Versatile stochastic dot product circuits based on nonvolatile memories for high performance neurocomputing and neurooptimization.

The key operation in stochastic neural networks, which have become the state-of-the-art approach for solving problems in machine learning, information theory, and statistics, is a stochastic dot-product. While there have been many demonstrations of dot-product circuits and, separately, of stochastic neurons, the efficient hardware implementation combining both functionalities is still missing. Here we report compact, fast, energy-efficient, and scalable stochastic dot-product circuits based on either passively integrated metal-oxide memristors or embedded floating-gate memories. The circuit's high performance is due to mixed-signal implementation, while the efficient stochastic operation is achieved by utilizing circuit's noise, intrinsic and/or extrinsic to the memory cell array. The dynamic scaling of weights, enabled by analog memory devices, allows for efficient realization of different annealing approaches to improve functionality. The proposed approach is experimentally verified for two representative applications, namely by implementing neural network for solving a four-node graph-partitioning problem, and a Boltzmann machine with 10-input and 8-hidden neurons

Short-term territorial investment for Europe’s long-term future

A huge number of geographical and economic theories and applied researches’ experiences inspire the adopting of common (semi-standardised) processes for sustaining long term territorial development (employment, inclusion, GPD growth). It appears like a urgent European Union need in order to stabilise appropriate territorial integrated strategic investments overcoming shock and sectorial measures of austerity (Junker plan). At the same time, it seems the unique solution for having to react to a pseudo global financial and economic war (geoeconomic and geopolitical play at no summa zero), focusing resources to maintaining the status quo. Starting from a critical review of literature positions, the paper discusses what modelling the European policy action should follow in order to not invalidate the efforts implemented by austerity measures. Multilevel experiences (benchmarking at different geographical scales) from several 2013 programs (mainly ESPON, URBACT, ENPICiBMED) are resumed to demonstrate this thesis. In order to assess and to measure this aim, territorial cohesive capability is considerate the main vehicle for transforming European challenges in common geopolitical goals. So the paper considers the Europe 2020 pillars and flags as a first turning point to be related to the territorial regional capability of transforming its diversity in cohesive and competitive development. Some words will be spent about the real compliance between Structural Funds objectives, declared priorities of investment, territorial regional capability, including complex and multidisciplinary variables as cohesion, sustainability and subsidiarity confidence in this evaluation. Example of place evidence and economic-social trends from countries, regions and cities are mentioned and compared for fixing the distance among symbolic expected priorities and real potentials at the short time. At this scope the 2020 political addresses by government declarations and obligations, the regional potential attractive capital, the city potential public and private investments are illustrate with particular regard to the Italy position in the Southern of Europe future. The dissertation in the whole pays particular attention to relate the significant of European territorial evidence with the European policy and funds (e.g. the programming for internal areas distinguished respect to the inner areas ones). This permits to better clarify the different impacts and effects produced from European addresses when the national/regional interpretation does not take in account the relationship between territorial evidence and programming obligations that should increase employment and income. Finally, a set of feasible recommendations are launched on the short time providing viable, flexible, proper, effective and resilient answers to existing needs of territorial investments. These are due because expectations of citizens in front of the current period of economic stagnation. The strategic investment, in principle, should help territories (mainly cities) in having major perspective to realise a territorial regeneration accessing to mainstreaming financing linked to the new Structural Funds, which define the perspective horizon of long term European challenges. They imply joint capitalization, which means not just a(nother) prêt-a-portrait concept, and triggers a multifaceted approach ("quick & dirty" ideas / solutions). Drawbacks so far relate to fragmented territorial intelligence and the need for a certain critical mass willing to get involved. We mean the creating models for strategic integrated sustainable planning by addressing the efficiency of technology across various sectors (energy, climate change, public services, accessibility and transport, etc.) in different typologies and dimension of territory. It means supporting territories with the development of ambitious and innovative challenges embedded in comprehensive territorial agenda

Come sviluppare e valutare le politiche di coesione territoriale nella prospettiva 2020

Ricercare una comune metodologia quali-quantitativa coerente con le necessità espresse dal Consiglio UE nel 2011 per la stima della coesione territoriale è un impegno fondamentale della ricerca geografico-economica, al fine di individuare le misure concrete da adottare per rendere efficace la Strategia Europe 2020 in Italia utilizzando i potenziali territoriali regionali. Coerentemente con le ricerche in corso (la coesione è sempre localizzata; è dunque possibile misurarne la dimensione territoriale che la lega al comportamento dei sistemi socio-economici regionali: Prezioso, 2008), il paper svilupperà l’obiettivo trattando la coesione come mezzo, strumento e fine della politica territoriale regionale per misurare gli squilibri economico-sociali, ambientali e culturali (variabili strutturali del capitale territoriale regionale e locale) rispetto ai target europei fissati per rilanciare la crescita sulla base delle diversità territoriali. Questo carattere, già presente in Brunhes e Vallaux (1921), Jaia (1938), Schumpeter (1954), Sombart (1967), George (1967), Lo Monaco (1983), ne ha fatto, insieme a quello del capitale territoriale attuale e potenziale (Martin in Lennert 2006; Lennert 2010; Camagni 2010; Prezioso 2011), il tema centrale della ricerca geografico-economica europea più recente in materia di new regionalisation, superando le tradizionali interpretazioni (Porter, 1990; Storper, 1997) di capacità regionale. Per questo la coesione territoriale, già principale obiettivo della programmazione regionale europea 2013, è stata rilanciata nel 2011 (Cohesion Policy Programme of Polish Precidency of the Council of European Union) come necessaria all’attuazione della Strategia Europe 2020 (Barca Report, 2009; V Cohesion Report, 2010; Territorial Agenda, 2011), considerandola il mezzo e lo strumento con cui affrontare l’attuale periodo di stagnazione e crisi e generare diversi e originali modelli geografico-economico competitivi, policentrici, sostenibili (ESPON 2013). In molte regioni la Strategia 2020 deve rispondere ad una scarsa resilienza e all’aumento della vulnerabilità agli effetti prodotti dalle grandi “questioni”: Climate Change, Energy, Demography Change, Globalisation. La rinnovata Agenda Territoriale 2011 rilancia questi target evidenziando la necessità di sviluppare indicatori territoriali comparabili delle risorse reali e potenziali a scala regionale all’interno di una metodologia condivisa per rendere immediatamente efficaci ed efficiente le azioni di sviluppo. Alcuni metodi (Prezioso, 2006, 2008; Capello, 2008; Radej, 2008; Evers, 2009, Camagni, 2010), dopo un’iniziale sperimentazione, sembrano oggi in grado di misurare più di altri la coesione attraverso la valutazione d'impatto ex ante, stimando le relazioni di interdipendenza tra variabili socioeconomiche e ambientali, sommandole ai tradizionale indicatori del benessere regionale (PIL, occupazione, produttività) (Faludi, 2010)

Introduzione alla lettura

ESPON accompagna, dal 2002, l’analisi dei temi e degli indirizzi che informano l’agenda europea degli ultimi 15 anni, rappresentando un punto di riferimento sostanziale per chi si occupa di territorio seguendo un approccio interdisciplinare. Spaziando dalla geografia all’economia, dalla pianificazione alle politiche, ESPON ha sviluppato, ad oggi, una robusta base di informazione quantitativa e geografica e appropriati strumenti di rappresentazione dello stato dell’Unione, accumulati e aggiornati nel tempo alla ricerca di una sempre più stretta aderenza tra indirizzi “dello spazio europeo” e il “territorio reale” . Inizialmente lontani da quella concezione pienamente territoriale propria dell’approccio geografico europeo che si è manifestata dopo il 2007 , i contributi prodotti nell’ambito del Programma rappresentano un forte incentivo a rinnovare l’atteggiamento politico, economico, culturale nei confronti del valore che il territorio e la sua identità (intesa come capitale territoriale) hanno per lo sviluppo. Non è dunque un caso che le parole chiave dei diversi periodi di programmazione (sostenibilità, competitività, coesione) costituiscano, seppure diversamente declinati, il comune riferimento di tutti i progetti. Di fronte alle sollecitazioni dell’ultimo quinquennio (crisi, spread, austerità, rigore), il campo dei progetti ESPON, sempre transnazionali, si è aperto alla revisione e condivisione di paradigmi e contenuti operativi, affrontando e sviluppando temi quali: i cambiamenti strutturali e le grandi tendenze del territorio europeo tra il 2007 e il 2013 (la sostenibilità, il policentrismo, l’urbano-rurale, la dimensione competitiva e smart delle città anche medio-piccole, il comportamento sociale delle istituzioni, la governance, ecc.), ed i conseguenti scenari; l’integrazione tra i principi della ricerca e della pianificazione attraverso la creazione di modelli multidisciplinari applicabili a differenti scale - NUTS 2, 3, 4, 5 - per l’individuazione delle capacità coesive e competitive endogene entro i limiti di sostenibilità; le procedure e gli strumenti di valutazione comuni per la scelta di politiche e direttive europee (Territorial Impact Assessment -TIA) e di piani/programmi (Valutazione Ambientale Strategica - VAS); lo sviluppo massivo di DataBase, GIS e manuali dedicati alla georeferenziazione, al benchmarking urbano e alla gestione di processi trasparenti, sussidiari, integrati; la definizione e l’applicazione di un protocollo di indicatori statistico-economico-geografici (anche sotto forma di serie storiche) condivisi e accreditati a sostegno dei processi analitici e decisionali. In Italia, molti cambiamenti nella ricerca applicata e nello sviluppo di piani regionali e locali, tematici e strategici, sono stati introdotti e sperimentati attraverso i risultati delle Priorità ESPON, confermando il potenziale valore di nuovi orientamenti transnazionali per la pianificazione e la programmazione anche per il nostro Paese.Since 2002, ESPON has accompanied the analysis of the issues and guidelines that have informed the European agenda over the last 15 years, representing a significant point of reference for anyone involved in “territory issues”, following an interdisciplinary approach. Ranging from geography to economics, from planning to policies, ESPON has developed, to date, a strong base of quantitative and geographic information and appropriate tools representing the state of the Union, which have been accumulated and updated in time, always in search of a closer adhesion between addresses of the " European space " and of the " real territory " . Initially far from a fully territorial understanding typical of the geographical European approach appeared after the 2007 , the contributions produced by the programme are a strong incentive to renew the political, economic, cultural attitude in the respect to the value that the territory and its identity (meant as the territorial capital ) have for the development. It is therefore no coincidence that the keywords of the different programming periods (sustainability, competitiveness, cohesion ) constitute, albeit differently declined, the common reference for all projects. To cope with all the requests of the last five years ( the crisis, spreads, austerity, rigour), the field of ESPON projects, always transnational, opened to revision and sharing of contents and operational paradigms, by addressing and developing topics such as: • the structural changes and trends in the European territory between 2007 and 2013 (sustainability, polycentricity, the urban-rural, size, the competitive dimension of both smart and small-medium cities, the social behaviour of institutions, governance , etc..), and the resulting scenarios; • the integration of the principles of research and planning through the creation of multidisciplinary models applicable to different scales - NUTS 2, 3, 4, 5 - for the detection of endogenous cohesive and competitive capacity within the limits of sustainability; • the procedures and assessment tools common to the choice of policies and European directives (Territorial Impact Assessment-TIA) and of plans/programmes (Strategic Environmental Assessment - SEA); • the massive development of Data Base, GIS and manuals dedicated to geotagging, urban benchmarking and management of transparent, subsidiaries, integrated processes; • the definition and implementation of a protocol of statistical, economic and geographic indicators (also in the form of time series) shared and credited to the support of analytical and decision-making processes. In Italy, many changes in applied research and development of regional and local, thematic and strategic plans, have been introduced and tested through the results of the ESPON Priorities confirming the potential value of new trans-national guidelines for planning and programming also for our country

L'Italia in Europa: da «Lisbona/Gothenburg» a Europe 2020

L’articolo riassume i risultati di ricerche geografico-economiche condotte tra il 2000 e il 2011 analizzando l’origine della crisi in Italia e la sua collocazione nel contesto europeo alla luce della mancata attuazione economico-territoriale delle riforme richieste dalle strategie Lisbona/Gothenburg e Europe 2020. L’obiettivo è discutere perché la diversità territoriale che contraddistingue l’Italia nel contesto UE rappresenti il carattere fondamentale di coesione territoriale e come questa sia utile ad affrontare l’attuale periodo di stagnazione e crisi e generare diversi e originali modelli geografico-economico competitivi, policentrici, sostenibili, superando le tradizionali interpretazioni di capacità regionale favorendo l’investimento sul capitale territoriale potenziale in relazione agli obiettivi della Strategia Europe 2020.In order to analyse the origin of the crisis in Italy and its place in the European context, the paper summarises the results of some geo-economic researches conducted between 2000 and 2011 in the light of the failure to implement economic reforms required by the territorial strategies Lisbon/Gothenburg and Europe 2020. The paper’s aim is to discuss why the territorial diversity, that distinguishes Italy in the EU context, represents the fundamental character of the territorial cohesion and how the cohesion is useful to address the current period of stagnation and crisis and generate different and original geographic economic competitive, polycentric and sustainable models, overcoming the traditional interpretations of regional capacity and favouring the investment in potential territorial capital in relation to the pillars of the Europe 2020 Strategy

Politiche e strumenti per sviluppare sostenibilità e competitività delle città e delle destinazioni turistiche

Sostenibilità e Competitività presentano stretti legami con il turismo ed il suo sviluppo. Perché questo legame si attui e dia luogo a risultati positivi di accrescimento progressivo e stabile di ricchezza ed occupazione, è necessario che la dimensione territoriale interessata allo sviluppo di un’attività turistica sia pienamente compresa nella diversità che la distingue da altri territori e nei potenziali di risorse da impiegare, perseguendo scelte economiche ‘convergenti’ negli obiettivi (occupazione, PIL, produttività, coesione sociale, innovazione) soprattutto nelle città o in luoghi urbanizzati a forte potenziale appeal turistico. In questa sede, il tema, di cui sono evidenti le implicazioni politico-strumentali, viene affrontato alla luce dei risultati ottenuti dalla più ampia e trasversale ricerca condotta per l’European Spatial Program Observatory Network (ESPON) dal titolo “Territorial Dimension of Lisbon-Gothenburg Process” , allo scopo di misurare la capacità territoriale nazionale e regionale di generare competitività in sostenibilità, da perseguire attraverso la nuova stagione dei Fondi Strutturali europei 2007-2013

Methodological Approach for a new Economic Geography of the Territorial Cohesion in Europe and Italy

Al momento, il Territorial Impact Assessment (TIA) sembra il migliore processo a sostegno dello sviluppo di politiche globali e locali sostenibili, poiché capace di individuare problemi e obiettivi territoriali/spaziali (attraverso diverse fasi ex ante ed ex post), scenari politici/programmatici e misure di impatto economico, ambientale, culturale e sociale. Delineando vantaggi e svantaggi per ciascuna opzione politica, TIA esamina tutte le possibili sinergie e alternative sulla base del contesto territoriale (diversità geogra( ca). Al ( ne di studiare l’integrazione degli obiettivi della Politica di Coesione 2020 e post nei programmi di sviluppo italiani (nazionali e regionali), TIA è stata applicata alla valutazione della Coesione Territoriale nelle regioni italiane, attraverso il metodo STeMA, concepito per sostenere una visione strategica integrata di politiche generali, territorializzate e settoriali a livello decisionale NUT1, 2 e 3. Questo strumento è stato concepito come parte integrante della valutazione della dimensione territoriale delle strategie europee. Nell’ambito della ricerca in corso (PRIN Project 73. PI Maria PREZIOSO – 20155NXJ8T – SH3 “Territorial Impact Assessment della coesione territoriale delle regioni italiane. Modello, su base place evidence, per la valutazione di policy rivolte allo sviluppo della green economy in aree interne e periferie metropolitane “), viene illustrato di seguito il metodo e l’applicazione ex ante seguiti per ottenere la prima parte dei risultati attesi, discussi anche a livello europeo.In this time, the Territorial Impact Assessment is the best process to support the development of global/local sustainable policies. It identi( es territorial/spatial problems and objectives (by several ex ante and ex post steps), the main political/ programming scenarios and options measuring impacts on economic, environmental, cultural and social ( elds. It outlines advantages and disadvantages for each policy option and examines all possible synergies and trade-o) s on the base of the territorial context (geographical diversity). In order to study the integration of the Cohesion Policy objectives 2020 and post within the Italian development programs (national and regional), the evaluation of Territorial Cohesion in Italian regions by TIA was applied. * e STeMA-TIA model has been devised to support an integrated strategic vision of general, territorialised and sectoral policies at NUT1, 2 and 3 decision-making levels. * is assessment tool was created as part of the territorial dimension evaluation of the European Strategies. In the context of ongoing research (PRIN, 2015), the method and the ex ante application are illustrated in the following in supporting of attended results of ( rst step, which was critically discussed at European level, too

Regional territorial cohesion: what indicators for an EU sustainable perspective?

Research on territorial cohesion indicators detects and describes a set of territorial cohesion indicators to be applied in the new programming period 2007-2013. The main aim of the research is to enhance territorial cohesion through the improvement of indicators fit to evaluate and measure the different levels of cohesion at local, national and European level. Thus, the methodological approach has to describe, analyse and detect a set of territorial cohesion indicators and to evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the indicators’ systems currently used to measure territorial cohesion. This kind of approach is relevant both to current and new Structural Funds programming period. Moreover, the study proposes a methodological approach to implement an effective management system for the 2007-13 Programmes (STeMA). Sound and efficient indicators’ systems are crucial for monitoring and evaluating Structural Funds Programmes and projects. The 2000-2006 programming period produced a good progress in the quality of such systems which contribute to a more effective Programme management. The current monitoring systems contain inadequacies and the indicator sets can be further developed. In line with the strategic character of the 2007-2013 programming period, more attention must be paid to strengthening the link between Structural Funds Programmes and the Lisbon and Gothenburg Strategy. This paper provides an overview of the indicators’ systems currently used, while featuring also a practical guide to implement an indicators’ system suitable to evaluating territorial cohesion in the new programming period. After a description of the territorial cohesion concept and an in-depth overview of the new programming period objectives, the study analyses the main cohesion indicators used at European level and their effectiveness in monitoring activities. Some indicator systems analysed are: - the 27 indicators concerning employment, innovation and research, economical reforms and social cohesion - the 42 indicators, that are considered more flexible than the previous ones- the 14 indicators, chosen among the 42 indicators because of their relevance - EUROSTAT regional indicators - ESPON 3.3 project indicators. In the framework of Lisbon Strategy for a sustainable economic growth, the key challenge to strengthen territorial cohesion implies the improvement of EU regions’ territorial “capital” and potentials. The enhancement of territorial integration is achieved through the promotion of trans-European synergies and clusters of competitive and innovative activities. The use of a sound and effective system to manage territorial cohesion Programmes is crucial to promote Lisbon and Gothenburg objectives. Within this context the use of adequate tools, such as indicators, is pivotal to measure, monitor and evaluate the Programmes’ impact, result and output. According to the results of the indicator systems analysis, the most effective methodology to measure cohesion levels is the STeMA (Sustainable Territorial environmental/economic Management Approach), used also in ESPON 3.3 project “Territorial Dimension of the Lisbon/Gothenburg Strategy”. This approach pays particular attention to territoriality, economy, employment and the socio-pedagogical sector of intervention. The STeMA process is a multi-disciplinary management system used to calculate territorial capability with regard to competitiveness, sustainability and cohesion. Its standardised methodological approach can be applied at national, regional and sub-regional level by using a dedicated GIS tool. The main cohesion indicators are drawn from ESPON research and aggregated through a qualitative and interactive matrix

Territorial cohesion facing the crisis: how do indicators address newly the issue?

A lot of words were spent about European cohesion policy, linking it to territorial development and cooperation, balanced growth, polycentrism, urban drives, rural areas, ultra-peripheries (Territorial Agenda 2007). Thus, it could presuppose the cohesion policy influences Energy, Climate Change, Demography, Global Economic Competition, Accessibility, Geographical structure of UE (cities, regions), etc., because, changing the policy paradigm through cohesion, new investments in potential growth areas are needed, but, at the same time, regional and urban influencing areas change promoting cooperation and cohesion to create integrated areas. At the moment, in Europe, researchers and institutions’ points of view are various: 1 traditional indicators (like GDP) are not exhaustive to explain how wealth is distributed onto regions and it helps cohesion 2 the indicators’ polarization is made without territorialisation 3 some territorial indexes, like ETCI, could be manipulated, excluding demographic situations, education, employment and life expectancy, from the cohesion calculation. 4 territorial indicators for cohesion remind to complex visions, so we should design a territorial base and adopt a systemic approach and a method to impact assessment, to identify territorial indicators 5 time dimension is fundamental to measure cohesion status and progress 6 it’s wrong to implement only a few and simplified indicators in cohesion measure 7 some experiences of Territorial Impact Assessment (TIA) and new methodologies could help cohesion characteristics to be identified So, a Multilevel Governance and a Multiscalar Approach are needed, as well as the role of territorial indicators to maintain comparable information in particular to territorial diversity. A support for operational tools for territorial impacts, policies’ implementations and orientations should be developed. Instead policy makers suggest 1 the use of traditional cohesion indicators included in past 4 relative reports 2 the development of policy composite indicators able to measure regional competitiveness in terms of attractiveness, labour market, accessibility, too 3 territorial cohesion as aspect of sustainable development which minimises conflicts. It crossrefers to costs of environmental protection, environmental externalities, environmental performance or economy, policies' assessment and solidarity. So, it’s necessary to change the approach and to use indicators for policy processes too

La geografia al tempo della crisi: territorial rigor vs spatial austerity

Taking inspiration from the ideas of A. Pettifor (2006), A. Rodriguez-Pose (2010), M. Kitson, R. Martin and P. Tyler (2011), the section analyses and discusses the so defined Geographies of Austerity in front of the current crisis. The resulting critical considerations suggest to adopt rigorous measures rather than austerity measures, in order to not invalidate the development efforts implemented by states and regions in Europe. Discussions are also directed to that part of the European and Italian economic and political Geography that used traditional tools to read economic trends in a strongly territorialized key. These considerations are discussed to investigate the causes which hindered to take significant preventive measures, as in Italy