Transporting us to a Better Future, One Action at a Time: Adding another dimension to the Doughnut Economic Framework
Michael Hallam
10 August 2022
Michael Hallam
10 August 2022
This article is aimed at those who think that there is clearly something wrong with our current financial-economic system and the incentives and mechanisms that underly it. I don’t intend to go into all the ways in which the current global financial system is broken (there are thousands of places you can go for that analysis) but rather suggest a way in which we might build a better system, from the ground up, that is kinder to people, the environment, and the real needs of both.
Introducing the Doughnut
In her 2017 book “Doughnut Economics: Seven Ways to Think Like a 21st-Century Economist”, [1] Kate Raworth introduces a radical, yet elegantly simple reframing of economic measurement and economic purpose, which goes a long way to providing a viable alternative to the current growth-based GDP model.
In her 2017 book “Doughnut Economics: Seven Ways to Think Like a 21st-Century Economist”, [1] Kate Raworth introduces a radical, yet elegantly simple reframing of economic measurement and economic purpose, which goes a long way to providing a viable alternative to the current growth-based GDP model.
|
The problem with measuring all economic outputs as positive; as items of Gross Domestic Product (GDP), is that such a model is indifferent as to whether an output has a genuinely positive or negative effect on the overall health of the system, as we have discussed elsewhere. In effect the GDP model, especially in its current neo-liberal metastasis, can be sending signals that all is well and healthy when, in fact, all is seriously unwell and whilst the system is, in fact, dying.
With traditional forms of economic measurement, values are only generated within the economic system or, to be more accurate, within the economic model that claims to accurately represent the real-world economic system. If something lies outside of this economic model and does not enter within the orbit of a financial accounting practices, then it is deemed to have no intrinsic value to that system. |
|
There are two types of ‘objects’ that essentially have no intrinsic value from a neo-liberal perspective: People and Nature. [2] Whilst this might seem surprising, as these are precisely the two entities that hold and generate all of the real values, it is the lack of applied quantification that effectively renders them valueless to the economic system.
It is only when people and nature is converted into recognisable resources, as raw material, labour, or become paying consumers that an economic numerical value can be attached to them and their ‘worth’ can be assessed.
Not surprisingly “we”, as genuinely rational human beings, know that our human economic system is entirely contingent upon the existence of healthy people and a healthy environment, but unfortunately, the mind that inhabits the body that animates the ’invisible market hand’, [3] seems completely ignorant and indifferent to this self-evident fact.
It is only when people and nature is converted into recognisable resources, as raw material, labour, or become paying consumers that an economic numerical value can be attached to them and their ‘worth’ can be assessed.
Not surprisingly “we”, as genuinely rational human beings, know that our human economic system is entirely contingent upon the existence of healthy people and a healthy environment, but unfortunately, the mind that inhabits the body that animates the ’invisible market hand’, [3] seems completely ignorant and indifferent to this self-evident fact.
|
Albert Einstein allegedly said that “you cannot solve a problem from the same consciousness that created it. You must learn to see the world anew.” Whether he actually said this is irrelevant. [4] What is important is to know that, if the current model, which is meant to explain how things are working, is self evidently wrong, as is the case with the neo-liberal economic operating system, then we need to come up with a better model.
|
Like all good ideas, Kate Raworth’s doughnut model reconciles and pulls together a number of threads that were nearly but not quite coming together in previous attempts to scope out what could supersede the growth-based GDP economic model.
In contrast to the ideal of a permanently upward growth trajectory, represented by the GDP line, Doughnut Economics provides a simple but radically different picture for measuring the accumulation of real values, one that takes both human and planetary needs fully into account.
In contrast to the ideal of a permanently upward growth trajectory, represented by the GDP line, Doughnut Economics provides a simple but radically different picture for measuring the accumulation of real values, one that takes both human and planetary needs fully into account.
|
At its heart is a picture of two circles, which creates the doughnut. In its simplest terms the doughnut represents an organism with two boundaries as represented by the inner and outer circle of the doughnut.
Everything that lies within the boundary lines is green and everything that lies outside the boundary lines is red. Beyond the green zone of the doughnut lie the two red zones; an outer red zone, which represents the state of planetary health and wellbeing and an inner red zone, which represents the state of human health and wellbeing. Human and planetary wealth turns to “ilth” [5] when the healthy operating parameters of those two systems is pushed beyond comfortably tolerant levels. |
|
Systemic Balance and Imbalance
In terms of Viable Systems thinking [6] when human and planetary wellbeing are operating within their normal ranges they are in balance and healthy (green) and their ongoing viability is maintained. When they are pushed beyond their normal ranges into a state of imbalance, they become stressed (red)and their ongoing viability comes under threat.
Self-evidently, any rational sane human being would want to live in the green zone, rather than the red zone. They would want to be living in a balanced (green) environment with their own personal and collective needs also being met. Only a crazy irrational person would prefer to live in an imbalanced system (red).
The Doughnut, therefore, provides a conceptual tool for theoretically assigning a given activity as something that will make things better (more balanced-green) or worse (more unstable-red).
In terms of Viable Systems thinking [6] when human and planetary wellbeing are operating within their normal ranges they are in balance and healthy (green) and their ongoing viability is maintained. When they are pushed beyond their normal ranges into a state of imbalance, they become stressed (red)and their ongoing viability comes under threat.
Self-evidently, any rational sane human being would want to live in the green zone, rather than the red zone. They would want to be living in a balanced (green) environment with their own personal and collective needs also being met. Only a crazy irrational person would prefer to live in an imbalanced system (red).
The Doughnut, therefore, provides a conceptual tool for theoretically assigning a given activity as something that will make things better (more balanced-green) or worse (more unstable-red).
Defining the Boundaries
To add more detail to the model Kate Raworth adopts two thoroughly researched and widely uncontested indicator sets to give details as to what the planetary boundaries and human needs are.
On the ‘outer’ planetary side, the Doughnut Model adopts the nine planetary boundaries, as defined by the Stockholm Resilience Centre, [7] whilst on the ‘inner’ human needs side of the doughnut it adopts the relevant goals from the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDG’s) [8]
To add more detail to the model Kate Raworth adopts two thoroughly researched and widely uncontested indicator sets to give details as to what the planetary boundaries and human needs are.
On the ‘outer’ planetary side, the Doughnut Model adopts the nine planetary boundaries, as defined by the Stockholm Resilience Centre, [7] whilst on the ‘inner’ human needs side of the doughnut it adopts the relevant goals from the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDG’s) [8]
Measuring Consequences
One of the good things about this model (apart from how ridiculously and elegantly simple it is) is the fact that it solves a critical problem associated with the ever-ascending GDP curve model. It opens up the prospect of assigning a positive or negative value to the consequences of various types of economic activity.
GDP measures all incidents of economic activity as a positive, regardless of whether its outward ripple effects have a positive or negative effect upon the wider human and planetary systems. In the GDP model having to replace broken things counts as a greater economic 'good' than making sure they don’t break in the first place. [9] so disastrous and non-disastrous activities are both counted as positives.
With the doughnut model, these are theoretically separated out into red and green actions. An action with negative consequences (more CO2 for the atmosphere to absorb, more rainforest habitat, cut down, more resources being produced to help refugees fleeing a war zone, etc) will increase segments in the red zones, making them larger. Such negative outcomes should be reflected in any measure that supersedes the current GDP based system. In an economic 2.0 system (let’s call it the GAME System for now) [10] actions that further destabilise human and planetary systems would lead to a fall in ‘GDP’ rather than an increase.
One of the good things about this model (apart from how ridiculously and elegantly simple it is) is the fact that it solves a critical problem associated with the ever-ascending GDP curve model. It opens up the prospect of assigning a positive or negative value to the consequences of various types of economic activity.
GDP measures all incidents of economic activity as a positive, regardless of whether its outward ripple effects have a positive or negative effect upon the wider human and planetary systems. In the GDP model having to replace broken things counts as a greater economic 'good' than making sure they don’t break in the first place. [9] so disastrous and non-disastrous activities are both counted as positives.
With the doughnut model, these are theoretically separated out into red and green actions. An action with negative consequences (more CO2 for the atmosphere to absorb, more rainforest habitat, cut down, more resources being produced to help refugees fleeing a war zone, etc) will increase segments in the red zones, making them larger. Such negative outcomes should be reflected in any measure that supersedes the current GDP based system. In an economic 2.0 system (let’s call it the GAME System for now) [10] actions that further destabilise human and planetary systems would lead to a fall in ‘GDP’ rather than an increase.
The doughnut as the Basis for Further Development
Kate Raworth invites us to build upon the Doughnut Model and help reframe and add detail to this new ‘economic guidance system’. Detail that can help us re-evaluate and re-orientate our direction of travel as we are inevitably pulled into the future.
The rest of this article will explore and suggest some additions to the Doughnut model.
Kate Raworth invites us to build upon the Doughnut Model and help reframe and add detail to this new ‘economic guidance system’. Detail that can help us re-evaluate and re-orientate our direction of travel as we are inevitably pulled into the future.
The rest of this article will explore and suggest some additions to the Doughnut model.
Green and Red Interaction
If we think through some of the implications of this model, we will quickly realise that, whilst the red overspill zones may get larger or smaller, the green zone does not remain static. There is an intense symbiotic relationship between the red and the green. If the green represents a system (or two systems) in relative harmonious coexistence (humans and the rest of the planetary biosphere) then it stands to reason that they are in that relatively stable and harmonious state precisely because they are getting all the ‘nutrients’ they need to remain viable.
Any stress on people or planet is, by definition, going to reduce their viability. If raging wildfires and heatwaves destroy crops and reduce available fresh water, this is going to cause stress to human populations, who will need to consume even more natural resources to replace what has been lost. The expansion of red stress zones will therefore inevitably lead to a contraction of green resource-abundant zones.
A negative feedback loop [11] is one which strives to maintain overall stability in spite of external changes to the system. The ability of the human being to keep their internal temperature between 36 and 37 degrees centigrade, in spite of the environmental temperature typically being anywhere within a 70-degree centigrade range (-30 to +40) is a very good example of negative feedback loops in action.
In contrast, a positive feedback loop is one that alters a given state at an ever-increasing rate and which is self-feeding. So, as reflective white polar ice melts, less heat is reflected back into space and more heat is absorbed by the ocean, which leads to even more ice melting, etc, etc, creating a vicious circle.
In short, the effects of positive feedback can be anything but positive.
If we think through some of the implications of this model, we will quickly realise that, whilst the red overspill zones may get larger or smaller, the green zone does not remain static. There is an intense symbiotic relationship between the red and the green. If the green represents a system (or two systems) in relative harmonious coexistence (humans and the rest of the planetary biosphere) then it stands to reason that they are in that relatively stable and harmonious state precisely because they are getting all the ‘nutrients’ they need to remain viable.
Any stress on people or planet is, by definition, going to reduce their viability. If raging wildfires and heatwaves destroy crops and reduce available fresh water, this is going to cause stress to human populations, who will need to consume even more natural resources to replace what has been lost. The expansion of red stress zones will therefore inevitably lead to a contraction of green resource-abundant zones.
A negative feedback loop [11] is one which strives to maintain overall stability in spite of external changes to the system. The ability of the human being to keep their internal temperature between 36 and 37 degrees centigrade, in spite of the environmental temperature typically being anywhere within a 70-degree centigrade range (-30 to +40) is a very good example of negative feedback loops in action.
In contrast, a positive feedback loop is one that alters a given state at an ever-increasing rate and which is self-feeding. So, as reflective white polar ice melts, less heat is reflected back into space and more heat is absorbed by the ocean, which leads to even more ice melting, etc, etc, creating a vicious circle.
In short, the effects of positive feedback can be anything but positive.
|
Generally speaking, the doughnuts green zone is striving to produce negative feedback that will ensure that people and planet are in as stable a state as possible, whilst the activity feeding the red zone leads to increasing instability in the human and environmental system. As one expands the other contracts. They are inextricably linked.
|
|
Building on the Doughnuts Foundations
Having established the usefulness of the Doughnut Model along with some insights into the general dynamic, as various actions and activities lead to the expansion and contraction of the red and green zones, are there any further mechanisms that could give the model the functional capacity to track the real health of the wider economy, in the context of its stabilising or destabilising effects on people and planet?
I propose an expansion on the Doughnut Model to give it more agency.
Having established the usefulness of the Doughnut Model along with some insights into the general dynamic, as various actions and activities lead to the expansion and contraction of the red and green zones, are there any further mechanisms that could give the model the functional capacity to track the real health of the wider economy, in the context of its stabilising or destabilising effects on people and planet?
I propose an expansion on the Doughnut Model to give it more agency.
Enter the Future
People have been increasingly imagining what the future will be like for the whole of the modern era, going back to Thomas Moor’s writing of “Utopia” in 1516 [12] there is a critical difference between the future scenarios of the modern era and those of earlier times, such as the future scenarios outlined in something like The Apocalypse in the Book of Revelation. [13] What distinguishes the more recent from the more ancient crop of future scoping is the addition of human agency in determining what kind of future we will have. Celebrated classic examples of such what-ifs are Mary Shelly’s Frankenstein [14] and HG Well’s The Time Machine. [15] During the last few decades humanities propensity to imagine itself into the future and to explore various what-if scenarios has rapidly picked up in pace [16] and has now become a mainstay of popular culture, with explorations of time-travel and the concept of a multiverse of future possibilities now being an established part of our collective conceptual lexicon. [17]
This has reached the point whereby humanity as a whole, is now using broadly agreed future dates to orientate its direction of travel into the future, and to attempt to calibrate its activities, fully recognising that the futures we end up in, in 2030 and 2050, [18] are determined by the collective and compounded actions that we take in the present.
People have been increasingly imagining what the future will be like for the whole of the modern era, going back to Thomas Moor’s writing of “Utopia” in 1516 [12] there is a critical difference between the future scenarios of the modern era and those of earlier times, such as the future scenarios outlined in something like The Apocalypse in the Book of Revelation. [13] What distinguishes the more recent from the more ancient crop of future scoping is the addition of human agency in determining what kind of future we will have. Celebrated classic examples of such what-ifs are Mary Shelly’s Frankenstein [14] and HG Well’s The Time Machine. [15] During the last few decades humanities propensity to imagine itself into the future and to explore various what-if scenarios has rapidly picked up in pace [16] and has now become a mainstay of popular culture, with explorations of time-travel and the concept of a multiverse of future possibilities now being an established part of our collective conceptual lexicon. [17]
This has reached the point whereby humanity as a whole, is now using broadly agreed future dates to orientate its direction of travel into the future, and to attempt to calibrate its activities, fully recognising that the futures we end up in, in 2030 and 2050, [18] are determined by the collective and compounded actions that we take in the present.
|
This increasing ability for us to envisage and imagine multiple future outcomes and multiple versions of the future gives us a new orientation tool that is essentially a new human faculty. We can increasingly imagine the consequences of certain actions and start to choose which paths to follow based on the ones that optimise our future wellbeing, and the future wellbeing of the biosphere, upon which our personal and collective wellbeing depends.
This nascent ‘insight faculty’ was recently exercised by Christiana Figueres and Tom Rivett-Carnac in their 2020 book “The Future We Choose” [19] In which they imagine two future scenarios for the year 2050; a utopian future, which we move towards if we pull out all the stops and start using our resources intelligently, and a dystopian future, which is what we get if we carry on being as wasteful as we currently are. |
|
Adding a Third Dimension to the Doughnut
|
Until fairly recently it was general practice not to worry about the future consequences of our actions today. One of the biggest growth areas has been in ‘insight management’. Envisaging multiple what ifs and plotting our course of action based on the most optimised outcomes. Can this ability be incorporated into the doughnut Model in such a way that it both enhances the Doughnut as an effective activity measuring too and spurs the development of this nascent predictive faculty?
We believe the answer is yes. By giving the Doughnut Model a time dimension. We can add a third dimension to the model to reflect the range of possible future outcomes, with one pole ending in the most optimistic future (Utopia) and the other ending in the most pessimistic future (Dystopia). We therefore move from a single doughnut representing the present state of affairs to a doughnut cylinder, made up of multiple doughnut slices, which represent the full scale of future possibilities from best to worse. When it comes to which way to orientate this doughnut cylinder, I prefer to point the utopian axis upwards and the dystopian axis downwards. This pays homage to the Medieval world view that had “heaven” up and out ‘there’ and “hell” down and ‘in’ there. [20] If, in contrast, the doughnut cylinder is laid on its side one invites the unnecessary association of right/left side good and left/right side bad, which opens up the danger of becoming ensnared in outdated over simplified political notions of left-rightness, which will simply invite distraction from the task at hand. [21] |
Re-designing the Doughnut Itself
Having assigned the red and green zones to the horizontal axis we now free up space within the doughnut. The question is what kind of new filling are we going to give it? We still have the outer layer encircled with and defined by the 9 Planetary Boundaries, which I have coloured blue, as our planet is essentially blue, as and freely available water is essential to all known life.
Having assigned the red and green zones to the horizontal axis we now free up space within the doughnut. The question is what kind of new filling are we going to give it? We still have the outer layer encircled with and defined by the 9 Planetary Boundaries, which I have coloured blue, as our planet is essentially blue, as and freely available water is essential to all known life.
|
The inner layer is still defined by the SDG Goals that relate to human welfare and wellbeing. These I have represented in purple, which is a colour symbolically associated with the development of greater inner insight and wellbeing. It is also associated with kingship and, in the days when almost everybody has a super-computer in their own pocket, achieving personal sovereignty should be seen as a laudable global goal. [22]
Beyond the relative triviality of assigning colours to the planetary and human boundaries what can we meaningfully sandwich between them? In 2020 the author completed work on a set of goals for The Ethical Small Traders Association (ESTA) [23] These became a critical component of the development of ‘the ESTA system’. This work was partly in response to a perceived lack of coverage in the UN SDG Goals set regarding the importance of personal learning and self-development and the importance of active biosphere restoration. It was also a response to endless consultation and brainstorming exercises deigned to identify the problems and issues and suggest solutions and targets. We simply collated multiple examples of such exercises, and the 300+ Goals was the result of this distillation process. [24] To provide meaningful agency, these goals (310 in tota) [25] were assigned to one of 20 overarching sectors of economic and human activity, [26] with each sector taking the lead responsibility for delivering an average of 15 goals each. |
|
We believe this goal set, distributed across 20 delivery sectors, now provides a comprehensive system that covers all actual and potential human activities which, we believe, makes it easier to assign real world operations to the model. And so we have placed these in the centre of the Doughnut which was previously occupied by the red and green zones, which have now been transposed to the vertical axis.
|
Approximately ten of the sectors are human centric services whilst the other ten are resource-heavy infrastructure services. We have therefore oriented the human services to face inwards, to correlate with the human goals, and the infrastructure-oriented services to face outwards to correlate with the planetary boundaries, as they have their primary impact upon people and planet respectively.
When we add this new filling to the Doughnut Cylinder we end up with the following arrangement: The red and green aspects of the doughnut are now transposed to the vertical axis, leaving room within the doughnut for a level of greater and more comprehensive agency as provided for by the system of 300+ goals spread across 20 sectors. Bringing the Model to Life In principle any given action at any level or scale will serve to nudge the doughnut in a positive (utopian) or negative (dystopian) direction. In principle this means that any activity, from small everyday personal decisions all the way up to large corporate strategies can be analysed and mapped as to its green or red contribution value, allowing us to evaluate whether the action is contributing to more overall system stability (contributing to the ‘solution’) or more overall system instability (contributing to the ‘problem’). We believe that the task of all human activity in the 21st Century should be to help create thriving local economies that help everyone meet their personal needs and reach their full potential, whilst ensuring that the operation of human society is as sustainable as possible and does not breach planetary boundaries. |
|
To achieve these three interlocking goals of needs met, full potential realised, and planetary boundaries maintained, we are free to use any and all tools and methodologies available to us. The 300+ Goals breaks down and describes the socially agreed tasks that need to be done to achieve these three goals, whilst the 20 sectors help orientate the goals with the people, organisations and businesses that are best placed to meet those goals.
|
For the Doughnut Cylinder to be an effective evaluation tool I propose that actions and outcomes are mapped within its frameworks as to their contribution and influence on the overall directionality of human civilisation as it moves through time. In other words, we can use the Doughnut Cylinder Model as a way of correlating all of our specific activities with the way they influence our direction of travel into the future.
|
A Whole Population of Doughnuts
I propose that the Doughnut Cylinder (DC) model can be seen as fractal or holonic, [27] in the sense that any given viable system can be represented by its own doughnut cylinder. This gives rise to the prospect of creating arrays of interlinked DC’s at different levels of scale, which makes the system more adaptable and implementable.
I propose that the Doughnut Cylinder (DC) model can be seen as fractal or holonic, [27] in the sense that any given viable system can be represented by its own doughnut cylinder. This gives rise to the prospect of creating arrays of interlinked DC’s at different levels of scale, which makes the system more adaptable and implementable.
|
Every organisational entity, from the individual household and small business to the level of international organisations, that has its own operational boundary can be represented by its own Doughnut Cylinder (DC), which can serve to model its specific activities. DC’s can then be arranged in multiple arrays and at multiple levels of recursion, in the same way that batteries can be connected to accumulate, discharge and transfer energy between them.
The interconnecting points are the goals that any given system is trying to achieve and sectors within which they operate, along with the input and output effects they have on other goals and sectors. |
|
The overriding aim is to create as much self-contained internal circularity of resources as possible (building up green charge), making smart circular exchanges between systems (transferring green charge) whilst trying to minimise destructive resource leakage into the wider system landscape (minimising red discharge). The relative success or failure of this will determine if it is the green or red zones that are growing, and hence determine the overall future orientation of the system elements and the system as a whole.
The expressed dynamics of the Doughnut Cylinder Model can provide a ‘substrate’ upon which various existing and future corporate social responsibility type mapping and analytical exercises can be overlaid.
The expressed dynamics of the Doughnut Cylinder Model can provide a ‘substrate’ upon which various existing and future corporate social responsibility type mapping and analytical exercises can be overlaid.
In its simplest form there are four critical questions that can be asked:
- Which direction is my action-operation nudging the system?
- Which goals is my action-operation enhancing or degrading?
- Which sectors and spheres of operation do those actions sit in?
- How can I meaningfully connect with other agents to accelerate our journey towards the green end of the spectrum?
In Conclusion
We now have a set of powerful orientation tools to guide our actions and against which to assess the actions of others at all levels of scale and recursion. This ‘orientation matrix’ is guided by a set of simple primary operational steps, as defined by the four questions above.
The more we can contextualise our actions the greater the chance we have of integrating them within a more comprehensive and organised systemic whole.
What gets attention and resources is what gets measured and, I believe that the doughnut Cylinder Model provides a comprehensive dynamic measuring tool that is both universal and works at any scale, and which can help us measure and orientate our direction of travel as we struggle over what kind of future we are going to live in.
I will end with an anecdote:
In the tale of the struggle between the black wolf and the white wolf, the one that wins is the one that we feed the most. [28] I suggest replacing them with a red wolf and a green wolf and using the analytical orientation that the Doughnut Cylinder Model provides to rapidly and consistently feed the green wolf so that, by the time we reach 2050, the lamb has become its companion, rather than its last supper. [29]
We now have a set of powerful orientation tools to guide our actions and against which to assess the actions of others at all levels of scale and recursion. This ‘orientation matrix’ is guided by a set of simple primary operational steps, as defined by the four questions above.
The more we can contextualise our actions the greater the chance we have of integrating them within a more comprehensive and organised systemic whole.
What gets attention and resources is what gets measured and, I believe that the doughnut Cylinder Model provides a comprehensive dynamic measuring tool that is both universal and works at any scale, and which can help us measure and orientate our direction of travel as we struggle over what kind of future we are going to live in.
I will end with an anecdote:
In the tale of the struggle between the black wolf and the white wolf, the one that wins is the one that we feed the most. [28] I suggest replacing them with a red wolf and a green wolf and using the analytical orientation that the Doughnut Cylinder Model provides to rapidly and consistently feed the green wolf so that, by the time we reach 2050, the lamb has become its companion, rather than its last supper. [29]
Notes and References
[1] Doughnut Economics: Seven Ways to Think Like a 21st-Century Economist by Kate Raworth https://www.waterstones.com/book/doughnut-economics/kate-raworth/9781847941398
[2] On the value of nature: https://www.cam.ac.uk/stories/dasguptareview
[3] On the invisible hand of the market: https://www.britannica.com/topic/invisible-hand
[4] Whether Einstein ever actually said this is somewhat irrelevant, as the general observation certainly seems to play out well in real life. It’s certainly true that he saw the world anew, which led to the solving of multiple observational problems that were building up in physics in the late 19th and early 20th century. https://hsm.stackexchange.com/questions/7751/did-einstein-say-we-cannot-solve-our-problems-with-the-same-thinking-we-used-to
[5] “ilth” is a term coined by John Ruskin to describe the creation of the opposite of wealth. https://www.ft.com/content/516690b0-2d51-11e6-bf8d-26294ad519fc
[6] For an interesting and relevant explanation of the Viable Systems Model applied to the creation of a non-extractive economy see: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EoNiDdonb2I
[7] For more details on the nine planetary boundaries see: https://www.stockholmresilience.org/research/planetary-boundaries/the-nine-planetary-boundaries.html
[8] For more details on the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDG’s) see: https://sdgs.un.org/goals
[9] For a detailed outline of a system designed to completely re-frame the GDP model see our article: “It’s time for a New Economic System: Moving away from a two-dimensional to a three-dimensional value system.” http://www.smallgreenconsultancy.co.uk/its-time-for-a-new-economic-system.html
[10] For example: The GAME: Gross Achieved Meaning Evaluation system: http://www.smallgreenconsultancy.co.uk/the-economy-of-mindfullness.html
[11] This is an easily digestible illustration of positive and negative feedback loops in living systems. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CLv3SkF_Eag
[12] Thomas Moor’s Utopia: https://www.bl.uk/learning/timeline/item126618.html
[13] The Book of Revelation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Revelation
[14] Frankenstein: Mary Shelly: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frankenstein
[15] The Time Machine: H G Wells: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Time_Machine
[16] Commentary/Can science fiction reimagine the future of global development?: https://rethink.earth/can-science-fiction-reimagine-the-future-of-global-development/
[17] For an interesting exploration of the concept of the Multiverse in popular culture see: https://theconversation.com/the-multiverse-is-huge-in-pop-culture-right-now-but-what-is-it-and-does-it-really-exist-181781
[18] Why are the dates 2030 and 2050 considered so important? : https://www.un.org/sg/en/content/sg/articles/2020-12-11/carbon-neutrality-2050-the-world%E2%80%99s-most-urgent-mission
[19] The Future We Choose: Christiana Figueres and Tom Rivett-Carnac: https://www.globaloptimism.com/the-future-we-choose
[20] This justification is further elaborated in our article on personal inner transformation and its juxtaposition with outer accumulation: http://www.smallgreenconsultancy.co.uk/the-economy-of-mindfullness.html
[21] I advise against Googling this topic, as you will find it all but impossible to find anything but content on the struggle between ‘left’ and ‘right’.
[22] Interesting observations and musings on the colour purple: https://www.sensationalcolor.com/meaning-of-purple/
[23] The Ethical Small Traders Association (ESTA): https://www.lancasteresta.org/
[24] See our article: : http://www.smallgreenconsultancy.co.uk/the-sdg-goals-have-nothing-to-say-about-the-importance-of-human-experience.html
[25] The full list of ESTA Goals listed by sector: https://www.lancasteresta.org/estas-300-goals.html
[26] The 20 Sectors Model: http://www.smallgreenconsultancy.co.uk/the-twenty-sectors.html
[27] Holonic structures: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/270338868_The_Holonic_Revolution_Holons_Holarchies_and_Holonic_Networks_The_Ghost_in_the_Production_Machine
[28] The parable of the black wolf and the white wolf: https://www.intepeople.co.nz/internal-conflict-white-vs-black-wolf/
[29] Please excuse my mashing of metaphors.