Quotes from Kate Raworth

we WEIRD ones typically practise what is known as 'strong reciprocity': we are conditional cooperators (tending to cooperate so long as others do too) but also altruistic punishers (ready to punish defectors and free riders even if it costs us personally). And it is the combination of these two traits that leads to the success of large-scale cooperation in society.

The pressure for shareholder returns is, however, just one manifestation of how financial gain drives growth. Indeed this expectation of gain is so ingrained that we hardly notice its most unusual feature: it runs counter to the fundamental dynamic of our world.

People's sense of reciprocity appears to co-evolve with their economy's structure: a fascinating finding with important implications for those aiming to rebalance the roles of the household, market, commons and state in any society.

the world has become extraordinarily unequal: as of 2015, the world's richest 1 percent now own more wealth than all the other 99 percent put together.

Worldwide, one person in nine does not have enough to eat.8 In 2015, six million children under the age of five died, more than half of those deaths due to easy-to-treat conditions such as diarrhoea and malaria.9 Two billion people live on less than $3 a day, and over 70 million young women and men are unable to find work.

Drawing on his uncle's insights into the workings of the human mind, Bernays knew that the secret to influencing preferences lay not in advertising a product's attributes (it's bigger, faster, shinier!) but in associating that product with deeply held values, such as freedom and power.

Around 40 percent of the world's agricultural land is now seriously degraded, and by 2025 two out of three people worldwide will live in water-stressed regions.

Distinctions must be kept in mind,' he advised back in the 1960s, 'between quantity and quality of growth, between

And here's the rub. Humanity's journey through the twenty-first century will be led by the policymakers, entrepreneurs, teachers, journalists, community organisers, activists and voters who are being educated today. But these citizens of 2050 are being taught an economic mindset that is rooted in the textbooks of 1950, which in turn are rooted in the theories of 1850. Given the fast-changing nature of the twenty-first century, this is shaping up to be a disaster.

Objectives should be explicit: goals for "more" growth should specify more growth of what and for what.'17

Gregory Mankiw's widely used contemporary textbook, Principles of Economics, the definition has become even more concise. 'Economics is the study of how society manages its scarce resources,' it declares—erasing the question of ends or goals from the page altogether.

What if we started economics not with its long-established theories but with humanity's long-term goals, and then sought out the economic thinking that would enable us to achieve them?

Though claiming to be value-free, conventional economic theory cannot escape the fact that value is embedded at its heart: it is wrapped up with the idea of utility, which is defined as a person's satisfaction or happiness gained from consuming a particular bundle of goods.

What do those warning signs say? To avoid dangerous climate change, for example, keep the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere below 350 parts per million (ppm). In terms of limiting land conversion, ensure that at least 75 percent of once-forested land remains forested. And when it comes to using chemical fertilisers, add at most 62 million tonnes of nitrogen and 6 million tonnes of phosphorus to Earth's soils each year.

population matters, distribution matters just as much because extremes of inequality push humanity beyond both sides of the Doughnut's boundaries.

But this set-up is, of course, just one among many possible enterprise designs. It happens to have dominated the nineteenth and twentieth centuries but that doesn't mean it has to dominate the twenty-first.

Population matters, and in an obvious way: the more of us there are, the more resources it takes to meet the needs and rights of all, and that is why it is essential for the size of the human population to stabilise. But here's the good news: although the global population is still growing, since 1971 its growth rate has been falling sharply.

aspiration: whatever people consider necessary for a good life.

by the end of the 1950s, output growth had become the overriding policy objective in industrial countries.

the last decades of the twentieth century, the focus shifted from measuring GNP to today's more familiar GDP, the income generated within a nation's borders.

the idea of ever-growing output fits snugly with the widely used metaphor of progress being a movement forwards and upwards.

Democracy, too, is jeopardised by inequality when it concentrates power in the hands of the few and unleashes a market in political influence. That is probably nowhere more evident than in the United States, which by 2015 was home to more than 500 billionaires. 'We are now seeing billionaires becoming much more active in trying to influence the election process,' observes political analyst Darrell

maintain such high levels of redistribution year on year. Far more secure is for every person to have a stake in owning the robot technology itself. What might that look like? Some advocate a 'robot dividend', an idea inspired by the Alaska Permanent Fund,

believe me it is not. Better still, let me prove it. From prehistoric cave paintings to the map of the London Underground, images, diagrams and charts have long been at the heart of human storytelling. The reason why is simple: our brains are wired for visuals. 'Seeing comes before words. The child looks and recognizes before it speaks,' wrote the media theorist John Berger in the opening lines of his 1972 classic, Ways of Seeing.