Academic Articles and Reports

Version 1.1 (December 2020)

Overview

Welcome to the DEAL Team’s curated list of academic articles and research reports that engage with the core concepts of Doughnut Economics. The list is organised by year of publication and it will be updated periodically, but it is by no means exhaustive. You can also find a PDF version at the bottom of this page.

Please do let us know of any additional source that you think we should include by posting a comment below, or by sending a message via the contact page and select 'Research & Data Analysis' from the category options.

2020

Brand-Correa, L et al. (2020). ‘Understanding (and tackling) need satisfier escalation’. Sustainability: Science, Practice and Policy 16, no. 1: 309–325.
Büchs, M et al. (2020). ‘Wellbeing Economics for the COVID-19 Recovery’. Wellbeing Economies Alliance (WEAll) Briefing Papers.
Ensor, J and Hoddy, E (2020). ‘Securing the social foundation: A rights-based approach to planetary boundaries’. Earth System Governance (in press).
Fanning, AL et al. (2020). ‘Provisioning Systems for a Good Life within Planetary Boundaries’. Global Environmental Change 64: 102135.
Gough, I (2020). ‘Defining floors and ceilings: the contribution of human needs theory’. Sustainability: Science, Practice and Policy 16, no. 1: 208–219.
Hickel, J, and Kallis, G (2020). ‘Is Green Growth Possible?’ New Political Economy 25, no. 4: 469–86.
Lieberknecht, L (2020). ‘Ecosystem-Based Integrated Ocean Management: A Framework for Sustainable Ocean Economy Development’. UNEP-GRID Arendal.
Mair, S (2020). ‘Neoliberal economics, planetary health, and the COVID-19 pandemic: a Marxist ecofeminist analysis’. The Lancet Planetary Health 4, no. 12: e588–596.
Millward-Hopkins, J et al. (2020). Providing decent living with minimum energy: A global scenario. Global Environmental Change 65: 102168.
Roberts, JT et al. (2020). ‘Four Agendas for Research and Policy on Emissions Mitigation and Well-Being’. Global Sustainability 3: e3.
Roy, A, and Pramanick, K (2020). ‘Safe and Just Operating Space for India’. In Handbook of Environmental Materials Management, 1–32. Springer International Publishing.
Stratford, B and O'Neill, DW (2020). ‘The UK’s Path to a Doughnut-Shaped Recovery’. University of Leeds.
Turner, R et al. (2020). ‘Towards a Sustainable Cornwall: State of the Doughnut’. University of Exeter.
Wiedmann, T et al. (2020). ‘Scientists’ Warning on Affluence’. Nature Communications 11(1): 3107.
Wugt Larsen, F and Lung, T (2020). ‘Is Europe Living within the Limits of Our Planet?’ European Environment Agency.

2019

Bourges, B et al. (2019). ‘La société française face aux limites de la planète’. In L’environnement en France 2019, 155–193. Ministère de la Transition Écologique et Solidaire, Gouvernement de la République française.
Capmourteres, V et al. (2019). ‘A Complex Systems Framework for the Sustainability Doughnut’. People and Nature 1, no. 4: 497–506.
Downing, AS et al. (2019). ‘Matching Scope, Purpose and Uses of Planetary Boundaries Science’. Environmental Research Letters 14, no. 7: 073005.
Hickel, J (2019). ‘Is It Possible to Achieve a Good Life for All within Planetary Boundaries?’ Third World Quarterly 40, no. 1: 18–35.
Jackson, T and Victor, P (2019). ‘Unraveling the Claims for (and against) Green Growth’. Science 366, no. 6468: 950–51.

2018

Beaudoin, Y (2018). ‘Hacking Economics for People and Planet’. Early Warning, Emerging Issues and Futures Foresight Brief 6. United Nations Environment Programme
Boehnert, J (2018). ‘Anthropocene Economics and Design: Heterodox Economics for Design Transitions’. She Ji: The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation 4, no. 4: 355–74.
Häyhä, T et al. (2018). ‘Operationalizing the Concept of a Safe Operating Space at the EU Level – First Steps and Explorations’. SRC Technical Report. Stockholm Resilience Centre.
O’Neill, DW et al. (2018). ‘A Good Life for All within Planetary Boundaries’. Nature Sustainability 1, no. 2: 88–95.
Steffen, W et al. (2018). ‘Trajectories of the Earth System in the Anthropocene’. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 115, no. 33: 8252–59.
Wiedmann, T and Lenzen, M (2018). ‘Environmental and Social Footprints of International Trade’. Nature Geoscience 11, no. 5: 314–21.

2017

Cole, MJ et al. (2017). ‘Spatial Variability in Sustainable Development Trajectories in South Africa: Provincial Level Safe and Just Operating Spaces’. Sustainability Science 12, no. 5: 829–48.
Lamb, WF and Steinberger JK, (2017). ‘Human Well-Being and Climate Change Mitigation’. WIREs Climate Change 8, no. 6: e485.
Raworth, K (2017). ‘A Doughnut for the Anthropocene: Humanity’s Compass in the 21st Century’. The Lancet Planetary Health 1, no. 2: e48–49.
Raworth, K (2017). ‘Why It’s Time for Doughnut Economics’. IPPR Progressive Review 24, no. 3: 216–22.

2016

Häyhä, T et al. (2016). ‘From Planetary Boundaries to National Fair Shares of the Global Safe Operating Space — How Can the Scales Be Bridged?’ Global Environmental Change 40: 60–72.
Hoornweg, D et al. (2016). ‘An Urban Approach to Planetary Boundaries’. Ambio 45, no. 5: 567–80.
Verburg, P et al. (2016). ‘Methods and Approaches to Modelling the Anthropocene’. Global Environmental Change 39: 328–40.

2015

Daly, H (2015). ‘Economics for a Full World’. Great Transition Initiative.
Hajer, M et al. (2015). ‘Beyond Cockpit-Ism: Four Insights to Enhance the Transformative Potential of the Sustainable Development Goals’. Sustainability 7, no. 2: 1651–60.
Sayers, M and Trebeck, K (2015). ‘The UK Doughnut: A Framework for Environmental Sustainability and Social Justice’. Oxfam Policy and Practice, Oxfam.
Steffen, W et al. (2015). ‘Planetary Boundaries: Guiding Human Development on a Changing Planet’. Science 347, no. 6223.
Steffen, W et al. (2015). ‘The Trajectory of the Anthropocene: The Great Acceleration’. The Anthropocene Review 2, no. 1: 81–98.
Turnheim, B et al. (2015). ‘Evaluating Sustainability Transitions Pathways: Bridging Analytical Approaches to Address Governance Challenges’. Global Environmental Change 35: 239–53.

2014

Cole, M et al. (2014). ‘Tracking Sustainable Development with a National Barometer for South Africa Using a Downscaled “Safe and Just Space” Framework’. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 111, no. 42: E4399–4408.
Dearing, JA et al. (2014). ‘Safe and Just Operating Spaces for Regional Social-Ecological Systems’. Global Environmental Change 28: 227–38.
Hoekstra, AY and Wiedmann, T (2014). ‘Humanity’s Unsustainable Environmental Footprint’. Science 344, no. 6188: 1114–17.

2013

Griggs, D et al. (2013). ‘Sustainable Development Goals for People and Planet’. Nature 495, no. 7441: 305–7.
Leach, M et al. (2013). ‘Between Social and Planetary Boundaries: Navigating Pathways in the Safe and Just Space for Humanity’. In World Social Science Report 2013: Changing Global Environments, 84–89. Paris: UNESCO.
Nykvist, B et al. (2013). National Environmental Performance on Planetary Boundaries: A Study for the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency. Stockholm: Swedish Environmental Protection Agency.
Steffen, W and Stafford Smith, M (2013). ‘Planetary Boundaries, Equity and Global Sustainability: Why Wealthy Countries Could Benefit from More Equity’. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 5, no. 3: 403–8.

2012 and earlier

Costanza, R et al. (2012). ‘Building a Sustainable and Desirable Economy-in-Society-in-Nature’. New York: United Nations Division for Sustainable Development.
Meadows, D (1999). ‘Leverage Points: Places to Intervene in a System’. The Sustainability Institute.
Raworth, K (2012). ‘A Safe and Just Space for Humanity’. Oxfam Discussion Papers. Oxfam International.
Rockström, J et al. (2009). ‘A Safe Operating Space for Humanity’. Nature 461, no. 7263: 472–75.
Scheffer, M et al. (2012). ‘Anticipating Critical Transitions’. Science 338, no. 6105: 344–48.
Vince, G (2012). ‘Living in the Doughnut’. Nature Climate Change 2, no. 4: 225–26.