How Lack of Engineering Capability Undermines Sovereignty
Why Southern European and MENA regions remain stuck in subordinate roles despite hosting major industrial assets — and how rebuilding local engineering ecosystems is key to escaping dependency.
Author
Tommaso Piccinno, Senior Process Engineer – CRF Italy
Sebastiano Martignano, research strategy advisor – CRF Italy
Abstract
Across Southern Europe and the MENA region, large-scale industrial infrastructures have been installed in regions that lack the institutional and educational capacity to design, govern, or adapt them. This article examines how this structural disconnection—between production and engineering sovereignty—has been deliberately maintained as a mechanism of dependency. Focusing on Puglia (Italy) and oil-producing MENA countries, we explore how the suppression of process engineering capabilities has prevented these territories from achieving technological autonomy, undermining their ability to transition toward sustainable and circular models. Drawing on recent academic literature and policy frameworks, we argue that reclaiming sovereignty starts with restoring the right and the capacity to design.
Industrial Development Without Technological Control
In many regions of Southern Europe, industrial presence is used as a proxy for development. But this assumption collapses under scrutiny. Puglia, for instance, hosts an impressive range of strategic infrastructure: from the ENI refinery and petrochemical complex in Brindisi to the ex-Ilva steelworks in Taranto, from large thermoelectric and biomass power stations to the logistics and port systems of Taranto and Brindisi. Yet the region does not possess the engineering capacity to govern, modify, or replicate any of these systems. There are no university programs in refinery process engineering, no specialized curricula in petrochemical systems or biochemical engineering for pharmaceutical production, despite the fact that these sectors are all physically present and economically significant.
This is not a marginal issue. It is at the core of a structural condition that Andreoni and Chang describe as “a country’s ability to develop new industries is directly tied to its capacity to master process technologies. Without this, production can happen, but the value and control are externalized” (Cambridge Journal of Economics, 2019). In other words, industrial presence alone does not generate sovereignty. That requires the knowledge systems to design and redesign.
Puglia is not unique. Across the Mezzogiorno, universities have been distanced from production systems, and engineering education has become increasingly theoretical, shaped by national academic metrics that reward publication volume rather than territorial transformation. According to Bianchi and Labory, this has led to “a triple disconnection: between university and industry, between public investment and engineering education, and between industrial presence and process innovation” (Industrial Policy After the Crisis, 2011).
The MENA Paradox: Oil Without Sovereignty
The same dynamic is observable in many MENA countries, particularly those rich in hydrocarbons. Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Algeria, and Egypt collectively operate some of the most advanced oil and gas infrastructures in the world. Yet, the design, optimization, and technological governance of these systems are almost entirely outsourced. Multinational engineering firms such as Bechtel, Technip, Sinopec, and Saipem dominate the project pipeline, from feasibility studies to turnkey delivery. Domestic technical universities, although numerous, are rarely embedded in these systems, and often play marginal role in the design of national infrastructure.
As UNIDO points out, “the absence of process engineering institutions in oil-exporting countries is not a market failure—it is a structural feature of a system designed to externalize value creation” (Industrialization in the MENA Region, 2020). This is not simply the legacy of colonial extraction, but a contemporary logic of control, exercised through institutional and educational dependency. Mazaheri is even more explicit: “Natural resources generate wealth only when coupled with sovereign institutions of technological transformation. By controlling the knowledge but not the land, dominant powers maintain control over both” (Oil Booms and Business Busts, 2016).
This artificial separation between resource ownership and technological autonomy is deeply geopolitical. It ensures that capital-intensive infrastructures in the global South operate under the technological supervision of global North institutions. It also reproduces a cycle in which local capacity is permanently underdeveloped—by design.
Engineering Sovereignty and the Circular Transition
The implications of this model are not only economic but environmental and developmental. Both the circular economy and the bioeconomy—key pillars of sustainability transitions—require robust process engineering capabilities. Without them, it is impossible to build systems that valorize industrial waste, convert biomass into bioproducts, or optimize closed-loop material flows. The OECD emphasizes this clearly: “Process engineering is central to the transition towards a circular economy, as it enables the design of sustainable value chains, waste valorisation pathways, and resource-efficient production systems” (Policy Highlights on Circular Economy and Innovation, 2018).
In regions like Puglia, the potential for a circular bioeconomy is enormous. Agricultural residues, wastewater, organic waste, and industrial by-products could be transformed into biofuels, biofertilizers, and green chemicals. But these resources remain underexploited, precisely because the region lacks the technical institutions and process design capacity to integrate them. The European Commission reinforces this point: “Regions with strong engineering capabilities are better positioned to implement circular economy models tailored to their industrial structure and resource base” (S3 Industrial Modernisation Platform, 2020).
The FAO and UNEP add that “localized engineering and process innovation are prerequisites for deploying circular bio-based systems in regions lacking legacy infrastructure” (Global Bioeconomy Outlook, 2021). In other words, green transitions do not happen by decree—they require embedded technical institutions capable of steering them.
Reclaiming the Right to Design
Recovering technological sovereignty in Southern and peripheral regions is not just a technical issue. It is an institutional, cultural, and geopolitical task. It begins with reterritorializing engineering education, re-establishing public design institutions, and re-embedding innovation within mission-oriented strategies.
As Schot and Kanger argue, “transformative innovation systems require mission-oriented, territorially grounded institutions capable of steering complex socio-technical change” (Research Policy, 2018). This means moving beyond fragmented funding and university rankings, and instead reconnecting knowledge production with real, place-based challenges.
The lesson is clear: without the power to design, no region can truly claim sovereignty. Industrial presence without engineering autonomy may create jobs and GDP, but it does not create resilience. Sovereignty begins with the right—and the ability—to imagine and build.
References
- Andreoni, A., & Chang, H.-J. (2019). The Political Economy of Industrial Policy in the 21st Century. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 43(4), 1129–1153.
- Bianchi, P., & Labory, S. (2011). Industrial Policy After the Crisis: Seizing the Future. Edward Elgar.
- UNIDO (2020). Industrialization in the MENA Region: Drivers and Challenges. Vienna.
- Mazaheri, N. (2016). Oil Booms and Business Busts: Why Resource Wealth Hurts Entrepreneurs in the Developing World. Oxford University Press.
- Schot, J., & Kanger, L. (2018). Deep Transitions: Emergence, Acceleration, Stabilization and Directionality. Research Policy, 47(6), 1045–1059.
- OECD (2018). Policy Highlights on Circular Economy and Innovation.
- European Commission (2020). Smart Specialisation Platform: Industrial Modernisation.
- FAO & UNEP (2021). Global Bioeconomy Outlook.
