Doughnut Economics: The must-read book that redefines economics for a world in crisis

At its worst, economics is a highly mathematical undertaking that is completely useless for understanding anything about the real world. Rather than explain inflation or international trade, you get utility functions, aggregate supply and demand curves that were supposed to wind up in some incomprehensible equilibrium, so obscure and bound up in such highly abstract assumptions that only a mathematician could understand it all and that utterly lacked any real-world relevance. For all of these reasons, I found Doughnut Economics both fascinating and useful. Raworth challenges academic "economic science" and offers a number of new notions that I hope will fundamentally re-shape the field. In addition, the book is lucidly written, which stands in stark contrast to the abstruse crap that so many economists churn out, where they twist logic into bizarre configurations and examples. It is practical, based on common sense notions, and relatively easy to understand. Raworth offers 7 "ways to think". First, we need to change the goal from one of unending "growth" of GDP to an equilibrium state inside the doughnut shape: in the hole, social needs are neglected; outside the edge, ecological concerns are violated. The doughnut encompasses a number of factors in dynamic balance, including social equity, work and income, global warming, resource depletion, etc. Second, instead of a hermetically sealed engine that flows between business and households in an unending circle, which neglects the bigger picture, we need to view the economy as embedded in both an evolving society and the larger ecosystem. Third, we must concentrate not on a single, abstract, selfish individual maximizing his/her well being in consumption of goods, but on socially adaptive communities of individuals who must work together for many other intangible values. Fourth, we need to integrate a systems approach, replacing the artificial calculation of an abstract equilibrium state, i.e. feedback loops of factors offer a more realistic image and concept of the economy than the simple assignment of an optimal overall price. Needs change and act upon each other dynamically, there is no "Pareto optimality". Fifth, the economic system should be designed to distribute resources fairly; inequality, in her view, is a failure of the system, not its inevitable outcome. This introduces a strong, legitimate role for public policy and activist government rather than some assumption that the "market" will achieve fairness or efficiency. Sixth, taking sustainability into account, the system can be set up to regenerate itself rather than simply use natural resources as inputs. Seventh, we have to give up the notion that GDP growth is the most important measure of how well the economy functions. Not only is perpetual growth a physical impossibility - indeed we are reaching the limits of capitalist growth rates at the levels we knew from 1870 to 1970, the golden age - but it diverts attention from more pressing tasks. Raworth gets into lots of technical detail. I could not do justice to her model in this description, indeed I will have to go back and re-read the book a few more times before I fully grasp it myself. Whatever, this is a marvelously stimulating intellectual journey that is also of vital importance. I do have a criticism of the tone of the book. Some of it reads like a TED talk, a formula that bores me to tears. The examples given are also too brief for my taste and need to be expanded upon in much great detail. Finally, there is a bit of zaniness in it that bothered me on occasion. For example, I would rather call it a torus than a doughnut, as I believe the associations with that are more serious. Perhaps it's nitpicking. Recommended with enthusiasm.

I agree completely with George Monbiot's review. This book is a comprehensive tour de force of the systems and mind set required for our survival. Doughnut Economics should become the basis for the education of our children, and ourselves. There's no esoteric language found within its pages, it can be read and understood by everyone. The books content is quite dense so it's not the sort of book to skim through quickly. It is evident that Kate Raworth has completely immersed herself in the subject over many years, drawn together the most important strands, then with a dash of brilliance, allowed herself to distill the simple essence of necessary change into one book. Our consciousness needs a leg up - this book can do it. Our political and business infrastructure seems set like stone in the old order. Shifting this mass in any meaningful way will not happen unless we demand it. Currently all political parties are resolute in their determination to look and go backwards. They maintain that there are no solutions except more of the same and are comfortable with this since their proponents gain so much personally from these policies. The biggest political passion of the moment is fiddling with Brexit while Earth burns. Thus do the years slide by. Pressure will have to come from the bottom up. The solutions are here in this book but don't underestimate the opposition from the established order. The fact that the economics departments of universities around the world are still teaching the same old neo-con claptrap Voodoo science without reference to any other science or even economic history is a crime of the highest order. If this continues for much longer the future death of millions, a genocide, the greatest crime against humanity, will be fairly placed on their heads. Doughnut Economics is the most enlightened book on economics for 100 years - it brings it all together beautifully. Read it and press for change. With these tools and more like them we may just make it. PS. Here are some puzzles for growth addicts. Imagine all the wealth of an Ancient Egyptian King gathered together to fill a 1 meter cube box, then allow 4% growth per year. How big is the box now? There are some good videos on YouTube - search Exponential Function to immerse yourself in the challenge. Answer. The box is now millions of times bigger than our solar system. Any conventional notions we may hold of reasonable economic growth explode, double quick, under the lens of real scientific inquiry. A 2% loss of rare materials in the production cycle goes equally badly in the opposite direction, rapidly towards zero materials remaining for future generations. Here's another puzzle - if we continue to use energy on current trends, from whatever source, renewable or not, how long before we boil the oceans dry? If you need any help solving this one ask a physicist, an economist will have nothing to offer. The Exponential Function is the simplest and toughest reality check of what is sustainable and what is not, so welcome to hard science Mr Economic Man.

I enjoyed reading this well-researched book and feel its central message is really important. GDP as a measure of growth is outdated as it provides a very narrow view of ‘progress’ (perhaps a better word than ‘growth’) and may well be leading us in completely the wrong direction, does not have an end point in mind (just more growth) and seems only to be achieved through ever more exploitation of the earth’s resources. Suitable measures of progress need to include many other factors such as poverty levels, environmental health, general feeling of well-being, equality, sustainability etc. In addition, perhaps the time for GDP growth is past. We are well outside the (ring) doughnut both in terms of the environment and of our approach to other human beings and more GDP growth will probably just make that worse. So far, so good (or bad). But the changes that are required are far-reaching and will take a lot of effort and I, for one, am not optimistic. The financial system alone will need to de-leverage and somehow accept that financial growth is no longer the goal. What will that do to valuations, which are all based on future growth projections? If we (and the financial markets) can accept that growth is not just financial, but should include improvements in well-being, the environment and social justice and security for all then perhaps we stand a chance. Unsurprisingly, the book is better when discussing the problem, the direction we need to take to solve it and potential solutions, than it is with addressing how we get to move in that direction, how we move along the sustainable path and what we do when we get there. This is forgivable given the enormity (and some would say impossibility) of the task, but perhaps there is a sequel planned?! I followed up some of the references to initiatives (not many so far) and wondered how many of them had got off the ground and/or were still going. We certainly need radical action rather than (or as well as) small incremental changes, but I don’t see government taking any risks and the financial system generally is too short-term in its outlook. I would love to hear some arguments that say I am wrong.

I found the book fascinating and thought provoking as possibly more than anything else, it shows why fixing the eco system that supports all life we, along with everything else, need to start with the redemption of economics. As I learnt in management, if you don't fully understand the problem, your solution will not fully work. Prof Steve Keen started me this journey which this book further develops. Economics, has to change.

Modern economics is clearly not fit for purpose. It is based on false axioms like unbounded rationality, and individual optimisation. It is too narrow a model, not including many important and linked systems, like the family, the state, and the biosphere. It requires continual exponential growth, which is physically impossible, and is destroying the planet. And its predictions have been repeatedly falsified, from repeated financial crashes to ever-increasing wealth inequalities. So what to do? Raworth lays out a plan for a better economics, based on the visual image of the doughnut. The outer edge represents an upper level of activity, beyond which activity is unsustainable, due to climate change, biodiversity and habitat loss, pollution, etc. And the inner edge represents a baseline activity, below which people cannot thrive: the need for food, water, shelter, healthcare, education, equality, justice, etc. (I would have liked some acknowledgement that it is necessary to demonstrate that the inner edge is indeed inside the outer edge!) The doughnut forms a useful image to illustrate the goal of the new economics; Raworth then carefully unpicks the requirements to achieve this, identifying seven facets of the new approach. Each chapter digs into a particular facet, such as the goal of economics, the need for systems thinking, the issue of growth, and more. Starting with a brief review of the historical development of the current theories, Raworth shows how they came about, how that often the originators emphasised they were mere approximations or idealisations, yet that they have subsequently come to be been set in stone. This background serves to demonstrate that changing the models is not somehow going counter to some established truth, but is rather correcting old fundamental errors. So next Raworth outlines how to correct the errors, giving a new model and new requirements. And just when each chapter gets to the point where you are thinking “yes, this is all very well and good, but it would never be possible to make that change”, Raworth gives examples of how that change is already happening in certain (albeit often small and local) cases. So this is informative, constructive, and hopeful. Everyone should read it, and act on it.

Heard her speak at the Hay Literary Festival in May 2026. She was very good; I’m hoping the book is, too?!

For this review I need to decouple my feelings about the author from those about the book. Firstlh - and I think most importantly, she seems to be debating somewhat dishonestly from a degrowth position. Much as all sorts of conspiracy theorists debate by “just asking questions” - this feels like she’s wrestling with the question “how degrowth can you be and still have a highly paid career briefing CEOs and speaking at Davos?”. This would be a much better (although likely less well selling) book if she stated her degrowth position and explored what that really means. In terms of style, I find this a somewhere between Yuval Harari and Malcom Gladwell in repackaging and sharing other peoples ideas. Which leads me to my second complaint about this self styled “renegade economist” - it’s very notable how many of the people she quotes are NYT bestseller list inhabiting men, and in particular how few women she quotes. It seemed particularly egregious to me how much she quoted Brynjolfsson, for example, without ever quoting the vastly more relevant Carlota Perez. She also seems to be of the opinion that economists are powerful, important people. This may be true - especially in the minds of economists, but honestly just seems sweet. With all that said - I think she does a good job of synthesizing a lot of different concepts and placing them in a context that makes a lot of sense. Bringing in systems thinking, pointing out the limits of neoliberal economics and sharing some historical context of how we got to where we are now, and also laying out that it is going to change, seems well done.

It has to be said that Doughnut Economics is a very accomplished piece of work. There is something of a triumph of integrated scholarship on offer here. A substantial public audience is deserved. For its genre, there is probably now no better book out there. Specifically, the image of the doughnut - symbolising the vexed pursuit of “the safe and just space” for humanity, the space between ecological degradation and mass deprivation - is really well worked. (Giambattista Vico would have been proud of it). And the whole story is delivered in often really creative prose, passionately punched out, paragraph after heavy-payload paragraph. For much of the time, DE is really hard to dislike. However, irony lurks. For a start, there is nothing particularly new about attacking “mainstream economics”. (Ormerod’s The Death of Economics first appeared, after all, in 1994!). Very few people will really now be arguing that GDP growth is either the primary purpose of or the most valid measurement of economic activity. Besides, when Dr. Raworth attacks that mainstream economics she is really referencing our mainstream politics, the human and ecological outcomes of which she, like many others, will often quite understandably deplore. And conventional economic theory does contain many precepts - not to mention a lot of maths - which absolutely should not be discarded in any surge to make the world brave and new. (Pierre Cahuc’s Le Négationnisme économique 2016 is but one attempt to rehabilitate macro-economic management as an ideologically neutral science; there is life in the old dogma yet). At heart, this is what is amiss in DE. After listing her seven imperatives (better ways of seeing, interpreting, behaving for the 21st century), the author rather un-winningly admits that “they promise no immediate answers for what to do next”, as if she thinks that, after slashing at the reputation of long-dead economists for the dire consequences of their policy recommendations, it is somehow not her job to deliver any such thing. This evasiveness heralds the chapter which is in effect the pivot of the whole book, the one entitled “Be Agnostic About Growth”. After having declared that “no country has ever ended human deprivation without a growing economy”, Dr. Raworth wants to design an economy that promotes prosperity “whether GDP is going up, down or holding steady”. Well, that’s good but one has to wonder how all those adults in the UK now being paid only the National Living Wage (£7.20 per hour) or labouring on zero hours contracts (ca I million) would welcome another recession or a spike in inflation. Would they feel like being equally agnostic while the macro-economy is being re-set by new policy managers with no care about whether GDP is expanding or not? One has to wonder. Does anyone seriously believe that redistribution is somehow just as easy in the desert as it is at the oasis? Finally, Dr. Raworth recycles too much clapped-out social science (a discipline as worthy of her whipping as “mainstream economics”). Nobody in business or in advertising these days believes, for instance, that competitive acquisitiveness (clichéd as “keeping up with the Jones’s”) represents a primary consumer motivation any longer. To blah-blah the contrary is the analytical equivalent of wearing flared jeans and drinking Babycham. And this insistence that increased buying power makes us humans no happier (the Easterlin Paradox) - a story that really needs shredding - too easily turns into a haughty moral commandment to poor people to consume less. Are they really to be invited to be better people by visiting the shops more infrequently? Those on average incomes of £27,000 per annum? Really? And is there measurably less social capital around these days? And is inequality really synonymous with poverty? And is it possible that sometimes those who want to make the world a better place listen only to the ideas and proofs which match with theirs? Running a social democracy in ways which respect ecological fragility and human appetite is a gruesomely hard business now. In the end, it’s truly not an economics at all but indeed a politics. Yes, to agree with Dr. Raworth, we might all want to close tax havens, re-regulate the banking system and create jobs to replace those which will be lost to robotics (no room for optimism here). But globalisation makes such goals hellishly troubled now. We should worry more about all this - and about maintaining GDP expansion in order to prevent social despoliation in the West - than about whether the old supply-demand curve still makes sense. DE is actually a terrific read. But maybe it’s not quite 21st century enough.

Da leggere. Lo inserirei nei programmi delle scuole : medie e superiori . Analisi e spiegazioni interessanti e chiare (con grafica semplice) per comprendere che il benessere - e la pace - delle ns società dipende dalla salute del funzionamento degli ecosistemi del pianeta che ci ospita. Espone un modello economico (che integra il più vago concetto di sviluppo sostenibile) che consente all'umanità di continuare a prosperare, riducendo diseguaglianze socio-economiche, nel rispetto dei limiti dei processi ecosistemcii da cui dipende la ns esistenza.

Respondeu às minhas dúvidas e ansiedades sobre como seria o mundo pós pandemia. Um roteiro para enfrentarmos enormes desafios que já enfrentamos.

Easy to understand for non economists, fresh and positive approach, full of solutions only politicians would oppose to keep their power, but all possible

This was a book club selection. We read non-fiction on a broad range of subjects and most recently on global themes. This created a great discussion, offering different and specific ways to rethink economics and providing historical background on what led to the current situation. Loved the book and recommend highly - worth the effort!

A solid overview of how economics can be remade as a discipline that focuses on delivering a more balanced, more prosperous society.