Prosperity
Carbon Neutrality vs Relief of Poverty
April 2024 · Milan
How can the world invest in saving the planet without abandoning its most vulnerable people? The green transition carries a social cost that too few documents are willing to name.
In Europe, carbon neutrality is pursued largely through the regulatory architecture of the Green Deal. The "Fit for 55" package aims to cut net greenhouse-gas emissions by at least 55 percent by 2030, later raised toward 57 percent. The governing Directive 2023/1791 is explicit about including the weakest: a fair transition must reach everyone, and energy is treated as an essential service.
The paradox of green development
And yet the transition itself generates social stress. Rising energy prices feed inflationary pressure, which falls hardest on those least able to absorb it. This is the paradox of green development: a policy designed to protect the planet can, without deliberate countermeasures, damage the most vulnerable by raising consumer prices and displacing jobs. The European Union acknowledged this in 2023 by creating a Social Climate Fund to support energy-poor households, vulnerable micro-enterprises and low-income groups — in Italy, micro-enterprises alone make up some 94.8 percent of all companies.
Poverty, moreover, is not only a feature of poorer countries. In the wealthiest economies, the unemployed and the precarious can fall into extreme poverty precisely as living standards — and prices — rise around them. Strikingly, several major climate and development reports barely mention the word "poverty" at all.
What experience can offer
If no single actor holds a complete answer, shared experience still points to workable directions. Innovation — underpinned by a solid framework of intellectual-property protection — generates value and resilience. Cultural heritage, treated not as mere tourism but as a field for research, restoration and a genuine "cultural industry," sustains employment and identity alike; Italian and Chinese institutions already collaborate on restoration work. And the circular economy — reuse, recycling, secondary raw materials — offers a threefold benefit: it generates revenue, it cleans the environment, and it absorbs workers from declining industries who cannot easily be retrained into services or technology.
None of this is a miracle solution. But by sharing experience and knowledge across borders, it is possible to pursue environmental protection without leaving the most vulnerable unprotected — to save the planet without forgetting the people on it.