by The global emergency caused by the Covid-19 pandemic was, in many respects, a watershed: it compressed time and forced us to change our daily lives. During that period there was a moment when cities changed pace. Not only empty streets or less crowded public transport: when and where people concentrated changed, neighborhood life changed, breaks changed, even queues changed. The pandemic functioned as a huge accelerator of the spread of remote work: it suddenly made “normal” something that previously seemed an exception, forcing organizations and workers to experiment on a large scale.
But remote work is not only a matter of individual convenience or organizational flexibility. When where we work changes, how we live space also changes: not only because commuting decreases (or is redistributed), but because consumption shifts, service needs are transformed, and the attractiveness of neighborhoods and medium-sized cities changes. Meanwhile, new social infrastructures emerge that become spaces for meeting, learning, and community.
It is on this transformation and on the intertwining between people and space that Ilaria Mariotti works, Professor of Applied Economics at the Department of Architecture and Urban Studies. From the location of firms to research on workplaces, up to the REMAKING project, Ilaria observes remote working as a lever of economic and social transformation: a phenomenon that involves individuals, organizations, and territories.
In this interview we enter the heart of the research: from the scenarios of the city of Milan to the policies that in Europe have attempted to transform remote work into an opportunity for peripheral areas, up to the risks that — if neglected — can amplify inequalities and tensions, especially on the housing and accessibility front.
Ilaria, your academic path starts from your degree at the University of Genoa and arrives at the economics of the territory, passing through international research experiences. Can you tell us how it unfolded?
After obtaining my degree, I received a scholarship that allowed me to undertake the Master of Science in Regional Science at the University of Reading, in the United Kingdom. During this path, my interest progressively oriented itself towards economics and regional sciences, with particular attention to the study of economic processes in different territorial contexts.
Subsequently, I obtained two PhDs: the first in Applied Economics at the University of Genoa, in Italy, and the second in Economic Geography at the University of Groningen, in the Netherlands. In this period, I moved to Milan for personal reasons and, in parallel, for the strategic position of the Lombard city, which constituted a valid starting point for my frequent trips to the Netherlands.
After the PhD, I entered the Politecnico di Milano as a research fellow in Management Engineering. Then I moved to the Department of Architecture and Urban Studies (at the time DiAP) and here I have been an associate professor since 2016.
I am satisfied with my educational path because it allowed me to gain experience in different contexts, both in Italian and foreign universities. This conviction also guides the composition of my research group, which includes scholars coming from different regions of Europe and beyond. I am firmly convinced of the importance, for an institution such as the Politecnico di Milano, of attracting and enhancing talents trained in different academic contexts, in order to promote an international and multidisciplinary research environment.
What pushed you to change your object of study? Is there an event in particular that led you to make this choice?
In Reading, in the United Kingdom, my passion was born for the study of territorial development and of the interactions between economic activities, institutions and space. It was a fortuitous encounter, a crossroads of circumstances: initially I had reached the University of Reading thanks to a scholarship from Sapienza University of Rome, intended for a different path. During the presentation of the Master in Regional Science I understood that that was the direction that I really wanted to undertake. The change of path was complex, but Sapienza supported my choice, allowing me to keep the scholarship and thus to follow the new training direction.
My teacher and source of inspiration in the field of regional economics was Philip McCann, one of the major scholars internationally of the economics of territory and of the location of firms. During the Master in Regional Science, I developed a deep interest in the study of territorial development gaps: on the one hand the central areas, characterised by greater wealth and economic dynamism, on the other hand the peripheral and rural areas, often subject to structural disadvantages and diseconomies. The analysis of these phenomena also implies a reflection on the consequences in terms of policy, with the objective of concretely supporting effective and targeted territorial development strategies.
What does the economics of the territory deal with?
My territorial studies focus mainly on economic and social impacts. As a researcher, I have participated in numerous projects, addressing different themes within the field of regional sciences. Initially, my research activity focused on firms’ location choices. My doctoral thesis, as well as in part the work carried out during the Master in the United Kingdom, analysed this theme, with particular attention to the role of public incentives in the relocation of firms in three countries: Italy, the United Kingdom and the Netherlands. Subsequently, I dealt with the labour market: at the Department of Management Engineering I carried out a study funded by Unioncamere on processes of skill upgrading and on the dynamics of firms’ internationalisation.
Starting from 2016, my research activity focused on workplaces, including coworking spaces, maker spaces and fab labs, within a project funded by my Department. On this theme, in 2019 I obtained funding for a COST Action (European Cooperation in Science & Technology), a European project aimed mainly at the creation and strengthening of scientific networks. The COST Action provides for the organisation of meetings, seminars, conferences and training schools, as well as the funding of small grants intended for young researchers.
With the emergence of the pandemic, the theme of workplaces acquired increasing importance: knowledge workers, unlike other professional categories, were pushed to work predominantly remotely, generating an increase in demand for “third places” of work. In the project, we placed particular attention on the new workplaces located in peripheral and rural areas, with the objective of understanding how these can contribute to territorial development and socio-economic cohesion.
The COST Action CA18214, concluded in 2024, involved about 115 researchers from all over Europe and offered me the opportunity to collaborate also with lecturers from other departments of the Politecnico di Milano. Managing such a large number of participants was demanding, but the project represented a significant source of professional satisfaction, because I was able to observe the growth and development of the skills of numerous young researchers. With many of them I still maintain professional contacts and active collaborations.
Immediately afterwards, together with some of the partner universities of the COST Action, we obtained funding for the CORAL-ITN Marie Curie project, which made it possible to activate 15 PhD scholarships dedicated to the study of the impacts of new workplaces and of coworking spaces in peripheral and rural areas. This project produced numerous scientific publications and led to the publication of a collective volume recently released, contributing significantly to the dissemination of the research results.
The concrete impact of your research is clearly visible also in the last project you are dedicating yourself to: REMAKING (REmote-working Multiple impacts in the Age of disruptions: socioeconomic transformations, territorial rethinKING, and policy actions). Can you tell us about it?
The REMAKING project was born in continuity with the previous studies conducted by me on third places of work, expanding the analysis to knowledge workers who operate remotely and to the effects of this form of work on individuals, organisations and territories.
The project, with the University of Bologna as lead partner under the guidance of Professor Marco Di Tommaso, is multidisciplinary in nature and involves economists, sociologists, geographers and psychologists. Academic partners from Italy, France, Germany, Lithuania, Ireland, Portugal, Greece, the Czech Republic, Ukraine and the Basque Country participate.
What are the results of the REMAKING project?
It is important to underline that remote work is not a phenomenon born with the pandemic, but was already widespread, in particular in the countries of Northern Europe, where it had reached greater consolidation. In recent years, however, various external shocks have had a significant impact on ways of working and on workers’ mobility, such as the pandemic, but also geopolitical changes. In particular, the Russian invasion of Ukraine forced numerous individuals to leave the country; among these, knowledge workers relocated more easily, being able to continue their activity from anywhere, with a computer and a stable connection being sufficient.
The REMAKING project focuses on four main case studies: digital nomadism, the post-pandemic period, high-tech-intensity sectors and remote workers forced to flee from war contexts. The effects of remote work manifest themselves at different levels: for people, in terms of wellbeing, work–life balance and productivity; for organisations, in relation to restructurings, spaces and new operational practices; and for territories, in particular in medium-sized cities and in peripheral areas.
A relevant aspect that emerged from the research concerns the transformation of company headquarters: organisations progressively reduced traditional spaces and rethought the office as an attractive place, capable of stimulating meeting and collaboration among workers. This process also involved an increase in shared spaces and of services linked to company welfare, profoundly changing internal dynamics and the social function of work environments.
What are the impacts of remote work on individuals?
Within the REMAKING project, we carried out a quantitative analysis based on 14,000 observations, aimed at identifying the determinants of life satisfaction of knowledge workers at the European level. The study was co-authored with Federica Rossi, from the Department of Architecture and Urban Studies at Politecnico di Milano, and Laura Vici and Pierpaolo Pattitoni from the University of Bologna, and was presented at the Regional Studies Association conference in London. The main result highlights that life satisfaction is on average higher among those who work remotely, provided that this mode is not adopted exclusively for the entire working week. The positive effect, in fact, manifests itself up to a certain threshold, beyond which it tends to decrease.
This datum brings to light a crucial element: face-to-face contacts remain fundamental. Proximity — in its different geographical, relational, social, institutional and organisational dimensions — continues to play a central role in processes of knowledge exchange, in the building of trust and in the coordination of complex activities.
A further area of research concerns the possible relationship between remote work and birth rates, a theme that arouses strong interest and that I intend to deepen further. Some studies carried out in the United States suggest that even a partial adoption of remote work — limited to a few days a week — can have positive effects on birth rates. This evidence could take on particular relevance in the Italian context, where remote work could contribute to compensating, at least in part, for shortcomings in family support policies. The analysis of such a relationship therefore appears crucial for understanding the demographic implications of the transformations under way in ways of working and for orienting any policy interventions.
In REMAKING you also study the impact of remote work on cities, including Milan. What emerged?
The aspect that interests me most concerns the impact of this phenomenon on the territory, a theme on which my research group and I have published various scientific contributions. In particular, a study published in the journal Futures focuses on the case of Milan. In this work we elaborated three evolutionary scenarios for cities, differentiated on the basis of the share of remote work, in order to analyse the possible urban and territorial transformations associated with the spread of remote working.
- If the share of remote work exceeds a certain threshold, the city runs the risk of depopulating. It is the so-called “doughnut effect”, which has happened in cities such as San Francisco and New York, but not in Milan.
- If instead the share remains as today (one–two days of remote work), the risk is an increasingly gentrified city. This means an expensive city and with property values skyrocketing, and therefore less accessible for young people and creatives.
- If the share were to increase stably (for example three–four days a week), a relocation towards medium-sized cities and peripheral areas could occur, thus favouring a rebalancing.
On 12 February we presented at the Politecnico di Milano the results of a qualitative survey based on 56 interviews conducted with workers of the Municipality of Milan. From the analysis the relevance of remote work in improving quality of life emerged clearly, in particular as regards the management of children or elderly parents, as well as the reduction of stress, of economic costs and of fatigue associated with home-to-work commuting.
In the context of public administration, remote work can also configure itself as a tool for staff retention: in the face of remuneration levels that are not particularly high, the possibility of working remotely represents a significant benefit in terms of overall wellbeing and reconciliation between professional and private life.
A further element of relevance concerns the possible reallocation of time saved thanks to the reduction of journeys. Such time can be dedicated not only to the individual and family sphere, but also to activities of care and civic participation at the local level. In this perspective, remote work can contribute to strengthening social capital and public participation, taking on a value that goes beyond the organisational and productive dimension to acquire a broader territorial and value-based connotation.
What, instead, are the impacts on peripheral and rural areas in Italy?
In our country a particularly significant change was recorded (as we pointed out in the working paper La crescrita del lavoro da remoto e ibrido e la nuova geografia del lavoro): before the pandemic the country occupied the second-to-last place in Europe for the diffusion of remote work, while in the subsequent period it placed around sixth position, according to Eurofound data.
Remote working represents a relevant opportunity for rural areas, in that it can contribute to attracting and retaining talents. At the base of this phenomenon a change of paradigm is observed: if in the past it was predominantly the worker who approached the workplace, today it is in part work that approaches the worker. In this perspective, people who leave their rural contexts of origin for study or occupational reasons — often directed towards big cities or abroad — can maintain active relationships with their territories of origin. This favours the circulation of skills, experiences and relational networks, potentially contributing to processes of local development and to the revitalisation of peripheral areas.
Among the case studies analysed, a significant example is represented by the SEI Ventures incubator (as we pointed out in the working paper Revitalizing rural areas through innovation and entrepreneurship: public and private initiatives to train, attract and retain human capital), active in the provinces of Avellino and Benevento. The project originates from the initiative of some young people who, after leaving the territory of origin to study in Northern Italy and subsequently work abroad, returned during the pandemic with the objective of investing in their areas of origin. Thanks to the skills acquired and the relational networks consolidated, both at national and international level, these actors promoted the creation of a coworking space and of a business incubator, aimed at supporting and developing innovative start-ups. The case highlights how the return of qualified human capital, favoured also by the spread of remote work, can generate positive effects in terms of local entrepreneurship and territorial regeneration.
An element of particular interest concerns the policies adopted by some public bodies — including the Municipality of Milan, the Emilia-Romagna Region and the Municipality of Bologna — oriented to the promotion of proximity “third places”, intended to allow workers to carry out their tasks in alternative spaces and closer to home. In this perspective, for example, an employee of the Municipality of Milan living in Gessate can avoid daily commuting towards distant central offices, instead making use of structures located near their home. Similarly, the Emilia-Romagna Region activated a widespread network of workspaces distributed across the entire regional territory, including mountain areas. Such initiatives are based on a cross-analysis between demand and supply, based on identifying workers’ places of residence and on mapping coworking spaces, libraries and other already existing spaces, subsequently reconfigured and enabled as environments of distributed work.
The location of firms is certainly influenced by the country’s policies. What is the situation in other European countries?
In some countries this theme has been addressed in a more structured way than in ours. In Ireland, for example, the State promoted and funded the network called “Connected Hubs”, a network made up of over three hundred spaces between coworking and incubators distributed capillarily across the territory, with particular concentration in rural areas. The initiative pursues the objective of retaining qualified human capital and favouring the training of younger generations through the organisation of training paths, also in the university sphere, thus reducing the need for migration towards the main urban poles, such as Dublin.
In Italy, instead, many initiatives were born from below.
One can think, for example, of the Southworking association, which activated community outposts — often placed inside public libraries and other spaces granted by municipal administrations — intended for carrying out remote work, as well as experiences such as the Isola Catania coworking, which hosts in the urban centre firms oriented to generating employment opportunities for young people in the territory, with the objective of reducing the incidence of NEETs.
This phenomenon also responds to the needs of firms, which can settle in spaces that are more sustainable under the economic and environmental profile, sometimes located in contexts characterised by lower property costs. Similar dynamics are also observed on an international scale: in some countries, in fact, starting entrepreneurial activities requires the presence of a registered or operational office in the host country. In such circumstances — as in the Gulf countries, in Malaysia or in Singapore — coworking spaces configure themselves as a functional and flexible solution to meet such requirements.
Can you tell us what third places are?
They are places not only of work, but they are hybrid spaces (coworking spaces, smart work centres, maker-spaces, fab labs, open workshops, living labs, etc.) characterised by a “sense of community” that promotes and facilitates a high frequency of collaborations and interactions. Users of such spaces share knowledge, skills and relational networks, generating positive externalities in terms of increased productivity, stimulus to innovation and expansion of professional development opportunities. At the same time, these environments often present a marked social vocation, offering services such as baby-sitting, free after-school programmes, Italian language courses for foreign citizens and training and aggregation activities aimed at favouring interaction between the native population and migrant communities.
Beyond the individual dimension, such spaces exert a significant impact on the territorial contexts of settlement, configuring themselves as social infrastructures capable of activating dynamics of local regeneration. In this sense, they operate as enabling factors for the birth of new associations, informal groups and community services, contributing to the strengthening of social capital and to territorial cohesion.
In Milan, for example, the presence of numerous hybrid socio-cultural spaces is recorded — at least twenty-six according to recent estimates — frequently hosted in buildings owned by the municipality, granted in management at controlled rents. This phenomenon is the object of a design laboratory that I have been conducting for several years together with two colleagues: within this teaching experience, students are called to analyse specific Milanese neighbourhoods through the examination of socio-economic data, of the provision of services and of the needs expressed by the resident population, in order to elaborate design proposals for hybrid spaces capable of favouring social aggregation and countering dynamics of expulsion connected to processes of gentrification.
Moving to the countries of Northern Europe, libraries have long been places where people can work for free. In Milan this is happening for workers of the Municipality.
In this sphere a fundamental role is played by the policies and experiments put in place by administrations to transform existing spaces and to reuse some of them as shared work spaces.
So far we have spoken of the advantages of remote work for individuals. In your analyses have you also found risks?
Our empirical evidence is consistent with what has already been documented in the scientific literature of reference. At the individual level, the most relevant risk is that of isolation, which however emerges significantly especially in contexts of work entirely at a distance (fully remote), that is when the activity is carried out remotely for the entire working week. Direct contact and informal interactions in fact maintain a crucial role not only in fostering collaboration, but also in supporting high levels of productivity, creativity and innovative capacity.
Remote work also requires adequate management from the point of view of organisational leadership. In particular, the need emerges for targeted training paths both for managers and for other workers, in order to develop specific competences linked to the management of distributed teams. In this perspective, our findings indicate that, in the public administration sector, the adoption of dedicated coaching programmes represents an effective and promising practice.
Have you found risks also for the territory?
Also in this sphere the impacts can be both positive and negative. Coworking spaces tend in fact to aggregate and attract people and, to guarantee their economic sustainability, often integrate complementary services such as bars, catering and events open to the local community. The presence of such infrastructures can also activate dynamics of revitalisation in the surrounding areas, as observed in various deindustrialised urban neighbourhoods, where the increase in visitors contributes to stimulating demand for services and economic activities.
However, in rural contexts or characterised by high naturalistic value, the arrival of new workers can generate gentrification effects. Since such subjects generally have a greater spending capacity, increases are recorded in property prices and in housing demand, with consequent pressures on the local market. This process can determine exclusion effects for the resident population, which risks being progressively disadvantaged or forced to move to other areas.
In the REMAKING project, however, problematic cases were also analysed, which highlight the possible criticalities of such dynamics. An emblematic example is represented by some areas of Crete, where high tourist attractiveness, combined with the arrival of digital nomads, contributed to determining a significant increase in property values. In such contexts, the increase in pressure on the housing market generated particularly marked distortive effects in high season periods. During the summer months, in fact, situations were recorded in which local workers, because of the scarcity of affordable housing and the increase in rents, found themselves forced to resort to makeshift housing solutions, up to sleeping in their car. This case highlights in an evident way the risks of social imbalance that can emerge in the absence of adequate instruments of regulation and territorial planning.
The role of the local community therefore proves crucial. It is called to govern inflows, to define housing policies and access to services coherent with the characteristics of the territory and to promote pathways of integration of new workers within the local socio-economic fabric. A proactive and strategic management of such dynamics can contribute to maximising positive effects and to mitigating possible negative externalities.
In various countries, associative experiences are recorded that carry out a function of strategic intermediation. It is the case of the non-profit organisation Rural Move, active in Portugal, which supports remote workers and talents in identifying housing solutions and coworking spaces. These intermediary actors play a relevant role in processes of local development, because they facilitate the meeting between demand and supply, reduce information asymmetries and contribute to guiding the settlement of new residents in a more balanced and sustainable way.
What are the themes that you will develop in your future research?
The research projects in progress analyse the impact of remote work on local development, with particular attention to innovation, talent attraction and talent retention. In this framework two key concepts emerge: the right to stay, understood as the right to remain in one’s own territory without having to migrate to access qualified opportunities, and the right to disconnect, central in the debate on the balances between work and private life.
I am also broadening my gaze outside Europe, including Asia and the Middle East — in particular Thailand, Singapore, the United Arab Emirates and China — and the United States context, where the debate on the return in presence is particularly heated.
ceso.
A further axis concerns the role of universities in the new ecosystems of distributed work. Remote work increases the capacity of universities, including Italian ones, to attract talents and strengthens their function as “third places”, spaces of meeting between academia, firms and society. In this perspective, the creation of open and inclusive environments represents a concrete tool to enhance the third mission and generate social and territorial innovation.