Glossary

The principle of “Do No Significant Harm” to the environment (DNSH) was introduced to balance economic development with ecosystem protection, ensuring that investments do not compromise natural resources. To this end, Regulation (EU) 241/2021, establishing the Recovery and Resilience Facility, stipulates that only measures that comply with the DNSH principle can be financed in national plans.
This principle was introduced by Regulation (EU) 2020/852, known as the “Taxonomy Regulation”. The European Taxonomy of Sustainable Assets, defined by EU Regulation 2020/852, represents a decisive step in European sustainable finance policies.

It establishes quantitative and qualitative criteria for assessing the contribution of economic activities to sustainability objectives:
1) climate change mitigation;
2) adaptation to climate change;
3) sustainable use and protection of water and marine resources;
4) transition to a circular economy;
5) pollution prevention and reduction;
6) protection and restoration of biodiversity and ecosystems.

The concept of the taxonomy of sustainable economic activities indicates a classification of economic activities according to their impact on six environmental objectives. Article 17 of the Taxonomy Regulation specifies that "an economic activity causes significant damage
(a) to climate change mitigation, if the activity leads to significant greenhouse gas emissions;
(b) to climate change adaptation, if the activity leads to a worsening of the adverse effects of the current and projected future climate on itself or on people, nature or assets;
(c) the sustainable use and protection of water and marine resources, if the activity harms:
(i) the good ecological status or potential of water bodies, including surface waters and groundwater; or
(ii) the good ecological status of marine waters;
(d) the circular economy, including waste prevention and recycling, if:
(i) the activity leads to significant inefficiencies in the use of materials or in the direct or indirect use of natural resources such as non-renewable energy sources, raw materials, water resources and soil, at one or more stages of the life cycle of products, including in terms of durability, reparability, upgradeability, reusability or recyclability of products
(ii) the activity results in a significant increase in waste generation, incineration or disposal, with the exception of the incineration of non-recyclable hazardous waste; or
(iii) the long-term disposal of the waste could cause significant long-term damage to the environment;
(e) the prevention and reduction of pollution, if the activity leads to a significant increase in emissions of pollutants into the air, water or soil compared to the situation before the activity started; or
(f) the protection and restoration of biodiversity and ecosystems, if the activity
(i) significantly impairs the good condition and resilience of ecosystems; or
(ii) harms the conservation status of habitats and species, including those of Union interest. The DNSH principle is also applied in the National Recovery and Resilience Plan (NRP), which details the interventions financed by the Next Generation EU programme, a EUR 750 billion fund for post-COVID-19 economic recovery. The NRP promotes projects in line with the European Green Deal and other international sustainability agreements, making compliance with the DNSH principle essential. This entails a rigorous assessment to ensure that interventions do not compromise the environmental objectives defined by EU Regulation 2020/852'.

MISE Circular No. 120820 of 28 March 2022 sets out the criteria for verifying compliance with the DNSH principle. The assessment is based on:
- the exclusion of specific sectors from the DNSH (e.g. coal mining, metal ores, hazardous waste treatment);
- the investment threshold, with differentiated evaluation criteria for projects above EUR 10 million;
- the sustainability report, in which companies must provide information on environmental impacts according to the investment threshold and the applicable assessment regime;
- evidence such as environmental assessments, certifications (EMAS, UNI EN ISO 14001, Ecolabel) and expert opinions.
The DNSH principle plays a central role in incentive and funding policies at European and national level. One example is the “Directorial Decree - Sustainable Investments 4.0”, which supports innovative and sustainable investments to boost the post-Covid economy and strengthen competitiveness. To access the incentives provided, companies must demonstrate compliance with the DNSH principle.
In a context where it is becoming increasingly important to measure and communicate the environmental, economic and social impact of production activities, compliance with the DNSH principle is assessed using the Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) method.
This approach analyses the life cycle of products, processes and services, from their development to their disposal (cradle-to-grave), to determine any significant damage to the environment.

Environmental constitutionalism is an evolution of constitutional law that recognises environmental protection as a fundamental principle of legal systems, responding to the growing awareness of the global ecological emergency. Since the last decades of the 20th century, the number of Constitutions that include environmental provisions has increased significantly, from just over 40 in 1989 to over 150 today, covering more than three quarters of the United Nations member states. This phenomenon has been fostered by increased public awareness and the need for effective legislation to counter global environmental risks, accentuated by the ecological footprint of the Western political-economic model and climate change.
The evolution of environmental constitutionalism has followed a trajectory from the marginal inclusion of environmental protection in constitutional texts to its centrality as a structural principle. In a historical perspective, the first constitutions to introduce explicit environmental provisions date back to the 1970s, such as those of Greece, Portugal, Spain and India. It was only in the 1990s, however, that the constitutionalisation of the environment accelerated, culminating in the 1992 Rio de Janeiro Conference, which enshrined environmental protection as a global political priority. Some legal systems, such as those of Ecuador and Bolivia, have further radicalised this trend, placing the relationship between man and nature at the centre of the entire constitutional set-up.

Comparative analysis allows us to classify constitutions into three categories:
(1) Environmental constitutions, born with a strong characterisation in an ecological sense;
(2) Revised constitutions, which incorporated environmental articles after their adoption, such as those of France, Germany and Italy;
(3) Constitutions without explicit environmental provisions, where ecological protection is affirmed through ordinary legislation and the jurisprudence of the supreme or constitutional courts, as in the case of the United States, Canada, Australia and the United Kingdom.

Geographically, the greatest impetus for this transformation comes from the so-called global South, where the more immediate perception of environmental risks has led to the recognition of sustainability not only as a constraint on economic development, but as the very foundation of the legal system.
Environmental constitutionalism thus takes shape as a normative response to the global ecological crisis, overcoming the sectoral approach of traditional environmental law to structure environmental protection in constitutional terms. This evolution implies not only the definition of environmental principles and rights, but also the attribution of concrete obligations to states and citizens, with a view to ensuring a sustainable balance between economic development and ecological protection in the long term. In Italy, the constitutional reform of 2022 sanctioned the inclusion of environmental protection in the Constitution, adding a third paragraph to Article 9 of the Constitution in which the protection of the environment, biodiversity and ecosystems is enshrined, also in the interest of future generations. Environmental protection is also introduced in Article 41 of the Constitution: the constitutional reform adds a new limit in the second paragraph, establishing that private economic initiative must not damage health and the environment and provides in the third paragraph that the law must determine the programmes and appropriate controls so that public and private economic activity can be carried out in an environmentally friendly manner.

The European Environment Agency (EEA) is a European Union agency based in Copenhagen, established in 1990 by Regulation (EC) No 401/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 (on the European Environment Agency and the European Environment Information and Observation Network).
It has a Management Board composed of one representative of each of its 32 member countries (27 Member States, Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway, Switzerland and Turkey), two representatives of the European Commission and two scientific experts appointed by the European Parliament
The Agency's functions (defined in its founding regulation) are essentially advisory and communicative, through monitoring tasks and active support for European environmental and climate policies.
It is the ‘institutional hub’ of knowledge on the environment, climate and sustainability, collecting and validating data to analyse and communicate conclusions on environmental and climate policies.
Its work is carried out in collaboration with and at the service of the European institutions (in particular the Commission, when implementing EU environmental legislation), governments and other national authorities in the Member States, but also NGOs, the scientific and academic community and European citizens in general.
The EEA works to support the environmental, climate and sustainability goals set as part of the European Green Deal (EGD) for 2030 and 2050. In practice, this means that the EEA builds its thematic work around these specific goals to help the EU achieve them.
The EEA produces the State and Outlook Report on the European Environment (SOER). Published every five years, it cuts across all three thematic areas and is considered the EEA's flagship product.

The European Green Deal is a long-term political and economic programme that sets out a series of public policies designed to reshape the EU's commitment to environmental protection in a more ambitious way. The specific goal, made clear from the outset, is to make Europe “the first climate-neutral continent in the world” by 2050. The overall objective is to transform European society in an ecological sense, based on a new (harmonious) relationship between humans and the environment, which should be achieved, in concrete terms, through the gradual reduction of greenhouse gas emissions and the achievement of climate neutrality.

Although it was created as part of Next Generation EU (from which it was financed), it goes well beyond its scope, as it is a permanent programme. The Green Deal is of historic transformative importance for the process of European integration, as it is a programme that, by explicitly setting out concrete political goals for the Union, reorients a structure that has hitherto been characterised above all by public neutrality in favour of freedoms, especially economic freedoms.

Il Green Deal europeo è stato annunciato dalla comunicazione n. 640 del 2019 (quindi un atto c.d. di soft law) della Commissione Europea nel Dicembre 2019, (Comunicazione della Commissione al Parlamento Europeo, al Consiglio Europeo, al Consiglio, al Comitato Economico e Sociale Europeo e al Comitato delle Regioni, Il Green Deal europeo, COM (2019) 640 final). Il suo contenuto prefigura l’adozione di un ampio spettro di iniziative e misure. Le più importanti di quelle già adottate sono sicuramente:
- la legge europea sul clima (Regolamento (UE) n. 2021/1119 del Parlamento europeo e del Consiglio, del 30 giugno 2021, che istituisce il quadro per il conseguimento della neutralità climatica e che modifica il regolamento (CE) n. 401/2009 e il regolamento (UE) n. 2018/1999 («Normativa europea sul clima»);
- il Piano di investimenti del Green Deal europeo (Comunicazione della Commissione al Parlamento europeo, al Consiglio europeo, al Consiglio, al Comitato economico e sociale europeo e al Comitato delle regioni, Piano di investimenti per un'Europa sostenibile, Piano di investimenti del Green Deal europeo, COM(2020) 21 definitivo);
- la Strategia dell'UE sulla biodiversità per il 2030 (COM(2020)380 definitivo)

Future generations refers to the set of individuals who do not yet exist but whose interests, in the face of the adoption of specific policies, may be relevant to legal reasoning. More specifically, the idea of providing forms of protection for the benefit of those who will exist has often been brought back to the perimeter of the principle of sustainability, which, however, is known to find application in distinct, albeit sometimes communicating, spheres. For example, if we take the perspective of the Italian Constitution, the concept of sustainability originally found affirmation with reference to economic policy and, in particular, with regard to budget balance, making its appearance, within Article 97 Const. following the 2012 revision. In this direction, there are multiple rulings by the Constitutional Court, which, using the combined provisions of Articles 81-97 Const. has declared the illegitimacy of legislative provisions by recalling the necessary respect for the principle of intra- and inter-generational equity.
At the international and European level, on the other hand, the principle of sustainability, and thus the need to express guarantees for the benefit of future generations, has found citizenship above all in the context of the instruments adopted in the field of environmental protection; indeed, it can be said that the construction of these instruments has moved in tandem with the idea that the policymaker must take into account those who do not yet exist when formulating his policies.
This is particularly evident from the Stockholm Declaration (1972), the Brundtland Report (1987) and the Rio Declaration (1992), which provided the basis for the signing of the Climate Agreement.Hand in hand, environment and future generations find an important space in the founding Treaties of the European Union.The Italian legal system, of course, has been no stranger to these developments.
This happened first in jurisprudence, where the Constitutional Court, in the absence of an express reference to the environment in the original wording of the Charter, defined its constitutional coverage, often pointing out how the latter was also to be guaranteed for the benefit of future generations. Later, the idea that the environment is a good that is inherently characterized by intergenerational value accompanied the amendment of Article 9 Const. in 2022, where the revisor chose to include an express reference to future generations

The concept of landscape refers to the set of natural and anthropic elements that characterise a territory, whose value can be cultural, aesthetic, environmental and identity. An initial regulatory framework was introduced with Law no. 778 of 11 June 1922 (the so-called “Croce Law”), which recognised the landscape as an expression of the national soul, linking the protection of natural beauty to that of the historical and artistic heritage. The subsequent Law No. 1497/1939 (the so-called “Bottai Law”) confirmed this approach, defining the landscape as a set of natural assets of exceptional beauty, comparable to works of art.
With the entry into force of the 1948 Constitution, the landscape took on constitutional importance. The second paragraph of Article 9 of the Constitution entrusts the Republic with the protection of the landscape and the historical and artistic heritage, extending its protection compared to the previous legislation. The protection was extended to the entire natural heritage, distinguishing the landscape from the historical and artistic heritage and attributing to the public authorities an active role in its conservation and enhancement.
Law No. 431/1985 (the so-called “Galasso Law”) introduced a further development, establishing that certain natural assets (such as woods, rivers and lakes) were protected regardless of their aesthetic value. In addition, it imposed an obligation on the regions to adopt landscape or urban-territorial plans with specific provisions for the enhancement of the landscape.
The notion of landscape was once again reworked with Legislative Decree No. 42/2004, the so-called Cultural Heritage and Landscape Code (or Urbani Code), which came into force on 1 May 2004. It qualifies in Art. 131 the landscape as ‘the territory expressive of identity, whose character derives from the action of natural and human factors and their interrelations’. The Code also establishes the criteria for the protection and enhancement of the landscape, providing specific tools such as landscape plans, protection restrictions and the authorisations required for interventions in areas subject to protection.
Landscape regulations are closely integrated with territorial and urban planning, with the aim of ensuring harmonious development of the territory, preserving aesthetic and environmental characteristics and preventing uncontrolled landscape transformation.
In addition to national legislation, the landscape is protected at supranational level. The European Landscape Convention, adopted in Florence in 2000 and ratified by Italy with Law No. 14/2006, introduces an innovative vision of landscape protection. It goes beyond the traditional conception that limited protection only to landscapes of exceptional value, extending it to all landscapes, including urban, agricultural and industrial ones, recognising their fundamental role for quality of life and cultural identity.
A similar approach emerges in the 2018 National Landscape Charter, drawn up on the initiative of the Ministry of Cultural Heritage and Activities and Tourism and the National Observatory for Landscape Quality. The Charter describes Italian landscapes as fundamental elements of territorial and collective identity, guardians of the history and life of communities. For this reason, in the face of phenomena such as unauthorised building, coastal cementification and excessive soil consumption, it becomes essential to adopt policies that consider the landscape not only as a heritage to be preserved, but also as a key factor for development, social cohesion and collective wellbeing.
At the international level, landscape protection is also promoted by UNESCO through the concept of Cultural Landscapes, recognised as world heritage when they represent a significant interaction between man and nature.
The concept of landscape is increasingly linked to the principles of sustainability and territorial resilience as protection is not limited to mere conservation, but implies dynamic management that reconciles the protection of natural and cultural values with economic and social development. This integrated approach underpins strategies such as the European Green Deal, which promotes ecological transition, reduced land consumption and urban regeneration in harmony with the landscape context.

Landscape protection is implemented through regulatory and administrative instruments, including:
- regional landscape plans (PPR), which regulate the conservation and enhancement of the territory;
- landscape constraints, which limit interventions in areas of particular value;
- landscape authorisations, which are required for projects in constrained areas;
- environmental impact assessment (EIA) and strategic environmental assessment (SEA), which guarantee sustainable development of the territory.

Landscape, therefore, is not only an element to be preserved, but a key factor for the wellbeing of communities, the quality of life and the competitiveness of territories, requiring a constant assessment of the impact of human activities through advanced regulatory and scientific tools.

In the Encyclopaedia of Law, Massimo Severo Giannini wrote that planning is a word that does not admit general definitions that have any legal meaning, but only attempts at ‘logical conceptualisation’ and that, considering this, the most that can be said about its content is that it is "the determination: a) of the temporal or spatial order, or both; b) of the object; c) of the objective.‘ Understood in this sense, and therefore as the general activity of making plans, planning has always existed (’since man acting in a community is required to decide on the use of the resources at his disposal" ) and everywhere: it is a plan that a student chooses and organises their exams, that an entrepreneur organises their resources and their business, as is the activity of the State that regulates, according to predetermined objectives, the territory or the economy. It is not much, therefore, but in logical terms it is sufficient, given that, in the absence of prescriptive relevance, it is of no importance “whether the planner is a private, public or collective entity”, nor “to establish what the object of the planning was”, nor, even less so, to examine the mechanisms of how a plan works.
It is quite another matter, of course, to examine the concept from a legal point of view, but in this field the operation is rather simple. Planning and plans, in fact, become activities and objects of legal interest (whatever the subject and form of the action) only when, and to the extent that, there is a legal rule that deals with them. Thus, things that have nothing to do with each other beyond this minimal conceptualisation can be legally relevant: not only the economic plan of the state, but also that of a private entrepreneur, or even that of a student (to use Giannini's very clear example) can take on legal relevance if and as attributed by a legal norm.
However, when the concept of planning is examined from the perspective of Italian constitutional law, its meaning becomes more precise and takes on particular significance. This is because, as is well known and as will be explained, in Italy planning is a matter of positive constitutional law, by virtue of Article 41(3) of the Constitution, which mentions and regulates a particular aspect of it: economic planning, as a tool for regulating the economy for socio-environmental purposes (“The law shall determine the appropriate programmes and controls so that public and private economic activity may be directed and coordinated for social and environmental purposes”).
This is why economic planning was a recurring theme in public law discourse in Italy, especially during the 1960s. After that, it had almost ceased to interest scholars, who have only recently begun to take an interest in it again, first to try to understand certain acts (of various kinds) of the European Union bearing that name, and then, inevitably, because the constitutional reform of 2022, by intervening on Article 41, paragraph 3, of the Constitution, suddenly revitalised not only the instrument itself but also the debate surrounding it. 3 of the Constitution, suddenly revitalised not only the instrument itself but also the debate surrounding it.
In his book Pianificazione e Costituzione (Planning and Constitution), Alberto Predieri defines economic planning as a “complex, coherent, purposeful set of fundamental decisions taken ex ante by public authorities”. The subject is therefore the “complex”, whose attributes are “organicity” (a1), “coherence” (a2) and “finalisation” (a3), and whose object is “decisions”, which in turn are characterised by being taken “ex ante” (b1) by public authorities (2). The anteriority, together with their unitary and goal-oriented rationality, thus translate a plurality of public decisions into economic planning. Economic planning is, therefore, a tool for rationalising economic processes, in that it is an “organic, coherent, purposeful complex of fundamental decisions taken ex ante by public authorities”. In other words, it is a set of targeted decisions through which predetermined objectives are imposed on economic activity.
This set of decisions (i.e., the objectives predetermined by the set of public decisions expressed in the plan), as an expression of political power, imposes itself on economic activity, resulting in a corresponding reduction in freedom. Planning decisions correspond, in other words, to a reduction in the freedom of private economic activity through the imposition of a limit or an end. The mechanism of operation is always of an ablative nature (such as expropriation or taxation). However, the object is not an asset (as in the case of expropriation) or income (as in the case of taxation), but a power. Planning reduces the decision-making power of economic operators by imposing an action. It does not impose the coercive performance of economic initiative (which is free, pursuant to Article 41(1) of the Constitution) but, where economic initiative is freely undertaken, it requires the subject to act in a certain way or to do certain things. In this sense, planning, which can also work through gentle nudges, incentives, contributions, etc., is only effective to the extent that it is binding and authoritative.