migration and industrial development: the southern italian experience

Clark University

Migration and Industrial Development: The Southern Italian ExperienceAuthor(s): Allan RodgersSource: Economic Geography, Vol. 46, No. 2 (Apr., 1970), pp. 111-135Published by: Clark UniversityStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/142621 .

Accessed: 09/05/2014 00:36

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Clark University is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Economic Geography.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 169.229.32.137 on Fri, 9 May 2014 00:36:38 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=clark

http://www.jstor.org/stable/142621?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


ECONOMIC GEOGRAPHY VOL. 46 APRIL, 1970 No. 2

MIGRATION AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT:

THE SOUTHERN ITALIAN EXPERIENCE*

ALLAN RODGERS

The Pennsylvania State University

The process of economic growth in underdeveloped regions and the conse- quences of that growth are still imper- fectly understood. This is especially true of our comprehension of the evolving spatial patterns of industrial development in such areas. In particular, despite a vast scholarly literature concerned with problems of economic development, the relationships between industrial growth and migration in the developing areas have received remarkably limited atten- tion.1 Since population movements in these regions have normally taken the form of rural-urban flows, demographic studies in underdeveloped areas have focused mainly on those push elements in the rural landscape which have stimulated outflows to the cities and on the problems of adjustment of migrants to their new urban environments. There remains a need for further empirical research on the relationships between migration and industrialization in developing areas leading to the formulation of descriptive, and perhaps, predictive models which may help to account for such associations.

*This paper is one of several studies resulting from field work in Italy undertaken with the aid of the Guggenheim Foundation, the Italian Fulbright Commission, and the Central Fund for Research of the Pennsylvania State University and the Cassa per il Mezzogiorno.

1 These include studies by Herrick [8], Hutchinson [9], Prothero [21], and Philips [18].

This paper is concerned with the relationships between migration in southern Italy and the evolving pattern of industrialization and economic development in that region. At the outset, it must be stressed that it would be simplistic and perhaps naive to assume that industrialization is the only "pull" element influ- encing the migration process, but, as will be demonstrated in the course of this analysis, in this instance it is possibly the most important single force. The Mezzogiorno, or southern Italy, has been chosen for study because it is a classic area of subnational underdevelopment, one with a long development experience involving the expenditure, since 1950, of over three and a half billion dollars by the state in an attempt to narrow the huge economic and social gap between the Mezzogiorno and the far more pros- perous North.2 A rapidly increasing

2 The most recent report of the Cassa claims that investments through 1967 totaled over ten billion dollars; however, these include loan funds plus matching contributions on the part of those who have secured loans, while the figure of three and a half billion dollars comprises only the direct expenses for infrastruc- ture facilities, capital subsidies, interest on loans as well as investments in the building of schools, hospitals, etc. An additional twelve billion dollars was disbursed in the South as part of normal governmental expenditures, but the Mezzogiorno's proportion of these funds was less than its share of the Italian population (36.4 per cent versus 38.7 per cent of the population in 1959).



ECONOMIC GEOGRAPHY

share of these funds, currently over thirty-eight per cent of the direct subsidies, has been utilized to subsidize industrial growth.3 If one uses the new definition of the Cassa per il Mezzogi- orno, the chief governmental agency concerned with the development of the South, of "realized and stimulated investments," sixty-five per cent of these investments were devoted to the industrial sector in 1967. Yet despite these subsidies, there has been a net out-migration since 1951 of well over two and a half million persons from the South, or roughly one-seventh of the population of the region at the start of the development program. These outflows, which have been termed "the hemorrhage of the Mezzogiorno" by the southern press, have fluctuated drastically over the years mainly in response to cyclical variations in the levels of economic activity in western Europe and northern Italy. More important for the purpose of this study have been spatial variations in the volume of out-migration within southern Italy, and it is the initial hypothesis of this study that these regional differences are mainly a reflection of changing employment levels resulting from government stimulation and subsidization of industrial investment in the South. This paper is one of a series of studies of the impact of the government-sponsored development effort on the changing spatial economy of the Mezzogiorno [22, 23, 24]. A review of socio-economic conditions in the South at the beginning of the investment program and their comparison with the situation in northern Italy in 1951-52, will set the stage for this analysis.

THE SOCIO-ECONOMIC STRUCTURE OF THE MEZZOGIORNO ON THE EVE

OF THE DEVELOPMENT EFFORT

Italy's per capita gross national prod- uct in 1951 was less than one-sixth that

3 Unless otherwise noted the term "industry" as used in this study is synonymous with manufacturing.

of the United States and roughly one- third of the average for the United King- dom.4 These differentials, however, mask stark internal contrasts between the depressed areas of the Mezzogiorno, or southern Italy, which are delimited on Figure 1,5 and the North. Thus income levels in 1951 [26], demonstrated on Figure 2, for the thriving industrial centers of the Po Valley, even prior to the so-called miracle years of the fifties, were not strikingly below those of western Europe, while average per capita incomes in the South were one-sixth those of Sweden or Switzerland. To cite ex- treme disparities, income levels in the province of Milan were over five times those of the poorest southern province (Agrigento); and Naples, on a relative basis one of the richest areas in the South, had a per capita income that was about two-fifths that of Milan.6

Furthermore, even these data under- state interregional income differentials because of marked urban-rural contrasts within the southern provinces as well as those between the upper and lower classes of the cities themselves. The great majority existed at subsistence levels, some with incomes and living conditions resembling those commonly described in the truly underdeveloped world, while a small minority lived "apart" in relative luxury.

4Computed from data published by the United Nations [31, pp. 410-11].

5 The highest order administrative division in Italy is the "regione"; descending the scale, the next level is the "provincia" and finally the "comune." Communes are the lowest order administrative unit in Italy. Population numbers are available for subdivisions of these units at the times of the decennial censuses. Communes contain geographic "frazione," which comprise inhabited centers and nuclei and houses on the peripheries of these nodes; as well as dispersed houses or farmsteads. Note that parts of the province of Rome, the communes of Rieti and Ascoli Piceno and several islands, the most prominent of which is Elba, are all included within the administrative limits of the Mezzo- giorno.

6These data for Naples are probably over- estimates; for an evaluation see Rodgers [24, p. 33].

112



MIGRATION AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT: SOUTHERN ITALY

FIG. 1. Regional and provincial divisions in southern Italy.

Some comparative indicators of the relative socio-economic positions of the South and North in 1952 are presented in Table 1. While such statistics cover only a limited sample of the available data for the period, they are illustrative of a broad range of socio-economic contrasts between the two regions.

Demographic studies of southern Italy invariably emphasize its high population densities (averaging nearly six hundred inhabitants per square mile), particularly when viewed on provincial or prefer- ably commune levels. However, simple arithmetic densities in the Mezzogiorno are not markedly different from those of other segments of Mediterranean Europe and when considered on a micro-level are far lower than those of many areas of northern Europe. Unlike the latter regions well over half of the population

of the Mezzogiorno in 1951 was directly dependent on agriculture, compared with one-third in the North, and in contrast to far lower proportions in most of northern Europe. Thus the density of farm population per unit of area was relatively high for a major segment of a "developed nation." It should also be stressed that given the poor quality of the arable land in the South, with its problems of steep slopes, thin and infertile soils, coupled with low and variable precipita- tion, the pressure of farm population on the land has been exceedingly high. If the inefficient economic, political and social structure of southern agriculture is also taken into consideration, one can readily understand the push forces that have helped to produce the continuing depopulation of the countryside. These pressures have intensified over the past

113



ECONOMIC GEOGRAPHY

FIG. 2. Per capita income in Italy, by province for 1951.

century as the population of the region has doubled, despite a massive exodus abroad and modest flows to the North, a flight which was only temporarily reduced during the Fascist era. By 1952, the South with less than thirty-nine per cent of Italy's population accounted for half of the nation's births, and as a result of declining mortality levels, sixty-eight per cent of the natural increase in her

population. There was still a striking economic and social gap between the "Two Italies" and it was to this problem that the development program was directed.

THE INDUSTRIAL PATTERN IN 1951

It must be noted at the outset, that prior to the development effort, manu-

114




TABLE 1

SOCIO-ECONOMIC INDICATORS, BY PROVINCE AND

REGION IN ITALY IN 1952

Indicator

Net annual income

(thousands of lire) per

inhabitant*

Per cent illiterate or lacking elementary

certificate **

Bank and postal savings

(thousands of lire) per

inhabitant*

Electrical energy consumption, for illumination, KWH per inhabitant **

Radio licenses per thousand

inhabitants ***

Index of "motorization" per thousand

inhabitants***

Milan

350.2

12.6

23.6

111.1

190.9

172.8

N.Italy

201.7

20.9

13.6

56.3

113.0

103.0

Naples

141.7

43.0

8.4

49.8

83.6

36.9

Agrigento

68.1

53.4

3.1

14.4

33.3

12.9

Sources: *Tagliacarne [26, pp. 82-84, 112-14].

**Istituto Centrale di Statistica [14]. These percentages refer to the share of the population over five years of age in November of 1951.

***Tagliacarne [25, pp. 174-77]. The index of motorization refers to personal motor

facturing in the sense of large scale factory-type industry was of minimal importance in the Mezzogiorno, and those industries which had developed in the region were mainly of minute scale, with limited capital investments and low productivity.

Figure 3 illustrates the distribution pattern of manufacturing employment, by commune, in Italy in 1951 when the South had less than six hundred thousand industrial workers, about one-fifth of the northern total.7 Note the high degree of spatial concentration of manufacturing employment; Naples was the only notable southern industrial center,

7 The employment data cited here and por- trayed in Figure 3 were derived from the Istituto Centrale di Statistica [12].

vehicles calculated on the following base: motor scooter = 1, motorcycle == 1.7, and car = 3.2. In succeeding articles covering calculations for more recent years, these equivalents were changed by Professor Tagliacarne. The exchange rate at the time varied between 620 and 625 lire to the dollar.

as of that date, with roughly sixty-two thousand persons engaged in manufacturing (without its industrial suburbs). Although this node far outstripped that of any competing area in the Mezzo- giorno, it was far less important than the

giants of northern Italy, for its employment in manufacturing was only about one-third that of Turin and one-fifth that of Milan. Aside from Naples, the only nodes of even modest proportions were Palermo and Catania in Sicily, and Bari in Puglia.

THE INDUSTRIAL PROGRAM AND

ITS IMPACT

It was from this base that the development program proceeded. Space limita-

115

S.Italy

104.4

48.5

4.9

23.5

52.1

29.3



ECONOMIC GEOGRAPHY

FIG. 3. Employees in manufacturing in southern Italy, by commune in 1951.

tions preclude a detailed analysis and critique of this effort, but its most important feature has been a program of long term, low interest loans and more recently direct subsidies for working capital and equipment. The loan program has now been underway for over fifteen years, yet the disbursement policy, in practice, was one of unplanned growth which relied heavily on the market mechanism.8 In effect, there was no organized locational design until 1959, and in an operational sense, the pattern still does not reflect the new policy.

Figure 4 illustrates the distribution of loans on a provincial basis. Since there is a lag of possibly two to three years from the time of granting a loan to its

See in particular the comments of Chenery [2].

implementation in a functioning plant, data through 1964 were used in this analysis.9 It must be emphasized that the correlation between the volume of loans and expanding employment is dependent on the nature of the facilities supported. Thus centers with highly capital intensive industries as for example Taranto with its huge new steel mill, and Brindisi, Siracusa and Caltanisetta (Gela) with their massive petro-chemical complexes are all notable on this map, yet the number of workers sup-

9 Loans calculated from data published in Comitato dei Ministri per il Mezzogiorno [3, pp. 471-87]. It should be noted, however, that there have been some shifts in the relative proportion of funds disbursed to the various regions of the South since 1964; in particular, there has been a significant increase in loans allocated for the construction of news plants in Sardinia.

116




FIG. 4. Manufacturing loans (all institutes) in southern Italy from 1953 through 1964 (in per cent).

ported by these plants is relatively low compared with the total investment. In contrast, centers like Naples, Bari, Ca- tania, and Palermo have gained new industries that are, on a comparative basis, labor intensive. The locational pattern, though relatively concentrated, is far more diffuse than that a few years earlier when Sicily and Campania were of almost overwhelming importance.

What then have been the effects of these investments on the industrial pattern of the Mezzogiorno? Unfortunately, no industrial census has been taken in Italy since 1961, and that enumeration probably reflected only the impact of loans granted through 1959, before the major upsurge in their number and volume had taken place (seven-eighths of the loans were granted from 1960

through 1967). There are, however, materials which can be used to approximate the provincial changes of employment since 1961, and these have permitted estimates of employment in manufacturing for 1966 on a comparable basis with the published data of the 1951 Census.10

1( These include manufacturing employment data on a regional basis, covering the years 1951 through 1966 which were recently published by the Istituto Centrale di Statistica, (ISTAT), [10, 13], and unpublished statistics, on a provincial level, collected by INAM and INAIL, the two national insurance agencies covering employed workers in manufacturing. These sources coupled with data furnished by government agencies like ISTAT and the Minis- try of Labor as well as materials supplied by IRI and ENI, which are semi-state holding com- panies in the manufacturing sector, were used in the estimation of the 1966 provincial employment levels.

117



ECONOMIC GEOGRAPHY

FIG. 5. Estimated changes in manufacturing employment between 1951 and 1966.

The changes during the fifteen-year interval are recorded on Figures 5 and 6. It must be stressed that these estimates are most reliable for the Mezzo- giorno as a whole, less so on a regional base and only approximate on the provincial scale. During the intervening period, the numbers of permanent workers employed in manufacturing in Italy increased by more than eleven hundred thousand or a growth of ap- proximately twenty-eight per cent. In contrast, employment in the Mezzo- giorno grew about twenty per cent or two-thirds the level of the North. In all, roughly one hundred and forty thousand workers were added to those engaged in manufacturing in southern Italy. Thus, despite heavy subsidies, the gap had apparently widened.

As was also evident from the loan data, there was considerable regional diversity in the changing industrial location pattern. Note the striking concentration of growth along the northern confines of the development region as well as in the belt extending from Rome through Salerno. Expansion also was evident in Puglia and southeastern Sicily. On the other hand, there were a number of provinces where industrial employment had declined, particularly the zone following the highland spine from Campobasso through Reggio di Calabria. Here there had been a drastic decrease in the number of handicraft and artisan workshops, many of which had failed as a result of depopulation of the smaller centers, and competition of factory goods both from the North and

118




FIG. 6. Estimated relative changes in manufacturing employment between 1951 and 1966.

from the newer modern establishments that had developed within the Mezzo- giorno itself.

MIGRATION PATTERNS SINCE 1951

It is apparent that there have been significant advances in industrial employment in the South since the beginning of the development program. Neverthe- less, such improvements have not reduced the gap between the "Two Italics" nor has the manpower drain been checked, for over two and a half million southerners emigrated or moved to the North between 1952 and 1968. The question remains, however, whether the investment effort, which has been strikingly differentiated in a spatial sense both in intensity and effectiveness, has resulted in a slow "clotting" of the out-

flow or has conceivably produced a reversal of migration flows towards the new southern growth poles.

Figure 7 demonstrates the provincial changes in population from 1951 through 1968. Here the results of the out-migration are readily evident. Note that with the exception of Pescara there was a decline of population in a belt extending from L'Aquila through Avellino. Losses were also recorded in southern Calabria and central Sicily. In contrast, the areas that gained population were mainly confined to those which had received the heaviest industrial subsidies, i.e., Latina through Naples and Salerno, Puglia, Palermo, southeastern Sicily and two of the three provinces in Sardinia.

Perhaps more important to this study has been the increased urbanization of

119



ECONOMIC GEOGRAPHY

300,000

^ &^ - A ~ 200,000

100,000 50,000

10,000

+ < 10,000

FrIG. 7. Absolute changes in

the South. The depopulation of the countryside had resulted in two migration streams: one northward and abroad; and the other, paralleling the experience of other developing areas, to the southern cities. While the population of the Mez- zogiorno as a whole grew by almost one- tenth during the period from 1951 through 1968, the growth in the provincial capitals coupled with that of all communes with over fifty thousand inhabitants was almost one-third. In contrast, the population of the smaller urban centers and the rural areas was essen- tially stable (an increase of one and a half per cent). Although there were regional variations, it is significant that increases were registered in every southern province. It is also noteworthy that there were increases in several urban

provincial population, 1951-1968.

centers (most notably in Calabria) that had not benefited from the development effort. Here there had been a growth in the population of administrative centers and market towns, despite the absence of expanding employment opportunities. This may reflect a two-stage migration process with an ultimate shift to the North or abroad, once rural ties are severed.

Turning to the question of migration patterns, the major concern of this paper, there are two major data sources available, both limited in their geographical detail and reliability. The first con- sists of anagraphical records covering inter-commune movements, and the second comprises the reports of the various population censuses, particularly those comparing place of birth with

120




place of residence as of the various enumeration dates. Because of internal migration restrictions, which remained in effect until modified in 1961, migration data through that year are underesti- mates of actual movements. The exact dimensions of such illegal flows are un- known., However, the underreporting of the earlier years was balanced by a paper inflation of such movements from 1961 through 1963, when those who had moved unofficially proceeded to take advantage of the relaxed legislation.

Because of space limitations the 1961 Census will not be discussed in detail. What should be noted here is that with the exception of rural-urban movements, normally in the same province, internal migration within the Mezzogiorno had not been a major phenomenon as of that date. Thus, as of the 1961 enumeration, seventy-eight per cent of the resident population of the South were born in the same commune, ninety-one per cent in the same province and ninety-five per cent in the same region [15]. Of course, there were some important spatial variations in these patterns. Southern Lazio stands out in a relative sense as a region with a larger than average flow from other parts of southern Italy. An exam- ination of provincial data shows clearly that movements normally took place between adjacent provinces. The only centers with even modest flows from distant provinces were Latina and to a lesser degree Naples and Palermo.

Figure 8 compares the year to year variations in net out-migration levels in the Mezzogiorno from 1952 through 1968 with variations in industrial investment in northwestern Italy (the so-called "industrial triangle") for the same years. The migration data are derived from inter-commune transfer of residence re-

11 It is possible to estimate the size of these illegal flows, see Predetti [20, p. 30]. Professor Predetti, an Italian demographer, has made such a calculation for the years 1952 through 1960, and his estimate of 148,000 unofficial migrants, though surprisingly low, is the best that is available.

ports for these years. Viewed on a macro-scale, these fluctuations appear to be associated mainly with changing economic conditions outside the South rather than with variations in intensity of push forces within the region. Therefore, the significant increase in net out-migration levels in the late fifties coincides with a rapid improvement in employment opportunities in the North. How- ever, it is also a reflection of a general relaxation in enforcement of the legal bars on internal migration. Note, in particular, the sharp upsurge in 1962 reflecting major modifications in that legislation. From that point the net out- flow to the North and abroad decreased sharply as a result of the economic re- cession in northern Italy, and declining employment opportunities in western Europe, particularly in Germany. Finally, the notable increase in the final two years of the tabulation appears to rep- resent again an improvement in economic conditions outside of the Mezzo- giorno. Given these year to year fluctuations in the volume of net out-migration, and considering the data problems prior to 1963 previously discussed, it was felt that a summation by province for the years since 1952 should provide a reasonably accurate reflection of long term migration trends since the start of the development effort.

300 1200

NET OUTMIGRATION . 250- (SOUTHERN ITALY) \ 1000

200 - o \ /

E 0

0 150 , / ... '' .. . \ i - 600 )oo

.------ INDUSTRIAL INVESTMENT : ::3 . .. (NORTHWESTERN ITALY)

50 - - 200

O . I . . . . . . . . I 0 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68

years

FIG. 8. Comparison of net out-migration from the Mezzogiorno and investment in the Northwest, 1952-1968 (lire at constant 1963 prices).

121



ECONOMIC GEOGRAPHY

FIG. 9. Net out-migration, 1952-1968, as a per cent of the 1960 population.

Figure 9 presents the net out-migration statistics (shown as positive values) by province from 1952 through 1968, which were summed and converted into net migration ratios using as a base the population in 1960. The map is an obvious reflection of spatial variations in population pressure and economic differentials within the Mezzogiorno. Clearly, there is a belt of heavy out- migration which follows the highland spine from the northern tier of provinces (Teramo, L'Aquila, and Frosinone) through Reggio di Calabria in the South. Note, too, the very high values in central and southwestern Sicily. In contrast, net out-migration from Palermo and southeastern Sicily has been quite low. This has also been the case on the western coast of the mainland in the zone stretch- ing from Latina through Salerno and

also in the northeast in the provinces of Pescara and Chieti. Pugila and northern Sardinia occupy an intermediate position on this scale.

MIGRATION AND INDUSTRIAL CHANGE

If one compares Figure 9 (net out- migration) with Figure 6 (relative changes in manufacturing employment) the patterns on these maps seem to support the initial hypothesis of this study. There appears to be a visual correlation between the areas of low out- migration and those areas that had experienced significant increases in manufacturing employment. To test this hypothesis on a more rigorous basis, a simple regression (Pearson) was computed using net out-migration (positive values) as the dependent variable, and

122




relative shifts in manufacturing employment as the independent element. This computation resulted in a negative relationship with a coefficient of determination of 0.39, indicating that two-fifths of the spatial variation in provincial out- migration patterns was inversely associated with growth in manufacturing employment. That is, increases in industrial opportunities have helped to check potential outmovements. Clearly, however, as anticipated in the preface to this paper, the growth of manufacturing could not be identified as the sole factor affecting migration behavior.

Given the stress on industrial investments in the development program, the lack of a stronger relationship cannot readily be explained. The most important reason appears to be the degree of aggregation of both data sets, for they obviously conceal rural-urban differentials. Migration data do exist on a commune level for the study period, and the statistics for the capitals differ strikingly from those on provincial levels. Thus the overall net out-migration ratio for southern Italy from 1952 through 1968 was -13.1, while a similarly computed measure for the provincial capitals alone was -1.0. Fourteen capitals (out of thirty-four) had significant in-migration values, and these were mainly administrative centers of provinces that had received major support for industrial development. Naples and Trapani exhibited the reverse relationship with greater out-migration ratios for the capitals than was true for the provinces as a whole. These anomalies will be discussed in the final stages of our analysis. Un- fortunately, similar data covering changes in manufacturing employment for the same years at this scale are not available, so that no statistical tests were feasible. But, statistics for the 1951-1961 period and partial information on the exact location of new manufacturing enter- prises since that date make it clear that the correlation would be much higher if it could be computed at that geographic scale.

As a further step in this analysis the residuals from this simple regression were calculated and plotted using as limits the standard error of estimate of 0.78, see Figure 10. Note that, despite the reservations discussed above, with some exceptions the major areas which had benefited from the industrial loans and rising employment levels appear as provinces with less than one standard error. If one examines those areas with larger deviations, strong positive residuals are apparent in the provinces of L'Aquila and Teramo in the northern tier, Campobasso and Salerno also on the mainland, plus Enna and Caltanisetta in Sicily. All these then had heavier than anticipated out-migration as predicted from the manufacturing data. In contrast, the provinces of Pescara, Naples, and Lecce on the mainland, Messina, Catania and Ragusa in Sicily, and Sassari in Sardinia all had significant negative residuals, implying lower than anticipated out-migration when this single predictor variable was used.

MIGRATION AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC

HEALTH

The manufacturing estimates may, as noted earlier, be incorrect, and this could be the case for Catania and Naples, whose growth may be understated; but more logically, as has been noted fre- quently in the literature, no one element can be isolated as the sole stimulant to economic growth and in turn act as the single restrainer of out-migration. Thom- as [29, pp. 27-30, 39-41] has noted that one of the goals of residual measurement and analysis is its use in the identifica- tion of new independent variables. In the course of the analysis, tests were also conducted to measure the relationships between out-migration and other simple economic variables such as changes in unemployment levels, growth of employment in non-agricultural activities (other than manufacturing), road distance to Rome, and the increase in governmental expenditures on provincial

123



ECONOMIC GEOGRAPHY

1.56 30 . 1,17 ,,/2 - 0.78 1 -0.57 ':7.

0.39 2 . . 1

0__ STANDARD ERROR 0 FoA OF ESTIMATE - ;

-0_39 , 0 100

-0.78 . ..- t r'9g f MILES

-1,17 1/2

-1.56 2

FIG. 10. Residuals from simple regression of net out-migration, 1952-1968, and relative

changes in manufacturing employment, 1951-1966.

levels; all of these produced weaker results. An obvious addition to the list is income change, a complex variable which clearly incorporates the impact of many elements in the development effort. There had been significant increases in total and per capita income levels during the intervening era. Total income (at constant 1963 prices) more than doubled in the South, and average per capita income increased from three hundred and fifty-eight to six hundred and sixty-six dollars per year [28, pp. 375-687; 11].

Figure 11 demonstrates the provincial changes in per capita income levels from 1951 to 1966. Clearly, the industrial investments and changes in manufacturing employment were reflected in regional

variations in income growth, but it is

again evident that the relationship was not perfect. As an experiment, a stepwise multiple regression, with parsimony option, was computed incorporating net income change as a second independent variable, and the "explanation" increased to a coefficient of multiple determination (R2) of 0.51. As expected, income change was the first entry. Clearly, however, the two variables are not independent. They are both facets of economic change in the Mezzogiorno.

To measure more effectively socio-economic levels and change in the South and to minimize problems of spatial auto- correlation, fifteen variables reflecting absolute levels or relative change (using standardized scores) were computed for

124




FIG. 11. Absolute changes in per capita income, 1951-1966.

each of the southern provinces.12 These variables, which are shown in Table 2, were then subjected to a principal components analysis. The first component, which accounted for thirty-seven per cent of the variance, was clearly a factor reflecting socio-economic health. All variables with high loadings (over 0.5) are shown by double asterisks in Table 2. Note the expected negative loading of illiteracy indicative of poor socio- economic health. While an additional thirty per cent of the variance was ac-

12 The data sources for most of these variables were the statistical yearbooks of the Isti- tuto Centrale di Statistica and the 1961 Census. Income data for 1966 were derived from Tagliacarne [28] and those for 1961 were ob- tained from Tagliacarne [27, pp. 80-83]. Dis- tances were calculated from detailed road maps with modifications for Sardinia and Sicily.

counted for by the next two components, there seemed to be no patterns either in terms of variable loadings or provincial scores which made these seem relevant to our analysis.13

The provincial scores on principal component 1, which is termed here "socio-economic health," are mapped in terms of standard deviations on Figure 12. The resemblances between this map and those of manufacturing or income

change (Figures 6 and 11) are apparent, but the new patterns are more meaning- ful. Note the strikingly high scores for

13 The procedure for using a principal component as a variable in multiple regression was suggested by Professor Barry Riddell of the Department of Geography, Queens Uni- versity. Varimax rotation was also used with no material improvement in the results.

125



ECONOMIC GEOGRAPHY

Latina, Naples, Pescara, Siracusa, Paler- mo and Bari. In contrast depressed conditions are apparent in the highland belt from Campobasso through Reggio di Calabria, as well as for Enna in central Sicily and Nuoro in eastern Sardinia.

A simple regression was calculated between net out-migration ratios (dependent variable) and the scores on the first component with a marked improvement in the level of explanation, for the r2 was now 0.65; thus roughly two-thirds of the variance in migration levels was accounted for by spatial differences in socio-economic health within southern Italy. Figure 13 shows the residuals from this regression. Clearly, given a standard error of estimate of 0.60, there were still a number of provinces for which socio- economic variations were insufficient reasons to explain out-migration differentials. Thus, there were high positive residuals where provinces had greater than predicted out-migration, as for example L'Aquila, Campobasso, Foggia, Bari, Reggio, Enna, Caltanisetta, and Pa- lermo, and provinces with significant negative residuals where provinces had less than predicted out-migration such as Nuoro, Messina, Cosenza, Matera, Lecce, and Caserta.

MIGRANT STOCK AS AN ADDITIONAL

INDEPENDENT VARIABLE

The literature abounds with references to the role of non-economic variables in migration flows, and clearly our analysis is distorted because too great an empha- sis has been attached to the role of spatial variations in socio-economic factors within the Mezzogiorno and out- migration. A recent article by Green- wood [6] offers a method for evaluating the role of migrant stock, an element that has not been previously considered in this analysis. Migrant stock can be viewed in the broadest possible sense as providing information flows on the relative attractiveness, in a socio-economic sense, of destination regions; more con- cretely it means job offers, temporary

TABLE 2

LOADINGS ON COMPONENT 1 OF PRINCIPAL COM-

PONENTS ANALYSIS, BY PROVINCE, FOR SOUTHERN ITALY

Variable

Change Indicators ** 1. relative changes in manufacturing

employment (1951-1966) 2. relative changes in unemployment

levels (1952-1965) 3. relative changes in the proportion of

population resident in all provincial capitals and communes with over 50,000 inhabitants (1951-1968)

*t 4. relative changes in net income (1951-1966)

Position Indicators

** 5. manufacturing employment in relation to population (1961)

6. density of agricultural population per square kilometer of cultivated land (1961)

** 7. per capita income (1961) 8. agricultural income in relation to

population engaged in agriculture (1961)

** 9. hospital beds in relation to population (1964)

**10. teachers (holding certificates) in middle schools in relation to population (1964)

**11. new residential construction (1963- 1965) in relation to population (1964)

**12. proportion of population in communes with over 20,000 inhabitants (1968)

**13. proportion of illiterates in population over five years of age (1961)

*914. motorization index (1966)

15. road distance to Rome

Loading*

0.748

0.191

0.160

0.581

0.821

0.222

0.729

0.379

0.628

0.637

0.804

0.730

-0.634

0.895

-0.065

*The eigenvalue was 5.54, so that component 1 accounted for thirty-seven per cent of the variance.

*Variables with loadings over 0.5.

housing, and moving expenses, received through the aid of former migrants. Greenwood uses as his surrogate for this type of information flow and aid the number of persons born in one state and living in another in 1950. This was then utilized as one of the explanatory variables to account for interstate mobility between 1955 and 1960. The inclusion of this migrant stock factor increased markedly the proportion of explained variance (R2) in his multiple regression model.

126




FIG. 12. Principal component 1 (socio-economic health) for southern Italy.

Given the evidence in the literature of the importance of this phenomenon and its influence on migration flows, it was decided to test this hypothesis in the southern Italian context. As a first stage, the place of residence versus place of birth data from the 1951 Census of Population were used to compute the net out-migration for all southern provinces through that year. The result was surprising. The relationship between the net out-migration (1952-1968) ratios (dependent variable) and the earlier flow was negative (the simple correlation coefficient was -0.40). An examina- tion of the provincial scores clearly con- firmed the spatial differences between the two patterns. It should be recalled that the outflows from the southern provinces prior to 1951 did not reflect the effects of the development program in

the Mezzogiorno, and they preceded the boom in northern Italy and western Europe. On this basis, it was decided to include as a new-migrant-stock variable similar place of birthplace compared to place of residence data from the 1961 Census. The resulting relationship was relatively weak, but it was now positive (r = 0.44). It could logically be argued that the new data involved flows dupli- cating, in part, those in the dependent variable. However, the 1961 statistics included all flows prior to that date, and secondly, the fifties was a period of major outflows northward with southerners taking advantage of rapidly expanding job opportunities, particularly in the industrial triangle of the North- west. These former migrants presumably were the key members in the "migrant stock" who provided the information and

127



ECONOMIC GEOGRAPHY

-0.30 --/2 0. 100

-0.60 : I -*:= -0.20.. 'MILES

-0.90 ?. . 1/2

-1 20 X- 2

FIG. 13. Residuals from simple regression of net out-migration, 1952-1968, and principal component 1 (socio-economic health).

help for those that followed. The same pattern was probably also applicable in the cases of foreign destinations such as West Germany and Switzerland. It should also be noted that when net out- migration from 1961 to 1968 was compared with the flows through 1961, the relationship was also positive with a simple correlation of 0.37, not significantly different from the relationship noted above.

On this basis, a stepwise multiple regression was calculated using the net

migration ratios for 1952-1968 as the

dependent variable (Y), while migration through 1961 (X1) and principal com-

ponent 1 (X2) served as the independent factors. In our computations, the ex-

pression was Y = 0.377X1 + 0.775X2. The coefficient of multiple determination

(R2) had now increased to 0.79 (from 0.65 with principal component 1 alone). Almost four-fifths of the variance in out-

migration levels from 1952 through 1968 was "accounted for" by these two factors. Thus spatial variation in socio-economic health in the South appear to be roughly twice as important as the migrant stock measure, but the latter added significantly to our explanation. It should, however, be stressed that migrant stock as measured in this analysis, is not in-

dependent of the variables in principal component 1, so that problems of mul- ticollinearity, which are not resolved by the stepwise regression format, may weaken our "explanations."

RESIDUAL ANALYSIS

Using the procedure outlined earlier,

128




residuals from this regression were calculated based on the standard error of estimate (0.46) and mapped on Figure 14. While the addition of the new variable had reduced the unexplained variance, more than one-third of the southern Italian provinces had positive or negative residuals that were higher than one standard error. Given the large number of anomalous provinces with relatively high residual values, the interpretation of these deviations from predicted values is a logical culmination of this analysis. It should be stressed at the outset that these judgments are largely qualitative and intuitive; defini- tive answers would require intensive field investigation.

Table 3 shows detailed migration data (1955-1965) for those provinces with high residuals.14 Six provinces had greater than predicted out-migration levels: Campobasso, Naples and Bari on the mainland; and Trapani, Palermo and Enna in Sicily. In the cases of Trapani and Enna, the answer appears to be not only the sheer poverty of these provinces, for there are others as depressed, but the proximity of centers of relatively rapid socio-economic development such as Palermo in the case of Trapani, and Catania for Enna. The attraction of these large cities, illusory though it may be, appears to offer a partial answer. In the instance of Trapani, the exodus resulting from recent earthquakes cannot be ig- nored. Note in Table 3 that roughly eighteen per cent of the out-migration from Trapani went to Sicilian destinations, and roughly half of that was des- tined for Palermo. Similarly, one-fourth of the migrants from Enna moved to Catania. The case of Campobasso cannot be readily explained. Even before 1951, it had been a major area of exodus to the North, and that long tradition of out-migration with a general hopeless-

14 These are necessarily summary materials, but an inter-provincial matrix can be readily constructed from statistics in the demographic yearbooks, and these details are used in the subsequent analysis.

ness on the part of the rural population, coupled with the lack of any reasonably close attractive urban center within the Mezzogiorno!, may provide partial explanations. Palermo is, perhaps, less puzzling; the "explanation" of its out- migiation was reduced by inclusion of the migrant stock variable (as was true in the case of Trapani), but Palermo is a major center of attraction for all of Sicily, particularly the western part of the island. This is possibly a case of two- stage migration. Either there were initial movements to this key transport node prior to the ultimate jump northward, or as has been true in internal migration elsewhere,15 the flows from the countryside to nearby towns were paralleled by the often greater out-migration of young adults from these towns to larger, more rapidly developing urban centers in other parts of the nation or abroad. The case of Naples is presumably similar to that of Palermo. First, it must be recalled from Figure 9 that this area had one of the lowest net out-migration ratios of all of the provinces of the South, so that the high residual is a relative measure. The essential argument is that given the comparative improvement in Naples' economic health, one would have expected some in-migration. It should also be recalled that the city of Naples was unusual in that it had a higher out- migration ratio than the province as a whole; this is further indication of Naples' role as a funnel for migration to the North and abroad. Bari might appear to be similar to Palermo and Naples, but judging from Table 3, that province has not been an unusually large center of inbound movements from other provinces in Puglia. One can only speculate that despite relatively rapid industrialization and socio-economic development, unemployment levels have encouraged greater than anticipated out-migration. It is also true that in such a metropolis, there is a far greater awareness of ex-

15 Note especially the comments of Torsten Higerstrand on Ravenstein's second "law of migration," [7, p. 111].

129



ECONOMIC GEOGRAPHY

FIG. 14. Residuals from multiple regression of net out-migration, 1952-1968, and principal component 1 and out-migration through 1961.

ternal economic opportunities than is the case in the impoverished Appenines.

Turning to the areas with lower than predicted out-migration, seven provinces fit this category: Frosinone, Pescara, Matera, and Brindisi on the mainland; Catania in Sicily; and Sassari and Nuoro in Sardinia. The case of Frosinone is another example of a shift in residual values with the addition of the migrant stock variable (from +0.37 to -0.70). The answer for the lower than anticipated outflows appears to be proximity to the capital. An unusually large share of those who left during the study period moved to Rome (forty per cent). This movement appears to be complemented by heavy commuting, via the new Rome- Naples autostrada, to jobs in the metropolis as well as in the adjoining province

of Latina. There is considerable evidence that this movement will taper off with new industrial development currently in

progress [17, pp. 19-41]. Because of their proximity to Rome both Latina and Frosinone have profited from government subsidized industrial investments.

The same argument to hold true for Matera, which is close enough to the rapidly developing provinces of Puglia, particularly Taranto, to permit postpone- ment of a permanent shift of residence by long distance commuting. Neverthe- less, one-fifth of this province's migrants, from 1955 to 1965, did move to Puglia. It is also possible that the estimated increase in manufacturing employment was an understatement; so that a growth in job opportunities within the province of Matera itself may help to explain this

130



TABLE 3

MIGRATION STATISTICS FOR THE MEZZOGIORNO, BASED

ON TRANSFER OF RESIDENCE REPORTS FOR THE YEARS

1955-1965* (in thousands)

4 Out-Migration In-Migration Net Migration

Same Same Other N. and Same Same Other N. and Same Other N. and Province Region S.Italy Foreign Total Province Region S.Italy Foreign Total Region S.Italy Foreign Total

Provinces with High Positive Residuals or Greater than Predicted Out-Migration**

Campobasso 46.1 3.9 15.1 77.2 142.3 46.1 5.8 14.9 21.2 88.0 +1.9 -0.2 -56.0 -54.3

Napoli 330.2 76.1 57.2 140.1 603.6 330.2 91.4 56.8 97.3 569.7 +15.3 -6.4 -42.8 -33.9 Bari 112.9 38.9 42.3 177.9 372.0 112.9 35.6 39.3 90.9 287.7 -3.3 -3.0 -87.0 -93.3 Trapani 50.8 23.8 5.1 54.3 134.0 50.8 23.2 6.0 22.9 102.9 -0.6 -10.9 -31.4 -31.1 Palermo 130.1 58.8 17.3 122.5 328.7 130.1 62.5 18.5 54.0 265.1 +3.7 +1.2 -68.5 -63.6 Enna 17.3 39.9 1.7 35.9 94.8 17.3 26.3 0.9 12.7 57.2 -13.6 -0.8 -23.2 -37.6

Provinces with High Negative Residuals or Less than Predicted Out-Migration*

Frosinone 45.1 7.8 14.4 97.4 164.7 45.1 5.5 17.5 34.5 102.6 -2.3 +3.1 -62.9 -62.1 Pescara 43.3 15.8 5.1 34.5 98.7 43.3 24.3 5.1 21.8 94.5 +8.5 - -12.7 -4.2 Brindisi 29.8 25.9 6.5 32.6 94.8 29.8 25.6 8.8 15.9 80.1 -0.3 +2.3 -16.7 -14.7 Matera 22.2 4.3 19.5 22.5 68.5 22.2 4.9 18.1 7.7 52.9 +0.6 -1.4 -14.8 -15.6 Catania 123.8 58.7 10.4 83.2 276.1 123.8 78.7 12.1 44.3 258.9 20.0 + 1.7 -38.9 -17.2 Sassari 73.2 22.0 5.5 43.7 144.4 73.2 23.1 5.0 21.4 122.7 +1.1 -0.5 -22.3 -21.7 Nuoro 29.9 31.3 2.9 29.6 93.7 29.9 24.7 3.7 12.8 71.1 -6.6 +0.8 -16.8 -22.6

Southern Italy 2508.3 897.3 507.9 2487.4 6400.9 2508.3 787.1 490.8 1116.4 4902.6 -110.2 -17.1 -1371.0 -1498.3

Per cent 39.1 14.0 7.9 39.0 100.0 51.2 16.1 10.0 22.7 100.0 7.4 1.1 91.5 100.0

Derived from data published in the Annuario di Statistiche Demografiche, Istituto Centrale di Statistica, 1955 through 1965.

Q*Provinces with residuals greater than one standard error of the estimate.

0

z It:~

cn z

t:5

z

C

z t2l

H

cr- 0

HC

z H

vC 0= piA



ECONOMIC GEOGRAPHY

apparent anomaly. This interpretation may also hold true for Brindisi; its rapidly growing petro-chemical industries could have provided more employment possibilities than estimated. It is clear that these plants have had minimal multi- plier effects; but the image of such massive installations suggests, perhaps erroneously, that a wave of new opportunities will develop, and this vision may have helped to retard out-migration.

Pescara is one of the most interesting and certainly one of the best document- ed cases. It has been a focus for in-migration from its region-the Abruzzi-as is evident from Table 3; yet this province has not benefited significantly from government industrial subsidies. Ca- fiero's excellent study of internal migration in the Mezzogiorno16 demonstrates Pescara's long history of balanced economic growth, subsidized in large measure by local capital. Other factors include: the excellence of its entrepre- neurial spirit (a rarity in the South); the skills of its labor force; and above all its role as the political, social, and economic focus of the Abruzzi. These have in essence been the stimuli for in- migration from the other provinces of this generally impoverished region.

Catania is another puzzle. It is clearly the destination for large numbers of migrants from adjacent provinces, double the average percentage for southern Italy. The province has, in relation to the rest of Sicily, an unusually long tradition of commercial and industrial development. This economic growth has not only attracted in-migration, but it has also presumably retarded outflows. Finally, there remains the high positive residuals in the provinces of Nuoro and Sassari in Sardinia. Here again, the evidence is sparse. Sardinia was never an important area of emigration either to the Americas or western Europe. It is also clear that the region has contributed

16 Unfortunately, the author's treatment is confined to the period between 1951 and 1961, and the only detailed provincial analysis is that of Pescara and Siracusa [1].

far less than its expected share of migrants to the North, despite the depressed conditions prevalent, particularly in Nuoro. Sardinia's poor internal communications, insular position, and relative isolation from the mainland have been suggested as tentative but hardly comprehensive hypotheses. The effects of the "Piano di Rinascita della Sardegna" and recent industrial investments in retarding out-migration are possible additional factors.17

EMPIRICAL FINDINGS AND

THEORETICAL IMPLICATIONS

Clearly the results of this study, whose chief concern has been with the interpretation of the relationships between migration and industrialization in southern Italy, are applicable primarily to that restricted area. Generalizations and prin- ciples must ultimately be derived from a variety of substantive studies of the migration process in the underdeveloped world. More specifically, it has been stressed in the course of this analysis that industrialization is rarely the sole explanatory element in migration behavior. Previous studies have shown that it is typically one factor among many. However, in the southern Italian context, industrialization was the most important single element, as opposed to more complex variables like income change, "economic health," etc.; the industrial sector received the largest share of the development funds, and it experienced the most rapid expansion of employment opportunities.

What is perhaps more critical in terms of the focus of this study, is the not un- expected finding of marked spatial variations in the growth of manufacturing in the South, with absolute declines evi- denced in many areas. As noted earlier, these industrial changes have not resulted from a conscious governmentally directed or planned location policy. As

17 A recent two part demographic study on Sardinia by N. Federici [4] and A. Golini [5] was, unfortunately, not available to the writer.

132




is so often the case in industrial location practice, plants have adapted themselves to the changing socio-economic environ- ment or failed [30; 19, pp. 81-97].

Shifting to the migration patterns, in a macro-sense, it is apparent that they have been broadly responsive to changing levels of industrial investment and employment opportunities outside of southern Italy. These outflows have also exhibited striking spatial variations within the South which have been partially a reflection of industrial growth. Un- questionably, the expansion of industrial employment opportunities helped to retard out-migration, and in many in- stances it has acted as the magnet for rural-urban flows. There was, nevertheless, a stronger association between out- migration levels and regional variations in socio-economic health, one indication that the development program had had positive results when viewed in spatial detail. Certainly this component can be considered the most important predictor variable, and this relationship conforms to generalizations from other empirical studies both in the developed and underdeveloped worlds. Less satisfactory, but significant, has been the attempt to include migrant stock as an explanatory factor. It does appear, however, to have served as a partial surrogate for information flow. Circumstantial evidence has also been presented on internal migration flows which appears to support the thesis of a two-stage replacement process of migration behavior often reported by other investigators. This does not, of course, mean that there have been no direct leaps to the North or abroad. There are also indications that several of the key growth poles as Pescara and Latina have succeeded in intercepting such movements.

Though in overview our "explanations" of regional variations in out-migration patterns appear to conform to migration theory, a number of anomalies were present and our interpretations of these departures has been partially intuitive and perhaps speculative, suggest-

ing the need for further field investigation.

POLICY CONSIDERATIONS

The economic and social gap between northern and southern Italy has not been narrowed despite almost two decades of development subsidies. Progress has certainly been registered, but considering the plans of the development author- ities and particularly the hopes and perhaps the dreams of the southerners, the results have fallen far short of expecta- tions. Some have argued that the program's goals were set too high. Others, not only skeptics from the North, but also well informed foreign observers sure as Vera Lutz [16, p. 45] have rea- soned that "forcing" industry into un- suitable locations in the Mezzogiomo may handicap the overall growth of the Italian economy as did past tariff policies. Perhaps the most telling counter- argument is that of Professor Pescatore of the Cassa, who stresses the indisputa- bly high annual growth rates of the South and notes that these have been significantly greater than those of some "developed regions."

Nevertheless, out-migration continues to plague the Mezzogiorno. It could be argued that the "hemorrhage" might have been far greater had the development program never been implemented. There are, however, continuing cries that "raising men for export," aside from its social costs, is hardly a profitable economic investment. Yet it should be recalled that past outflows to northern Italy were one of the major reasons for the "economic miracle" of the North during the fifties and early sixties. If one thinks in terms of the overall growth of the national economy and plans accord- ing to that goal, then the northward migration certainly has had positive results. Rural depopulation of some of the dreadfully impoverished and isolated areas of southern Italy must inevitably continue, but it could mean far better economic opportunities for those that re- main in the South who are not neces-

133



ECONOMIC GEOGRAPHY

sarily the least able or the least success- ful. Hopefully, the adoption of an organized locational design for future investments in the Mezzogiorno will channel investments into a limited number of growth poles, thus intercepting at least a share of those flows previously directed to the North.

More important perhaps, is the des- perate need to change the southerner's image of his own region, to convince him that the development program is not merely a political charade producing "Cathedrals in the Desert." Often the inauguration of new manufacturing facilities has not meant any greater struc- tural transformation of the regions where the plants were sited. On the contrary, in some respects hardships have been en- gendered. There has often been a sharp increase in the number of relatively low- skilled employees during the construction phase, followed by layoffs, and ultimate replacement at a reduced level by skilled personnel and engineers. The construction workers, many of whom had shifted from former agricultural pur- suits, either joined the unemployment rolls or shifted into marginal low-wage tertiary activities. This proved to be the case at Taranto, Brindisi, and Gela. The resulting loss of faith in the program is understandable. If this image can be changed and the southerner, both work- er and entrepeneur alike, can be instilled with confidence in the development effort, perhaps the exodus can be checked. This need for the creation of trust in the economic effectiveness of the investment policy is also vital in northern Italy, for it is there that private investment funds exist which could, in part, be channeled to the South. Ulti- mately, however, it is probably investment by the government in state owned and operated facilities which must bear the brunt of the burden. Perhaps as important for the future is the massive program of superhighway construction currently underway. These roads will undoubtedly reduce the long term economic and social isolation of the region

and conceivably act as the stimuli for new industrial growth in the most favored areas of the Mezzogiorno.

Finally, it is clear that there is a need for additional empirical studies of the migration process in the underdeveloped world, particularly in areas participating in industrial development efforts. This paper is a step in that direction. Such studies may suggest additional hypotheses which would give us a better understanding of the evolution of migration patterns in these regions and perhaps aid in the prediction of the course of future demographic developments in such areas.

LITERATURE CITED

1. Cafiero, S. Le Migrazioni Meridionali, SVIMEZ (Associazione per lo Sviluppo dell'Industria nel Mezzogiorno), Rome, 1964.

2. Chenery, H. "Development Policies for Southern Italy," Quarterly Journal of Eco- nomics, 76 (November, 1962), pp. 515- 547.

3. Comitato dei Ministri per il Mezzogiorno. Relazione sulla Attivitd di Coordinamento. Volume Primo, Rome, April, 1965.

4. Federici, N. L'Analisi Demografica e i Piani Regionali di Sviluppo Economico. Milano: Giuffre, 1967.

5. Golini, A. Aspetti Demografici della Sar- degna, Milano: Giuffre, 1967.

6. Greenwood, M. J. "An Analysis of the Determinants of Geographic Labor Mobility in the United States," Review of Economics and Statistics, (May, 1968), pp. 189-194.

7. Hagerstrand, T. "Migration and Area," in Migration in Sweden. Lund Studies in

Geography, Ser. B, Human Geography, No. 13 (1957).

8. Herrick, B. Urban Migration and Economic Development in Chile. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1965.

9. Hutchinson, B. "The Migrant Population of Urban Brazil," America Latina, No. 6 (April-June, 1963), pp. 41-72.

10. Istituto Centrale di Statistica, "Occupazione in Italia negli Anni 1951-1965, Industria," Bollettino Mensile di Statistica, Supple- mento Straordinario, No. 8 (August, 1966).

11. Istituto Centrale di Statistica, "I Conti Economici Territoriali dell'Italia," Bollet- tino Mensile di Statistica, Supplemento Straordinario, No. 7, (July, 1967).

134




12. Istituto Centrale di Statistica, Notiziario ISTAT, No. 3, (August, 1967).

13. Istituto Centrale di Statistica, III Censi- mento Generale dell' Industria e del Com- mercio, 1951, Vol. I, Tomes I and II, Rome, 1964.

14. Istituto Centrale di Statistica, IX Censi- mento Generale della Popolazione, 1951, Vol. VII, Dati Generale Riassuntivi, Rome, 1956.

15. Istituto Centrale di Statistica, X Censi- mento Generale della Popolazione, 1961, Vol. V, Rome, 1968.

16. Lutz, V. Italy, A Study in Economic De- velopment, Lloyd's Bank Review, (October, 1960), pp. 31-45.

17. Mori, A. "I1 Limite della Zona di Inter- vento della Cassa del Mezzogiorno come Fattore d'Attrazione e di Localizzazione Industriale," Rivista Geografica Italiana, 72 (1965), pp. 19-41.

18. Philips, D. "Rural to Urban Migration in Iraq," Economic Development and Cul- tural Change, 7 (July, 1959), pp. 405-521.

19. Pred, A. Behavior and Location, Part I, Lund Studies in Geography, Ser. B, Human

Geography, No. 27 (1967), p. 111. 20. Predetti, A. "Le Componente Economiche,

Sociale e Demografiche della Mobilita Interna della Popolazione Italiana," Univer- sita Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Ser. 3, Scienze Statistica, No. 1 (1965).

21. Prothero, M. "Socio-Economic Aspects of Rural-Urban Migration in Africa, South of the Sahara," Scientia, 59 (1965), pp. 1-7.

22. Rodgers, A. "Regional Industrial Develop- ment with reference to Southern Italy," in Essays on Geography and Economic De- velopment. Edited by N. Ginsburg. Uni-

versity of Chicago, Department of Geog- raphy, Research Paper No. 62, 1960, pp. 143-173.

23. Rodgers, A. "Locational Policy and Prac- tice in Industrial Development: The Italian Experience," Proceedings of 20th Interna- tional Geographical Congress, London, 1964, pp. 243-244.

24. Rodgers, A. "Naples: A Case Study of Government Subsidization of Industrial Development in an Underdeveloped Re- gion," Tijdschrift Voor Ekonomische en Sociale Geografie, (Jan.-Feb., 1966), pp. 20-32.

25. Tagliacarne, G. "Calcolo del Reditto nelle Provincie e Regione d'Italia nel 1952," Moneta e Credito, No. 22 (Second Tri- mester, 1953), pp. 174-177.

26. Tagliacarne, G. "Calcolo del Reditto Pro- dotto del Settore Privato e della Pubblica Amministrazione nelle Provincie e Regioni d'Italia nel 1959 e Confronti con gli Anni dal 1951 al 1959," Moneta e Credito, (December, 1960), pp. 82-84, 112-114.

27. Tagliacarne, G. "Calcolo del Reditto Pro- dotto del Settore Privato e della Pubblica Amministrazione nelle Provincie e Regioni d'Italia nel 1962 e Confronto col. 1961," Moneta e Credito, No. 63 (September, 1963), pp. 436-439.

28. Tagliacarne, G. "I Conti Provinciali e Re- gionale," Moneta e Credito, 88, No. 4 (December, 1967), pp. 400-403.

29. Thomas, E. Maps of Residuals from Regres- sion: Their Characteristics in Geographic Research. Department of Geography, State University of Iowa, No. 2, 1960.

30. Tiebout, C. "Locational Theory, Empirical Evidence and Economic Evolution," Papers and Proceedings of the Regional Science Association, 3 (1957), pp. 74-86.

31. United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs. Statistical Yearbook of the United Nations, 1954.

135



migration and industrial development: the southern italian experience

Documents