While evaluating some
Italian proposals in the field of the Urban Environment, with consortia most of the times led by some
public administrations claiming EU funding, I asked myself why they were quite poor. For instance, on average, they are worse than
the Spanish ones. In Italian proposals I hardly find any innovation or
possible "reproduction" potential capable of providing
valuable results. Why that?
One reason could be that Italian universities are not among the best ones worldwide (as much as the whole education system of the country) and therefore most technicians and urban planners coming from Italian universities are, as a consequence, not very good. Most Italian projects are also drafted using a language - be English or Italian – redundant in the form but with very few ideas, with sentences hardly getting to the point and phrases that twine without being able of adequately clarifying the object and the goal of the project. Moreover, not seldom projects are fragmented and not coherent. This does not only make our work as evaluators extremely difficult, but it heavily jeopardises projects' chances of correctly expressing their value and potential (if there is any), hence of getting funds. I also wonder if such a confused language and project structure are among the reasons why quite often actions foreseen for achieving an intermediate goal are confused by applicants with the project's objectives, thus de facto mixing up the means with the end. As a matter of fact, those projects focus on procedures, techniques and methods (tools/means), and practically stop there (with the collection of data), without directly facing environmental problems for suggesting solutions (goals). In this respect, it should be also remembered in Italy urban matters are mainly dealt by people with a degree in architecture or engineering, who concentrate in their hands also tasks they do not master, with results - in a field by definition multidisciplinary - that cannot be adequate nor fulfilling.
A recurrent fact in Italian proposals is they miss
the concept of “EU Added Value of The Project”. The usual answer
they provide is: “because similar cases can learn from us”. Sadly enough most of the times there is nothing to learn
from a very local intervention that has no innovativeness. Such a distortion probably does not only have to do with the “myth”
of best practices, normally misconceived as a blind copy&paste procedure (and not just in Italy), but I assume this
happens mainly because in Italy public administrators might still see the EU
as a cow to milk. They probably were spoiled by the EU with the
indiscriminate funding of the past decades, and therefore in this case it is possible that the one to blame is the EC, which in the past was not far-sighted as it is becoming today. A teaching we should strongly consider also for learning from past mistakes, especially for not replicating bad practices with EU newcomers. As a matter of fact, now many applicants are only
interested in getting funds for doing something very local,
completely neglecting that they should provide a congruent feedback,
or better, a payback in terms of spreadable knowledge.
However, I also believe it
is a cultural matter: a concept like “ask not what Europe
can do for you, ask what you can do for Europe” (1) just does
not fit into their brains. Today Italian politicians
and private entrepreneurs hardly understand even the more basic
concept of “ask not what citizens can do for you, ask what you can
do for your fellow countrymen”. Sadly enough, the last 25 years in Italy have been dramatic (economically, politically, ethically, freedom, etc.), and what I have described is not surprising when remembering that the most among the best Italian minds were forced to leave the country for not giving way to unacceptable compromises, and being rewarded for their value abroad. Nonetheless, I truly hope the EU policy and guidelines will help Italy to leave the diverting path that is currently following, for becoming again a paragon of virtue like in the '60s.
(1) adapted from John F.
Kennedy, Inaugural Address of the President of the United States,
Friday, January 20, 1961.
are you italian?
ReplyDeleteYou must be a little bit constructive!!!
It is very much a constructive post, is it not? How people can progress if they do not know where they are wrong? If they keep on writing proposals in that way, they will NEVER get funds!
DeleteAnyway, why my nationality should be important? Does it change my freedom of speech? Yes, I have an Italian passport, but am Italian as much as the Palestinians are Israeli, or catholic Northern Irish are British. But above all I am a human being who makes the effort of using his brain. Please, let's put those labels aside...
possibly because I graduated in one of the worst Universities of the world (Rome University) and am consequently obviously an ignorant person, I fail to see and constructive aspect in your long post. to me, being constructive means pointing out problems and proposing solutions. when you say that all italian urbanists are obviously bed, because all italian universities are bad, where is the constructive aspect? are you implying that unles we significantly improve out university system we will never get a chance? but that will take decades! also, if you want to be constructive what would you do to improve our academic system?
DeleteNo, I am saying: put aside those dinosaurs who cannot write a proposal capable of providing benefit to the environment and added-on outcome for the EU strategies!
DeleteIf their proposals fail, it is not because we are racist (!!!), but because their proposals are bad. In my opinion the fact they fail should be also interpreted as a proof of the inadequacy of people writing them, and, as a consequence, the necessity of changing the people who draft those proposals... or better, the structure of personnel (qualification, skills, expertise, experience) involved in those projects.
Don't you think this is constructive? Well, I tried to express this concept... but it seems your comment was necessary for offering me the chance of clarifying it.
Interesting view point from someone who should know. Looking forward to see what the reactions/responses are going to be. We may have to "fasten our seat belts as it's going to be a bumpy ride" (to quote famous Hollywood line).
ReplyDeleteBy Alain Thery
I do not know about Italian proposals, but am afraid to label any country based on my personal experience. That can take a scary path, unless backed by sufficient evidence. You seemed to be prepared for a backlash if any. Would follow to see where it goes
ReplyDeleteHi, and thank you for your comment.
DeleteI am not sure what you mean with "backlash". I was just "thinking aloud", asking myself why proposals and projects coming from Italy generally are quite poor and clearly neglecting they MUST provide a useful outcome at EU level.
My answer is: there is a cultural problem. Both in terms of technical knowledge (which is also a cultural matter) and of approach towards funds. An approach that to me seems egoistic... It seems rather an attempt of convincing the EC to give out funds like they were charity, and not envisioned within the quid-pro-quo approach. While the rules of game in reality are: I give you money for fixing your problem, but you give me back useful information.
I wonder if it is also the manifestation of the clash between the catholic and the protestant vision of life, like Max Weber brilliantly described in 1905.
Anyway, I published my considerations only in the hope of getting better explications than the ones I figured out. With the ultimate goal of providing a feedback to those applicants, and help them improving their proposals.
I hope I cleared the reason of my post.
Dear Fabrizio, I do absolutely agree with you. In other strands it's not so obvious, but when you are in the strategic-urban zone, the cultural problem is there. So many convoluted, empty sentences. But it is fairly coherent with our overall situation, isn't it? Few people with quality ideas and reasonable experience, a large majority of empty, big talkers. Here is where we have to start from.
ReplyDeleteAbout the cultural factor, just a quick look at our national priorities for LIFE+ would suffice to grasp the idea. Maybe it's not a perfect translation, but it is my cleanest.
ReplyDeleteFor the Strategic Approaches strand: "Directive of the Minister to the National Parks (...) addressing Biodiversity conservation activities: Implementation of new studies and projects capable of tackling biodiversity conservation in a unitary vision, up to the promotion and valorisation of ecosystems’ services with a strategic coordinating character between the holders of environmental information, defined by National Parks and Protected Sea Areas, in coherence with the objectives of the Directive at stake.”
And they always talk like that.
My opinion is that most of the times it is because who asks for funding under a EU labelled initiative do not really have a indeep knowledge of the matter and / or the ones that have kwnoledge are not really involved or given an important role in the process ... in general because EU funding but public funding in general is seen as a way to get easy money .. and in the end it this is becuase the Public Administration is not able to express strong competencies to manage contents rather than procedures
ReplyDeleteProposal writing is a challenge at best and a monumental nightmare for many, I guess! Anywhere in the world. A particular reality in the world of academia in South Africa or in the Non-profit sector where livelihood depends on the success of that proposal.
ReplyDeleteBy Marcel Londt
dear Fabrizio,
ReplyDeleteThere are some characteristics of the Italian history which could explain the problem you mentioned.
China, Spain and France, to look only to some examples, are all countries where through their history they have had a centralized authority with a centralized bureaucracy operating at the scale of the country. As a result production of written documents to be sent to the central authority was the normal rule, a well-defined and regulated production of documents was created and developed through centuries. The centralized archives where the place where all the public administration were registered and kept. The Sevilla archive is even today the place to find and study the official documents produced by the local authorities in a faraway continent LatinAmerica.
The history of Italy, excluding the Roman Empire, it is the history of small kingdom or princes, dukes, marquises dominions with a reduced territorial scale, as result the further development of the country it has been mainly on the municipal scale. As the distances insided these territories were small, verbal communications and personal relations were and are more important than documents connections.
The culture is more a verbal culture than writting culture, this it is also a result from the fact that reading was not something that everybody could have access, there was a very strong negative influence of the Catholic Church which make the sacred books accessible only to priests and monks. While the protestant church, in the north of Europe gave freedom to its followers to read directly the sacred books, as a result reading and writing was a social priority.
The first time I work within a British team I was surprised by the fact that before starting the work there was already a contents documents for the work to be performed while at that time in Italy we were having long verbal discussions around the form of organizing the work.
Maybe these considerations could look far from the fact that as you stated, proposals for funding submitted from Italy are quite poor, my idea it is that they are quite at the bottom of the problem.
Nevertheless, presently I am looking for access to the EU funding for extension of sewerage systems in an area where preservation of environment quality could result in an economic impulse to a series of connected small municipalities. Thus, I went to look in the site of the EU LIFE III site, but I found only descriptions of the programme not the information on HOW TO APPLY FOR AN EU CONTRIBUITION for sewerage system extension,WHICH ARE THE FORMS TO BE COMPLETED , and, the CONTENTS contents to be included. Do you have any advice about?
Best regards
Carlos Bello
Good comment Carlos, by the way.. LIFE III programme is an old one, and is closed, last one was LIFE+, that now is closed, and I guess the application forms for the next one (new EC budgets this year, so new everything) are far from being ready. :)
DeleteVery interesting point of view.. Actually also the educational and academic approch is very much centered on verbal tools rather than written ones. This couls also contribute to explain why Italians do not perform thata well when it comes to produce written documents.. By the way what you said about long discussions instead of key brief bullet points is absolutely true!
DeleteVery interesting discussion. Unfortunately i can not provide any interesting new idea. Endeed, i'm not neither italian nor european. Furthermore, i never work with an italian. But, i know that in a region, a country can be a bit behind others on specifics areas of development, either due to problem of language, or due to the openessless to other to abroad, or for other cultural reasons.
ReplyDeleteJérémie Nkunzimana
Dear Fabrizio,
ReplyDeleteThank you for your honest and provocative discussion.
I am a convinced European, but "there is no smoke without fire", and yes, generalities can be drawn. As an evaluator of proposals for several EU funding programmes (incl. LIFE+ and CIP-IEE), I can confirm your observations.
As for the reasons for the poor quality of IT proposals, my experience would tend to make me agree with you. This includes the influence of a country's "religious culture", vast subject! By the same logic of approach, I would suggest that climate, weather and temperatures may also play a role in influencing behaviour?!?
You might be a bit harsh about the lack of citizenship spirit, but I am not familiar enough with the country to actually express a strong opinion on this.
Of course, needless to repeat, these are generalities, and I know some fantastically good IT proposers and evaluators and project managers! Still, there is certainly a market demand in IT for professional help with proposals ... ;-)
Helene
Thank you for your thoughtful comment, Helene.
DeleteLet me clarify that when I have a proposal in my hands I am not influenced by its origin, nor if it is drafted in English, Italian or Portuguese. I merely focus on its value. As far as nationalism (or “citizenship spirit”) is concerned, I am afraid, I tend to reject it as much as fascism, because I believe it forces people to discriminate others according to their passport. And most of the times prevent people to provide a serene judgement.
As said before, I have no statistical data, nor I am referring to thousands of projects, but am merely reflecting on the number of proposals that I had in my hands. Therefore, it is far from my intentions to state “the truth”. Mine is just a personal impression based upon the sheer number of cases I analysed. Obviously backed by my personal experience, including the one in the field of urban planning.
Sure, religion can be a point, as well as climate (and its consequences), but with this respect I was struck by the average better quality of Spanish proposals, coming from a country which has comparable cultural and environmental conditions to Italy. It is not by accident I have compared Italian cases with the Spanish ones and not the Scandinavians or the Romanians. Exactly because I wanted to purge the discussion from some well-known clichés southern countries suffer from. Thus forcing people to concentrate on the Italian peculiarities that might stand out. Some of which I tried to highlight at the very end of my article, also providing some references with the enclosed links.
There are great people in Italy (geographically meant), and Italy – against all odds - is still a country capable of “producing” very proficient experts and very intelligent people, having they an Italian passport or not (this post is about Italian proposals, not Italian people: there is a HUGE difference). However, there is something in the “Italian System” that prevents good people to express themselves, because my impression is in current Italian society most of those capabilities that are needed for drafting a good proposal are not at the top of current Italian requirements for being valued, especially in the public sector (including universities and public administrations). It is not a fortuity that the best Italian minds are abroad...
Fabrizio - I love your 'tirade'. ! I too have read proposals (and many, many reports) that have elicited the same response from me. I never thought of it in terms of nationality though. Great, I'll follow with interest nay, perhaps, avidity. April
ReplyDeleteApril, mine is just a hypothesis, not a solution. Also because based on some personal experience limited to what I had the chance of browsing. Moreover, given some other comments here, let me stress I accept the word "nationality" only as a cultural matter, and not as a racial or ethnic label. What you meant was crystal clear to me, but it seems I am forced to pay extreme attention to what goes on here.
DeleteThis is the best discussion I've seen for a long time. If we are to have credibility as evaluators, we must, even if not "innovative " (overworked word and, now, meaningless). At the very least, the proposal should focus on the objectives/purpose required by the stakeholder and describe how this will be done. Above all, the evaluation must provide robust, credible information (positive or negative) that the stakeholders can use - utility.
ReplyDeleteP.S. I can't cope with the new reply system. I don't intend to be anonymous, but can't work out the others. Also, for context, I'm of Protestant Anglo-Saxon descent, but, living in a small, relatively new (post colonial) nation, do not have the 'hang-ups' that nations with a longer history may experience.
Dunno. Your name would do the job ;)
DeleteBeing an Italian and having worked for the last 28 years in EU projects, I cannot accept a single word of Fabrizio's post. It is true that it is a different filed to mine (MY experience is basically in Information Technology), but I can't believe that Italian proposals are on the average the worst of all proposals, unless you show me statistics showing that the percentage of acceptance is the lowest one in Europe. Besides figures, the wording you use is a typically racist one, and having declared this type of negative bias vis-à-vis italian proposal I do not think you should be evaluating proposals anymore. I will forward this post to the Commission asking whether a person with such prejudices can be considered and objective evaluator.
ReplyDeleteDear Raniero,
DeleteThank you for your email and comment. I am afraid, I fear you did not understand the meaning of my article, and above all the goal of my post... but it is probably me who did not manage to express myself correctly.
I therefore would appreciate it very much if you could go into details, and explain me exactly where you find some racist prejudices in my article. Also because, you probably do not realize how much you offend me labelling me as a racist.
Waiting for your response, I leave you with best regards
Fabrizio Giulietti
Dear Raniero, I will let to Fabrizio to answer, but since I have participated in the discussion I would like to stress the fact that here we are just talking about a specific strand, with specific problems, that appear to show a recognizable pattern. I too am italian, and pretty proud of it just like Fabrizio, and the discussion is obviously aimed (beyond a little expression of frustration) at fixing and improving the things. I have been in urban studies for decades too, and what we are seeing here - and that in no way implies biased judgements - is that many italian proposals are failing for some common characteristics. Your suggestion about statistic evidence is absolutely valid. Just to reinforce what you have said, in the Innovation and Health strands the pattern does not appear.
ReplyDeleteHI marco
Deletecan you pick up one single sentence in Fabrizio's original post which sounds constructive, or trying to fix things? I didn't spot any.
Dear Raniero,
DeleteI can tell what this post have helped me in realizing. Maybe in the first words frustration was predominant, but here is something, quite surprising, I have never thought about before. What I would like to stress is that the idea, in the first post was: hey colleagues, there is something wrong here. Any ideas, anyone can help?
I have studied as an architect first, and then as environmental chemist. What is remarkable to me, is that at the Architecture faculty, even in the department of urban studies, no one was supposed to publish on peer-reviewed papers. I have very discovered the concept of "impact factor" after my architecture degree.
So, you see, what we are receiving is material from people who often is never been trained in publishing scientific, or simply fact-supported materials. Just like it was for me, and - you would agree - I cannot be racist with myself. And let me also say that your one has been a very positive contribution for the discussion to take off in the proper way, avoiding any kind of misunderstanding.
my point about racism is that I refuse to accept the fact that only in Italy these things happen. that's all.
DeleteOf course it is not so! I perfectly agree with you. Italy and Spain are the nation that have the larger number of proposals approved. So, excellence is here too. But Italy and Spain are also the two nations with the larger number of proposals presented, and this huge number of proposal, in the urban and strategic strands, present this pattern of diffused bad quality. That's it. The problem of the post, I guess, is that - being also an expression of frustration - haven't put the sufficient attention in contextualize the sentences. So, thank you for reminding!
DeleteI did not think or wrote that. I said: the proposals coming from Italy I evaluated were quite bad. I don't have a clue about German, Polish, etc., and therefore do not talk about them. I never talk about things I do not know. In any case, if also proposals coming form Germany or Poland were bad, does it would make the Italian ones less bad or even good?
DeleteWell said Fabrizio!
ReplyDeleteSimilar to my conclusions.
So many naturally talented people in Italy having systemic barriers preventing growth of skills during or after graduation.
I remember writing a proposal in the 1990s for an italian region (FVG). A successful one but then having it taken and reproduced, in 'cut & paste' style as you say, for other proposals! Wasn't the same of course!
By Walter Viti
Dear Fabrizio,
ReplyDeleteInteresting that you have opened up this issue, and there are some great thoughts above.
I have noted how in Arabic there are set conventions for publc speaking, often elaborate and formal to an 'outsider' (who has learned Arabic as a second language) which are considered required etiquette. Similarly in EU proposal writing (as in any organisational communication) there is 'best practice' which is often the language of 'insiders', of the informed, as set against 'outsiders' who cannot understand.
In the case of Italian public officials (as with all public officials everywhere) there is the issue of administrative practice,custom and etiquette, where a sophistication is expected from the writer and the reader, where problems are fully understood but alluded to only indirectly, where 'difficulties' are hinted at, or presented in particular formulations to be understood by 'insiders' who can understand the pattern.
So in summary, a set of language conventions from one set of 'insiders' may interfere with practice, custome and etiquette expected from another set of 'insiders'.
How does this resonate?
Best,
Michael
I think you are perfectly right, and you beautifully explained and framed it!
DeleteThank you all for your comments. If we can go back to the real meaning of my post and its goals - putting aside what somebody is willing to read in it - I was reflecting on the potential reasons why, on average, Italian proposals I assessed were quite poor. Could it be because Italian consortia are still influenced by the old ways of getting funds? Shall we therefore blame the old EC policies of providing indiscriminate funding? Is there any lesson we can learn from it for not making the same mistake with the new EU countries?
ReplyDeleteThanks!
Just to give an idea, the problem key could be that in Italy we did not have a real, independent Urban Studies University until the late '90s. We had two courses, one in Reggio Calabria and one in Venice, under the inspiration of Giovanni Astengo, the noble father of urban studies in Italy. But up to very recent times there have not been even a professional association.
ReplyDeleteEverything about urban studies have been developed under the Architecture Faculties, and the only professionals who could legally sign urban plans were Architects and Engineers! This is rather a significant handicap, and probably one of the most important factors in the issue.
You use a language which is clearly negatively biased vis-à-vis a certain nationality. Some quotes follow, with my coments:
ReplyDelete“It is known Italian universities are EXTREMELY bad and therefore all technicians and urban planners coming out from Italian universities are, as an obvious and unavoidable consequence, extremely bad.”
RC> saying that ALL Italian professionals are bad is an unacceptable generalization. I came out of an Italian University and I do not think I am that bad. If your statement is true, then our country does not have any qualified professionals and therefore I wonder how it can survive, this Is clearly not the case.
“That is not enough. Most Italian projects are also drafted using a silly language - be English or Italian – redundant in the form but empty in ideas, with sentences NEVER getting to the point, phrases that chaotically twine, while the rare concepts are just dispersed in a self-legitimating bla-bla-bla. “
RC> you sue such terms as “silly”, empty in ideas, chaotically, bla-bla-bla…which are clearly offensive ones. Would you use these terms in a report to the Commission? I do not think so.
“Moreover, in Italy urban matters are mainly dealt by people with a degree in architecture or engineering, who concentrate in their hands tasks they do not master at all, with results that is impossible to imagine decent.”
RC> results that it is impossible to imagine decent. Again, offensive and harsh language very far from any attempt to being objectives
“at they completely miss the concept of “EU“Added Value of The Project”. The usual answer they provide is: “because similar cases can learn from us”. Geniuses!
RC>> as above. If you as a proposer got an evaluation report from the Commission formulating such statements would you consider it a fair evaluation?”
AND one final remark: I am talking about a racist attitude and confirm this because you concentrate only on Italian proposals and there is no way I can accept that ONLY Italian proposals are that bed. Unless you provide figures which show that this is the case, I will remain convinced that there is a bias from your side
1) Italian universities 20 years ago - in my era - were not good. Now - after a couple of dreadful reforms - are bad, pretty bad. I studied in Rome and abroad (Germany, Spain, the Netherlands) and, believe me, they were different planets. Of course, I cannot generalise, and obviously just refer to my personal experience...
Delete2) Italian urban planners are bad, yes, they are... Not all of them, but many... too many. You don't agree? Have you ever took a walk in those hells outside the centre of Rome? Magliana, Corviale, Tor Bella Monaca. Please, do that at night. Or the dozens of dormitories with no public transportation disseminated all over in the outskirts of the city? Is that "good urban planning"?
3) About the language, listen to Crozza's parody character Fuffas (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XcZuVXBoyNU): the way he talks is way more concrete and sound of many things (not just proposals) I have read written by Italian architects.
4) Urban planning is a serious, complex and difficult matter, and - as already explained by Marco Rosina, me in the article and in the mail I privately sent you, CANNOT be dealt just by engineers of architects. Sadly enough in Italy it is a "private kindergarten" only in the hands of mentioned people. This is not good.
5) again, I was talking about my impression based on the cases I analysed, and extrapolated some considerations that had the purpose of igniting a discussion aimed at looking for some answers. And possibly solutions. But if you like statistics, I will publish them as soon they will be available... still, I do not think they would add much to this conversation...
Raniero, just to clarify part of the problem with ultra-public material: our own national priorities for the Strategic Approaches are:
ReplyDeleteImplementazione di nuovi studi e/o progetti in grado di avere esito sulla conservazione della biodiversità in una visione unitaria, in grado di spingersi fino alla promozione e valorizzazione dei servizi ecosistemici aventi carattere di coordinamento strategico tra i detentori delle informazioni ambientali, predisposti dai Parchi nazionali e dalle Aree marine protette in coerenza con le finalità della Direttiva in questione.
Maybe we are not supposed to discuss this, since we are evaluators, but just to say that we have some kind of a problem with language. One can agree with a sentence like this at first sight, but when it comes to translate and use this to sustain a proposal, you are already in troubled waters. You need: biodiversity conservation, unitary vision, promotion and valorization of ecosystems services with strategic coordination character between the holders of environmental information - but wait - prepared by the national parks and protected sea areas, in coherence with the Directive. This is, more or less, the language we have to cope with.
This is Poland priority, same strand.
Projects aimed at increasing EMAS uptake among SMEs, inter alia by establishing technical assistance measures for SMEs, sectoral projects engaging e.g. industrial associations, chambers of commerce.
Quite of a difference.
Dear Fabrizio,
ReplyDeleteyes Italian proposals are poor on average but I am not convinced it depends on a lack of citizenship spirit.
I believe that the Italian schooling system is very much focused on trying to give “discipline” to students and it does so at the expenses of individual elaboration and thinking. Italian students need to memorize plenty of extremely detailed information for each single class they attend and the system is there to check whether they did so or not. Very often a student can go by the university producing just one piece independently written, that is the final dissertation.
In the US system, for example, students are constantly pushed not to be passive recipients of knowledge but rather to undertake their own critique of what they are learning and they are required to do so also through a high number of periodic assignments. In the US system, participation in class is part of the final grade, in the Italian one definitely not as students on 90% of the cases are required to listen and be quiet.
Then I don’t believe it should be surprising that Italians are not that good at writing proposals compared to others. If we add to this the fact that civil servants probably were never properly trained on how to design a project, how to write it and so on, you get those “nicely-packed-voids” you rightfully complained about.
Luisa
Thanks Luisa, but I did not talk about "citizenship spirit" at all...
DeleteI do not know if Italian schools still work like that. It was a bit like that 40-50 years ago, I think, but already when I went to the lyceum we were trained to use our brains dialectically and not just for memorizing things. Secondary school in Italy until 20 years ago - as far as I am aware of - was excellent! The problem has always been the university system. Which has been dramatically worsening in the years, for so many reasons that we cannot properly discuss here, but just mention (nepotism, lack of money, wrong methods, etc.).
Forced to make and/or manage the whole process, not really interested to do the job the best possible. Though, to be honest, development of a very good and highly competitive proposal is not an easy task, at all. Takes a time, creativity, quality information availablity and the management, responsibility and real authorization. If anything of listed is missing, chances are small to make it through.
ReplyDeleteNerka Jugo Ahmic
Repetition is mother of kwnoledge, this is latin? Regards,rijad
ReplyDeleteWell, that is actually English ;)
DeleteYou probably refer to "repetita iuvant", which means something like "repeated things help", as to say, by dint of being repeated, facts are learnt by the listener.
Yes, I tried my best for explaining my post is a criticisms towards the Italian proposals I analysed, and not against Italy. As shown by Walter (who, in spite of his family name, is not Italian) Italian cases are also drafted by foreigners.
Anyway, sure there is a link, a cultural link, and in my opinion the general poorness of the proposals I analysed should be led back to the dramatic situation (mainly ethically, with consequent extinction of the concepts of "responsibility", "accountability", and "merit") Italy has been going through in the last 25-30 years.
Sadly enough - as shown by provided links - Italy as a country manages to destroy itself with its own hands... Unbelievable, considering what the people of that country achieved after WWII until begin of the '80s.
I don't think it is just an 'italian' issue. I think there are many others with experience of bidding for and running EU projects in previous decades who see them as 'cash cows' rather than opportunities for self development and the production of outcomes that have value for others. In the past there was too much emphasis on cultural sharing and integration, noble objectives for the strengthening of European ties, but times have changed whilst many project bidders, managers and participants have not. Along with being authentic and valid outcomes must be measurable and measured. With some projects my role as the external evaluator starts during the bidding process with me advising on what I hope is good practice and taking the risk that the bid may not be successful.
ReplyDeletePaul Nash