Mountain municipalities, now to protect life in the highlands
Living in the mountains is not just a matter of altitude or slope, but involves coming to terms with the complexity of an area where physical aspects are intertwined with economic and social problems
The new classification of mountain municipalities returns a map of Italia's mountains that stretches across the whole country. There are now 3,715 municipalities considered mountainous, equal to 51% of the boot, distributed between north (40%), centre (25%) and south (35%).
Compared to the definition proposed at the end of 2025, the new scheme makes up for the vulnus that had penalisedthe Apennine mountains with respect to the Alpine ones, arousing strong protests in the institutional (regions), associative (above all Anci and Uncem) and scientific (with the appeal of the geographical community and more than 150 professors) spheres. In fact, reducing support for the mountains to a restricted fortress, considered the guardian of the 'true' mountainity and often not even representative of the most fragile territories, seemed to conflict not only with the aims of the new law no. 131/2025, but also with Article 44 of the Constitution.
If, therefore, the sense of this reform must be read in favouringthe repopulation of mountain territories and, ultimately, in guaranteeing full citizenship to those who live there, restoring a definition of mountains that is more in line with the one that has shaped Italian political geography since 1952 also seems more consistent with the dictates of the Constitution. In fact, it should not be forgotten that the Constitution assumes a vision of the mountains not as a mere natural environment or tourist resource, but, in homage to a more complex interaction between man and the environment, as simultaneous protection of the communities that inhabit them and perform an essential function of care and protection of the territory.
From this perspective, the approach adopted by the law itself remains limited. Recourse to criteria of a physical nature (altimetry and slope) is in fact the expression of an outdated conception since the scientific debate has highlighted the importance of integrating morphological data with other indicators, such as peripherality, socioeconomic marginality, income and depopulation, also enriching the discourse on 'internal areas' and the marginalisation and fragility of places. In other words, separating the mountain from the human element entails the risk of reproducing a dichotomy already experienced: on the one hand a mountain "without men", on the other a human presence uprooted from the mountain context. With the effect of reserving the former for the comfort of city dwellers - condemning the mountain to an eternally tourist function - without caring about the lives and needs of those who actually live there.
The real challenge, still to be played out, will therefore be to identify a more restricted list of municipalities to accessincentives for mountain health and schools, youth entrepreneurship and smart working. Living in the mountains is not just a question of altitude or slope, but implies, above all, coming to terms with the complexity of an area where the physical aspects are intertwined with the economic and social problems of the highlands.
