The 1€ Houses Initiative: Agency Building and Cultural Heritage Preservation in Small Italian Municipalities

Signe Williams [e-mail]

This essay carries out an anthropological investigation of the 1€ houses initiative in Italy.  The initiative is a strategy employed by small municipalities in order to revive depopulated towns and villages, or “ghost towns”, by selling uninhabited and decayed properties for one euro. Through an analytical focus on agency, the essay examines to what extent the 1€ houses initiative confers agency to depopulated Italian municipalities in their aim to preserve their cultural heritage. I first suggest that the 1€ houses initiative can be considered a means for depopulated Italian municipalities to gain agency, as they implement alternative strategies for saving their towns and thus preserve their heritage. I then contrast this with the argument that the 1€ houses initiative ultimately does not revive municipalities as it leads the way for rural gentrification, which manifests through the influx of outside privatised economic forces that despite contributing to the monetary economy of these towns, do not sustain essential services nor preserve the cultural landscape in the long term. In conclusion, I argue that rather than the 1€ houses initiative, alternative revival strategies such as the “welcoming initiative”, which aims to preserve cultural heritage by giving uninhabited houses and abandoned local businesses to refugees arriving in Italy, can be considered as agency conferring processes. 

I grew up in a small Italian municipality. My village today has 112 inhabitants, a number which is decreasing every year due to an aging population, younger locals moving away, and lack of in-migration. Apart from a small grocery store, a restaurant and a café, the village is dependent on the neighbouring village and the nearest larger town for all essential services. For most of the year the streets of the village are deserted. Yet in the summer the village revives, as Italians retreat to their holiday homes and tourists staying in the many AirBnbs spread across the village, walk around admiring the characteristic built environment and landscape. Brightly coloured “for sale” signs stand out on the medieval brick walls of various buildings. Out of 110 houses, many remain uninhabited and “unsellable” to potential long-term newcomers, due to lack of incentives for residency. My village is affected by the struggles of depopulation and housing discomfort faced by thousands of small municipalities across Italy. As the village slowly dies out, the traditions that are constituent of its identity will disappear, leaving behind a beautiful but desolate cultural landscape.

“Can selling its homes for the price of an espresso save this Sicilian town?” (Tondo 2019). This headline refers to one of the many towns throughout Italy in which municipalities are selling uninhabited and decaying properties for one euro – i.e. the price of an espresso. The 1€ houses initiative (Case a 1€) represents a strategy employed by small Italian municipalities throughout the country to revive depopulated towns and villages, which are becoming “ghost towns”.

This essay will situate the 1€ houses initiative within a discussion of Italy’s political and cultural landscape. Italian politics are characterised by a lack of trust in the government by many citizens due to recurrent clientelist and corrupt politics (Schneider & Schneider 2003). In this context, the general perception that the government will not be present to provide help and care aliments practices of alternative and localised means of acquiring political agency. This political landscape is entangled with the Italian cultural context, in which the country’s cultural and historical heritage has great importance for the Italian sense of identity. A significant part of Italy’s cultural heritage is made out of the country’s small towns and villages, including their historical built environment and their cultural traditions. In a context where the government is a source of uncertainty and disappointment (Bock 2016), the importance of Italy’s cultural heritage for its citizens’ sense of belonging and self is reinforced.

With this background, this essay will discuss the 1€ houses initiative with an analytical focus on agency. The essay will unpack to what extent the 1€ houses initiative confers agency to depopulated Italian municipalities in their aim to preserve their cultural heritage. Cultural heritage will be considered in terms of its contribution to strengthening the agency of people within broader economic and political contexts. In the first part of the essay, it will be proposed that the 1€ houses initiative can be considered a means for depopulated Italian municipalities to gain agency, as they implement alternative strategies for saving their towns and thus preserve their heritage. This idea will be challenged by the argument that the result of the 1€ houses initiative ultimately does not revive these municipalities, as many houses are bought by outsiders and turned into holiday homes or short-term rentals, which are left empty for most of the year.

This argument will be situated within a discussion on the effects of rural gentrification, and how this phenomenon is linked to the spread of holiday short-term rental services. It will be suggested that loss of cultural heritage results from rural gentrification, which manifests through the influx of outside privatised economical influences that, despite contributing to the monetary economy of these towns, do not sustain essential services nor preserve the cultural landscape. It will ultimately be argued that rather than the 1€ houses initiative, alternative revival strategies may be considered as agency conferring processes. This will be exemplified by the “welcoming initiative” - in particular the case study of the town Riace, Calabria, that was revived by giving uninhabited houses and abandoned local businesses to refugees arriving in Italy from across the Mediterranean.

From Housing Discomfort to Ghost Towns

Following the post-World War II period, small Italian municipalities have been suffering from the phenomenon of depopulation. Depopulation occurs as a consequence of people abandoning smaller towns and villages due to economic and social factors, such as lack of work, remoteness, and absence of (essential) services. Further, depopulation is exacerbated by Italy’s increasingly aging population, which affects small municipalities in particular . The conditions that cause depopulation are summed up in the phenomenon of “housing discomfort” (Confcommercio-Legambiente 2016). A report by Confcommercio-Legambiente (ibid.) indicates that among the Italian municipalities that suffer from housing discomfort (4295 total), 1650 are destined to become “ghost towns” – towns that do not reach the minimum “survival” threshold in the various demographic, social, economic and service categories.

Small municipalities in Italy preserve much of Italy’s cultural heritage. This includes much of the country’s cultural landscape, cultural values and historical built environment that characterise many Italian small towns and villages. Further, 92% of all Italian PDO-certified products are produced in the small municipalities (Symbola-Coldiretti 2018). The making of these products require methods and techniques that have been maintained within the smaller communities and that are closely linked to the specific traditions of the areas from which they originate. The ghost town phenomenon, understood as an ultimate phase of the housing discomfort phenomenon (Iannotta 2016), thus poses a risk to a significant part of Italy’s cultural heritage, which will gradually disappear together with its towns. The rich and strong cultural heritage of Italy is fundamental for social constructions of Italian identity (Maggi 2012). The importance of a shared Italian cultural heritage for Italians’ notions of identity and belonging is enhanced by Italy’s unstable political landscape, characterised by a lack of trust in the government. This political and cultural climate favours the development of alternative and localised means of acquiring political and economic agency by part of many Italian communities (Legambiente 2018). The following paragraphs will discuss the 1€ houses initiative as such a potential alternative means for small Italian municipalities to gain agency, rooted in the preservation of cultural heritage.

The 1€ Houses Initiative

The 1€ houses initiative was first devised in 2008 by the mayor of Salemi, a small municipality in Trapani, Sicily, with the purpose of favouring the requalification of the territory through the renovation of old houses and repopulation of the town (De Cesco 2019). Small municipalities all across Italy have since adhered to the initiative in various attempts to revive their towns. The 1€ houses initiative involves decaying uninhabited houses that are given as donations by private owners to local municipalities to sell for a symbolic price of 1€ (Case a 1 euro 2020). Exact regulations may vary depending on the single municipality, but generally as part of the purchasing agreement, buyers must envisage a restructuring and re-evaluation project of the property within a year of the purchase, commence renovation of the property within maximum 2 months following granting of all permits and support notarial fees. The buyer must also pay a safety deposit of 5000 euros that is refunded after 3 years (ibid.). In the case of some municipalities buyers must also commit to investing at least 15 000 euros into the renovation of the property (Nuccio 2019). While the actual selling price of the property may be as little as 1 euro, the initiative does require potential buyers to have considerable monetary funds for the renovation of the houses, therefore delimiting the social group that may take advantage of this offer.

The Social Significance of Houses

The introductory home page of the 1€ houses initiative’s website stresses the importance of taking care of abandoned properties as a resource for Italy’s cultural development, and the role of the initiative in preserving the country’s historical and cultural identity (Case a 1 euro 2020). The project’s mission statement reads as follows: “The strategy to improve the housing environment and reclaim our cultural identity is to revive the small abandoned centres or to redevelop buildings in a state of abandonment, with a story that is our history” (ibid.). The statement emphasises the need to overcome the housing discomfort, which these municipalities are suffering from, as a means of reclaiming cultural identity, with a focus on culture in terms of its potential for strengthening the agency of its people (Stefano et al. 2012). The mission statement highlights the important link between the social and the built environment.

The social significance of houses has been discussed extensively in anthropology. The link between the preservation of buildings and people is made evident by studies on houses and the body – houses are considered as an extension of the person and thus as an extension of the self (Carsten & Hugh-Jones 1995). Bourdieu’s (1973) account of the Berber house is among the most influential ethnographic descriptions of the link between people and their houses. In particular, Bourdieu argues for the dualistic relationship between the materiality of the house and the social realities within it. This is made evident for instance by the way that gender roles within the Berber community are reflected in the organisation of the house: “the low and dark part of the house is also opposed to the high part as the feminine is to the masculine: besides the fact that the division of work between the sexes, which is based upon the same principle of division as the organization of space entrusts to the woman the responsibility of most objects which belong to the dark part of the house...the opposition between the upper part and the lower part reproduces within the space of the house the opposition set up between the inside and the outside” (ibid.: 100). Bourdieu thus illustrates the importance of the built environment for the social. Further, “if people construct houses and make them in their own image, so also do they use these houses and house-images to construct themselves as individuals and as groups” (Carsten & Hugh-Jones 1995:3).

The built environment is thus intimately related to the identities of its people. Further, as with their identities, houses are entangled with the life-processes of the people who build and live in them. In his Treatise on Architecture, Filarete (1965:12) describes buildings as living humans: a building “...sickens when it does not eat, that is when it is not maintained and begins to fall off little by little exactly as a man when he goes without food, and finally falls dead”. Iannotta (2016: 276) describes depopulated small Italian municipalities as “the last bastions of stubborn identity rooted in places just through their memory...”. As these towns decline and become ghost towns, the memories and identities they carry will be wiped out with them (Mocciola 2010). Therefore, in a context such as Italy in which cultural heritage is fundamental for identity and belonging (Maggi 2012), the preservation of the historical built environment of Italy’s small municipalities assumes the meaningful social function of safeguarding the identity and sense of belonging of many Italians.

1€ Houses as Countergovernmentality

Buildings are concrete representations of political relationships. In their discussion on housing struggles, Alexander et al. (2018) unpack “the home” as a paradigmatic case where political economy intersects everyday moralities and affect. As social and affective units, homes are not simply places of domesticity and engagement with local actors, but also a conduit through which broader political and economic relations play out (ibid.). The 1€ houses initiative is telling of the discrepant relationship of trust between Italian citizens and the Italian state (Bock 2016). The mayor of the small municipality Montieri, Tuscany states that the town adhered to the 1€ houses initiative as a provocation aimed at the Italian government, exemplified in the slogan employed by Montieri “buy a house for the price of an espresso” (Legambiente 2018). The initiative represents an alternative strategy of survival for small municipalities in the absence of official governmental guidelines and incentive measures for housing and economic initiatives that allow for small municipalities to attract inhabitants. The 1€ houses initiative is thus articulated as a resilient means through which small Italian municipalities acquire political and economic agency, within a political landscape that fails to provide the measures needed for their survival and well-being.

Understood as a provocation aimed at the Italian state, the adherence to the 1€ houses initiative by small municipalities across Italy might be considered as a form of what Appadurai describes as “countergovernmentality”: a “governmentality from below...animated by the social relations of shared poverty, by the excitement of active participation in the politics of knowledge, and by its own openness to correction through other forms of intimate knowledge and spontaneous everyday politics” (Appadurai 2001:35). Fennell (2011) employs Appadurai’s concept of countergovernmentality in her argument that the actions and formal critiques carried out by residents of the Chicago public housing complex, Horner, concerning the demise of subsidised home heating due to redevelopment, represents a form of political empowerment for the otherwise disempowered Chicago public housing residents. Relating to a different context, the 1€ houses initiative might similarly be considered a means for disempowered small Italian municipalities to attain agency. For instance, Montieri’s adherence to the project has resulted in the sale of 15-20 uninhabited houses and supported the village’s tourism as some houses have been turned into B&Bs by their new owners (Case a 1 euro 2020). Ollolai, Sardinia is another apparently successful example, where almost 30 houses have been sold. New owners include foreign young professionals or retirees, and Italians who have returned to their hometown (Marchetti 2019).

Rural Gentrification as Loss of Cultural Identity

While some municipalities seem to have managed to revive their towns by means of the 1€ houses initiative, the project’s ultimate effectiveness in preserving the cultural identity of communities is questioned (Legambiente 2018). Legambiente (ibid.) notes that in order to revive these municipalities it is not sufficient for mayors to simply sell houses to outsiders, if essential services remain absent. In fact, the mayor of the small municipality Teora, Campania notes how most of the houses bought as part of the 1€ houses initiative will only be used as holiday homes for short periods of the year (Case a 1 euro 2020), resulting in towns remaining empty.

To unpack the problematic effects of the 1€ houses initiative it is useful to situate the case study within a discussion on the phenomenon of gentrification – in particular, its transformative effects on community identities and how it is linked to the increase of short-term rentals. In their study on the effects of Airbnb on New York’s urban landscape, Wachsmuth and Weisler (2018) consider gentrification as a direct consequence of the spread of short-term rental services. As most of the 1€ houses initiative agreements do not oblige buyers to become effective residents of the towns, many of the houses bought through the initiative ultimately become either seasonal holiday homes or are turned into BnBs for short-term tourists to enjoy (Montrella 2019). Thus, even though these sales contribute to the economy of the small municipalities via taxes and increasing tourism, they do not solve the issues of depopulation and housing discomfort. On the other hand, the initiative may result in “rural gentrification”: the process by which rural communities face major socio-cultural transformations and displacement caused by the influx of affluent newcomers (Ghose 2004). In particular, Spain (1993) stresses how rural gentrification leads to changes in community identity as a consequence of reallocation and privatisation of resources, and conflicts over cultural values.

In-migration of outsiders resulting from the 1€ houses initiative is in many cases prompted by the notion of the “rural idyll” (Ghose 2004: 531). The attractiveness of “rural idyll”, understood as an idealised lifestyle of beautiful landscapes, slower pace of life and “rural ways of living”, is a major motivating factor for rural migration in Britain and the US (ibid.) – the same may be considered for Italy. Newcomers and locals may hold very different notions of local traditions. Newcomers are more than often attracted by their own images of local traditions rather than how they are effectively lived (Spain 1993). This is reflected for instance by diverging consumption expectations among locals and newcomers. Ghose’s (2004) ethnographic study on the effects of rural gentrification in Missoula, Montana, reveals how locals feel that new stores, consisting of trendy boutiques, expensive restaurants and designer stores, “are not for people from Missoula, these are for bigwig spenders” (ibid.:542). As mentioned earlier, the obligation to invest 15.000 euros in housing renovation limits potential buyers to wealthier groups. Iannotta (2016:280) points out how the beauty and identity of the small Italian municipalities “are linked to their fragile balance with the delicate physical and social context in which they are situated; therefore, their vulnerability is very high and subject to the continuous challenges of modernity”.

There are many examples of historical Italian towns that have suffered from rural gentrification. Civita di Bagnoregio, Lazio (although not part of the 1€ houses initiative) has up to 5000 tourists visiting a day during the tourist season, but only 11 inhabitants (Needleman 2017). The village has no pharmacy, school, hospital or other essential services (ibid.). Rather, most of Civita’s houses remain empty for most of the year as they have become holiday homes of wealthy Italians or expats (ibid.). In an article on Civita, Needleman (ibid.) notes how the village has “the unfortunate air of a Disney set: a hyper-clean, historically accurate medieval town as realized on a Universal Studios backlot”. Despite not being part of the 1€ houses initiative, the case of Civita di Bagnoregio exemplifies the potentially problematic outcomes of the 1€ houses initiative. The example serves to show how relying on the influx of outsiders to revive these municipalities fails to address the underlying issues of depopulation and housing discomfort. Rather small municipalities need long-term plans to develop the local territory and create incentives for residency (Legambiente 2018). When implemented in the absence of effective incentives for residency, the 1€ houses initiative risks being detrimental to small municipalities by contributing to the disappearance of their cultural identities. The 1€ houses initiative therefore loses its potential to confer agency to small Italian municipalities by leading the way for rural gentrification.

Welcoming Villages

In the attempt to effectively address issues of depopulation and housing discomfort, some small Italian municipalities have adopted alternative strategies for revival to the 1€ houses initiative. These include “welcoming villages” (borghi dell’accoglienza) – small municipalities that have successfully revived their communities by welcoming migrants and refugees arriving in Italy in search for new homes (Legambiente 2018). The “welcoming strategy” is based upon the case of Riace, Calabria, which successfully managed to reverse depopulation by accepting asylum seekers. As part of the initiative, Riace’s municipality committed to integrating newcomers into the cultural landscape of the town, by offering them uninhabited houses and asking them to revive abandoned local businesses (ibid.). Integration measures also included Italian lessons and teaching local crafts (ibid.). This guaranteed the survival of essential services and allowed for the reopening of crafts shops, which are representative of local cultural heritage. The initiative thus provided Riace with a long-term measure against depopulation and housing discomfort, as it created incentives of residency for future newcomers and revived the local economy, relying not simply on tourism.

Lucano (in Zolin 2020), the mayor of Riace notes how the cultural tradition of the town is linked to agriculture and zootechnics - “tourism should be complementary to this identity. A community can’t rely on outsiders to survive, as this would mean assuming an artificial lifestyle” (Lucano, in Zolin 2020). Preserving the cultural heritage of the small municipalities is thus an integral part of the welcoming villages initiative, as a strategy for revival. In 2018, Lucano and his welcoming initiative were attacked in the media by Matteo Salvini (Italy’s Interior minister at the time and head of the populist and anti-migrant party Lega). The critique escalated in Lucano getting arrested with the charge of incitement to illegal immigration. The absence of Lucano, saw that the refugee program collapsed, and the migrants were moved out of Riace to facilities across Italy (Nasso 2018). Today, Riace newly suffers from depopulation and housing discomfort as houses remain empty and essential services are lacking (ibid.). The note on the failure of the welcoming initiative due to anti-migrant governmental action may serve as a final reflection on the difficulty of extracting the transformative influence of the state on human existence. This influence can be implemented by means of policies that dictate the destiny of the built environment, and the cultural landscapes that it embodies, to either be revived or left to die out.

Conclusion

In this essay, I explored to what extent the 1€ houses initiative, employed as a revival strategy, confers agency to small Italian municipalities that are suffering from depopulation and housing discomfort. This question has been situated within a discussion of the importance of Italy’s cultural heritage, in particular the built environment of historical small municipalities, for Italy’s cultural and national identity. Initially, I unpacked the notion that in the context of Italy’s political and cultural landscape, within which the Italian government is not trusted to provide adequate care for its citizens, the 1€ houses initiative may be considered as a form of countergovernmentality. The initiative is employed by small municipalities as a provocation towards the government, which aims to point out the lack of official guidelines and incentive measures for housing and economic growth provided by the government. In this sense the 1€ houses initiative might be considered to confer political agency to the small municipalities which take part. This idea has been contrasted by the argument that the 1€ houses initiative is not an adequate means for preserving the cultural heritage of the small municipalities, as the initiative is a potential vector for rural gentrification. Rural gentrification has been discussed as a consequence of the spread of short-term rental services and with regards to its transformational influence on community identity. In many cases, the 1€ houses initiative relies on outsiders to revive small municipalities through tourism. The “welcoming village” initiative, discussed through the case study of Riace, has been proposed as an alternative revival strategy to the 1€ houses initiative. This alternative has been shown to be effective in providing a long-term solution for the issues of depopulation and housing discomfort, allowing this way for small Italian municipalities to survive in the future. Therefore, it is argued that this initiative confers agency to small Italian municipalities as it allows them to regain long-term economic and social stability.

References

Alexander, C., Hojer Bruun, M. & Koch, I. 2018. “Political Economy Comes Home: On the Moral Economies of Housing”. Critique of Anthropology, 38 (2).

Appadurai, A. 2001. “Deep democracy: Urban governmentality and the horizon of politics”. Environment and Urbanisation 14 (2).

Atlante dei Piccoli Comuni. 2015. ANCI, iFEL. Available at: https://www.fondazioneifel.it/. (Accessed 16th April 2020).

Bock, J. J. 2016. “The second earthquake: how the Italian state generated hope and uncertainty in post-disaster L’Aquila”. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 23(1).

Bourdieu, P. 1973. ‘The Berber House,’ in Rules and Meanings, M. Douglas (ed.). Harmondworth: Penguin.

Carsten, J. & Hugh-Jones, S. 1995. “Introduction”, In About the House: Lévi-Strauss and Beyond.

J. Carsten & S. Hugh-Jones (eds). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Case a 1 euro. 2020. Available at: https://casea1euro.it/. (Accessed 17th April 2020).

Confcommercio-Legambiente. 2016. “Rapporto sull’Italia del “Disagio Insediativo”: 1996/2016 Eccellence e Ghost Town nell’Italia dei Piccoli Comuni”. Serico Gruppo Cresme.

De Cesco, A. F. 2019. “Noi delle case a un euro: già venduti 200 edifici in tutta Italia”. Corriere della sera. Available at: https://www.corriere.it/salone-del-mobile/notizie/noi-case-un-euro-giavenduti-200-edifici-54c05ba8-8945-11e9-bfcc-731d367bbf04.shtml.

European Commission. n.d. Quality schemes explained. Available at: https://ec.europa.eu/info/food-farming-fisheries/food-safety-and-quality/certification/qual ity- labels/quality-schemes-explained. (Accessed 17th April 2020).

Fennell, C. 2011. “’Project heat’ and sensory politics in redeveloping Chicago public housing”. Ethnography, Vol. 12(1). Filarete. 1965. Treatise on Architecture. New Haven; London: Yale University Press.

Ghose, R. 2004. “Big sky or big sprawl? Rural gentrification and the changing cultural landscape of Missoula, Montana”. Urban Geography, Vol. 25(6).

Iannotta, F. 2016. “Ghost Towns and Housing Discomfort: The Landscape of Risk in Italy”. UPLanD, 1(1).

Legambiente. 2018. “Scatti di futuro: storie di piccoli comuni che innovano”. (Available at: https://www.legambiente.it/sites/default/files/docs/scatti_di_futuro_storie_di_piccoli_comuni_c he_i nnovano.pdf). Lucano, M., in Zolin, N. 2020. “Benvenuti a Riace, dove i migrant hanno risollevato l’economia”. Corriere della sera. Available at: http://reportage.corriere.it/senza-categoria/2015/a-riacelaccoglienza-ai-migranti-e-di-casa-2/.14

Maggi, M. 2012. “Conversation Piece: Intangible Cultural Heritage in Italy”, in Safeguarding Intangible Cultural Heritage. M. L. Stefano, P. Davis & G. Corsane (eds.). Woodbridge, Suffolk; Rochester, NY: Boydell & Brewer.

Marchetti, S. 2019. “Cash for babies, $10,000 gifts, $1 homes: The battle for the soul of rural Italy”. CNN travel. Available at: https://edition.cnn.com/travel/article/italy-town-pays-people-to-move- intl/index.html.

Mocciola, A. 2010. Le vie Nascoste. Napoli: Gianmarino Editore. Montrella, S. 2019. “Qualcuno compra le case in vendita a 1 euro?”. AGI. Available at: https://www.agi.it/cronaca/vendita_case_euro-5139241/news/2019-03-14/.

Nasso, A. 2018. “Riace addio, il Natale triste del borgo simbolo dell’accoglienza: senza migranti e con il sindaco ‘esiliato’”. La Repubblica. Available at: https://video.repubblica.it/cronaca/riaceaddio-il-natale-triste-del-borgo-simbolo-dell-accoglienza-senza-migranti-e-con-il-sindacoesiliato/323222/323843.

Needleman, D. 2017. “Who will save these dying Italian towns?”. The New York Times Style Magazine. Available at: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/07/t-magazine/abandoned-italian- towns.html.

Nuccio, F. 2019. “Scoppia la febbre della ‘case a 1 euro’ a Sambuca”. ANSA. Available at: https://www.ansa.it/sicilia/notizie/2019/01/19/scoppia-la-febbre-della-case-a-1-euro-a-sambu ca-il- video_1bde059b-4073-481e-bad3-50e665adbb41.html.

Schneider, J. & P. Schneider 2003. Reversible destiny: mafia, antimafia, and the struggle for Palermo. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Spain, D. 1993. “Been-heres versus Come-heres: Negotiating conflicting community identities”. Journal of American Planning Association, Vol. 59(2).

Stefano, M.L., Davis, P. & Corsane G. 2012. “Touching the Intangible: an Introduction”, in Safeguarding Intangible Cultural Heritage. M. L. Stefano, P. Davis & G. Corsane (eds.). Woodbridge, Suffolk; Rochester, NY: Boydell & Brewer.

Symbola-Coldiretti. 2018. “Piccoli comuni e tipicità”. I Quaderni di Symbola.

Tondo, L. 2019. “Can selling its homes for the price of an espresso save this Sicilian town?”. The Guardian. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jan/26/sambuca-sicily-housesone-euro-foreign-buyers.

Wachsmuth, D. & Weiser, A. 2018. “Airbnb and the rent gap: Gentrification through the sharing economy”. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, Vol. 50(6).