"Settlement of the ASN has sparked an acrimonious debate in and out of Italian academia. People who were denied the scientific qualification despite possessing all requisites lamented academic boycott towards those who do not belong to academic circles. However, those who were granted the qualification were not in a better position than those without the qualification if they did not have an academic sponsor. Although highly qualified, they are likely to succumb to inferior competitors who are already settled in Italian academia. Indeed, the toxic mix of inadequate competitive financing in the higher education system and a high amount of corruption have made Italy a case study in discrimination and favouritism in faculty recruitment." (Source: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(17)30513-5).

Achieving the ASN is undeniably challenging, especially for those not engaged in full-time academic research. It effectively requires a mature academic profile with a robust record of publications, professional service, project management, technology transfer, and more. The process has significantly shifted the perception of academic research in Italy.

On the positive side, ASN has introduced stricter selection criteria, making it harder for unqualified individuals to enter academia, even through favoritism. However, it has also leaned too heavily on quantitative evaluations, which is eroding universities as places of culture and transforming them into production-driven institutions. This aligns with the "publish or perish" philosophy, now evolved into a harsher "publish and perish", as researchers are pressured to meet thresholds and navigate bureaucratic requirements. These constraints stifle the freedom and courage necessary for groundbreaking research, forcing academics to focus on safe and immediate applications...

Another paradox of ASN is its disregard for teaching activities. While this is understandable given its focus as a scientific qualification, it raises concerns because the qualification is a prerequisite for professorship. Unlike other countries, Italian academia does not distinguish between lecturers and researchers. Consequently, even those who are passionate about teaching more than research cannot be evaluated on their teaching ability. Some advocate for a clearer distinction between teaching and research roles, but I remain unconvinced. In rapidly evolving fields like Computer Science and Computer Engineering, teaching and research are deeply interconnected: teaching can inspire better research, while research can enhance the quality of teaching. That said, teaching should receive greater recognition. While I lack the expertise to propose a definitive solution, tools like student satisfaction surveys, which are currently underutilized, could play a larger role in evaluations.

Finally, the most pressing issue for research in Italy is the severe lack of financial resources. Demand for academic positions far exceeds supply, creating an extremely competitive career path. This often involves a decade or more of precariousness and uncertainty, even for the fortunate few who succeed. For many brilliant individuals, especially those less lucky, the prolonged instability forces them out of academia entirely, leaving them too old to seamlessly transition into the job market.

This systemic issue fuels the well-documented brain drain, as many talented researchers leave Italy in search of better opportunities abroad—a phenomenon not offset by the arrival of international researchers. Addressing this imbalance is critical to restoring Italy's academic and research competitiveness on a global scale.