From Bologna to Trento, Florence to Naples, Italian cities have long embodied the coexistence of intellectual and cultural life. Universities and cultural institutions often share the same streets, public spaces, and audiences. Yet, surprisingly, they are still studied as if they belonged to separate worlds: the “knowledge economy” on one side, the “cultural economy” on the other. Our recent study, published in the Journal of Cultural Economics, set out to explore the link between these two engines of local development. We asked a straightforward question with complex implications:are higher education and cultural vibrancy stronger together?
What we wanted to know
Both universities and cultural sectors contribute to urban vitality by attracting talent, generating knowledge, and shaping the symbolic capital of places. Yet, most empirical research in cultural economics evaluates their efficiency separately, measuring how well universities transform staff and budgets into graduates and research outputs, or how cultural institutions turn infrastructure and funding into attendance and participation.
It is reasonable to hypothesize that the two systems influence each other’s productivity. Does a vibrant, rich, lively cultural environment make universities more efficient? Or do high-performing universities boost cultural vibrancy in their cities?
To find out, we examined the reciprocal relationship between the two using data from 48 Italian cities and their public universities in 2019, which is the last pre-pandemic year and a stable policy period following the 2010 Gelmini reform.
How we measured it
We treated higher education (HE) and cultural vibrancy (CV) as two production systems, each with their own inputs, outputs, and contextual conditions.
For HE, inputs included academic staff, administrative staff, total expenditure, and lecture-hall capacity; outputs were graduates and research publications (normalized per 100 students or scholars).
For CV, inputs were the density of bookshops, cinemas, theatres, and museums (per 100,000 inhabitants), while outputs captured cultural participation — namely, the number of shows and visitors per 1,000 inhabitants (based on SIAE and ISTAT data).
To estimate how efficiently each system converted inputs into outputs, we applied the order-m conditional frontier method (Cazals et al. 2002), a semi-parametric approach that is less restrictive than DEA and allows for “super-efficiency” — i.e., cases where a unit performs better than its reference sample. We then used conditional efficiency estimations and a structural equation model (SEM) to examine the direction and magnitude of influence between HE and CV. This two-step strategy helped avoid endogeneity and capture latent causal effects between the two sectors.
What we found
Fig 1 – Conceptual model of the findings (elaboration of the authors).
Our results reveal a symbiotic but non-linear relationship between universities and cultural vibrancy, as shown in the conceptual model (Fig.1).
When one sector performs below average, the other tends to compensate, suggesting a collaborative alliance: efficient universities can lift local cultural performance, and vice versa (the coefficient of CV on HE efficiency is positive and significant in Model 6, while the reciprocal influence of HE on CV is slightly stronger in Model 7).
However, when both HE and CV operate efficiently, the relationship shifts towards competition. In cities such as Bologna or Trento, where both sectors are at the frontier of productivity, efficiency gains in one are associated with marginal declines in the other (indicating potential competition for skilled labor, funding, or audiences).
Overall, only 16 % of universities in our sample show room for improvement, while one-third are fully efficient and more than half are “super-efficient,” producing roughly 10 % more output than expected given their resources (e.g., University of Trento, 1 − 𝜆4,48 = 0.2093; University of Bologna, 1 – 𝜆₄,₄₈ = 0.1938).
The picture for cultural vibrancy is more polarized: cities are either highly efficient or markedly inefficient, with a wide gap between them (efficiency scores range from 0.37 to 2.57). Interestingly, geographic factors play a secondary role: northern cities perform slightly better overall, but several smaller southern cities achieve strong results when universities and cultural institutions collaborate closely.
Why it matters
The findings suggest that the link between knowledge and culture is context dependent. Collaboration thrives where one system compensates for the other’s weaknesses, but once both sectors reach high efficiency, their interaction becomes competitive, a dynamic rarely captured in traditional models of the creative city.
For local policymakers, this implies that universities and cultural institutions should not be treated as independent silos. Instead, strategic coordination — joint programs, shared spaces, or co-funded cultural initiatives — can enhance mutual performance and contribute to inclusive urban development.
Looking ahead
Our study provides empirical backing to the idea that universities and cultural institutions are not just economic actors; they co-produce knowledge, meaning, and social cohesion.
Future research could explore how this interdependence evolved during and after the pandemic, when digitalization and hybrid cultural participation reshaped both higher education and cultural supply. Comparative analyses across European countries could also test whether similar “collaboration–competition cycles” emerge elsewhere.
In policy terms, the takeaway is simple but powerful: investing in universities and culture together is not a luxury but it’s a strategy for resilient, knowledge-based cities.
References
Cazals, C., Florens, J. P., & Simar, L. (2002). Nonparametric frontier estimation: A robust approach. Journal of Econometrics, 106(1), 1–25.
About the article
Macrì, E., Morea, V. & Rania, F. Stronger together? A semi-parametric approach to evaluate the productivity of higher education and cultural vibrancy in Italy. J Cult Econ 49, 895–937 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10824-025-09546-0
About the authors
Emanuela Macrì is an Adjunct Professor of Political Economy and Cultural Economics at the Department of Law, Economics and Sociology of Magna Graecia University, Catanzaro
Valeria Morea is an Assistant Professor at the Department of Arts and Culture of the Erasmus School of History, Culture and Communication, Rotterdam
Francesco Rania is an Assistant Professor in Mathematics for Economics at the Department of Law, Economics and Sociology of Magna Graecia University, Catanzaro
About the image
Guglielmo Giambartolomei, Piazza dei Miracoli Aerial Picture, CC BY-SA 4.0 , via Wikimedia Commons.
