The Doughnut Theory, an innovative recipe for environmental and social justice
Authors: Carrick Reddin & Alexandra van Milink
Pioneered by British researcher Kate Raworth (2012), the doughnut model represents a “safe and just space” for humanity within planetary boundaries — a concept that combines and harnesses the economy to serve social needs and the ecology on a global scale with a practical approach rooted in design thinking.
A new way of thinking about sustainable economics
The doughnut economics theory is a new way of thinking about sustainable economics in the twenty-first century, targeting an idea that has long obsessed both economists and policymakers: limitless growth. Pioneered by British researcher Kate Raworth, the doughnut model represents a “safe and just space” for humanity within planetary boundaries. The concept combines and harnesses the economy to serve the ecology and social needs on a global scale with a practical approach rooted in design thinking.
How does it work? Imagine a classic doughnut (chocolate, strawberry or your favorite flavor) with a hole in the middle: the outside edge represents the ecological ceiling of our living environment while the inner circle represents the social foundation. In between these two rings, we find the “just home for humanity,” where all our needs can be met without overstraining the planet. The first mentioned ring, the ecological ceiling, is represented by the planetary boundaries we must respect if we want the environment we live in, as well as the earth, to thrive (1). These planetary boundaries — the 9 key processes vital to our planet’s ability to sustain human life — have already been exceeded at least four times (2). Exceeding these boundaries means risking human and ecological disaster.
The second ring, the social foundation, includes the fundamental things that humans need in order to live — access to food, adequate shelter, etc. However, the model is not meant for humans to merely survive, it places an emphasis on providing them with opportunities to thrive. Therefore, the social foundation also includes social goods such as sense of community, gender equality, and political representation. The metrics of this “social floor” are drawn from the Sustainable Development Goals. The doughnut symbolizes an economy that promotes human prosperity within the limits of what the planet can support. It is used as a tool that aims to limit the environmental and social impacts of urban and human activities, and also to prevent overconsumption.
In order to act quickly, we need to change our perception of economics
Raworth suggests that, in order to limit the threat of ecological disaster while guaranteeing society’s fundamental needs are must, we must challenge the field of economics’ obsession with growth. The roots of economics bring us back to the time of the ancient Greeks — long before the nineteenth century’s new definition of economics as a science. In ancient Greece, economics meant the art of managing resources and managing a household. It was only by the end of the twentieth century that the discipline was linked to growth and wealth. The images related to how we understand and see economics today have been embedded in our minds over the past several decades. To change our vision of economics, we need to change these engraved images. Scratch the diagrams you learned — or put Wite-Out on them — and redraw them through the seven new images Kate Raworth suggests better meet our needs and times.
By transforming the economic model of the circular flow diagram, discrediting the Rational Economic Man, changing the supply and demand curve into massive systems of interconnected variables, and enabling better design to overcome the general assumptions made by the Kuznets bell-shaped diagram, Raworth takes us to another level of economics 101. By dropping mechanical metaphors and thinking about the economy holistically, Raworth fundamentally challenges the 20th-century foundation of the field in order to propose a new way of thinking for the 21st-century economist.
In reshaping our understanding of economics, Raworth challenges what we commonly hold as the most appropriate and accurate model of economic activity. She shows how the economy is dependent on the flows of power and materials, which are embedded in society and in the Earth’s apparatus. Through this new image of economics, she highlights that we, as humans, are more than just workers and consumers of capital. Our lives are complex and multifaceted. The economy should, thus, reflect the relationship between humans and our environment.
All in all, conventional economics saw environmental conservation as something societies can only afford once they have reached a certain level of wealth and thus development. But studies such as Grossman & Krueger have already shown that when a country’s economic development increases, its environmental footprint does too (3). Economic growth cannot be an infinite upward curve, as it is often shown, as the planet has only a finite number of resources. The doughnut model represents a circular, regenerative model of economics in which actors are agnostic to growth and, instead of GDP, measure social well-being and planetary boundaries.
Yet, some questions remain. What do we do when our current growth goals are not environmentally sustainable? And when, inevitably, economies stop expanding? One thing is clear: we must stop relying solely on economic growth as a measure of positive development and instead find alternative metrics and solutions. Raworth’s doughnut model makes impressive progress toward such an alternative future.
To go further…
Inspiration from Limits to Growth and the Commons
Raworth’s work finds inspiration in 20th-century economics and environmental studies. The 1972 book Limits to Growth, commissioned by the Club of Rome, studies the phenomena of exponential economic and population growth in the context of finite resources. Lead author Donella Meadows and her colleagues show that, over the past century, the single most powerful predictor of GDP growth in a country is its rate of resource consumption (4). Recent editions of the book show that the world has largely followed the “business-as-usual” scenario wherein population growth, pollution, and industrial output rise exponentially; in their model, this scenario results in sudden population loss, environmental devastation, and loss of industrial production in the latter half of the 21st century. Specifically, as shown in the graph below, we see 2020 as a turning point where industrial output peaks, resources become increasingly scarce, and the value of the global economy begins to decline. Indeed, data from 2020 confirms this prediction. The doughnut model situates itself in this contemporary reality as it advocates for a growth-agnostic approach to promoting social and environmental well-being. Instead of valuing economic growth for the sake of economic growth, Raworth’s model prioritizes reducing the human ecological footprint while securing social and natural resources in order to break away from the business-as-usual model. The book also draws inspiration from Elinor Ostrom’s work in the 1990s on the commons, specifically the notion that humankind has the capacity for effective self-organization not only through markets but also through common ownership of cultural and natural resources (5). Communities, with their myriad ways to govern common resources, are best situated to assure survival for themselves and for future generations.
Questions and Reflections
Central to Raworth’s argument is a criticism of the over-reliance on GDP growth as a goal and metric of success for sustainable development. Notably, she calls for “economies that [overcome] the structural dependence… on endless GDP growth.” There is, thus, an apparent contradiction in the use of the Sustainable Development Goals, adopted by member states of the United Nations in 2015, to serve as the “social floor” of the doughnut model.
While the SDGs lay out a number of important social standards that are essential to ensuring the well-being of people worldwide, including gender equality, poverty eradication, and access to food and water, they also call for consistent long-term GDP growth, particularly in developing nations. Goal 8 specifies “at least 7 per cent gross domestic product growth per annum in the least developed countries through 2030” (6). There is no evidence to suggest this level of GDP growth is feasible while achieving the other SDGs, particularly those which seek to ensure humans live in harmony with nature and preserve environmental wellbeing. Additionally, we see that the SDGs represent subjective, however widely accepted, measures of sustainable development. Thus, while the outer ring of planetary boundaries is likely to remain fixed over time, the inner ring of social well-being may change as new objectives and metrics are defined. We find ourselves wondering if the SDGs are the most appropriate framework to measure social well-being and, if not, what is a viable alternative? We can imagine this may be an opportunity for the doughnut — with its basic principles of a social floor and an environment ceiling — to influence the language of the next international development agenda so as to avoid the contradictions found in the Sustainable Development Goals.
In our estimation, realizing the promise of the doughnut model will require wide-spread adoption through global agreement. As nations continue to compete with one another for resources and economic growth, there is little to ensure they respect planetary boundaries. Too often, countries will lower taxes or eliminate environmental protections to attract companies and foreign direct investment. We forsake environmental and social well-being for GDP growth. In this context, we see the indispensable role of local communities in adopting the doughnut model; since the launch of the Doughnut Economics Action Lab (DEAL), we see grassroots movements across the world advocating for this holistic, regenerative economic model. Simultaneously, we must recognize the importance of international cooperation on issues such as corporate taxation, carbon pricing, environmental standards, fair trade policy, and human rights. Without coordinated government action on these issues, it will be challenging to realize the promise of social and environmental justice. This is yet another reason for local action and advocacy on this topic of critical importance.
Raworth leaves us with a daunting challenge: “No country has ever ended human deprivation without a growing economy. And no country has ever ended ecological degradation with one”. Through this series, we explore how the Doughnut Economics Action Lab and other actors across the globe are working to deliver solutions to this challenge. Follow along as we advance, bite by bite, through this doughnut; it may well be the best thing we can consume today for our health tomorrow.
Fun Fact: Why do doughnuts have a hole in the middle?
The hole allows the outsides and insides of the dough to cook equally. If there were no hole, the dough would need to sit in oil much longer which would burn the edges.
Links for further exploration (conferences, articles, books, people, podcasts, vidéos, …):
- Architects Declare (2020). Conference Kate Raworth — Talk plus Q&A. UK. https://vimeo.com/387734201
- OECD (2020), The Circular Economy in Cities and Regions: Synthesis Report, OECD Urban Studies, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/10ac6ae4-en.
- Parrique, T. (2019) The political economy of degrowth. Economics and Finance. Stockholms universitet. English. NNT : 2019CLFAD003 . https://tel.archives-ouvertes.fr/tel-02499463/document
- Raworth, Kate. (2017). Meet the doughnut. The new economic model that could end inequality. In Weforum.org. Retrieved from : https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2017/04/the-new-economic-model-that-could-end-inequality-doughnut/
Bibliography (Works Cited):
- Rockström, J., Steffen, W., Noone, K. et al. (2009). A safe operating space for humanity. Nature 461, 472–475. https://doi.org/10.1038/461472a
- Steffen et al. (2015). The Nine Planetary Boundaries. Stockholm Resilience Centre. https://www.stockholmresilience.org/research/planetary-boundaries/planetary-boundaries/about-the-research/the-nine-planetary-boundaries.html
- Grossman, Gene M. and Krueger, Alan B. (1994). Economic Growth and the Environment. NBER Working Paper No. w4634, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=227961
- Meadows, Donella, et al. (1972). The Limits to Growth: Report to the Club of Rome. http://www.donellameadows.org/wp-content/userfiles/Limits-to-Growth-digital-scan-version.pdf
- Ostrom, Elinor. (1990). Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action. 30 November 1990. https://books.google.co.uk/books/about/Governing_the_Commons.html?id=4xg6oUobMz4C&hl=en
- United Nations. 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. “Goal 8: Promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment and decent work for all.” https://www.un.org/development/desa/disabilities/envision2030-goal8.html
