Michele Santurro

The study analyses the settlement patterns and residential mobility motivations of the two largest extra‐EU migrant communities in Rome—Bangladeshis and Filipinos—combining unique individual‐level population register data with an original survey data. Adopting an intra‐urban and comparative perspective, it explores how sociodemographic characteristics, community background, and neighbourhood context shape (re)location patterns and underlying motivations. Results show distinct spatial trajectories: Bangladeshis display strong clustering in low‐income peripheral areas, driven by ethnic attraction, affordability constraints, and the consolidation of enclave economies in small‐scale trade. Filipinos, by contrast, exhibit greater spatial dispersion, associated with employment opportunities in domestic and care work within affluent households. While Bangladeshi residential concentration reflects both social support networks and structural barriers in the housing market, Filipino settlement patterns highlight employment‐related mobility and long‐term integration in a niche labour sector. The findings underline the interplay between individual preferences, own‐group preferences, and structural constraints typical of Southern European housing and welfare regimes. By linking residential mobility to labour market segmentation and welfare transformations, the study contributes to a broader understanding of migrant settlement processes and spatial inequality in Southern European cities.

The Italian Online Probability Panel (IOPP) is the first initiative in Italy designed to produce high-quality longitudinal survey data for monitoring social transformations. Developed in alignment with leading European experiences—such as LISS, ELIPSS, GESIS panel, etc.—it brings Italy into the broader landscape of advanced survey infrastructures, enabling both cross-sectional and longitudinal analyses. Launched in early 2025, IOPP is based on an offline recruitment strategy using a push-to-web approach, drawing from a nationally representative probability sample of approximately 10,000 individuals aged 18–74 from the national population register. The data collection is structured around five annual CAWI waves, centred on a core questionnaire that tracks stable constructs such as family and housing, health, education, employment, income, leisure, social integration, and political attitudes. These are complemented by rotating or one-time modules developed through open calls to the research community. To ensure inclusivity, the panel also integrates offline participants through paper questionnaires sent via postal mail. The calibration phase is expected to conclude by the end of 2025, with the panel fully operational from 2026. Data will be released in compliance with FAIR and Open Science principles with the aim of offering a collaborative infrastructure, which encourages contributions from a wide range of stakeholders, including researchers, policymakers, and public institutions.

The chapter highlights the importance of principles guiding open science in the specific case of data production for social sciences through the use of probabilistic and non-probabilistic panels. It offers guidance for researchers, institutions, and policymakers to conduct research that shares knowledge with communities in ways that are morally sound and socially responsible. By adhering to core values, practitioners of open science can build trust, foster collaboration, and advance knowledge transparently, inclusively, and with accountability. This is crucial across all research contexts, especially in projects with significant collective value and social impact. Therefore, ethical review processes, appropriate handling of research data, and compliance with legal frameworks and professional standards play a central role in planning and implementing initiatives of broad scientific, social, and political relevance. The chapter examines these aspects through a comparative analysis of several European longitudinal studies, namely the LISS Panel (Netherlands), the UK Household Longitudinal Study (UKHLS), and the German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP), as well as through the Italian experience of the FOSSR project (Fostering Open Science in Social Science Research), which integrates considerations of responsibility and governance into the design of large-scale data infrastructures.

This article examines the evolving relationship between self-employed creative workers and trade unions, exploring the reconfiguration of collective engagement during the COVID-19 pandemic within a specific case study. Using a mixed-methods approach, we first analyse two decades (2002–2018) of European Social Survey data across different models of capitalism to provide an overview of unionisation trends among creative workers. We then integrate findings with qualitative insights from an Italian case study, focusing on workers’ changing strategies. While Varieties of Capitalism (VoC) contextualises institutional constraints to unionisation, Crozier’s Strategic Actor Theory (SAT) highlights worker agency in responding to them. Drawing primarily on SAT, we argue that, despite institutional barriers and occupational fragmentation, the pandemic created opportunities for workers to engage with unions, recognising their lobbying power in shaping emergency employment protection and income support. This study contributes to the debate on union revitalisation by showing how workers’ agency influences collective strategies in changing labour market conditions.

This chapter discusses the methodological innovations and challenges related to surveying child well-being in Italy, and the role of the GUIDE (Growing Up in Digital Europe) project. The GUIDE research infrastructure aims to develop a comparative longitudinal survey on child well-being across European countries. The proposed survey would follow two cohorts of children, one from ages 8 to 24, and one between ages 1 and 24. The data collected through this longitudinal survey will provide a holistic evaluation of child well-being and constitute an evidence base for public policies at different territorial levels in participating countries, as well as creating a unique dataset for comparative policy analysis. Building on pilots conducted in five countries in 2023, the Italian GUIDE team at the University of Bologna pre-tested the implementation of the survey in Italy. In collaboration with the Italian National Research Council (CNR-IRPPS), the team also produced a design for the pilot in Italy. This design will facilitate the evaluation of different survey modes, with particular interest in the option for a “push to web” via self-completion Computer Assisted Web Interviews (CAWI). The pilot will also permit assessment of the robustness of the survey instrument to regional heterogeneity, as data will be collected in northern (Lombardy and Emilia-Romagna) and southern (Campania and Apulia) regions; specific technical elements of the sampling strategy are discussed. After outlining the state-of-the-art regarding data on child well-being in Italy, the chapter analyses the work conducted so far to establish GUIDE in Italy, and presents pathways to the full-scale launch of the GUIDE survey in 2027 in Italy and Europe.

The Generations and Gender Programme (GGP) is a research infrastructure that generates harmonised, high-quality, and timely data on families and individual life-course trajectories. Its flagship instrument—the Generations and Gender Survey (GGS)—provides comparable evidence on demographic behaviour, intergenerational relationships, and the evolving social roles of women and men, thereby enabling scholars and policy-makers to address pressing societal challenges. Currently, a second round of comparative data collection is ongoing and will deliver fresh insights into persistent low fertility, the increasingly complex transition to adulthood, and new forms of family solidarity. In Italy, Wave 1 of the second round started in summer 2025, supported by the PNRR projects “Fostering Open Science in Social Science Research” (FOSSR) and “Aging Well in an Aging Society” (Age-It).

Online Probability Panels (OPPs) have emerged as essential research infrastructures for social sciences, offering robust tools for longitudinal analysis and evidence-based policy-making. However, the growing role of the Open Science movement demands systematic evaluation of their compliance. This study compares major European OPPs—including LISS, GESIS, the GIP, ELIPSS, and the Swedish and Norwegian Citizen Panels—focusing on their practices of openness, recruitment, sampling, and maintenance. Through a qualitative analysis of public documentation and methodological reports, the study examines how their diverse approaches influence data accessibility, inclusivity, and long-term usability. Our findings highlight substantial variability across panels, reflecting the interplay between national contexts, governance models, technological infrastructures, and methodological choices related to recruitment, sampling, and panel maintenance. Some panels demonstrate stronger alignment with Open Science values—promoting transparency, interoperability, and inclusive engagement—while others operate within more constrained frameworks shaped by institutional or structural limitations. This comparative analysis contributes to the understanding of OPPs as evolving knowledge infrastructures and provides a reference framework for future panel development. In doing so, it offers valuable insights for enhancing the role of OPPs in advancing open and socially engaged research practices.