This paper aims at reviewing, through the analyses carried out by foreignscholars, the role of Italy as a natural laboratory for the building of theoreticalmodels able to explain the features of dualistic development. In particular, theeconomic theories on development, arisen after World War II, began with thegeneral view of the existence of developed economies distinct from underdevelopedeconomies, thereby excluding, in macroareas, the consideration of systemscharacterized by developed, and not, sub-systems. In this sense, the Italian economyhas represented a special exception, especially after the explosive economicgrowth of the Fifties of the last century.Firstly, this paper carries out a brief reconstruction of the key stages thatoutlined Italian industrial development, then goes on with the analysis of interpretativemodels proposed by economists after the war. In doing so, we will tryto support the thesis of an «hegemonic» model according to which all the academicdebate was built.In the last part we will observe how, with respect to a gap left by economistsin the analysis of Italy laboratory in the late 60s, contributions from political sciencehave developed, which to some extent led to the reversal of the point ofview of this phenomenon and the emergence of new intangible factors for understandingthe different paths of development between North and South. Weconclude that the Italian dualism is no longer a laboratory for foreign analysts because- in our opinion - on the one hand the geographical reference of comparedareas has changed as a result of community policies for regional rebalance and,on the other, localisms have developed in Italy, each claiming its own question.
