Looking for the Mediterranean way of territorial development. Creating a new intangible asset based framework.

The construction of the concept of territorial relational capital is not an end in itself, and from the perspective of public managerial control, it opens up the possibility that this can be measured and accounted for. The territorial relational capital considered as a set of relations and active exchanges, as a system of relations among parties in a territory, requires specific metrics to determine its value. The characteristic features of these specific and necessary measurements can be based on the efforts of data collection capable of building a reference system for a more comprehensive measurement model. At a public level and from a territorial slant, commitments of this kind are certainly expensive especially in the initial phase of the measurement process. It is natural that the repetition of the measurement processes besides ensuring an on going relationship with the actual parties themselves and with the territory, facilitates the processes supporting the information system, improves the value of the data and measurements, and determines benefits in the management mechanisms of public governance. Once the system is started, the aims of the measurement process are those of monitoring and appreciating the changes in the system of relations in an analytical way, both in absolute values and in terms of quality. In the management of development process dimension the measurement process, is not only internal but, being dependent on the significant involvement of external parties, it is also a "function" of the system of relationships that have been generated. In this sense, the process of measuring the territorial relational capital needs specifically dedicated resources and activities as well as an adequate extension of the information system. The management value of Territorial Relational Capital measurement in public sector, especially at the local level, is that of providing support for local authorities strategic planning and control. At a scientific level, in the Public sector and in particular in the development process area the system of intangible resources is considered, in most cases, according to its macro size and, thus, according to a mainly aggregate approach. In current literature, in this sense, there has been a significant interest in issues related to the estimation of the value and to the volume of investments in macro-level intangible resources with reference to the different policies adopted. The main line in studies, in the macro perspective, originated with Corrado, Hulten and Sichel ‘s work (2009) on investment in intangible assets in the U.S.. Following this stream, some studies were carried out in Japan (Fukao, Miyagawa, Mukai, Shinoda and Tonogi, 2009), in the United Kingdom (Marrano, Haskel and Wallis, 2009), in France and Germany, (Delbecque - Boufour, 2011) in Korea, (Pyo Chun, and Rhee 2011) and in the EU (Corrado, Hulten, Jona-Lasinio and Iommi 2012). Considering the quality of public sector as a possibility to enforce a development process and following Edvinsson, and Bounfour (2004) and Rodriguez Pose (2014) the great heterogeneity of the assets should be addressed or based on specific and different criteria. The financial and quantitative based approach and the non-financial metrics one have derived, mainly, from the Narrative approach whose pragmatic nature has long been established . In any case the relevance of representing intangible asset in order to address development process is something influenced by a specific approach to the idea of development of measurement and of course a particular shape of the value mix for a community. That means that we measure, we structure a policy and we represent the impact and the results according to some fix and homogeneous concepts of development taking into account a precise and stable idea of relational capital. Considering the UE development policy, it is clear that the value mix and the social relational capital, in Mediterranean area are structured differently from the continental part of Europe. To define development policy or to measure and represent results and impacts without considering this relevant specificity could dramatically affect the efficacy of investments for the development process itself. This work, following a cognitive approach on specific policy cases and policy regulations, tries to consider that :Managerial tools and reform processes do not always work the same in different institutional contexts;Political system and administrative cultures have to be accounted for;Culture /cultures of a country and its institutional features are the scenario where changes take place ; Intangible asset for a country is a variable concept . As a result, this work aims at defining a frame in which the intangible asset connected with relational capital can be shaped according to a specific value mix that can generate a new trend consisting in social innovation and social enterprises, co-design of public policies co-delivering , coproduction, co-financing.