Good evening, or rather good morning to everyone. It's a pleasure to be here. I had the fortune to launch the Regeneration Society 2030 back in 2020, so it's interesting to check in on the journey today. A lot of work and research has been done. Practical tools will be shared, but first the vision: why regeneration and not sustainability. The search for a metaphor brought me to my own bald head—I pushed hard to accelerate the transition until crises beat me to the finish. We are doing the same to the planet, so we cannot talk about sustainability, but regeneration, a biological term meaning the ability of a cell or tissue to regenerate. Today we will discuss the vision so we can all feel capable of participating in the regeneration of our ecosystems. We have a wonderful, sophisticated, resilient planet with tipping points. Understanding how to intercept them is a challenge. I invite you to active listening; at the end of the day there will be group work. With a holistic approach, open mind and heart. After discussing the foundations and the manifesto, we will move to action with business models, governance, financial tools, measurement, and well-being. You will all have this document to fill with keywords. Use the Interpify app for translation. Now, to start, let's hear from Andrea Illy, chairman of illycaffè and co-president of the Regenerative Society Foundation. Please, Andrea.
Thank you, Cristina. What a fantastic presentation; I almost don't want to add anything. Welcome, everyone. Such joy to see so many of you. Those who know me know I usually speak off the cuff, but today I wanted to weigh my words, so I will read. The Regenerative Society Foundation is a foundation of companies animated by a strong sense of responsibility. That alone is unique—there aren't many corporate foundations. In 2020, during the toughest post-war period, fearing that social, environmental, and economic unsustainability would worsen, we mobilized to find a way. We had a strong vision: regeneration, going beyond decarbonization with a model that could be resolving socially and environmentally, and applicable to all economic activities. Initially it seemed impossible, so we studied our own model, embracing all perspectives. We are now halfway—five years have passed since Regeneration 2030 was established. I open this forum with the answers we've found, hoping they will be discussed, expanded, and shared. Why regeneration? Because there can be no sustainability without regeneration. All vital factors are ensured by ecosystem services that perpetuate through spontaneous regeneration. The extractive, linear model hinders regeneration. It limits the spontaneous cycle through overexploitation and pollution, which have increased exponentially since the Industrial Revolution. We've lost roughly half of natural capital, and Earth has lost its resilience. Exponential growth of our ecological footprint has reduced adaptive capacity. The trend is worsening due to self-destruction of vital ecosystems. We estimate 2.5 hectares per person of vital ecosystems are needed; we are down to about 1.5, the biological minimum. The gap between regenerative capacity and our ecological footprint is widening. We must invert the vicious cycle that consumes natural capital for financial capital into a virtuous one where regenerative economy regenerates natural capital as monetary capital grows. Businesses are agents of change; citizens are the cause, but businesses represent about two-thirds of GDP and over 90% of capitalization and innovation. Regeneration is a key competitive factor, fueling growth and reducing costs. We need an organization to support companies in regenerating natural capital. The first principle of regenerative economy is circularity, drastically reducing ecological footprint through circular value chains and cleantech. The second is regeneration of vital ecosystems: conservation, restoration, rehabilitation. The third is well-being. These principles must be translated into applicable models. A systemic approach is needed, touching society, markets, environment, technology, geopolitics, politics. It's complex and non-linear. We must correct the trajectory of progress. The barriers are exit and entry, ignorance, bad faith, resistance. Businesses are pioneers voluntarily, competing for competitiveness while cooperating for market improvement. Technology, especially AI, is crucial. We need a knowledge hub. In conclusion, the regenerative company invests systemically in well-being, prosperity, and regeneration, returning more than it takes. The Regenerative Society Foundation is a think tank evolving into an impact foundation. Our common goal is regenerative scalability. Ideas are clear; we have no excuses. As Albert Einstein said, 'The world is a dangerous place, not because of those who do evil, but because of those who look on without doing anything.' An African saying: 'If you want to go fast, go alone; if you want to go far, go together.' Good forum.
Thank you, Andrea. Now we ask Paolo to explain how science can inform this business model.
Good. I'm Paolo Vineis, not an epistemologist. I'm an epidemiologist, dealing with public health. Andrea and others thought I could help as a public health scientist. I'm the scientific director of the foundation, and we've put together a strong, multidisciplinary scientific committee. I hope to be in line with the intention of moving from a conceptual model to real practice. This slide from a National Academy of Sciences publication, before censorship interventions, shows that climate change has cascading events: biodiversity loss, infectious diseases, health impacts, social inequalities, displacement, migration, conflicts. We can't quantify how many conflicts are due to climate change, but a causal relationship exists, leading to state fragility and system collapse. This affects current and future generations. This IPCC figure shows human costs in terms of diseases: heatwaves, infectious agents, pollen distribution, environmental pollutants, plus psychological and psychiatric issues. Microplastics are a concern; a Nature Medicine study shows increasing microplastics in the brain associated with dementia. That sets a vicious cycle—if we become demented, we can't address climate change. The polycrisis concept captures multiple interlinked phenomena. This slide shows anthropogenic mass has surpassed biomass (since 2020). As Andrea said, human appropriation of net primary production is about 24% per year, which can lead to biosphere collapse. Between 20% and 40% of Earth's land is degraded; only 3% of ecosystems are ecologically intact. One-fifth of countries are at the limit of natural system collapse. In such a situation, natural capital can become more valuable than monetary capital. China has introduced a Gross Ecosystem Product indicator. These are just examples of the topics the scientific committee addresses to support the foundation.
What I take away is the concept of polycrisis and how in the Anthropocene complexities add up, including pollution in water and air, which are exacerbated by climate change. In a polycrisis, how do we establish priorities? I leave that question to you. Professor Johan Rockstrom, mentioned by Paolo, a leading climate scientist, presented three clear priorities at Belen: first, stop fossil fuels immediately; second, start sequestering and storing carbon on a large scale; third, regenerate vital ecosystems. We focused on the last, as it was an emerging theme. We fully embraced the theory of ecosystem services. The climate crisis is not separate from environmental crises; it's a consequence. Ecosystem services regulate life on our planet. Decarbonization alone is a conceptual error, because it only addresses half the cycle—emissions. The fixation cycle, mainly photosynthesis, is natural. So again, the priorities are these three. From a 'stop the bleeding' perspective, yes, we must immediately eliminate fossil fuels and sequester carbon, then in parallel regenerate ecosystems. But from the logic of cascading events, we must start with regeneration of ecosystems, also because emissions continue to rise. So the problem is that we start from the bottom, and honestly, it's the only thing we can do independently as businesses and civil society, while we need great persuasion on legislators to invert the emission curve.
