We need endless growth though. Without it governments can’t spend more and eventually do universal basic income etc. Yes I agree endless growth is dumb. But that’s the way it is with fiat currency where you have to lend money into existence and lend more to pay the interest. If we used silver or gold money that would let people save in money. Today if you save in fiat paper dollar you lose maybe 10-20% to inflation last year in purchasing power. If you care about the environment we need sound money and no central banks and no bail outs. Baby boomers bought second homes. They had to. You can’t save in currency due to government spending and inflation but they could save if money was silver or gold. No one really considers that though. People say oh mining is bad. Sure but so isn’t millions of empty homes people buy as a savings account to protect earning or savings from inflation.
Kate is a great communicator and an inspiration to us all. As regards that first question, Why is standard economics so stuck in its neo-liberal framework? I looked into the history of the subject and when I read William Stanley Jevons work I realized what was the main answer to your question. Jevons mathematized the subject and made it a science on the model of the hard physical sciences. This secured its respectability in academic circles, and is still the ground for its status as a genuine science. In most intellectual as well as popular circles today a subject has to be a "science" to be thought worth studying. The subject as Kate teaches it is not a science; it is a branch of the humanities and should be considered such. To me this classification is not pejorative; I have taught in the humanities at universities all my life and at this juncture in human history I think a thorough knowledge of history, philosophy, literature, and economics of the sort Kate espouses is far more important than knowledge of the hard sciences. The reason standard economists resist change is that they know that if they accepted it their subject would slip from the sciences into the humanities, and they know that would end most of the support for it. I was glad you pushed Kate a bit on how what she advocates is relevant in the face of the disasters that she admits are coming. She has a wonderfully accurate assessment of what is wrong with the "superorganism" and what something sane would look like. But she gives the impression that all we need to do is convince some more people of her view and changes will take place VOLUNTARILY that would right the ship. That strikes me as very naive. Change is going to come because the great simplification will be forced upon us by eco-catastrophe and social disruption. As you said, we won't have degrowth, we'll have postgrowth. Most of her doughnut economics way of describing the world remains helpful in a postgrowth world, it's just that the focus now has to fall on how to survive as a decent civilization. Thanks for a great interview.
I tend to agree with your view. However, I'm far less certain we are a decent civilisation. If we were decent, we wouldn't have arrived at the situation we're now in, or at the very least we would be doing all we could to help our fellow human beings in other less fortunate places. Instead we're instigating and fighting wars and stealing resources with economic warfare home and away.
@@brianwheeldon4643 Good point, Brian. Maybe we don't deserve to survive. There are philosophers in Australia who say that openly. And even if we survive maybe we can't be decent. It's just not in our culture. But sometimes suffering is redemptive, so maybe there's a smidgen of hope for us yet.
Inspiring and immensely informative - thanks to you both! I can imagine a number of 'shorts' coming from this conversation that can help accelerate the sharing of these vital realities.
Yes, Kate nails it. Fantastic message. Thanks Nate. I met Kate here in Sweden in 2015 in a project where she talked about The Doughnut. I have suggested several times that Kate should be awarded the Nobel Prize in Economics. I hope that someone who has the possibility will nominate her. I´m now working on a public education campaign here in Sweden and I want The Dougnut to be part of the curriculum.
I saw this wonderful powerful speaker Kate Raworth on Beyond Growth seminar just gone And was in awesome of her powerful messages regarding Economics and her Inspirational Donut Economics Infact our country’s city council are using her Donut System in our resources of growth and wellbeing etc…. in New Zealand Great podcast Nate and Nate one of your Best 🕊🌳🌊💖
Question: How is the economic model you propose address the crowing population? Most things we need can have a circular economy but not all. Will this biosphere eventually not be able to support just enough economics?
Yes! At 1:06:55, this is the real concern: if a country wants to radically innovate to fit within the donut, there is an initial disadvantage. No one wants to be first! It’s too risky. In the long run though, it pays off. Europe, for example, has been forced to adapt to energy shortages. And Europe is innovating! European countries are busting through long-held paradigms and socially, they have an advantage: there is greater social cohesion and an understanding and acceptance of the commons and social contracts.
I agree 95% with Kate's embedded economy diagram. The only thing I would change is "State" by "Public". State is only 5000 years old, less than 3% of our species' history. You can run communities without the State. Libertarian municipalism is one of the best options out there, in my opinion. If you keep the State, then you can't have real democracy because there is a power over the community.
Brilliant! Wonderful interview. This might be my favorite interview, yet. As a recovering MBA and High School Math/Personal Finance Teacher, I am always looking for ways to work these ideas into my teaching. I will be diving into Kate's materials.
Interesting to think about the economics as she teaches. I like to think free market capitalism is as opposed to the free market economy. And now to mix in an ecology economy.
Good job both of you. Approaching master class standard (I would be masterful, but I believe that everything can and should be improved!). Keep doing what you're doing.
Are you addicted to doom? I have no issue with Derrick Jensen as a guest, but a discussion on ecological overshoot and how cities are starting to adopt a better model is hardly "jolly hockeysticks" stuff. Don't confuse the messenger with the message.
@@blahdelablah the idea that cities are doing something even remotely useful in relation to overshoot is entirely laughable. Is there a city that's got everyone growing food and has announced a ban on cars within a year or anything remotely resembling that? I am addicted to wanting to see people who seem plugged into reality which I think Nate is fwiw but this lady, no.
@@madameblatvatsky "the idea that cities are doing something even remotely useful in relation to overshoot is entirely laughable. " They are making inroads into this. Too late? Maybe, but if you're impatient then it doesn't surprise me that doomerism suits you, plenty of system collapse for you to enjoy in the coming decades. For those that prefer to make practical changes rather than sit back and watch the world burn, there's plenty to be getting on with. As for "has announced a ban on cars within a year", the city of Paris is banning private cars in the historical centre of the city by 2024, the Spanish city of Pontevedra has already almost completely banned cars and there are other examples of similar schemes.
Kate Raworth is inspiring. I've seen her speak before but this video really gives her the chance to shine. Thank you. Excellent content, I have several important takeways.
Redistribution won’t help much. There actually isn’t enough wealth to make a difference. Think of this way. You have a conference with 10000 people and there’s only 1 Pizza. Even if you divide the Pozza equitably it wouldn’t make much difference
What would be needed is a Pizza factory. Then there’s enough for everyone. And enough is as good as a feast. In fact it’s better for you ! Problem fixed.
Your example was a poor one. Instead, the current distribution model has 1 person controlling all 10,000 pizzas and the other 9,999 people have to pay (or to beg) the 1 person their asking price for these pizzas.
Kate Raworth! Another great guest. Nate, I love this series and it just keeps keeps getting better. I am half way through a Masters in Sustainable Resources - this series is part of the reason I felt empowered to start the course and it continues to be a valuable resource while studying. Thanks!
Kate is marvelous. Yes more with her, please, Nate. I'd definitely recommend also having Janine Benyus as a guest as soon as you can work it out. Janine is to the prevailing paradigms of manufacturing what Kate is to the current theories of economics. The first time I heard Janine speak about biomimicry... It changed everything for me.
1:32:00 that’s why I absolutely LOVE this podcast. Nate, thank you so much for teaching us, inspiring us, and giving us community through your incredible interviews with insightful guests. I get so much value from these videos and I really appreciate you for driving deep on these topics.
Nate, your podcasts continue to be a momentary "breath of fresh air" amidst a miasma of global lunacy. Thank you for providing an oasis of sensibility.
Nate, I'm so pleased you've caught up with Kate. She absolutely epitomises the continuation of Herman Daly's work. Doughtnut economics is "living economics" it's flexible and adaptive, its concepts are deeply embedded in those well known disrupters sounding the alarm Extinction Rebellion and by extension JustStopOil and A22 I've been keeping up with progress in Amsterdam and Copenhagen for a few years now. Great question, why don't we teach doughnut economics in our universities? Because the strategic model is entirely based on profit and growth and enables continual economic warfare on society and environment creating hyper-wealth for the few both domestically and internationally. Great Great interview, thanks and in my opinion the best interview so far. I know they're all valuable, but for me this is the most realistic in terms of education of the many and action withing societies around the planet.
Love Kate Raworth. She mentions coming to Daly’s *Beyond Growth* rather late, an important book I cherished in the 1990’s. Almost criminal how responsible academic thought is very often marginalized by entrenched academic careerist. Beware the sausage making of tenure outcomes.
I read Kate's Doughnut Economics 4 years ago. It brought me a frustration about how things are, a desire for change. As she said at the end of this interview with her "magic wand" wish, I thought that people needed to understand our interconnectedness with natural systems. But evidently, as things are now, it's not enough to switch systems. You could have every companies wanting a doughnut economy, bent on regenerative social justice, as long as companies owners make private profits from the labor of those working for them, in competition with other businesses on this metric, the core of the machine is not broken. Remove all PHDs in economics from the world, you'll still have the Owning and Working classes. You'll still have States. You'll still have money and markets. You'll still have Private Property. I love that Kate focuses on the Commons. Understanding that Life has no boundaries between its elements means Private Property should not exist. The Enclosure of the Commons is seen as the birth of Capitalism, so it should give a clue as to what is needed to dismantle it: expanding the Commons to all land and means of production. The Earth does not belong to us, it belong to all living things, present and future generations. For clarity, I want a Stateless, Classless, Moneyless society. I want a Library Economy, Eco-Socialism, Anarcho-Communism, call it whatever you want. I want production to be planned by us all, direct democracy. Everything's free (within this economic bubble), with distribution schemes to deal with scarcity. I want horizontal power dynamics, no more dominance hierarchies. Btw Nate, a great guest to have on the show would be Michael Albert, author of "Parecon" and "No Bosses", or Robin Hahnel, author of "Democratic Economic Planning". Leigh Phillips and Michal Rozworski, authors of "The People's Republic of WalMart" would be great to have on the show too. Peter Joseph, author of "The New Human Rights Movement" and of several documentaries, has a very similar Wall Street background as you have, and was associated with The Venus Project and other societally transformative projects. Or maybe other youtubers, like Anark, Andrewism, Second Thought, What is Politics, Richard Wolff, Zoe Baker, etc.
Wow! These just keep getting better. This one is massively life changing for me. It feels as if I have found the missing piece of a life long puzzle...no kidding. I am grateful to the point of tears to have learned about this. I love what both of you are doing and as you mentioned, it certainly does seem that this awakening is scaling more quickly than it did in years past. I can't help but wonder if she and Vandana Shiva have collaborated. I also can't help being excited that her greater concern regarding finance has likely been solved via BTC. It certainly seems to fit it each of the four categories mentioned, and appears to solve the incentive and corruption issues with fiat. Oh! AND it helps with several energy issues as well. Anyhow, so much love and many blessings for you both. Namaste' Thank you again - I love feeling 80% more clear about my mission and pray this is the day that I finally finish packing ~ remembering that I have more than enough will help eliminate the desire to hang on to 55yrs of "stuff" (okay maybe alleviate much of the desire is more realistic). Nevertheless, it's time to move on so I can get in a position to be of service. Aloha, a hui HOU!
Great interview. For an in depth discussion of the possibilities of new economics Yale’s Pricing Nature podcast #14 with Kate Raworth, Kim Stanley Robinson, and Delton Chen goes in the detail of resolving the climate and ecological crisis.
Was really looking forward to your conversation with Kate Raworth, having read her book ‘Doughnut Economics’, viewed her TED Talk and a number of UA-cam videos. So was expecting there’d be more of an Economic line to the conversation instead it came over to me as just a sounding board for what she’d presented elsewhere and explained in her book. Very little was said about the demise of flammable fossils and how they would affect her doughnut economy being implemented. As you Nate are financially and economically literate would have thought you would have asked some searching questions on this topic, I for one would like to have heard her views on MMT. I’m also left wondering where she would align with such of Annie Leonard of ‘Story of Stuff’ fame, maybe you could have a conversation in not too distant future with Annie Leonard. It wasn’t until close of your conversation when you asked Kate Raworth if she came back what she would like to talk about, that she replied, on present structure of economics and financing, what a pity this wasn’t part of this first discussion🤔
@@leonsappl Don’t disagree with what you say, a bit long winded but I take your point, and then again if Nate’s looking for a second bite of the cherry, he might not get it, so we never hear the reply to those awkward questions🤔
@@leonsappl "My criticism lies in the ideology of universal human rights and this mental distinction we make between humans as individuals vs other species as a collective." Your criticism seems unfounded. At the end of this video when asked about the one thing she would most like to change if she had a magic wand, Kate suggested she would like to spread the idea that humans are interdependent with Earth's ecosystems (including other lifeforms on Earth). This heavily implies that she understands that humans are not above other species of life but should exist in symbiosis with them.
Very well done done however I continue to think about companies wanting to make 15 percent and greenwashing…unfortunately there is still not enough cheap easy to get energy left and way too much debt. We are tribal and we will fall back to our tribe
The "problem" with academics like Kate Raworth is their models and frameworks do not include the reality of human nature. Like others, she assumes that human behavior will bend to the proposed model and framework. Though she acknowledges humans are the most social of animals. She seems to deny the dominating and corrosive influence of the most manipulative class of humans - Sociopaths and Psychopaths. These are the people that rise to positions of dominance in Government, Business and Social Institutions. They are typically the source of the "more for me and less for you" thinking that pits elements of each society against one another. The Sociopaths and Psychopaths are the primary driver of wealth inequality which then drives human behavior past the planetary boundaries captured by ecological economics. The bottom line is quite simple. None of what is proposed will have much impact until or unless the Sociopathic and Psychopathic characteristics of human behavior are suppressed or eliminated. And since those in power control the game and are largely the worst Sociopaths and Psychopaths to be found, it is unrealistic to expect that those players will ever agree to eliminate or suppress themselves.
I hardly doubt once a full accounting has been made, with most of us merely thinking about the predicament just stringing together the various influences, that anyone would come to an optimistic conclusion. Now, if the global elite were properly strung up things might fall into place naturally (Vincent Price laughter) hahaha!
@@RickLarsonPermacultureDesigner Hi Rick, Yep. If society wants to eliminate the impact of Sociopaths and Psychopaths then one has to eliminate the source of those behaviors. And that process would require many generations of human culling. Sad but true. Likewise, "managing" the problem of Sociopaths and Psychopaths would also require many generations of social conditioning to "unwind". And that approach would still require maintenance since the fundamental problem endemic to human nature was never really eliminated. Bottom line is that changing the world of human affairs requires "dealing" with the reality of our worst tendencies i.e. Sociopaths and Psychopaths. Education and good intentions only go so far and are not enough to solve the problem of over consumption i.e. living within the boundaries of our ecosystem. Rest assured that wherever there are differences and expectations to exploit, the Sociopaths and Psychopaths will be there manipulating the system and situation.
@@NancyBruning Hi Nancy, I would offer the sage insights of author John Micheal Greer. And that is simply we will "muddle through" because human nature is what human nature is. In other words, there is no grand "one size fits all solution or framework" to solve all the world's problems in one go i.e. if we only did "x, y, or z" everything would be "ok". Our path forward is "a little bit of this or that". Some will survive the forthcoming bottleneck and some will not.
@popeye Hit the nail on the head 🎯 Nothing changes until everything changes and nothing fundamentally has changed in human hierarchy in the last 10,000 years
The brief and brilliant economic "tutorial" that Kate Haworth provided was great. It illustrated the feasible and manageable aspects of the global economy but it presumes an underlying benignity and humanistic approach. My deep concern is that the "deciders", the "movers and shakers" in our current paradigm share none of those values. Money is power. Entities like BlackRock, Vanguard Group, et al. who hold more wealth (power) than many nations, have allegiance and fiduciary responsibility to their shareholders exclusively. Wealth accumulation is their raison d'être. Social responsibility is not. The viability of the Earth itself has become a mere externality to them. Kate Haworth has great ideas but no power. BlackRock has a lot of power but few ethics. And that scares the hell out of me.
Hey Treefrog. It’s a losing proposition to rely on the best of human nature. The economy has developed with a rule set that rewards consumption and concentration of wealth. The resolution is a parallel economy with a different rule set. Doing the opposite of consumption and concentration would be restoration and enhancement of the commons. It’s really a matter of lack of imagination. Have a look at Carbon Quantitative Easing. It’s a practical proposal with only lack of imagination and understanding in the way IMO.
I am not "relying on the best of human nature". Quite to the contrary, I fear the worst of it, as exemplified by the deteriorating state of world affairs.
@@treefrog3349 that’s how I understood your comment and agree. What is proposed is an alternative. Without changing human nature there’s a practical proposal to use monetary policy to support planetary survivability. It’s the foundation of the science fiction novel The Ministry for the Future and the policy is introduced in chapter 42.
Not one word about the total burden on the planet of human population! Only tinkering about better consumption, equity, transfers from rich to poor. OK so Global Pop MAY peak at 9 or 10 billion, and all aspire to a decent standard of living, but that can't be squared with all the other energy-related factors discussed here. Immediate world-wide reduction in population is our only chance of survival. Draconian action as mandated by Mao must happen first, THEN you can have your discussions as above.
If you're looking for material for your podcast, maybe you could do some classic Potholer54 debunking videos? I'm watching "The Inconvenient Truth About Climate Science - Steven Koonin" and I think it might need that.
I hope you both keep going in the right-brained, syntropic direction of Elinore Ostrom, rather than the zero-sum profit of L-brained Chicago economics. Intelligent systems composed of miraculous and resilient living beings have far more "value" than blind industrial consumption driven by hedonistic enslavement. May all of us better understand the natures of syntropy, entropy and co-creative potential. And as we follow the path of love, may we learn to place power-seeking in its proper place, as a vehicle of potential but never its navigator. The steady guide must be found elsewhere. Elsewhere in the physical and spirit world, on earth and in heaven, within our left and in our right minds. May our humble journeys and miraculous quests be fruitful for many and harmful to none!
I just read Doughnut Economics. It‘s an awesome concept which of course is standing on the shoulders of other giants. This was the first time I heard Kate live and I love her spirit and intellect. When dealing with „the dark side“ it might be interesting to also incorporate personality-psychology and neurobiology into the discussions. George Monbiot once stated that we, in the so called „developed“ countries, are prosocial citizens governed by psychopaths. How can we tackle this challenge?
Q. Why do economists seem to have 'society' and 'economy' swapped around to the detriment of everyone. Kate's doughout version appears to be far more sustainable.
One is going to have to confront the tough truth that 8 billion people is too many for the Earth to Sustain. In addition to population control; an maximum age limit per person will probably need to be imposed (it won't be close to 80 years for a lifespan). I am glad that I am old and will be gone before these tough choices will have to be faced.
Everyone who feel that the global economy needs reform badly or felt there has been something wrong for the longest time needs to see this video. As economics-trained individuals, some of us have been apologetic about its failure for modern societies and the need for sustainability and inclusivity. Kate Raworth and Doughnut Economics need to be known to everyone, it is not economics for everyone. Have long been a supporter since its creation. Thank you Nate for this brilliant interview. It is a breath of fresh air and highly informative.
How do you change a culture (what you think and do) where conventional Players and Clerks have a lot to lose if they recognize that the carbon pulse is over and deadly? Will they learn to live differently, change their values and care about things outside the narrow scope of The Great Game? Changing Culture is The Hard Problem. I wonder if we have time.
I am 77, have lived a good life and thought that I had been of service to those around me. Kate has given me a new sense of purpose and I am joining these truly wonderful thinkers to make things different !!
Thank you Kate and Nate, What an uplifting and inspiring interview. Kate you are a highly intelligent, wise, creative, inspiring, articulate and beautiful human being. I was so interested to learn about Saldanha Bay adopting your doughnut model. I spent much of 1990 and 1991 in Saldanha as a young white male conscripted by the South African Navy during the terminal decline of our apartheid regime and I have always felt a deep spiritual connection with that stark, arid and largely unspoilt West Coast and its colorful inhabitants. My question for Kate is how do you redistribute wealth equitably? South Africa already has the problem of too many social grants and too few taxpayers. Rich people (who previously paid tax) see no future in SA and are currently expatriating their wealth and emigrating in droves - part of me can empathize with them. They hand over large sums as tax but get nothing in return - no quality education, no state health, no safety and security, unreliable and intermittent electricity and water while infrastructure continues to collapse. At the same time we are incentivising pregnant teenagers, drunks and bums to sit around at home and contribute nothing while collecting social grants. Corruption is rife. We currently have probably a couple of million able working people and dead people receiving monthly state pensions as well - but at the same time many children receive no education or abysmal education because we don't have enough schools, classrooms, teachers and educational resources. But we hosted the World Cup Soccer in 2010 - which cost more than we needed to build 1000 excellent schools.
Bravo Kate! I'd like to add to the circle/donut, beliefs/religion/spirituality. Please correct me if I'm wrong. I think it is a part of the human evolution that gets lost, assuming everyone today is secular/athiest/post-modern. We have to at least admit, the Abrahamic traditions are the basis for the cultural evolution to post-modern.
It's never enough. We're wired to pursue more and more. In the U.S. low income people aren't content with an air conditioning unit, one bedroom apartment, access to decent food, public transportation, and a bike. They want central air, a two bedroom apartment, access to dining out, and a car. Our mindset would need to be adjusted, we really would need to be content with the simple things in life, and it seems there is so much fracturing going on. Kate seems to have good intentions and is sincere, but there are 8 billion of us, and I'm only at 1:11 but haven't heard any mention of overpopulation.
I'm all in favour of supporting there being fewer people on this Earth ~ can we start by dramatically thinning out the ranks of the very wealthy first please???
Kate nails it. Fantastic message. I have worked in the corporate world. Competition for promotion is similar to growth. We are chasing the promotion so we can get more. The system creates narcissism which is the opposite of the human condition.
Unfortunately narcissism and the other dark triad personality traits are just as much a part of the human condition. But they are selected for by civilization
This woman is, above everything, a beautiful person. How much passion and clarity. These are the messages that deserve most propagation. Before obtaining their degree, economist should pass a test for this kind of passion.
Yet another great discussion. I read Herman Daly back in the last century, and it was transformational in my thinking. Almost 20 years, I studied environmental economics with Phillip Lawn, who was involved with the development of the Genuine Progess Indicator. Phillip at the time wanted to teach the course as Ecological Economics, but at the time, the department wouldn't allow it.
Very good discussion on a narrow topic. I like that Kate has an "action team" and is actually working at the local level with mayors of cities and towns. I like that Nate signs off on postgrowth instead of degrowth. I first got onto the steady state economy in 1969 when I read Four Changes by Gary Snyder in the Whole Earth Catalogue. Either Herman Daly got it from Snyder or Snyder got it from Daly (most likely). I integrated this idea into my thinking and my activism until about 1973, when I realized the extremely high level of micromanagement needed. That is also when I stopped being an anarchist - for the same reason. This is also why MMT is a fail. Keep in mind that Nixon's departure from the gold standard in 1971 set us on the path for expanded levels of fiat currency. MMT has already been implemented just to keep the US federal government going, but without the micromanagemt needed to keep inflation in check. Also keep in mind that Nixon is the reason economists have such a gargantuan influence on publlic policy. Friedman was the first one with this outsized influence. Before him the "eco-prats" were still advisers, not drivers. Further, never forget that Dick Cheney was a Nixon protege and has done so much damage it is hard to quantify. I draw a direct line from Nixon to Cheney to Halliburton to Blackwater to the Wagner Group. My next read is The Modern Mercenary by Sean McFate. His thesis is that mercenaries are returning to the medieval model, something the narcocartels have already grasped. McFate was recently on NPR. So . . . the medieval model is not just using the most efficient engine we have - the human body - to grow food. It is also a tool for thinking. [For all you academic types, it is a heuristic.] In this sense, Kate and Nate are still behind the curve when they focus on preserving the modern state rather than adapting to an earlier version of a less complex society. Nate's podcasts are interesting and provide valuable insights into how we should be constructing our own paradigms and models for action. But one still has to do the hard work oneself. Radical change is not for the weak or the faint-hearted.
Wow! Great interview Nate. Never heard of Kate. She is awesome. You gotta love systems people. So obviously the correct way to look at everything. Great job both of you.
New to many of the concepts on this channel but having a rolling “aha!” moment as I make my way through different episodes. Love this lens and framework of the doughnut. As an elder millennial wondering wtf can be done, these are important ideas to adopt and spread. Thanks so much for having these conversations and sharing them.
Ooooh, I've been waiting for this. Kate 'Doughnut Economics' meets Nate 'The Great Simplification' Hagens. 2 of the most compelling and relevant voices on the planet, sharing ideas. If only we could get them to run the world instead of the talentless, ideologically-blinkered politicians our broken democracy has vomited up.
I’m concerned we rely on education as the solution. I think of our present economic system as the game of Monopoly. Once the rules are understood the game becomes boring and results in a single winner. It’s a horrible way to run a planet. How can it be reformed? The “winners” are uninterested in changing the game. A resolution is to start another game. Fortunately there’s a monetary policy option. Technically it’s called Carbon Quantitative Easing.
Kate is so awesome. I studied a masters of economics at uni after an undergrad of science. I majored in natural resources, so already had the ideas of how economics and the environment work together and against each other starting to form. But it wasn't until I finished uni and started reading further that I learned how backwards economics 101 is, how many incorrect assumptions it makes and how it simply ignores basically the whole world around us!
Until we introduce inquiry into education more we will not get enough change and hence division in society and throughout the world. Thanks for this Nate and Kate ❤
Be most careful when using Denmark's since 2007 in reality industrially controlled fascist Apartheid regime as example for anything good. Denmark's social democracy is nothing but a 'has been'. It isn't anymore. Denmark definitely does not treat its citizens equally anymore. Denmark doesn't provide justice and/or safety equally for all of it's citizens anymore so Denmark does not ophold human rights either.
When Gary Stevenson - an ex-City trader and inequality economist- had a crisis of confidence his colleague told him to stop reading his text books for the answers he was searching for - but to examine and analyse the world around him. The high street, what shops are opening which are closing down. Ask what his friends and families’ household incomes are like and so on. It was a turning point for him. You guys know what you’re talking about ❤
I’m going through all your podcasts, Nat. Weirdly I’m less anxious about the future having come into contact with these ideas. Thank you for doing this. Still looking for ways to progress.
Nate, here’s a fun one… if “extreme wealth” or “asset hoarding” is an issue, why not tax assets instead of income? Much like local municipalities tax property. Start with “what would happen is you taxed 1% of all assets?” In other words, any asset that doesn’t return at least 1% is a “luxury good” that requires subsidy from productive assets. And those with small assets can earn income tax free… thoughts?
My personal mantra for a while has been that “Climate Action Is Local” and here Kate gives a great example of how that can (and should) involve a total transformation of the local, civic, economic donut. It’s brilliant & probably the only real chance we have. On the ground civic realities can change national and international paradigms. 33:40
Kate Raworth an economist that knows what economics means! I am amazed by how many economists DON'T* know what economics is. Economics is the study of allocation of resources to met wants and needs. Schools of Economics get 'highjacked' by the market tool money. It is good to see dogma breakdown. *ignore
Agree that there are ne “developed” countries, only when we can provide the basic needs for all in a sustainable way will we even begin to be “developed” Amazing talk! Very inspiring and lots to think about as a first time CEO working on sustainable tech regarding organizing enterprise and establishing ecologically-focused directives
I love the work Kate Report is doing and this sort of discussion about transitioning to a sustainable world where economic systems and consumption are informed and determined by planetary constraints and sustainable models of circular renewable energy and resource consumption. But nobody knows when we might be plunged into complete chaos by extreme weather and be battling to grow enough food on this planet that would require a huge wartime community ‘dig for victory’ effort in our attempt to survive and at which point this could lead to all but essential administrative, communication, manufacturing, maintenance, transport and distribution services remaining. So it could turn out with hindsight at some point in potentially the near future that what is actually needed now or soon is for us to all stop what we’re doing and live off the land, but if you were to suggest that most people would think that was an extreme over reaction to the food supply threats we’re facing. It’s clear that knowledge of the science and the resulting warnings and projections, coupled with the dramatic changes we’re seeing around the world to the climate and daily weather and catastrophic impacts of fires, droughts, flooding and storm damage are not enough to overcome the cognitive dissonance of thinking, ‘but my world, my life, still looks and feels about the same’ if we’ve not been directly affected by some extreme climate event, so having that conversation about what might actually be necessary now or at some point possibly in the near future won’t happen because it’s stuck in a cognitive Catch 22. A rational way to consider the necessary course of action at any given point might be to consider the likely and possible projected scenarios (including difficult to predict tipping points) from this point on in time and consider what global response would be necessary to mitigate, avert or disaster manage each possible scenario using Kate Raworth’s planetary boundaries economic model to determine what changes would be needed. It would help to be mentally prepared too for these potential outcomes as well as helping people to decide on their own future course of action individually and with their community in bringing their own lives into alignment with planetary boundaries.
You can make anything from Hydrogen as long As the hydrogen comes from water. The Hydrogen economy is as close to a circular economy that you can get. The trick is to extract back the Hydrogen from the things we make. But for energy alone Hydrogen is the only fuel that is perpetually recyclable, instantly.
One could also call it goldilock economics. I wonder why the optimal size of the economy and it's relation to the population size wasn't discussed, the doughnut has a limited size, it can only fit so much people with a reasonable standard of living.
PS one more thing , - in a time where we know the outfall of raw energy consumption , the fine art of CREATING energy is something that we may ned to look to the indigenous people - the stone age cultures that co existed with earth and learned the MATH from the best math teacher ever , and so were able to create energy as well . The time we are entering is a time to learn from water , learn from trees , learn from animals , about HOW to function . They are all energizing in a self poetic way . HOW are they doing that ? Balance and integration is the answer . Nature must not be sidelined as a luxury , even though I did enjoy listening to Kate describe that picture . nature must be incorporated into our knowledge via incorporating it liberally into our language - after all , language was and continues to be the first AI .
This woman is so smart with an incredible ability to explain. Dana Meadows would be proud of her carrying on the message of the complexity of system dynamics.
I find this so inspirational, I don't feel that I can help make this a reality unfortunately, but I would if I could, I believe that this is so important, I choose this for the future of our home/planet. I read Silent Spring when I was at school which profoundly effected my awareness of nature and how the world is interconnected.
As Kate Raworth has explained, money / finance is a small picture in any economic model; Also, the well being of our planet and the human race are not externalities, instead they are the fundamentals of economics. In my perception / belief, because money is such a small part of true economics, we need to phase out money from economics and put our planet and people first. Of course this will most likely take generations, if not centuries, but it is attainable and sustainable.
Loved this conversation. The questions put back to Kate were so useful to understand what the main thrust of what detractors will say and how we can respond to their self-interested worldview
oddly I found the entire donut thing to be kind of pathetic as far as a great eureka moments. its kind of obvious. I think either Kate is a bit lost in her creative spiritual journey in her ego or something, or maybe she is just seeing the academic opportunity to create a brand that markets her in the world of international beaurocrats and social movements. The entire first chapter being committed to this simple logo was just way overdone in her book and really , I was confused as to why such an arguments was being put int the introduction. It really does come off as a sales pitch , or proposal, to use her logo as the official logo on the flag of the social movement. and looking to make the case that somehow the thing that everyone all knows is somehow her unique design of area of expertise worthy of trademarks and the like. is the book sold with t shirt and hats or something? The book itself reads like ti was written by AI. jumps all over the place , and randomly includes quotes as though attempting to demonstrate some kind of broad consent of the sages of ecnomics. some of which seem at odds with the content of the paragraphs themselves. I suspect many may not even notice as the book seems to be singing to the choir. it is as thought the profile of the potential reader or target audience came first and foremost and the writing style was to keep them nodding along. Certainly she did not challenge her own arguments. and while having some opinions about the use of transforming language to change perceptions she consistently present a very biased picture of certain policies and economic theories and policies. she does not present things in any way equally or neutral and fails to have any consideration for the strengths and intents of certain economic ideas. It was frustrating to have to read the book through this kind of approach. it's not all negative in this way though. at the end I think the thing that really stands out is that she is looking to build a case for selling her branded image of the fresh new thing that everyone can get behind. maybe movements need this kind of thing. Where I really found value in the book ... is that it helped me appreciate some of the arguments that the movement is rolling with, and it helps me articulate exactly where the counter weights are to the dogmatic assumptions portrayed in this long brochure
I found reading the book, donut economics, I have a few questions and am looking to explore any debates around the content of this book. I came here to find out if a discussion addresses any of the dogmatic statements made in the book. and also what the book did not include and why?
I would like this person to be interviewed with an economist with the idea of challenging the dogma rather then just offering a platform to make the pitch
Yes, at 1:40:00, if we truly believe that we are utterly dependent on and part of the natural world and the Earth organism, then it follows that we are not alone in this consciousness shift. The Earth is undergoing a shift at a planetary level and we are a part of this shift.
Another fabulous interview, unfortunately, we are stuck in Cancer economics of endless growth, which is killing our host.
We need endless growth though. Without it governments can’t spend more and eventually do universal basic income etc.
Yes I agree endless growth is dumb. But that’s the way it is with fiat currency where you have to lend money into existence and lend more to pay the interest.
If we used silver or gold money that would let people save in money. Today if you save in fiat paper dollar you lose maybe 10-20% to inflation last year in purchasing power.
If you care about the environment we need sound money and no central banks and no bail outs. Baby boomers bought second homes. They had to. You can’t save in currency due to government spending and inflation but they could save if money was silver or gold. No one really considers that though. People say oh mining is bad. Sure but so isn’t millions of empty homes people buy as a savings account to protect earning or savings from inflation.
Better than Prager U. 🤦♀️
Great, huge thank❤🌹🙏 you, dear Kate Raworth and Nate👍😊. People like you make me feel hopeful humans aren't doomed😢😊
Kate is a great communicator and an inspiration to us all. As regards that first question, Why is standard economics so stuck in its neo-liberal framework? I looked into the history of the subject and when I read William Stanley Jevons work I realized what was the main answer to your question. Jevons mathematized the subject and made it a science on the model of the hard physical sciences. This secured its respectability in academic circles, and is still the ground for its status as a genuine science. In most intellectual as well as popular circles today a subject has to be a "science" to be thought worth studying. The subject as Kate teaches it is not a science; it is a branch of the humanities and should be considered such. To me this classification is not pejorative; I have taught in the humanities at universities all my life and at this juncture in human history I think a thorough knowledge of history, philosophy, literature, and economics of the sort Kate espouses is far more important than knowledge of the hard sciences. The reason standard economists resist change is that they know that if they accepted it their subject would slip from the sciences into the humanities, and they know that would end most of the support for it.
I was glad you pushed Kate a bit on how what she advocates is relevant in the face of the disasters that she admits are coming. She has a wonderfully accurate assessment of what is wrong with the "superorganism" and what something sane would look like. But she gives the impression that all we need to do is convince some more people of her view and changes will take place VOLUNTARILY that would right the ship. That strikes me as very naive. Change is going to come because the great simplification will be forced upon us by eco-catastrophe and social disruption. As you said, we won't have degrowth, we'll have postgrowth. Most of her doughnut economics way of describing the world remains helpful in a postgrowth world, it's just that the focus now has to fall on how to survive as a decent civilization.
Thanks for a great interview.
I tend to agree with your view. However, I'm far less certain we are a decent civilisation. If we were decent, we wouldn't have arrived at the situation we're now in, or at the very least we would be doing all we could to help our fellow human beings in other less fortunate places. Instead we're instigating and fighting wars and stealing resources with economic warfare home and away.
@@brianwheeldon4643 Good point, Brian. Maybe we don't deserve to survive. There are philosophers in Australia who say that openly. And even if we survive maybe we can't be decent. It's just not in our culture. But sometimes suffering is redemptive, so maybe there's a smidgen of hope for us yet.
I was brought up as a young child in the ‘40s to know i was a part of everything on the world. Everything had a place and a right.
Inspiring and immensely informative - thanks to you both! I can imagine a number of 'shorts' coming from this conversation that can help accelerate the sharing of these vital realities.
Yes, Kate nails it. Fantastic message. Thanks Nate. I met Kate here in Sweden in 2015 in a project where she talked about The Doughnut. I have suggested several times that Kate should be awarded the Nobel Prize in Economics. I hope that someone who has the possibility will nominate her. I´m now working on a public education campaign here in Sweden and I want The Dougnut to be part of the curriculum.
I saw this wonderful powerful speaker Kate Raworth on Beyond Growth seminar just gone And was in awesome of her powerful messages regarding Economics and her Inspirational Donut Economics Infact our country’s city council are using her Donut System in our resources of growth and wellbeing etc…. in New Zealand
Great podcast Nate and Nate one of your Best 🕊🌳🌊💖
Question: How is the economic model you propose address the crowing population? Most things we need can have a circular economy but not all. Will this biosphere eventually not be able to support just enough economics?
Yes! At 1:06:55, this is the real concern: if a country wants to radically innovate to fit within the donut, there is an initial disadvantage. No one wants to be first! It’s too risky. In the long run though, it pays off. Europe, for example, has been forced to adapt to energy shortages. And Europe is innovating! European countries are busting through long-held paradigms and socially, they have an advantage: there is greater social cohesion and an understanding and acceptance of the commons and social contracts.
I hoped for Kate to express some mourning about GB having been forced out of the EU.
Our economy is one that should never have existed in the first place without factoring in ecology.
I agree 95% with Kate's embedded economy diagram. The only thing I would change is "State" by "Public". State is only 5000 years old, less than 3% of our species' history. You can run communities without the State. Libertarian municipalism is one of the best options out there, in my opinion. If you keep the State, then you can't have real democracy because there is a power over the community.
Brilliant! Wonderful interview. This might be my favorite interview, yet. As a recovering MBA and High School Math/Personal Finance Teacher, I am always looking for ways to work these ideas into my teaching. I will be diving into Kate's materials.
Interesting to think about the economics as she teaches. I like to think free market capitalism is as opposed to the free market economy. And now to mix in an ecology economy.
Good job both of you. Approaching master class standard (I would be masterful, but I believe that everything can and should be improved!). Keep doing what you're doing.
Who else is here because they read, "Superorgasm?"
Be honest.
Renewable energy future..... l'm gonna get me a mule..
Wow, another grand slam!
Oh , good question. What would finance look like in a donut view?
Three new definitions:
Over consumerist countries
Feeder countries
Minimalist countries.
When's Derrick Jensen coming on? I feel like I need that conversation to balance out all this jolly hockeysticks Guardian Oxbridge syrupy stuff 😀
Are you addicted to doom? I have no issue with Derrick Jensen as a guest, but a discussion on ecological overshoot and how cities are starting to adopt a better model is hardly "jolly hockeysticks" stuff. Don't confuse the messenger with the message.
@@blahdelablah the idea that cities are doing something even remotely useful in relation to overshoot is entirely laughable. Is there a city that's got everyone growing food and has announced a ban on cars within a year or anything remotely resembling that? I am addicted to wanting to see people who seem plugged into reality which I think Nate is fwiw but this lady, no.
@@madameblatvatsky "the idea that cities are doing something even remotely useful in relation to overshoot is entirely laughable. " They are making inroads into this. Too late? Maybe, but if you're impatient then it doesn't surprise me that doomerism suits you, plenty of system collapse for you to enjoy in the coming decades. For those that prefer to make practical changes rather than sit back and watch the world burn, there's plenty to be getting on with. As for "has announced a ban on cars within a year", the city of Paris is banning private cars in the historical centre of the city by 2024, the Spanish city of Pontevedra has already almost completely banned cars and there are other examples of similar schemes.
Kate Raworth is inspiring. I've seen her speak before but this video really gives her the chance to shine. Thank you. Excellent content, I have several important takeways.
Redistribution won’t help much. There actually isn’t enough wealth to make a difference. Think of this way. You have a conference with 10000 people and there’s only 1 Pizza. Even if you divide the Pozza equitably it wouldn’t make much difference
What would be needed is a Pizza factory. Then there’s enough for everyone. And enough is as good as a feast. In fact it’s better for you ! Problem fixed.
Your example was a poor one.
Instead, the current distribution model has 1 person controlling all 10,000 pizzas and the other 9,999 people have to pay (or to beg) the 1 person their asking price for these pizzas.
Kate Raworth! Another great guest. Nate, I love this series and it just keeps keeps getting better. I am half way through a Masters in Sustainable Resources - this series is part of the reason I felt empowered to start the course and it continues to be a valuable resource while studying. Thanks!
Patrick, could I ask where you are doing your Masters? I'm currently looking for something similar!
Kate rocks! Thanks Nate!
Kate is marvelous. Yes more with her, please, Nate. I'd definitely recommend also having Janine Benyus as a guest as soon as you can work it out. Janine is to the prevailing paradigms of manufacturing what Kate is to the current theories of economics. The first time I heard Janine speak about biomimicry... It changed everything for me.
1:32:00 that’s why I absolutely LOVE this podcast. Nate, thank you so much for teaching us, inspiring us, and giving us community through your incredible interviews with insightful guests. I get so much value from these videos and I really appreciate you for driving deep on these topics.
Nate, your podcasts continue to be a momentary "breath of fresh air" amidst a miasma of global lunacy. Thank you for providing an oasis of sensibility.
Nate, I'm so pleased you've caught up with Kate. She absolutely epitomises the continuation of Herman Daly's work. Doughtnut economics is "living economics" it's flexible and adaptive, its concepts are deeply embedded in those well known disrupters sounding the alarm Extinction Rebellion and by extension JustStopOil and A22 I've been keeping up with progress in Amsterdam and Copenhagen for a few years now. Great question, why don't we teach doughnut economics in our universities? Because the strategic model is entirely based on profit and growth and enables continual economic warfare on society and environment creating hyper-wealth for the few both domestically and internationally. Great Great interview, thanks and in my opinion the best interview so far. I know they're all valuable, but for me this is the most realistic in terms of education of the many and action withing societies around the planet.
Forty minutes in and she's still grabbing up new props, LUV it!
Love Kate Raworth. She mentions coming to Daly’s *Beyond Growth* rather late, an important book I cherished in the 1990’s. Almost criminal how responsible academic thought is very often marginalized by entrenched academic careerist. Beware the sausage making of tenure outcomes.
I read Kate's Doughnut Economics 4 years ago. It brought me a frustration about how things are, a desire for change.
As she said at the end of this interview with her "magic wand" wish, I thought that people needed to understand our interconnectedness with natural systems.
But evidently, as things are now, it's not enough to switch systems.
You could have every companies wanting a doughnut economy, bent on regenerative social justice, as long as companies owners make private profits from the labor of those working for them, in competition with other businesses on this metric, the core of the machine is not broken.
Remove all PHDs in economics from the world, you'll still have the Owning and Working classes. You'll still have States. You'll still have money and markets. You'll still have Private Property.
I love that Kate focuses on the Commons.
Understanding that Life has no boundaries between its elements means Private Property should not exist.
The Enclosure of the Commons is seen as the birth of Capitalism, so it should give a clue as to what is needed to dismantle it: expanding the Commons to all land and means of production.
The Earth does not belong to us, it belong to all living things, present and future generations.
For clarity, I want a Stateless, Classless, Moneyless society. I want a Library Economy, Eco-Socialism, Anarcho-Communism, call it whatever you want. I want production to be planned by us all, direct democracy. Everything's free (within this economic bubble), with distribution schemes to deal with scarcity. I want horizontal power dynamics, no more dominance hierarchies.
Btw Nate, a great guest to have on the show would be Michael Albert, author of "Parecon" and "No Bosses", or Robin Hahnel, author of "Democratic Economic Planning".
Leigh Phillips and Michal Rozworski, authors of "The People's Republic of WalMart" would be great to have on the show too.
Peter Joseph, author of "The New Human Rights Movement" and of several documentaries, has a very similar Wall Street background as you have, and was associated with The Venus Project and other societally transformative projects.
Or maybe other youtubers, like Anark, Andrewism, Second Thought, What is Politics, Richard Wolff, Zoe Baker, etc.
Add lawyers to your removal list too please.
Nate, you should make that bit about Kate teaching her 11 yr olds systems thinking into a short clip!
Wow! These just keep getting better. This one is massively life changing for me. It feels as if I have found the missing piece of a life long puzzle...no kidding. I am grateful to the point of tears to have learned about this.
I love what both of you are doing and as you mentioned, it certainly does seem that this awakening is scaling more quickly than it did in years past.
I can't help but wonder if she and Vandana Shiva have collaborated. I also can't help being excited that her greater concern regarding finance has likely been solved via BTC. It certainly seems to fit it each of the four categories mentioned, and appears to solve the incentive and corruption issues with fiat. Oh! AND it helps with several energy issues as well.
Anyhow, so much love and many blessings for you both.
Namaste'
Thank you again - I love feeling 80% more clear about my mission and pray this is the day that I finally finish packing ~ remembering that I have more than enough will help eliminate the desire to hang on to 55yrs of "stuff" (okay maybe alleviate much of the desire is more realistic). Nevertheless, it's time to move on so I can get in a position to be of service.
Aloha, a hui HOU!
I'm glad you enjoyed this video, I did too. I'm curious, when you suggest Bitcoin helps with several energy issues, what are you referring to?
Great interview. For an in depth discussion of the possibilities of new economics Yale’s Pricing Nature podcast #14 with Kate Raworth, Kim Stanley Robinson, and Delton Chen goes in the detail of resolving the climate and ecological crisis.
Was really looking forward to your conversation with Kate Raworth, having read her book ‘Doughnut Economics’, viewed her TED Talk and a number of UA-cam videos. So was expecting there’d be more of an Economic line to the conversation instead it came over to me as just a sounding board for what she’d presented elsewhere and explained in her book. Very little was said about the demise of flammable fossils and how they would affect her doughnut economy being implemented. As you Nate are financially and economically literate would have thought you would have asked some searching questions on this topic, I for one would like to have heard her views on MMT. I’m also left wondering where she would align with such of Annie Leonard of ‘Story of Stuff’ fame, maybe you could have a conversation in not too distant future with Annie Leonard. It wasn’t until close of your conversation when you asked Kate Raworth if she came back what she would like to talk about, that she replied, on present structure of economics and financing, what a pity this wasn’t part of this first discussion🤔
@@leonsappl Don’t disagree with what you say, a bit long winded but I take your point, and then again if Nate’s looking for a second bite of the cherry, he might not get it, so we never hear the reply to those awkward questions🤔
@@leonsappl "My criticism lies in the ideology of universal human rights and this mental distinction we make between humans as individuals vs other species as a collective." Your criticism seems unfounded. At the end of this video when asked about the one thing she would most like to change if she had a magic wand, Kate suggested she would like to spread the idea that humans are interdependent with Earth's ecosystems (including other lifeforms on Earth). This heavily implies that she understands that humans are not above other species of life but should exist in symbiosis with them.
Very well done done however I continue to think about companies wanting to make 15 percent and greenwashing…unfortunately there is still not enough cheap easy to get energy left and way too much debt. We are tribal and we will fall back to our tribe
Thanks for having Kate on! ♥️♥️♥️
Kate and Nate! Thank you for this and your work! This is how we achieve critical mass for the ongoing human consciousness shift. ❤
The "problem" with academics like Kate Raworth is their models and frameworks do not include the reality of human nature. Like others, she assumes that human behavior will bend to the proposed model and framework. Though she acknowledges humans are the most social of animals. She seems to deny the dominating and corrosive influence of the most manipulative class of humans - Sociopaths and Psychopaths.
These are the people that rise to positions of dominance in Government, Business and Social Institutions. They are typically the source of the "more for me and less for you" thinking that pits elements of each society against one another. The Sociopaths and Psychopaths are the primary driver of wealth inequality which then drives human behavior past the planetary boundaries captured by ecological economics.
The bottom line is quite simple. None of what is proposed will have much impact until or unless the Sociopathic and Psychopathic characteristics of human behavior are suppressed or eliminated. And since those in power control the game and are largely the worst Sociopaths and Psychopaths to be found, it is unrealistic to expect that those players will ever agree to eliminate or suppress themselves.
I hardly doubt once a full accounting has been made, with most of us merely thinking about the predicament just stringing together the various influences, that anyone would come to an optimistic conclusion.
Now, if the global elite were properly strung up things might fall into place naturally (Vincent Price laughter) hahaha!
@@RickLarsonPermacultureDesigner Hi Rick, Yep. If society wants to eliminate the impact of Sociopaths and Psychopaths then one has to eliminate the source of those behaviors. And that process would require many generations of human culling. Sad but true.
Likewise, "managing" the problem of Sociopaths and Psychopaths would also require many generations of social conditioning to "unwind". And that approach would still require maintenance since the fundamental problem endemic to human nature was never really eliminated.
Bottom line is that changing the world of human affairs requires "dealing" with the reality of our worst tendencies i.e. Sociopaths and Psychopaths. Education and good intentions only go so far and are not enough to solve the problem of over consumption i.e. living within the boundaries of our ecosystem. Rest assured that wherever there are differences and expectations to exploit, the Sociopaths and Psychopaths will be there manipulating the system and situation.
@popeye And your great solution is?
@@NancyBruning Hi Nancy, I would offer the sage insights of author John Micheal Greer. And that is simply we will "muddle through" because human nature is what human nature is. In other words, there is no grand "one size fits all solution or framework" to solve all the world's problems in one go i.e. if we only did "x, y, or z" everything would be "ok". Our path forward is "a little bit of this or that". Some will survive the forthcoming bottleneck and some will not.
@popeye Hit the nail on the head 🎯 Nothing changes until everything changes and nothing fundamentally has changed in human hierarchy in the last 10,000 years
The brief and brilliant economic "tutorial" that Kate Haworth provided was great. It illustrated the feasible and manageable aspects of the global economy but it presumes an underlying benignity and humanistic approach. My deep concern is that the "deciders", the "movers and shakers" in our current paradigm share none of those values. Money is power. Entities like BlackRock, Vanguard Group, et al. who hold more wealth (power) than many nations, have allegiance and fiduciary responsibility to their shareholders exclusively. Wealth accumulation is their raison d'être. Social responsibility is not. The viability of the Earth itself has become a mere externality to them. Kate Haworth has great ideas but no power. BlackRock has a lot of power but few ethics. And that scares the hell out of me.
Hey Treefrog. It’s a losing proposition to rely on the best of human nature. The economy has developed with a rule set that rewards consumption and concentration of wealth. The resolution is a parallel economy with a different rule set. Doing the opposite of consumption and concentration would be restoration and enhancement of the commons. It’s really a matter of lack of imagination. Have a look at Carbon Quantitative Easing. It’s a practical proposal with only lack of imagination and understanding in the way IMO.
I am not "relying on the best of human nature". Quite to the contrary, I fear the worst of it, as exemplified by the deteriorating state of world affairs.
@@treefrog3349 that’s how I understood your comment and agree. What is proposed is an alternative. Without changing human nature there’s a practical proposal to use monetary policy to support planetary survivability. It’s the foundation of the science fiction novel The Ministry for the Future and the policy is introduced in chapter 42.
"The Wealth of Nature: Economics as if Survival Mattered" by John Michael Greer details and explores similar ideas. Worth the read.
Excellent book with unique ideas
Not one word about the total burden on the planet of human population! Only tinkering about better consumption, equity, transfers from rich to poor. OK so Global Pop MAY peak at 9 or 10 billion, and all aspire to a decent standard of living, but that can't be squared with all the other energy-related factors discussed here. Immediate world-wide reduction in population is our only chance of survival. Draconian action as mandated by Mao must happen first, THEN you can have your discussions as above.
If you're looking for material for your podcast, maybe you could do some classic Potholer54 debunking videos? I'm watching "The Inconvenient Truth About Climate Science - Steven Koonin" and I think it might need that.
I hope you both keep going in the right-brained, syntropic direction of Elinore Ostrom, rather than the zero-sum profit of L-brained Chicago economics. Intelligent systems composed of miraculous and resilient living beings have far more "value" than blind industrial consumption driven by hedonistic enslavement. May all of us better understand the natures of syntropy, entropy and co-creative potential. And as we follow the path of love, may we learn to place power-seeking in its proper place, as a vehicle of potential but never its navigator. The steady guide must be found elsewhere. Elsewhere in the physical and spirit world, on earth and in heaven, within our left and in our right minds. May our humble journeys and miraculous quests be fruitful for many and harmful to none!
I just read Doughnut Economics. It‘s an awesome concept which of course is standing on the shoulders of other giants. This was the first time I heard Kate live and I love her spirit and intellect.
When dealing with „the dark side“ it might be interesting to also incorporate personality-psychology and neurobiology into the discussions. George Monbiot once stated that we, in the so called „developed“ countries, are prosocial citizens governed by psychopaths. How can we tackle this challenge?
Heck yeah!! So excited to see this! Kate is brilliant!
Q. Why do economists seem to have 'society' and 'economy' swapped around to the detriment of everyone.
Kate's doughout version appears to be far more sustainable.
One is going to have to confront the tough truth that 8 billion people is too many for the Earth to Sustain. In addition to population control; an maximum age limit per person will probably need to be imposed (it won't be close to 80 years for a lifespan). I am glad that I am old and will be gone before these tough choices will have to be faced.
Everyone who feel that the global economy needs reform badly or felt there has been something wrong for the longest time needs to see this video. As economics-trained individuals, some of us have been apologetic about its failure for modern societies and the need for sustainability and inclusivity. Kate Raworth and Doughnut Economics need to be known to everyone, it is not economics for everyone. Have long been a supporter since its creation. Thank you Nate for this brilliant interview. It is a breath of fresh air and highly informative.
How do you change a culture (what you think and do) where conventional Players and Clerks have a lot to lose if they recognize that the carbon pulse is over and deadly? Will they learn to live differently, change their values and care about things outside the narrow scope of The Great Game? Changing Culture is The Hard Problem. I wonder if we have time.
I am 77, have lived a good life and thought that I had been of service to those around me. Kate has given me a new sense of purpose and I am joining these truly wonderful thinkers to make things different !!
Thank you Kate and Nate,
What an uplifting and inspiring interview. Kate you are a highly intelligent, wise, creative, inspiring, articulate and beautiful human being. I was so interested to learn about Saldanha Bay adopting your doughnut model. I spent much of 1990 and 1991 in Saldanha as a young white male conscripted by the South African Navy during the terminal decline of our apartheid regime and I have always felt a deep spiritual connection with that stark, arid and largely unspoilt West Coast and its colorful inhabitants.
My question for Kate is how do you redistribute wealth equitably? South Africa already has the problem of too many social grants and too few taxpayers. Rich people (who previously paid tax) see no future in SA and are currently expatriating their wealth and emigrating in droves - part of me can empathize with them. They hand over large sums as tax but get nothing in return - no quality education, no state health, no safety and security, unreliable and intermittent electricity and water while infrastructure continues to collapse. At the same time we are incentivising pregnant teenagers, drunks and bums to sit around at home and contribute nothing while collecting social grants. Corruption is rife. We currently have probably a couple of million able working people and dead people receiving monthly state pensions as well - but at the same time many children receive no education or abysmal education because we don't have enough schools, classrooms, teachers and educational resources. But we hosted the World Cup Soccer in 2010 - which cost more than we needed to build 1000 excellent schools.
You should have Paul Kingsnorth as a guest to talk about man’s relationship to the ecology of the earth.
Kate is incredibly inspiring!
Bravo Kate! I'd like to add to the circle/donut, beliefs/religion/spirituality. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
I think it is a part of the human evolution that gets lost, assuming everyone today is secular/athiest/post-modern. We have to at least admit, the Abrahamic traditions are the basis for the cultural evolution to post-modern.
"We have to at least admit, the Abrahamic traditions are the basis for the cultural evolution to post-modern." What do you mean by this?
It's never enough. We're wired to pursue more and more. In the U.S. low income people aren't content with an air conditioning unit, one bedroom apartment, access to decent food, public transportation, and a bike. They want central air, a two bedroom apartment, access to dining out, and a car. Our mindset would need to be adjusted, we really would need to be content with the simple things in life, and it seems there is so much fracturing going on. Kate seems to have good intentions and is sincere, but there are 8 billion of us, and I'm only at 1:11 but haven't heard any mention of overpopulation.
I'm all in favour of supporting there being fewer people on this Earth ~ can we start by dramatically thinning out the ranks of the very wealthy first please???
Kate nails it. Fantastic message. I have worked in the corporate world. Competition for promotion is similar to growth. We are chasing the promotion so we can get more. The system creates narcissism which is the opposite of the human condition.
Unfortunately narcissism and the other dark triad personality traits are just as much a part of the human condition. But they are selected for by civilization
I still work there....trying to get out but yes what you say is absolutely true. Pity I can't tell anyone at work about that
This woman is, above everything, a beautiful person. How much passion and clarity. These are the messages that deserve most propagation. Before obtaining their degree, economist should pass a test for this kind of passion.
Yet another great discussion. I read Herman Daly back in the last century, and it was transformational in my thinking. Almost 20 years, I studied environmental economics with Phillip Lawn, who was involved with the development of the Genuine Progess Indicator. Phillip at the time wanted to teach the course as Ecological Economics, but at the time, the department wouldn't allow it.
Nate you need more props man
Very good discussion on a narrow topic. I like that Kate has an "action team" and is actually working at the local level with mayors of cities and towns. I like that Nate signs off on postgrowth instead of degrowth.
I first got onto the steady state economy in 1969 when I read Four Changes by Gary Snyder in the Whole Earth Catalogue. Either Herman Daly got it from Snyder or Snyder got it from Daly (most likely). I integrated this idea into my thinking and my activism until about 1973, when I realized the extremely high level of micromanagement needed. That is also when I stopped being an anarchist - for the same reason. This is also why MMT is a fail. Keep in mind that Nixon's departure from the gold standard in 1971 set us on the path for expanded levels of fiat currency. MMT has already been implemented just to keep the US federal government going, but without the micromanagemt needed to keep inflation in check. Also keep in mind that Nixon is the reason economists have such a gargantuan influence on publlic policy. Friedman was the first one with this outsized influence. Before him the "eco-prats" were still advisers, not drivers. Further, never forget that Dick Cheney was a Nixon protege and has done so much damage it is hard to quantify. I draw a direct line from Nixon to Cheney to Halliburton to Blackwater to the Wagner Group. My next read is The Modern Mercenary by Sean McFate. His thesis is that mercenaries are returning to the medieval model, something the narcocartels have already grasped. McFate was recently on NPR.
So . . . the medieval model is not just using the most efficient engine we have - the human body - to grow food. It is also a tool for thinking. [For all you academic types, it is a heuristic.] In this sense, Kate and Nate are still behind the curve when they focus on preserving the modern state rather than adapting to an earlier version of a less complex society.
Nate's podcasts are interesting and provide valuable insights into how we should be constructing our own paradigms and models for action. But one still has to do the hard work oneself. Radical change is not for the weak or the faint-hearted.
Amazing, so glad you got her on. I've just started listening so I am sure this will be great!
Wow! Great interview Nate. Never heard of Kate. She is awesome. You gotta love systems people. So obviously the correct way to look at everything. Great job both of you.
New to many of the concepts on this channel but having a rolling “aha!” moment as I make my way through different episodes. Love this lens and framework of the doughnut.
As an elder millennial wondering wtf can be done, these are important ideas to adopt and spread.
Thanks so much for having these conversations and sharing them.
You fill me with awe, Kate Raworth. Incredibly inspiring conversation. THANK YOU
Brilliant woman!
Kate + Nate = Great
Ooooh, I've been waiting for this. Kate 'Doughnut Economics' meets Nate 'The Great Simplification' Hagens. 2 of the most compelling and relevant voices on the planet, sharing ideas. If only we could get them to run the world instead of the talentless, ideologically-blinkered politicians our broken democracy has vomited up.
Eco-economists always make more sense than economists, but Kate seems to believe in "renewables".
She's a WEF puppet
I’m concerned we rely on education as the solution. I think of our present economic system as the game of Monopoly. Once the rules are understood the game becomes boring and results in a single winner. It’s a horrible way to run a planet. How can it be reformed? The “winners” are uninterested in changing the game. A resolution is to start another game. Fortunately there’s a monetary policy option. Technically it’s called Carbon Quantitative Easing.
Kate is so awesome. I studied a masters of economics at uni after an undergrad of science. I majored in natural resources, so already had the ideas of how economics and the environment work together and against each other starting to form. But it wasn't until I finished uni and started reading further that I learned how backwards economics 101 is, how many incorrect assumptions it makes and how it simply ignores basically the whole world around us!
Apart from details: the impossibility of infinite growth within a finite system should be a no brainer.
Until we introduce inquiry into education more we will not get enough change and hence division in society and throughout the world. Thanks for this Nate and Kate ❤
Be most careful when using Denmark's since 2007 in reality industrially controlled fascist Apartheid regime as example for anything good. Denmark's social democracy is nothing but a 'has been'. It isn't anymore. Denmark definitely does not treat its citizens equally anymore. Denmark doesn't provide justice and/or safety equally for all of it's citizens anymore so Denmark does not ophold human rights either.
The Super-organism finds itself within the Super-donut Commons.
When Gary Stevenson - an ex-City trader and inequality economist- had a crisis of confidence his colleague told him to stop reading his text books for the answers he was searching for - but to examine and analyse the world around him. The high street, what shops are opening which are closing down. Ask what his friends and families’ household incomes are like and so on. It was a turning point for him. You guys know what you’re talking about ❤
I’m going through all your podcasts, Nat. Weirdly I’m less anxious about the future having come into contact with these ideas. Thank you for doing this. Still looking for ways to progress.
Nate, here’s a fun one… if “extreme wealth” or “asset hoarding” is an issue, why not tax assets instead of income? Much like local municipalities tax property. Start with “what would happen is you taxed 1% of all assets?” In other words, any asset that doesn’t return at least 1% is a “luxury good” that requires subsidy from productive assets. And those with small assets can earn income tax free… thoughts?
My personal mantra for a while has been that “Climate Action Is Local” and here Kate gives a great example of how that can (and should) involve a total transformation of the local, civic, economic donut. It’s brilliant & probably the only real chance we have. On the ground civic realities can change national and international paradigms. 33:40
Kate Raworth an economist that knows what economics means!
I am amazed by how many economists DON'T* know what economics is. Economics is the study of allocation of resources to met wants and needs. Schools of Economics get 'highjacked' by the market tool money.
It is good to see dogma breakdown.
*ignore
Thank you.
What an inspiring woman.
I hope she doesn't mind being considered a woman.
Beautiful women are such a blessing to the world.
Agree that there are ne “developed” countries, only when we can provide the basic needs for all in a sustainable way will we even begin to be “developed”
Amazing talk! Very inspiring and lots to think about as a first time CEO working on sustainable tech regarding organizing enterprise and establishing ecologically-focused directives
I love the work Kate Report is doing and this sort of discussion about transitioning to a sustainable world where economic systems and consumption are informed and determined by planetary constraints and sustainable models of circular renewable energy and resource consumption.
But nobody knows when we might be plunged into complete chaos by extreme weather and be battling to grow enough food on this planet that would require a huge wartime community ‘dig for victory’ effort in our attempt to survive and at which point this could lead to all but essential administrative, communication, manufacturing, maintenance, transport and distribution services remaining.
So it could turn out with hindsight at some point in potentially the near future that what is actually needed now or soon is for us to all stop what we’re doing and live off the land, but if you were to suggest that most people would think that was an extreme over reaction to the food supply threats we’re facing.
It’s clear that knowledge of the science and the resulting warnings and projections, coupled with the dramatic changes we’re seeing around the world to the climate and daily weather and catastrophic impacts of fires, droughts, flooding and storm damage are not enough to overcome the cognitive dissonance of thinking, ‘but my world, my life, still looks and feels about the same’ if we’ve not been directly affected by some extreme climate event, so having that conversation about what might actually be necessary now or at some point possibly in the near future won’t happen because it’s stuck in a cognitive Catch 22.
A rational way to consider the necessary course of action at any given point might be to consider the likely and possible projected scenarios (including difficult to predict tipping points) from this point on in time and consider what global response would be necessary to mitigate, avert or disaster manage each possible scenario using Kate Raworth’s planetary boundaries economic model to determine what changes would be needed.
It would help to be mentally prepared too for these potential outcomes as well as helping people to decide on their own future course of action individually and with their community in bringing their own lives into alignment with planetary boundaries.
You can make anything from Hydrogen as long As the hydrogen comes from water. The Hydrogen economy is as close to a circular economy that you can get. The trick is to extract back the Hydrogen from the things we make. But for energy alone Hydrogen is the only fuel that is perpetually recyclable, instantly.
One could also call it goldilock economics.
I wonder why the optimal size of the economy and it's relation to the population size wasn't discussed, the doughnut has a limited size, it can only fit so much people with a reasonable standard of living.
PS one more thing , - in a time where we know the outfall of raw energy consumption , the fine art of CREATING energy is something that we may ned to look to the indigenous people - the stone age cultures that co existed with earth and learned the MATH from the best math teacher ever , and so were able to create energy as well . The time we are entering is a time to learn from water , learn from trees , learn from animals , about HOW to function . They are all energizing in a self poetic way . HOW are they doing that ? Balance and integration is the answer . Nature must not be sidelined as a luxury , even though I did enjoy listening to Kate describe that picture . nature must be incorporated into our knowledge via incorporating it liberally into our language - after all , language was and continues to be the first AI .
This woman is so smart with an incredible ability to explain. Dana Meadows would be proud of her carrying on the message of the complexity of system dynamics.
I find this so inspirational, I don't feel that I can help make this a reality unfortunately, but I would if I could, I believe that this is so important, I choose this for the future of our home/planet. I read Silent Spring when I was at school which profoundly effected my awareness of nature and how the world is interconnected.
As Kate Raworth has explained, money / finance is a small picture in any economic model; Also, the well being of our planet and the human race are not externalities, instead they are the fundamentals of economics. In my perception / belief, because money is such a small part of true economics, we need to phase out money from economics and put our planet and people first. Of course this will most likely take generations, if not centuries, but it is attainable and sustainable.
Loved this conversation. The questions put back to Kate were so useful to understand what the main thrust of what detractors will say and how we can respond to their self-interested worldview
oddly I found the entire donut thing to be kind of pathetic as far as a great eureka moments. its kind of obvious. I think either Kate is a bit lost in her creative spiritual journey in her ego or something, or maybe she is just seeing the academic opportunity to create a brand that markets her in the world of international beaurocrats and social movements. The entire first chapter being committed to this simple logo was just way overdone in her book and really , I was confused as to why such an arguments was being put int the introduction. It really does come off as a sales pitch , or proposal, to use her logo as the official logo on the flag of the social movement. and looking to make the case that somehow the thing that everyone all knows is somehow her unique design of area of expertise worthy of trademarks and the like. is the book sold with t shirt and hats or something? The book itself reads like ti was written by AI. jumps all over the place , and randomly includes quotes as though attempting to demonstrate some kind of broad consent of the sages of ecnomics. some of which seem at odds with the content of the paragraphs themselves. I suspect many may not even notice as the book seems to be singing to the choir. it is as thought the profile of the potential reader or target audience came first and foremost and the writing style was to keep them nodding along. Certainly she did not challenge her own arguments. and while having some opinions about the use of transforming language to change perceptions she consistently present a very biased picture of certain policies and economic theories and policies. she does not present things in any way equally or neutral and fails to have any consideration for the strengths and intents of certain economic ideas. It was frustrating to have to read the book through this kind of approach. it's not all negative in this way though. at the end I think the thing that really stands out is that she is looking to build a case for selling her branded image of the fresh new thing that everyone can get behind. maybe movements need this kind of thing. Where I really found value in the book ... is that it helped me appreciate some of the arguments that the movement is rolling with, and it helps me articulate exactly where the counter weights are to the dogmatic assumptions portrayed in this long brochure
I found reading the book, donut economics, I have a few questions and am looking to explore any debates around the content of this book. I came here to find out if a discussion addresses any of the dogmatic statements made in the book. and also what the book did not include and why?
The notion of the Biosphere didn't come from Daly, it came from Vernadsky.
I would like this person to be interviewed with an economist with the idea of challenging the dogma rather then just offering a platform to make the pitch
i wonder if Kate has ideas about whats being design in crypto world with web3 and descentralized finance
Yes, at 1:40:00, if we truly believe that we are utterly dependent on and part of the natural world and the Earth organism, then it follows that we are not alone in this consciousness shift. The Earth is undergoing a shift at a planetary level and we are a part of this shift.
can we just call these countries "over-developed" or "under-developed"?
lots of communities had "sobriete" but colonialism took that away from them :)
One can not blame governance in a democratic country. Because the citizens elect the governors.
both of you,take a retreat for activists in plum vilage❤
Inspiradora y encantadora persona. Saludos!