Andrea Pase

Cómo la réplica del modelo del distrito industrial del noreste italiano ha fallado en Timisoara (Romania)

Italy’s industrial districts of the Northeast are often cited as beings models of success due to their economic organisation, thus they have almost become an archetypal myth. One of the reasons for the Northeastern firms’ success is proximity (both geographical and relational), particularly with regard to the creation and development of the districts and their innovative and competitive capacity on a global scale. Our research compares the structures of proximity in Montebelluna, an industrial district in Northeast Italy, with Timisoara (in Romania), which has been one of the more favoured areas of delocalisation for Veneto firms. This comparison made it possible to focus on the non-economic categories (such as trust, face-to-face relations, cooperative attitudes, local context…) that have contributed to a large part of their success, although, in reality, they are often overvalued. Above all, the analysis reveals how these Italian industrial districts have concealed an unequal distribution of power, not only inside the firms and between the firms, but also between the firms and their delocalised territories. Today the “Northeast” model is questioned and debated; however a rethinking of regional dynamics is only possible if these hidden dimensions of district development are taken into consideration.espanolLos distritos industriales del noreste italiano son considerados frecuentemente como modelos de exito por su organizacion economica y por eso se han vuelto casi un mito arquetipico. Una de las razones de este exito es la proximidad (sea geografica que relacional), particularmente en lo que respecta a la creacion y desarrollo de los distritos y a sus capacidades de innovacion y competitividad global. Esta investigacion compara Montebelluna, un distrito en el noreste italiano, con Timisoara (Romania) que ha sido una de las areas de deslocalizacion preferidas de las firmas venetas. Esta comparacion ha permitido centrar la atencion en las categorias no economicas (como la confianza, las relaciones cara a cara, las actitudes cooperativas y el contexto local...) que han contribuido a su exito, pero que en realidad son a menudo sobrevalorados. Sobre todo, este analisis revela como estos distritos han ocultado una distribucion inicua del poder, no solo al interno de las firmas y entre ellas, sino tambien entre las firmas y sus territorios deslocalizados. Hoy el modelo “noreste” es cuestionado y discutido; sin embargo, un replanteamiento de las dinamicas regionales solo es posible si se toman en consideracion estas dimensiones ocultas de desarrollo de distrito. EnglishItaly’s industrial districts of the Northeast are often cited as beings models of success due to their economic organisation, thus they have almost become an archetypal myth. One of the reasons for the Northeastern firms’ success is proximity (both geographical and relational), particularly with regard to the creation and development of the districts and their innovative and competitive capacity on a global scale. Our research compares the structures of proximity in Montebelluna, an industrial district in Northeast Italy, with Timisoara (in Romania), which has been one of the more favoured areas of delocalisation for Veneto firms. This comparison made it possible to focus on the non-economic categories (such as trust, face-to-face relations, cooperative attitudes, local context...) that have contributed to a large part of their success, although, in reality, they are often overvalued. Above all, the analysis reveals how these Italian industrial districts have concealed an unequal distribution of power, not only inside the firms and between the firms, but also between the firms and their delocalised territories. Today the “Northeast” model is questioned and debated; however a rethinking of regional dynamics is only possible if these hidden dimensions of district development are taken into consideration.