The Sant’Anna School of Advanced Studies – Pisa (Italy) organized an advanced training program on “The Ethics of Climate Change: Duties, Responsibilities and Challenges”. The course was organized by Prof. Alberto Pirni (Scientific Coordinator), together with Dr. Adriano Angelucci (Coordination Staff), Dr. Stefano Calboli (Coordination Staff), Dr. Alessandro Chiessi (Coordination Staff), and Dr. Chiara De Lena (Administration Office).
The interdisciplinary course, held from 15 to 19 September 2025, explored the topic from legal, ethical, scientific, and financial perspectives. It brought together faculty from Sant’Anna School as well as other Italian universities, alongside a group of carefully selected participants – both Italian and international – chosen for their academic and professional backgrounds in fields related to environmental sustainability, including law, philosophy, science, and business. The program combined interactive workshops with active learning sessions, engaging participants in activities such as solving moral dilemmas, addressing real-world environmental challenges, and structured debates.
The following report outlines the main activities carried out and the key topics addressed during the course.
15 September – On the opening day, Francesco Corvaro (Italian Special Envoy for Climate Change / Polytechnic University of Marche) delivered a lecture on Climate, Peace, and Ethical Pathways: The Interconnected Roles of Water and Energy in Addressing Climate Change. He emphasized the global impact of climate change and the need for a multilateral approach, highlighting how climate change is reshaping the balance between humanity and nature, with severe consequences such as water scarcity, food insecurity, and desertification. These dynamics fuel migration and conflict, forcing communities to fight for survival and, in some cases, altering the behavior of entire populations. Corvaro concluded with a call to action, stressing that there is still time for mitigation and adaptation. He advocated investment in regions such as North Africa to strengthen water resilience, so that local populations are not driven to displacement or extremist groups. While solutions exist, he warned that decisive political choices are urgently needed, especially as migration linked to uninhabitable areas is becoming an unavoidable reality.
The morning continued with the introduction of the selected participants: young scholars and professionals from diverse backgrounds, including law, philosophy, the sciences, and companies engaged in sustainability analysis.
The afternoon featured a workshop by Giorgia Fosser (IUSS) titled How to Deal with a Changing Climate? She addressed climate change from a scientific and engineering perspective, engaging participants with conceptual reflections and practical exercises. Fosser began by distinguishing between weather and climate, climate variability and climate change, stressing that climate is not static. She explained the scientific basis of greenhouse gases, global warming, and the climate system, whose interconnected components are driven by solar energy. She then introduced the notion of climate drivers or forcings, both natural (e.g., volcanic activity) and anthropogenic (notably greenhouse gases since the Industrial Revolution), as well as the role of clouds in regulating the system. The focus then shifted to climate models, presented as simplified mathematical representations of reality used to study and predict climate trends. Fosser illustrated the differences between global climate models – three-dimensional, large-scale approximations – and regional climate models, which provide projections for specific areas. The session concluded with hands-on exercises in which participants experimented with scientific software used to monitor temperature changes and assess climate dynamics.
16 September – The second day was devoted to philosophical reflections on sustainability. In his lecture The Concept of Sustainability, Alessandro Chiessi analyzed the notion in relation to human action and technology, showing how technological acceleration has created a tension between productive systems and natural systems. Drawing on the history of philosophy, he recalled various conceptions of nature: as divine creation or object of study (the Bible, Galilei), as metaphysical reality assimilated to God (Spinoza), and as human nature itself, with Koselleck later describing nature as a “collective singular word”. In modernity, particularly in Ricardo, nature was redefined as a resource for production, turning the earth into an economic reservoir to satisfy needs and desires. Against this background emerged in the 1970s the concept of sustainability, closely tied to climate change and conceived as a counterbalance to the imbalance created by human activity, in order to preserve an ecological world. Central here is the notion of “system”: environment and climate as systems, and above all the opposition between productive and natural systems, each with its own temporality. The productive system follows the accelerated time of capital and labor (e.g., car production, independent of natural rhythms), whereas agriculture remains for instance bound to natural cycles. This distinction raises fundamental questions: is humanity inside or outside nature, and are we not privileging the productive over the natural system, although true sustainability can only be rooted in the latter?
Alberto Pirni delivered a lecture on Shaping the Ethics of Climate Change. He began with the role of philosophy, which, drawing on Aristotle, is not only to describe but to ask why phenomena occur, and to deconstruct assumptions by naming concepts. Applied to climate change, this frames sustainability as both a philosophical and practical challenge. Pirni traced the modern notion of sustainability to UN agendas of the 1980s–90s and its “three pillars”, while also recalling earlier sources: Carlowitz’s Sylvicultura Oeconomica (1713), which introduced the concept of Nachhaltigkeit in forestry, and the Club of Rome’s report The Limits to Growth (1972). He highlighted its historical roots in Bacon and Descartes, whose separation of mind and matter led to a dualistic view of the world and to a view of nature as a resource for human exploitation. A metaphor of the piano’s sustain pedal illustrated how sustainability today requires artificial intervention. Turning to climate ethics, Pirni situated it within applied ethics, highlighting Leopold’s “anti-Copernican revolution”: the land ethic, which shifted the focus from human beings to the earth itself, and which later inspired the development of the “rights of nature”. Pirni also emphasized Brian Barry’s concept of intergenerational justice, reshaping the paradigm of justice in relation to climate change. Finally, he addressed contemporary debates on the Anthropocene, Parfit’s “non-identity problem”, and the motivational gap in grounding obligations toward future generations.
Adriano Angelucci concluded with a lecture on Nudging and Climate Change. He introduced nudging as a tool of behavioral science that can be applied to environmental thought. Nudging works by shaping the choice architecture – the context in which decisions are made – rather than by eliminating options. Simple changes, such as the placement of food in a school cafeteria, can significantly influence children’s choices. Another example is a road along Lake Michigan in Chicago where lines are painted at decreasing intervals, creating an optical illusion that makes drivers slow down, thereby reducing accidents. This approach, often described as a “gentle push”, has sparked debate: is it intrusive, paternalistic, even manipulative? Angelucci noted that its ethical justification lies in a form of means paternalism: it influences how choices are made while leaving ends and goals to the individual, thus preserving autonomy. Applied to climate change, this becomes green nudging, encouraging environmentally responsible behaviour. Its value lies in benefiting not only the person nudged but also the wider community. Green nudges may also help address the “value–action gap”, the discrepancy between what people say they value and how they actually act – for instance, by making sustainable options the default.
The day concluded with reflections and practical exercises on moral dilemmas, understood as situations involving two conflicting ethical dimensions. These may be asymmetric dilemmas, where different principles are at stake, or symmetric dilemmas, where the conflict concerns the same principle (e.g., deciding whom to save between conjoined twins). The classic Trolley Problem was introduced as a starting point, followed by a climate change dilemma designed for classroom discussion: the construction of dams on Lake Victoria. While such dams could bring electricity and development to surrounding regions, they would also have severe negative consequences for other areas of Africa, raising questions of distributive justice and environmental responsibility. The exercise illustrated how philosophical and critical thinking can be applied to the analysis of concrete environmental issues, helping to illuminate the ethical trade-offs they entail.
17/09/2025 – The third day was devoted to the legal perspective on climate change. Beatrice Baldini (SSSA) and Emmalucia Virardi (SSSA) gave a talk titled Opportunities and Challenges in the European Green Deal, focusing on the 2019 initiative. Compared to Next Generation EU, the Green Deal not only set technical targets – climate neutrality by 2050 with interim goals for 2030 – but also introduced a new political principle: ecological primacy. This marked a shift from the 1987 sustainable development model, moving toward a society and market shaped by ecological limits, with priority given over economic freedom. The discussion also addressed the challenge of implementing this political objective, stressing the importance of participation and networks to bridge the gap between EU institutions and citizens. Yet the absence of a clear normative framework complicates this task. The Clean Industrial Deal was cited as a further step, highlighting energy efficiency as a means of economic growth. In the meantime, the EU has sought ways to persuade and legislate through the European Climate Law (2021), the Fit for 55 package (cutting emissions by 55% by 2030), and RePowerEU. A key focus has been on expanding renewable energy, gradually establishing new legal principles to guide the transition.
The next presentation was given by Riccardo Luporini (SSSA) on The International Climate Change Regime: Necessary and Fit for Purpose?. He examined the norms, principles, and institutional frameworks designed to guide state action, retracing the evolution of climate governance from the first conferences in the 1970s to the creation of the IPCC in 1988 and the 1992 Rio Conference, which led to the UNFCCC. The convention defined key objectives – stabilizing greenhouse gas emissions to avoid dangerous human interference – and set out principles such as intergenerational equity, precaution, basic obligations, and the creation of institutions. It also introduced the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities, distinguishing between developed and developing countries. Luporini then focused on the COPs (Conferences of the Parties), which bring together all member states. He highlighted the Kyoto Protocol (1997), which was weakened by the U.S. refusal to ratify and its late entry into force in 2005, and the Paris Agreement, which required each country to submit national climate plans and report on progress over time. He also noted the role of subsequent COPs and the growing involvement of civil society, which can participate as observers.
In the afternoon, participants took part in a group exercise. They were divided into two teams, each tasked with developing arguments in response to the following statement on climate policy: Considering historical responsibilities in addressing climate change, CO₂ emissions limits for Global North countries are not applicable to Global South countries (G77), in line with both distributive and intergenerational justice criteria. The exercise culminated in a debate, which yielded surprising results and highlighted the crucial role of structured argumentation in addressing such complex issues.
18/09/2025 – The following day was devoted to finance. Roberto Barontini (SSSA) presented Sustainable Financial Strategies for Energy Transition: The Role of Corporate Governance. He began by outlining how companies operate, introducing the roles of shareholders, stakeholders, and bondholders, and showing how their interests interact. This led to a discussion of credibility as a principle in corporate relations, and of the link between environmental policies and financial performance. Barontini contrasted the shareholder theory – which prioritizes shareholder profit and often views sustainability investments as conflicting with returns – with the stakeholder theory, which sees profit and sustainability as compatible. He stressed that environmental and financial performance need not be in conflict, but can reinforce each other. Challenges arise with ESG investments, which deliver long-term value while investors typically push for short-term gains, creating pressure on managers. The proposed solution is a shift in corporate governance toward sustainability. An example is the 2021 Italian Code of Corporate Governance, which defines corporate objectives as necessarily sustainable. The lecture concluded with an overview of governance features supporting sustainability and a discussion of green, sustainable, and social bonds.
Stefano Calboli (SSSA) then delivered a lecture titled Meeting the Thirst for Change through Ethical Nudges in Water Consumption. The session returned to the concept of nudging and its potential to encourage more sustainable water use. A key example discussed was the promotion of tap water as an alternative to bottled water, in order to reduce both waste and plastic consumption. This issue is particularly relevant since sustainable drinking water practices are high on the policy agenda. The idea explored was how nudging could be applied to increase the appeal and use of tap water. Several examples were presented to illustrate how nudges can modify the choice environment without removing or restricting available options. The aim is to foster environmentally virtuous behaviours. However, the concept of the green nudge raises challenges, especially the lack of ethical scrutiny. Furthermore, relying solely on preferences can be problematic, as it risks manipulating rather than empowering individuals. One proposed solution is to encourage public scrutiny and greater transparency in nudging practices.
Alberto Pirni (SSSA) delivered a lecture titled Reshaping the Energy Equity Issue in the Climate Change Era. He introduced the concept of energy justice, first formulated in 2010, which applies principles of justice to the energy sector with a focus on sustainability and intergenerational fairness. Pirni explained the three core dimensions of justice in this context. Distributive justice concerns how infrastructures, costs, and benefits are spatially allocated; procedural justice stresses that all stakeholders should have an equitable role in decision-making; and recognition justice affirms the dignity and rights of all individuals, especially those facing deprivation. He also distinguished between formal (de jure) equality, which treats like cases alike, and substantive (de facto) equality, which addresses structural imbalances to avoid discrimination. The lecture further traced the historical roots of justice back to Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics. For Aristotle, injustice meant failing to respect both written and unwritten norms. His view of distributive justice differed from the modern one: greater resources and responsibilities should be entrusted to the most capable, who in turn must act for the benefit of others. In this sense, the just person is both lawful and fair, responsible for restoring equilibrium and pursuing the common good.
Mario Ciancarini (ENEL) gave a presentation on Enel’s Approach to Scenario Analysis and Climate Adaptation. He outlined the company’s objectives, which include building resilience and identifying climate risks in order to deliver effective adaptation. This is pursued through the use of advanced technologies, the study of both acute phenomena and chronic impacts, and collaboration with experts to select reliable climate data. The process involves an initial preliminary screening followed by a more detailed analysis. A central theme was the need to move beyond short-term thinking and prioritize long-term adaptation strategies. The discussion also touched upon various compensation proposals aimed at addressing climate-related impacts.
Stefano Maran, representing Ricerca Sistema Energetico (the national research body that enables companies such as Enel to market their energy), gave a talk on Conflicts in the Development of Renewable Energy through the Principles of Energy Justice. He highlighted the institute’s mission of linking justice, responsibility, and fairness. As a public research company engaged in EU projects, RSE operates through five departments covering all aspects of the energy system, with the overarching goal of addressing climate change – an enormous challenge tackled through mitigation measures and decarbonization via renewable energy as a distributed resource. Maran then presented the energy trilemma, illustrated as a pyramid: at the top lies energy security – a reliable and continuous energy supply – while at the base stand energy equity, which addresses energy poverty and the affordability of energy for all, and environmental sustainability, which requires reducing emissions and environmental impacts. He returned to the three core tenets and ten principles of energy justice – among which responsibility and accountability – which serve as tools for shaping energy policies and for building a multi-criteria framework to guide the different phases of decision-making.
19/09/2025 – The final day was devoted to brief but impactful talks by Italian CEOs and company representatives, who outlined their corporate policies regarding water ethics. These were preceded, however, by two contributions from Alberto Pirni and Rudy Rossetto.
Alberto Pirni delivered a talk on Water as an Ethical Issue: A Preliminary Framework. After presenting the School of Excellence, the Institute of Law, Politics and Development Research Area, and the Ethics and Global Challenges section at Sant’Anna School of Advanced Studies, he explained how his group addresses the ethical challenges of climate change through a transdisciplinary approach. Philosophy and ethics play a central role in debates on environmental ethics, the tragedy of the commons, climate ethics, intergenerational justice, energy justice, the theory of motivation, and above all water ethics. Pirni stressed that water ethics – introduced and developed by his group – is a crucial component of environmental ethics, intended to shape values around the responsible use of water. He outlined six key dimensions: environmental values (health of ecosystems); economic values (efficiency and reducing waste); social values (the human right to water); cultural values (identity); governance values (participation and transparency, linked to the theory of fair communication); and intergenerational values (justice across generations). Finally, he explored how to operationalize water ethics: identifying and mapping principles, reaching consensus, applying them to water dimensions, monitoring compliance, and resolving conflicts. This framework, he concluded, opens the way to a global water ethics, which calls for the drafting of a dedicated charter.
Rudy Rossetto (SSSA) followed with a talk entitled Water: An Asset for Nature and Socio-economic Systems in the Context of Global and Climate Change. He stressed how only a very small fraction of the Earth’s water is actually usable, yet it forms the basis of life itself and is closely tied to global challenges such as food production, droughts, climate change, and the unequal distribution of resources. Since all resources are interconnected, the world as a whole risks facing insufficient water reserves by 2040 due to green wasting. Water scarcity, he noted, also generates conflicts. Against this backdrop, Rossetto highlighted European projects aimed at promoting more sustainable water management – focusing on water saving in agriculture, river restoration, wastewater reuse, and efficient use of water in the civil sector.
Finally, company representatives took the floor. Daniele Barbone, CEO of Acqua Novara, spoke on Integrating Sustainability and Climate Adaptation in Water Sector Governance. He illustrated how the company manages drinking water across the municipalities it serves, and explained the severe damage that floods cause to infrastructure – often amounting to millions of euros. Barbone also presented the ReAct – Research and Action project, developed with the support of Politecnico di Milano, which investigates the impacts of glacier melting – such as that of the Belvedere glacier on Monte Rosa – in order to understand how these processes evolve over time and how long society has to respond. He framed this as an intergenerational challenge, raising the ethical question of how public resources should be invested today to prevent future crises, through a participatory process. Pierpaolo Abis of Acquedotto Pugliese followed with a talk on Water as a Common Good, focusing on his region. He stressed the growing challenges of water scarcity and declining water quality, warning that the water crisis will worsen significantly by 2050. Abis proposed potential solutions centered on efficiency to reduce water loss, better communication strategies, mapping vulnerable areas, influencing habits and perceptions, and expanding wastewater reuse. The session concluded with Michele Falcone of Gruppo CAP, one of Italy’s largest public water utilities, who presented Toward a Dialoguing Management: How to Reduce the NIMBY Effect in the Implementation of Impactful Projects. The Experience of the CAP Group. Falcone described the company’s path toward becoming a green utility, committed to transforming waste into energy and heat through innovative bioplatforms. He emphasized their governance model based on participation, transparency, and dialogue – listening to stakeholders, building trust through participatory pathways, and engaging local communities in order to establish credibility.
The intensive week of advanced training concluded with a collective reflection between organizers and participants on the value of an interdisciplinary approach, the connections between the perspectives explored – ethics, finance, science, and law – and the practical tools each person would take away. The discussion made clear that environmental challenges, and climate change in particular, demand both interdisciplinarity and the active collaboration of multiple actors. Philosophy and ethics emerged as crucial methodological instruments, offering a critical lens to help other disciplines assess sustainability goals, principles, and ways to translate them into practice.
Overall, the course provided participants with a vital platform to broaden their knowledge, forge meaningful connections, and foster an engaged community of scholars and professionals committed to addressing one of the greatest challenges of our time.
Giulia Battistoni
