preliminary results of Marelli with the subsequent applications in the Alpine Space Project will integrate the sociological dimensions traditionally considered by the theory of the commons with the hydro-ecological assessment of the ecosystem benefits provided by water resources in low-plain rivers of Alpine valleys in the specific context of their application. The results will provide an example of an effective tool for a broader and integrated understanding of water resources management.