TO Davos investors, economists and political decision makers are wondering about the near future of the global economy and on new geopolitical balances. In an increasingly fragmented world, the questions that cyclically return to the center of the debate are always the same: how to cooperate in a context of growing tensions, where to find new sources of growth, how to truly invest in human capital.
These are questions that do not remain confined to the rooms of the World Economic Forum. On the contrary, they find a concrete – often problematic – response in individual countries. Italy is one of these cases. The picture drawn bylatest Oxfam Italia report on poverty and inequality it clearly shows how wide the gap between global ambitions and national reality remains.
Poverty in Italy: stable numbers, increasing fragility
In 2024 almost one Italian in five lived at risk of income poverty: around 11 million people with resources lower than 60% of the national median. Alongside this area of vulnerability, over 2.2 million families – equal to 5.7 million individuals – were in conditions of absolute povertywithout sufficient incomes to cover a minimum basket of essential goods and services.
The overall figure remains substantially stable compared to 2023but they hide behind this apparent estate signs of worsening. In fact, theincidence of absolute poverty among families with an employed reference person (15.6%), confirming that work alone is no longer enough to avoid the poverty trap. Inflation, high rents and stagnant wages continue to erode purchasing power.
Criticisms also remain conditions of minors: absolute poverty among children and young people reaches 13.8%the highest level since 2014. And the situation worsens further for families for rentespecially those with at least one foreigner (37.2%) and for families with children (32.3%).
Wealth is growing, but it is increasingly concentrated
In the last fifteen years the net national wealth increased of over 2,000 billion euros in nominal terms. But the increase it wasn’t shared at all. Around 91% of the new wealth ended up in the hands of the richest 5% of families, while just over 2% went to the poorest half. Between 2010 and 2025 the gap widened further. The share of wealth held by the richest 10% rose from 52.1% to 59.9%, while that of the poorest 50% fell from 8.5% to 7.4%.
In 2025 alone, 79 individuals increased their assets by over 54 billion euros, reaching a total of 307.5 billion. Today the top 5% check almost half of the national wealthmuch more than the bottom 90% of the population has.
Inequalities and democracy: a structural link
This gap between widespread poverty and concentrated wealth it is not just a social or economic issue. It directly affects the quality of democracy. According to the study Income Inequality and the Erosion of Democracy in the Twenty-First Century by Eli G. Rau and Susan Stokes, rising inequality is one of the main factors of democratic erosion in the 21st century.
The research analyzes over 90 democracies between 1995 and 2020 and identifies cases of democratic backsliding: not sudden breakups, but a gradual weakening of institutionsfrom the compression of freedom of the press to the reduction of the independence of the judiciary and Parliament.
The central point is not so much the average income of a countryhow much the concentration of wealth. Where increasing shares of income and assets accumulate in the hands of top 1% and top 10%increases the probability that they will emerge leaders capable of exploiting resentment and polarizationemptying the democratic rules from within.
Post-Covid policies: emergency interventions, no structural turning point
In the post-pandemic period, government responses have predominantly moved along one emergency line. In Italy, after the phase marked by Citizenship Income and from the extraordinary supports introduced during the health crisis, policies to combat poverty have been reoriented towards more selective and conditioned toolslike theInclusion Allowance and the Support for Training and Work.
A paradigm shift that, according to Oxfam, has narrowed significantly the audience of beneficiariesleaving large segments of the vulnerable population uncovered: low-income workers, families with intermittent employment, households without formally recognized fragility.
Tax bonuses, temporary discounts and measures lump sum they helped cushion the immediate impact of inflation, but without affecting the structural causes of the loss of purchasing power. The result is one fragmented social protection networkwhich intervenes ex post and in a non-homogeneous way, without managing to build a stable embankment against the expansion of vulnerability.
This is where the crux comes in back to Davos. Without a structural rethinking of redistributive, work and welfare policiesthe promises of inclusive growth they risk remaining disconnected from the reality of the countries. And that distance between institutions and citizensalready deep, continues to nourish mistrust, polarization and democratic fragility.
