Climate Action and Sustainability speakers
Voices shaping how organisations, industries and governments respond to the defining challenge of our time
Speakers Associates represents 159 speakers on Climate Action and Sustainability, including Peter Fisk, Neri Karra Sillaman, Mark Stevenson, Lucy Bullivant, Yasin Kasirga, Shela Gobertina von Trapp, Louis De Jaeger, Lucy Shepherd, Claudia Bechstein and Anna Gumbau.
Boards keep being surprised by which economies grow and which stall. Standard indicators fail to capture the mechanism, because growth depends on productive capabilities that GDP figures and governance scores cannot see. The harder question is what an economy can actually make, and which adjacent industries that capability opens up.
Climate is no longer a sustainability function. It is a security, supply chain and capital allocation problem that boards now have to answer for. Most leadership teams still treat it as compliance reporting rather than as a live risk to operations, alliances and the resources their business depends on.
Senior leaders need stages that hold attention without flattening complexity. The wrong host turns a strategy day into a script reading; the right one extracts something useful from each speaker and keeps a room of executives genuinely engaged. Internal communications teams know the difference and rarely have a confident shortlist of broadcasters who can do both.
Climate commitments have outpaced the capital and operating decisions meant to deliver them. Boards face a widening gap between net zero language in the annual report and what their procurement, energy and supply teams actually do on Monday morning. Closing that gap requires a different kind of conviction at the top of the house, grounded in evidence of what renewable systems can actually do under pressure.
Senior leadership forums, town halls and industry conferences live or die on the person holding the microphone. A weak host turns a sharp panel into a polite Q and A, lets executives drift into talking points, and leaves the audience disengaged before lunch. Boards investing in flagship events need a chair who can interview a CEO with the same confidence as a finance minister, switch between French and English, and keep a complex agenda moving without losing the room.
Founder-led brands collapse in the same places they get built: at the seam between creative authorship and capital. Most creative founders sign away control they do not understand, and discover the cost only after the work has scaled. The hard part is not making the thing. It is keeping the rights, the team, and the conviction intact long enough to do it twice.
Net zero commitments are now sitting on top of supply chains, capital plans and industrial policy that were not designed to deliver them. Boards are asked to allocate against energy and climate scenarios they do not control, while European industrial capacity in critical clean-tech segments has thinned to the point of strategic exposure. The decision is no longer whether to act on the transition. It is how to act without misreading the technology curves, the policy direction, or the geography of supply.
ESG has become a reporting exercise for many organisations. Boards approve the commitments; the people responsible for delivering them sit one step removed from what climate action means on the ground. Closing that gap matters more than refining the metrics.
Resilience that holds under sustained pressure is different from resilience that performs well in controlled conditions. Most leadership teams can describe what it looks like; far fewer know what they actually do when plans fail repeatedly, conditions worsen, and no external support is available. The gap between knowing resilience and practising it under genuine adversity is where decisions, culture, and performance diverge.
Most sustainability commitments are made on a reporting cycle. The returns arrive on a generational one. That gap is where credibility leaks: targets set for the next quarter, consequences inherited by people two decades out.
Boards spend heavily on summits, internal town halls, and public forums where the room is full of senior leaders, ministers, NGO heads, and customers, and the day succeeds or fails on how the conversation is run. A weak chair flattens the panel into platitudes. A strong one extracts the disagreement, keeps the timing tight, and sends people out with a clearer view of what was actually said.
Most leadership teams plan for a future that resembles the recent past. Then AI, climate volatility, and geopolitical fracture arrive at once, and the plan does not survive the first quarter. The question is no longer how to predict the next disruption, but how to build an organisation whose reflexes are tuned to operate when prediction fails.