Click here to download

Gli strumenti finanziari per lo sviluppo del territorio come sistema vitale
Author/s: Federica Fotino 
Year:  2016 Issue: Language: Italian 
Pages:  33 Pg. 65-97 FullText PDF:  393 KB
DOI:  10.3280/EI2016-002004
(DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation:  clicca qui   and here 

Purpose of the paper: The paper aims to analyse the Financial Instruments, under the Cohesion Policy framework, acting as a key driver for the urban and territorial development, underpinning economic growth and social cohesion, and facilitating the mobilization of the systemic components operating in the region and the value co-creation process for the territory. It identifies critical elements during the previous programming period and potential areas of improvement for the current period 2014-20. Methodology: The A. adopts the Viable Systems Approach (VSA) to identify the main characteristics, strengths and weaknesses of the Financial Instruments. The work is based on an empirical analysis of a number of cases in Italy, during the period 2007-13, with the aim of detecting critical elements and potential areas of improvement, particularly in the context of the management theory and practice related to the concepts of instrument, technique and method. Findings: Leveraging on the analysis of the Italian case in 2007-13, the A. identifies common features and critical factors and finally proposes potential areas for improvement in the design and implementation of Financial Instruments during the current programming period 2014-20. Research limits: Further insights could address any limitations of the upstream (at European Commission level) and downstream (between the various bodies involved in the multi-level implementation process) negotiation process and empirically investigate possible limiting factors for the territorial development in a Cohesion perspective. Practical implications: If the territory is a "viable system", then the social and economic operators (public, private, non-profit, citizens, financial intermediaries, etc.) will interact with each other as systemic components. Consequently, the policy maker needs methods, technics and tools able to synergically respond to a multitude of suprasystems’ needs. For their revolving, integrated and participative nature, Financial Instruments result to be particularly suited to be analysed through the conceptual and interpretive methodology of the VSA, which may contribute at creating innovative models to optimize the use of European Structural Investment (ESI) funds and maximize positive impacts on the territory. Originality of the paper: In the opinion of the A., the consolidation of the Financial Instruments represent a new modus pensandi concerning the spatial planning, which goes beyond structure-centric approaches (focusing on public grants and single initiatives), to adopt vital-systemic approaches (which provide for development strategies based on relationships and interrelationships between the systemic components and supra-systems, through integrated programmes and value co-creation models). According to such interpretative scheme, the various territorial players shall work in partnership, aligning their evolutionary paths, towards a "context consonance", with the final aim to ensure the sustainability - and therefore the long-term survival capacity - of the whole system: not only the enterprise, financial or political systems, but also the neighborhood, the city, in other words, the whole "territorial system". To this aim, the A. argues that a critical reflection is needed, together with the refinement of the practical approach, to territorial issues in the context of Cohesion Policy.
Keywords: Viable Systems Approach, European Structural and Investment Fund, Financial Instrument, Government of territory, Cohesion Policy, Urban Development

  1. Argyris C., Schön D. (1978). Organizational Learning: A Theory of Action Perspective. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, Paolo Alto, CA (trad. it. Apprendimento organizzativo. Teoria, metodo e pratiche. Milano: Guerini e Associati, 1998), pp. 1-356.
  2. Aristotele, Metafisica, IX, 1, 1046 a 4 – a 16; 3, 1046 b 28 – 1047 b 3.
  3. Barile S., Sancetta G., Saviano M. (2015). Management della complessità. Torino: Giappichelli, Vol I e II, pp. XXVIII-308.
  4. Barile S., Gatti C., Saviano M., Calabrese M. (2014a). Alla ricerca di un possibile principio evolutivo della teoria e della pratica d’impresa. Verso una formalizzazione. Sinergie – Conference Proceeding, XXVI Convegno annuale “Manifattura: quale futuro?”, 13-14 settembre 2014, Università di Cassino e del Lazio Meridionale
  5. Barile S., Saviano M., Sinone C. (2014b). Knowledge Economy, Complexity and the Need for T-shaped Innovators. Word Wide Web,
  6. Barile S., Saviano M. (2013). Dynamic Capabilities and T-Shaped Knowledge. A Viable Systems Approach. In: Barile S. (Ed.). Contributions to theoretical and practical advances in management. A Viable Systems Approach (VSA), vol. 2, Roma: Aracne.
  7. Barile S. (2011a), Management Sistemico Vitale: Decisioni e scelte in ambito complesso, Associazione per la ricerca sui Sistemi Vitali (ASVSA), International Printing, pp. XXII-150.
  8. Barile S. (2011b). L’Approccio Sistemico Vitale per lo sviluppo del territorio. Sinergie, 84: 47-87.
  9. Barile S., Calabrese M. (2011). Business design e consonanza di contesto. Quaderni di Sinergie, 32: 625-647.
  10. Barile S. (2009a). Management sistemico vitale. Torino: Giappichelli.
  11. Barile S. (2009b). Verso la qualificazione del concetto di complessità sistemica. Sinergie, 79: 1-32.
  12. Barile S., Golinelli C.M. (2008). Modalità e limiti dell’azione di governo del territorio in ottica sistemica. In: Barile S. (a cura di). L’impresa come sistema. Contributi sull’Approccio Sistemico Vitale (ASV). Torino: G. Giappichelli Editore, pp. 269-294.
  13. Barile S. (2006). L’impresa come sistema. Contributi sull’approccio sistemico vitale (ASV). Torino: Giappichelli, pp. 1-443.
  14. Bateson G. (1972). Steps to an Ecology of Mind: Collected Essays in Anthropology, Psychiatry, Evolution and Epistemology. University of Chicago Press, pp. 1-565.
  15. Beer S. (1991). Diagnosi e progettazione organizzativa. Principi cibernetici. Torino: Isedi. (Tit. orig., Diagnosing the system for organization, John Wiley, 1985), p. 63.
  16. Capra F. (1997). La rete della vita. Una nuova visione della natura e della scienza. Milano: Rizzoli.
  17. Commissione Europea – Directorate-General for Regional and Urban policy (2015).
  18. European Structural and Investment Funds. Guidance for Member States on Article 42(1)(d) CPR– Eligible management costs and fees, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg.
  19. Commissione Europea, Politica di Coesione 2014-2020. Sviluppo Urbano Sostenibile Integrato, marzo 2014.
  20. Commissione Europea (2011). First Commission decisions adopted: a State aid approach for future JESSICA-type measures, Christian Harringa – DG Competition, Unit H2, Warsaw, 27-28 October, 2011.
  21. D’aquino T. (1984). La somma teologica. Testo latino e italiano. Introduzione generale. Collana La somma teologica. ESD-Edizioni Studio Domenicano, pp. 1-430.
  22. Esposito De Falco S., Gatti C. (2012). La Consonanza nel Governo d’impresa: Profili Teorici e Applicazioni. Milano: FrancoAngeli.
  23. Esposito De Falco S., Vagnani G., Simoni M., Ricotta F., Gatti C. (2008). Ambito problematico, profilazione e consonanza: tra concettualizzazione e misurazione. Sinergie, 29: 295-305.
  24. European Investment Bank (2013). Financial Instruments: A Stock-taking Exercise in Preparation for the 2014-20 Programming Period. Final Report, marzo.
  25. European Investment Bank (2010). JESSICA Addressing State aid issues in Andalucia (ES) and the United Kingdom. Frank Lee, Head of Holding Funds and Advisory – Northern Europe, JESSICA & Investment Funds, European Investment Bank, Brussels, 30 novembre 2010.
  26. European PPP Expertise Centre (EPEC) (2014). Blending EU grants with PPPs in the next MFF, CSI-Europe towards 2014-20 Financial Instruments for Cities, European Investment Bank, 30 gennaio 2014.
  27. Fantappié L. (2011). Che cos’è la sintropia. Principi di una teoria unitaria del mondo fisico e biologico e conferenze scelte, Collana Arcobaleno. Di Renzo Editore, pp. 1-296.
  28. Fotino F., Calabrese M. (2017). La programmazione comunitaria per lo sviluppo territoriale in ottica sistemico-vitale. Sinergie, 103.
  29. Fotino F. (2018). Co-creating value in urban public policy context: a different approach, in corso di pubblicazione.
  30. Golinelli G.M. (2005), L’approccio sistemico al governo dell’impresa. L’impresa sistema vitale, seconda ed. Padova: Cedam.
  31. Golinelli G.M. (2002) (a cura di). L’approccio sistemico al governo dell’impresa, Vol. III. Padova: Cedam.
  32. Golinelli G.M., Gatti M. (2000-2001). L’impresa sistema vitale. Il governo dei rapporti inter-sistemici. Symphonya Emerging Issues in Management, 2: 53-81.
  33. Golinelli G.M. (2000). L’approccio sistemico al governo dell’impresa, Vol. I. Padova: Cedam.
  34. Golinelli G.M. (1997). Struttura e governo dell’impresa, Vol II, terza ed. Padova: Cedam.
  35. Interreg IVC – European Union (2014). Linee guida per l’attuazione degli strumenti finanziari. Progetto FIN-EN sharing methodologies on FINancial ENgineering for enterprises, Pubblicato da Finlombarda S.p.A., settembre 2014.
  36. Hansen M.T., Von Oetinger B. (2001). Introducing T-Shaped Managers: Knowledge Management’s Next Generation. Harvard Business Review, 79(3): 106-116.
  37. Huber G.P. (1991). Organizational Learning: The Contributing Processes and the Literatures. Organization Science, 2(1): 88-115, Febbraio.
  38. Kelso S. (1995). Dynamic Patterns. Cambridge: The MIT Press, pp. 1-334.
  39. Kuhn T. (1969). La struttura delle rivoluzioni scientifiche. Come mutano le idee nella scienza. Torino: Einaudi, pp. 1-252.
  40. Macaulay L., Moxham C., Jones B., Miles I. (2010). Innovation and skills. Future Service Science Education. In: Maglio P., Kieliszeski C.A., Spohrer J.C. (Eds). Handbook of Service Science. Service Science: Research and Innovation in the Service Economy.
  41. New York: Springer Science + Business Media, LLC, pp. 717-736.
  42. Maturana H., Varela F. (1992). Macchine ed esseri viventi. L’autopoiesi e l’organizzazione biologica. Roma: Casa Editrice Astrolabio, pp. 1-108.
  43. Peirce Ch. S. (1931-1935). Collected Papers of Ch. S. Peirce 2.228.
  44. Polese F. (2009). Reflection about Value Generation through Networking Culture and Social Relations. Quaderno di Sinergie, 16: 193-215.
  45. Polese F. (2004). L’integrazione sistemica degli aggregati reticolari d’impresa. Padova: Cedam.
  46. Porter M.E., Kramer M.R. (2011). Creating shared value. How to reinvent capitalism – and unleash a wave of innovation and growth. Harvard Business Review, 89: 62-77.
  47. Prahalad C.K., Hamel G. (1990). The Core Competence of the Corporation. Harvard Business Review, 68(3): 79-91.
  48. Rullani E. (2014). Manifattura in transizione. Sinergie, 93: 141-152.
  49. Rullani E. (2013). Territori in transizione: nuove reti e nuove identità per le economie e le società locali. Sinergie, 9: 141-163.
  50. Teece D.G., Pisano P., Shuen A. (1997). Dynamic Capabilities and Strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7): 509-533.
  51. Usai G. (2007). Metodo e contenuti nell’utilizzazione dell’approccio per sistemi nell’economia e gestione delle imprese. Sinergie, 72: 141-160.

Federica Fotino, in "ESPERIENZE D'IMPRESA" 2/2016, pp. 65-97, DOI:10.3280/EI2016-002004


FrancoAngeli is a member of Publishers International Linking Association a not for profit orgasnization wich runs the CrossRef service, enabing links to and from online scholarly content