Italy's north-south divide in one chart

Naples: poorer than the Czech Republic. Image: Pyrev via pixabay.

Britain isn't the only European country with a north-south divide to contend with. In contrast to blighty, however, in Italy it's the south that's falling behind. According to the Bank of Italy, GDP per person is more than 40 per cent lower in the Mezzogiorno than it is in the centre and north. To put that in context, it’s greater than the difference between the economies of the UK and South Korea.

Compare the country's biggest cities, in fact, and you'll find the disparity is even more extreme than that. This graph shows real GDP per capita at 2010 figures in selected cities since the turn of the century. Below we've also included a map showing their locations; the grey areas mark out southern Italy as defined by the European’s NUTS classification.

Real GDP per capita, $USD 2010. Source: CityMetric Intelligence.

The thing that instantly leaps out at you is that Milan is, give or take, twice as rich as the cities of the south. The municipality accounts for just 2 per cent of Italy’s population, yet generates around 10 per cent of national GDP. It’s most famous for its fashion industry, but it’s also the country’s media, tech, and financial capital.

It is, in the most literal sense, where the money is. Consequently, while Rome was showing signs of stagnation as early as 2004, Milan’s GDP per capita was growing steadily right up until the credit crunch struck in 2008.

At the other end of the scale you'll find Naples and Palermo, the key cities of the south, where (in 2010 figures) GDP per capita has been struggling to get above $25,000 for nearly 15 years now. To translate that into comparable national economies once again, that means that, while Milan is richer than Sweden, Naples is poorer than the Czech Republic. And, unlike Palermo, Naples shows little sign of progressing.

This divide isn’t new – in fact, it’s been in place essentially since unification in 1861, a process led by the northern kingdom of Piedmont and the Nice-born revolutionary Giuseppe Garibaldi – but the recent recession certainly hasn’t helped. In 2012, Italy’s youth unemployment rate stood at 35 per cent, which is quite shocking enough. In Naples, however, it was 53 per cent, and last winter the city was reported to be flirting with bankruptcy. The Mezzogiornio is making a play to attract more tourists, helped by the government's growing attempts to crack down on the corruption and organised crime which have dominated the region’s economy. Closing the gap, however, won’t be easy.

Unsurprisingly, this economic chasm has led to calls for devolution or even separatism – but not perhaps from the direction one might imagine. The Lega Norda (Northern League) was created from the merger of a number of smaller local parties, and campaigns for a federal Italy, with greater fiscal autonomy for the regions. In other words, what it wants is to reduce the flow of money from rich northern taxpayers to poor southern governments.

At times the league has even advocated full independence for the north under the name of Padania. In last year's general election, however, it received just 4.0 per cent of the vote, down from 8.3 percent five years earlier. Independence may be some time coming.


Does it matter that TfL are renaming White Hart Lane station Tottenham Hotspur?

New White Hart Lane. Image: Getty.

Pretend for a moment that you’re travelling in the London of 1932. You’re taking the Piccadilly Line northbound and alight at Gillespie Road station. The name should be obvious: it’s inscribed in bespoke brown tiling on the platform.

But that 31 October, following an intense campaign by the eponymous football club, the London County Council changed the station’s name to Arsenal (Highbury Hill). The area’s growing association with the name “Arsenal” ended in a lengthy negotiation that changed maps, signs and train tickets alike. Football had acquired so much power that it changed the name of not just a Tube station but an entire suburb, even before the era of Wenger or the Emirates.

Now the spectre of name changes is on the horizon once again. As Tottenham Hotspur FC inches closer to completing its new stadium, the club is clamouring for a renamed Overground station. Despite the fact the new stadium is located on almost exactly the same site as the old just off White Hart Lane, and fans have long been calling the scaffolding-laden mess “New White Hart Lane”, the club’s executive director is adamant that the station’s existing name cannot stand. White Hart Lane station, on the Overground line leaving Liverpool Street, is set to be renamed “Tottenham Hotspur”, at a cost to the club of £14.7m.

Little has been made of the fact that this peculiar PR kerfuffle is tied to Spurs’ failure to convince Nike to sponsor the venue. Some sources have even claimed that the sponsorship is yet to be finalised because it is somehow contingent on the renaming of the Overground station; beyond the ridiculous Johnson-era vanity project that was the Emirates Air Line, it seems improbable that TfL will allow any more corporate-flavoured information pollution. There will be no “Nike Stadium” station on the way to Enfield, much as there is no “Emirates” on the way to Cockfosters, especially if public consultation gets a look in.

The scene of the crime. Image: TfL.

But there’s a problem with the new name, all the same. “White Hart Lane” already means “football stadium”, in the same way Loftus Road or Stamford Bridge do. Changing it to “Tottenham Hotspur” risks opening the floodgates to an “O2 North Greenwich” or a “Virgin Euston” at some point in future, names as banal as there are dystopian. The Greater London Authority has promised to spend the £14.7m fee on community programmes in the local area – but that’s not much money to set the precedent that a private company can mess about with the Tube map.

What’s more, as CityMetric has often observed, there are plenty of station names across London that could do with a tidy up. Picking one that’s perfect already and asking for £14.7m to change it is adding insult to injury. How much would it cost a community group if they asked to change the name of Goodge Street to Fitzrovia? Why does a vast corporate entity backed by international sponsors and thousands of season ticket holders get to set the standard?

Back in Arsenal’s day, changing names on the Tube must have been easy; changes could be accommodated gradually without bothering the every day traveller. But in our world of online information, maps and apps, name changes are rather more complicated.

The question is – if TfL can bring itself to balefully accept this particular proposition, why can’t it accept ours? Why sort out a single non-issue on the Tube Map when you can catch lots of real ones in one go? A day’s pandemonium might just be a price worth paying to fix the Bethnal Greens problem once and for all.