Welcome! Please introduce yourself


Hello everyone!
My name is Silvia, I am from Italy. I have just started a PhD in History, in Bologna, and my project is about energy consumption during the 70ies. I am reading “Doughnut Economy” and I really hope I will be able to do my part in order to create a better and sustainable society, both in an environmental and social way.
Thank you, Kate, for this opportunity, I am looking forward to meeting and speaking with all of you!
Best regards,


Hello Kate and community, my name is Dan have been teaching for 45 yrs mainly Universities in US and Japan. Also consult Japanese organizations. Showed your TED talk to senior execs at Japan Steel Corp last wednesday ( Nov 28th). Have been trying ( for a couple of yrs) to write an essay on just your topic ( need for new metrics to measure prosperity, etc). Was prompted by Larry Summers essay on Secular Stagnation and Richard Layard’s “Happiness: lessons from a new science”. Also liked “Culture Matters” by Huntington,
My contention is that Japan’s economic and political system seems the best for achieving the goals in the new shape of progress.

As a side bar, my essay on the first global symbol, written in grad school explores the Sanskrit su = well + asti = being.

Looking forward to comments.

Dan inTokyo


Hi, everyone!
My name is Anke, originally from Germany (graduated as a vet), living in The Netherlands for 25 years (graduated here for economics).
Working (mainly) as concept developer and consultant for NGO’s, social entrepreneurs and citizen’s initiative. For the last three years, I read as much as I can about Doughnut Economics (thanks for those amazing insights!).
Worked as a civil servant for 20 years, mostly policy making and organisational development, before I started my own company. For that, I did some thinking about the role of governments, politics and lobbyists, in relation to translate the doughnut economy into practice; looking at the very basics of democracy and our understanding of it nowadays.
Hope to share and discuss some of those thoughts soon.
Best regards,


Hi Kate, I am Louis, living in the Netherlands. I love your Doughnut concept, I think society / humanity really needs to adopt it’s core ideas. I work in the energy industry on the thin line innovating new, renewable and existing incumbent energy systems with disruptive new upcoming technologie sin the digital realm, such as e.g. blockchain. In this line of work, developing technology without also developing underlying economical assumptions is not very effective. Therefore I strive to help debate new economic thinking using the already disruptive (digital) technologies of today as a tool to enable this new thinking. I am not an economist but due to my work I got more and more interesed in why it is like it is now, allmost all over the World and I still often wonder why there is so stubborness to hang on to old thinking. Like to help give people new fresh ideas, new perspectives, new trials etc. The Doughnut concept helps me enormously! Thank you for bringing it into the World!


Hi Kate and everyone,

I’m coming at this from a variety of places and experiences including:
My original academic training in biology, ecology, evolution and history & philosophy of science.
50-odd years as a committed environmentalist at both the personal and professional level - I worked in both rural and urban nature conservation, used to run an urban wildlife charity and be a member of the UKMAB Urban Forum. I was also a local authority Environment Co-ordinator and did a lot of work at national level on good practice and LA21.
Working as a researcher on sustainable development issues, including very minor roles on this like the World Conservation Strategy, projects on regional development banks, for SIDA and local authorities on anti poverty/economic development strategies.
I also spent 15+ years working on health, care, housing and equality issues undertaking work for UK LAs. I’ve worked directly with users of mental health, drug & alcohol abuse, homelessness, older persons, BAME groups and on poliicies affecting them. And been a Trustee of a rape crisis service.

I was hoping to find a discussion group here on ‘Equality & the Donut. Is anyone else interested as in my mind Equality is a key component of a sustainable society.



Hi Everyone!

I’m a donut believer after reading the book i want to use the knowledge I have gained in my businesses so we can flight the good flight and compete with money hungry neo-liberisms.

I am based in Gisborne, New Zealand and I manage our co-working space, grow hemp seeds for food plus do consulting and speaking.

Keen to spread the message as much as possible! Love the distributed by design aspects of your models and agonotic about growth. :slight_smile:



Greetings from Australia. I have been learning about economics for 2 years. I am 65 years old and i work as a data analyst.

My interest in economics began when i read The Secret Life of Real Estate and Banking by Phillip Anderson (about the 18 year real estate cycle). Then I read Doughnut Economics and then did some research into Georgism and learned about The Corruption of Economics.

Since year 2000 in Australia we have had a massive real estate price boom, fueled by federal government tax subsidies. Recently the value of new dwellings has been increasing at an annual value equivalent to 35% of GDP. Over the same period, manufacturing has declined.

Does Australia still have a Capitalist economy or has our econmy become a Landist economy?

This question should be of interest to economists who know about Georgism. Is there enough economic data in the public domain to answer this question?

If we can prove that the annualised value of Land exceeds the annualised value of “other” capital assets then we could justifiably label our economy as Landist.

If we could get the concept of Landist economy widespread in the world, then maybe we could start to prise apart the conflation of Land and Capital that was the foundation of neoclassical economics. Or even hijack the entire conflated mess!

Could this seven-letter word Landism change the framework for discussion of economics?



I have been invited to this forum just after reading the book Doughnut Economics. I thank so much Kate for writing this book in such a way even I can understand almost everything.

In this forum I feel like a duck in the moon. My experience comes just from observing people behaviour, reading and listening to people. I have many questions and few answers about how we, humans, should solve the problems we have now and come worst in the future. As you see, I am not optimistic about that.

I studied advertising and marketing at the university in Barcelona, but I did not work straight in that. I am skipper for recreational crafts and have been involved in all what I thought could be interesting for my nautical career. Now I try to give to the students who want to begin to sail, all the data they need from that I collected. I live in Mallorca.

More than 25 years ago (I’m 53) I set my formula for quality of life. Do not try to get all that your brain subconscious tells you to achieve or get. Stop your anxiety and advertisers’:

Quality of life = what you get / what you want or desire. Every time I got something, my brain established something new in the lower part of the fraction. Stop increasing this lower part and your quality of life raises to one.

Are we able to control our desires?

After centuries of wars, our societies still live under some kind of violence, because we want more and more. Is it “normal”? Shall we build more and more, just to consolidate an economic way of life based on principles set by few people?

Can we construct a network on the principle of helping the others to improve what they try to offer, services and products?

Can we forget money-based economy and set a new one based on thinking and working-time, where we people will not accumulate lots of rubbish?

Are all present democracies real democracies useful for all population or just for power?

I thank all of you to let me read your comments in this forum.

Best regards



Thank you.

My name is Sowmya Sharma. My husband and I are raising our two little boys and work full-time, here in Australia. Within these limitations, I would like to participate in helping the environment especially climate change.

Lately, I realised that despite the vast amount of information available about climate change, will-full blindness has taken over the world around us. There are the helpless, the non-believers and the underminers. I am not sure how to start a conversation when the moment I say the words “climate change” people look at me as if I have suddenly grown an extra pair of eyes.

I would like to contribute in small meaningful ways especially with my older son who is seven. Please let me know of avenues that I could explore towards this end.



Welcome here Sowmya! You might take a look at this article for your question: https://www.sierraclub.org/sierra/how-can-we-talk-about-global-warming


And another useful overview by Twitter account @ClimateLitigate:


And another one that might inspire: https://www.ted.com/talks/katharine_hayhoe_the_most_important_thing_you_can_do_to_fight_climate_change_talk_about_it?language=en


Hi Kate,
I’m an economist, based in Rome and have founded my own sustainable company recently. Love your talk and wish to know more on how to implement your ideas.


I am Mary-Wynne Ashford, MD Phd. My interest is in nuclear disarmament and public health. I am a past Co-President of the International Physicians for Prevention of Nuclear war, and author of Enough Blood Shed: 101 Solutions to Violence, Terror, and War. New Society 2006.

I am very interested in the health consequences of the militarization of the planet and climate change. My concern is that the carbon footprint of the world’s militaries is not counted in climate change conferences such as COP24. We cannot achieve our goals of emission reduction without including this major sector.

As I address the issue of militarization, and propose that we cannot survive a world system that bases security on military might, I recognize the wide ranging effects of shifting to a humanitarian system. In particular, the economic consequences are complex. I wonder if anyone else is writing on this?



I am Andrew. I work at a large Australian University for a suite of MBA Programs in a Postgrad Management School. I also study my MBA through University of the People. I am particularly interested in circular theories of economics and donut economics.

I am hoping to return to Environmentalism study at postgrad level after finishing my second Masters (the MBA). I presently curate climate change/global warming articles on a flipboard magazine and will be adding a daily podcast discussing the best of each of the days news (if it could be considered ‘best’ given the circumstances.


Hi Pablo, by any chance are you in Sydney?


Hi Rebecca, I work at UNSW, Sydney in the postgrad business school. I am seeking like minded business people to form a network around Donut Economics and Business Sustainability (in terms of the world environment). Contact me if interested.


Hi Andrew yes I am! I see you are UNSW? Did you want to chat doughnuts?


Hi Andrew,

Thanks for your message. It would be great to hear more from you and how the ideas in Doughnut Economics can be applied to your thinking and study in Business Sustainability.

Would you mind sharing a bit about what you are studying?

What aspects of the paradigm or concepts offered by Doughnut Economics relate the most to your study and how so?

Look forward to your response.

Kind regards,



Greetings Kate & Doughnut Tribe;

My name is TY Cherry, director at the EarthCorp Foundation (ECF) for environmental preservation and regeneration, a US 501c3 and nonprofit foundation in some Latin American countries, with an eye for global expansion. ECF was first envisioned July 2001 after learning of our dire environmental situation. Experiences led me to understand the cause to be finance and social economics. Note that I have no background or experience with economics so my terms and understanding may be off a good bit. The approach is intended to practical and functional. When I saw Kate’s TED talk, I felt compelled to reach out to this community for support and advice.

EarthCorp (Corp as Corporation not Corps) is the legal corporate entity of the Earth. We create corporations and give them rights as though they were living entities, yet we discount our very home planet, our living biosphere from which we take and often more don’t return. When a corporation fails, we write it off and start more. We absolve it of any debt or wrongdoings. ECF is about that fiction and how it can be woven into true reality to create a life cycle between human conceptions and the survival of our planet.

The design of ECF is to link global retail spending to preservation and regeneration using a self-perpetuating cycle that relies largely on social economy as I understand it. My apologies for such a long intro.


Acronym for Global Economic Stimulation, Environmental Regeneration and Preservation.

This was actually intended to be stage II, funded by Stage I, but it began first due to the scope of stage I and my lack of resources to develop and launch it.

This is the actual field work that we do. In each country we work with recognized universities for credibility, govt relationships, and to create applicable agricultural science (eg CATIE Univ in Costa Rica). We engage the governments to gain land grants where we establish the program: organic and biodynamic techniques, elimination of monocropping, introduction of one primary crop which is a commodity traded value (cacao, coffee, castor oil, rubber, etc), and multiple secondary crops which are non-commodities that have substantial economic value in the final consumer retail products produced from them. The primary crops are used to attract investors, however the secondaries are the most important to this model.
We bring in unemployed national citizens who want to work, give them everything needed to raise the crops, we then buy the crops at fair trade or above. We take the crops through their entire value chain to finished consumer packaged goods (CPG) which we market and sell. All of the net goes back to the project -no salaries for executive members or expensed out nets. 50% to ECF for operational costs, 25% to an international trust fund in each country of origin to expand the program, and 25% is given directly to the Small Food Producer (SFP—what we call Farmers).

We use three to five secondaries in addition to the primary crop. This provides multiple streams of income and takes away their reliance on single crops which are subject to failure, particularly in commercial monocropping scenarios. The cacao crisis throughout Latin America over the past 20 years is a prime example, also our first primary crop undertaking. From what we’ve seen in our preliminary work, the income from one or two secondary crops can match or exceed what they earn on average in 1 year, three to four or five crops plus the primary makes them wealthy and stable.

When the SFPs have been with us for three to four years, proving their commitment, we will deed them a parcel of land. The average family manages 3-4 hectares. They would be given 1-2 with certain special provisions/edicts. They’re now land owners and contributors to the tax system, rather than beneficiaries. All of the production is intended to be exported and the profits returned to stimulate economic growth.
These are the basics, the project is designed to fit into any environment, any country.

Stage II. Corporate Social Responsibility Ratings Program. (CSR).
We use a rating scale to establish the corporate social responsibility of retail sector businesses from a single owner small businesses up to the largest corporations. The score is based on two factors: environmental responsibility and social responsibility.
In my experience few if any retail sector businesses do any direct substantial harm to the environment. The social aspect is initially based on how they handle employees and community relationships. The score is actually weighed about 80% towards their B2B activities while using the other factors because most persons understand and relate to them.
The intent is to trace their supply chain back to the industrial sector of our society. No doubt you’re aware that few if any persons know exactly what goes on at that level. Commercial agriculture production, commercial animal farming (cafo’s), mining, heavy industrial manufacturing, fracking, and two I truly hope to see resolved: plastics and waste disposal. There are many more. These are the places we are doing the real damage to our planet.

On the consumer side, membership is always free. We ask them to shop at the businesses that have been rated and joined the program, either the higher score or larger discount. For this they are rewarded financially and socially.

Initially, businesses that receive a 70% or greater score are invited to the ECF community. We ask for a 2% or greater discount on their retail sales. When consumers make a purchase they present their membership card and they receive 50% of the discount at the point of sale. The other 50% is given to ECF.
I describe this as 100% effective use of advertising dollars on a post payment term basis. To my knowledge this is never been offered anywhere. The business is able to determine exactly how much they are willing to pay for a guaranteed sale, and they don’t pay for it until the sale is completed.

Short term goals are expanding participation of businesses and the public, generating revenue, and full proof concept. Extended goals are positive competition between businesses leading to an increase in the discounts the businesses are willing to offer, large amounts of revenue, and unification under a single cause for common good where all participants gain socially and economically.

From the consumer side, we call it Giving by Receiving. They never have to donate money, time, or effort. They shop and buy as they always have, and they help in the process. This is what I understand to be the interplay of social economy. Inviting everyone to help preserve and restore our environment and help others without having to take from their own pockets. The feel good effect at no cost. Social Currency.

From the business side, we create a similar social gain along with the financial. Businesses are now able to determine how much they will spend for sales and calculate more accurate expenses and profits. They gain dedicated patrons and stronger reputations. More importantly in my view, the business owners get the Social Currency income by being recognized and thus patronized by consumers that care and want to help. To me, that’s all of us, and there may be no ceiling to the amount of this Social Currency that can be earned and it couldn’t be devalued. We are either part if the resolution, or part of the problem. Perhaps at some point it can even have a form of exchange value that is not directly financial.

On the ECF side, we monitor the scores, we help them to improve. The score is dynamic. We show them how working with companies that are more responsible on the industrial side will give them a higher score. Consumers will see the higher scores and are encouraged to patronize those businesses.

A retail business that is purchasing through a supply chain supported by industrial sector businesses that are damaging the environment receive lower scores. We show them how the score evolved and how they can choose better options. The long-term goal is to put pressure on the industrial sector by having businesses stop buying from them. When they begin to feel this, ECF engages them to support them in improving their actions.

How? When ECF captures between 2% and 5% of the retail spending cycle it should represent a very substantial amount of money. This will be used to help industrial companies improve in many ways, as well as the retail businesses by collateral impact. Near Infinite options can be described, but the idea is to create a perpetual cycle where everyone wins and we stop pointing fingers at the “bad ones” and do something about it.

The list of so-called bad companies is pretty long, but I doubt that any of them sat down when they formed the company with the intent to devise a way to destroy our planet and our future. We think of ways to make money while often not contemplating the consequences.

Recently an associate called this process of the two programs “Earth Economics.” I hope to adopt that phrase.

This isn’t just theory. The GESERP program is underway and the initial ECF global brand will be released 1QR 2019. Some images are here https://docs.google.com/document/d/11jC2_P8Yw3C6hFf6EeUlNPqL_SMfW9Xm7xNDyUOdxOs/edit?usp=sharing

As part of this vision two other US based non-profits have been created to support ECF through social awareness and to create more income.

Helios Water which is a very low cost, durable solar system that desalinates ocean water to drinking and agricultural grade water. A commercial bottled version infused with a proprietary organic detoxification compound to remove herbicides, pesticides, and heavy metals will be released 2019. It will be produced as locally as possible geographically speaking, and sold in an all paper water bottle. Profits from the sales will be used to build new systems which will be given to needy locations globally. Large solar field versions may be able to have a substantial impact on the devastation of our water supply by agricultural and industry uses, and people worldwide will have free, safe, plentiful water.

The Florida Hemp Coalition was founded in 2017 in anticipation of industrial hemp being legalized by the US government. Likely it will become a global commodity soon, and the economic and environmental benefits are very large. The coalition mandate is job creation, economic development, and environmental remediation through public private partnership. Hemp is one our most powerful tools for phytoremediation, and the byproducts of biodiesel, CBD and other oils, seeds for food, and fiber for cloth and concrete offer multiple revenue streams.

I noted the intros from @Michael Linton and @Graham Caswell and comments around “Irish question, Irish answer” posted by Michael. The role of Social Economy (is that business integrity perhaps?) seemed greater than the power of traditional finance in that presentation. People were trusting one another when the banks/economy let them down.

For the Irish model to work, it appeared the businesses were issuing currency that was based on their integrity as a business and the patrons’ trust in that integrity. Power of the people and their ability to choose how their society would best function. How many people, if given the opportunity to decide, would choose to write a good check and move things in the better direction? Seems this event supports the majority doing that. It’s what I’m counting on. And I happen to be an Irish national who hadn’t heard of this until now :slight_smile:

Writing and explanation are not a strong point of mine. I am grateful to those of you who made it through this, and I truly welcome any feedback on the concept and how it may work and be improved.

With kind regards,