A preview of this full-text is provided by Springer Nature.
Content available from Nature Sustainability
This content is subject to copyright. Terms and conditions apply.
Articles
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-021-00799-z
1Sustainability Research Institute, School of Earth and Environment, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK. 2Doughnut Economics Action Lab, Oxford, UK.
3Institute of Environmental Science and Technology, Autonomous University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain. 4International Inequalities Institute, London
School of Economics, London, UK. 5Institute of Social Ecology, Department of Economics and Social Sciences, University of Natural Resources and Life
Sciences, Vienna, Austria. ✉e-mail: a.l.fanning@leeds.ac.uk
The doughnut-shaped ‘safe and just space’ framework (also
called the ‘doughnut of social and planetary boundaries’) has
received widespread attention as a holistic tool for envision-
ing human development on a stable and resilient planet1,2. However,
despite the urgent need to define, and move towards, a safe and just
future3, little is known about the pathways of countries over time
with respect to the multi-dimensional social and ecological goals of
the doughnut. This article advances integrated global sustainability
research by assessing whether any countries have lived within the
doughnut in recent decades, or are on track to do so in the future,
on the basis of current trends.
The doughnut combines two core concepts: (1) an ecological
ceiling that avoids critical planetary degradation, which is informed
by the planetary boundaries framework for Earth-system stability4;
and (2) a sufficient social foundation that avoids critical human
deprivation, which is closely aligned with the 12 social priorities of
the Sustainable Development Goals5. The doughnut visualizes the
goal of meeting the needs of all people within the means of the liv-
ing planet6.
Empirical research that combines social and biophysical indica-
tors in the doughnut framework is maturing, and the framework
has been applied to evaluate the performance of cities7,8, regions9,10,
countries2,11,12 and the world as a whole1,6. In general, places that do
well in terms of social achievement use resources at unsustainable
levels, while places that use resources sustainably do not reach a suf-
ficient social foundation2.
A large body of empirical research finds diminishing returns in
social performance as resource use increases, and this finding holds
across different social indicators or baskets of indicators, such as life
satisfaction, life expectancy or composite indices, together with CO2
emissions13,14, energy use15–17, ecological footprint18–20 and others2,21.
Modellers have described the impact on planetary boundaries of
achieving the Sustainable Development Goals22, the socioeconomic
effects of CO2 mitigation pathways23,24 and the energy requirements
of meeting a set of basic needs25,26. However, these studies either
do not disaggregate from the global to the national scale or do not
include multiple planetary boundaries and social indicators. To
date, O’Neill et al.2 provide the only global cross-national analysis of
the level of resource use associated with achieving minimum social
thresholds using the safe and just space framework, but their study
is limited to a single year.
There is an emerging view that achieving social thresholds with-
out overshooting biophysical boundaries requires a dual focus on
curbing excessive affluence and consumption by the rich while avoid-
ing critical human deprivation among the least well off27–29. A better
understanding of country trajectories with respect to the doughnut
could provide insights into the type of action needed to transform
unsustainable systems of social and technical provisioning30.
Biophysical boundaries and social thresholds
We gathered historical data from 1992 to 2015 and analysed national
performance on 6 consumption-based environmental indicators
(relative to downscaled biophysical boundaries) and 11 social indi-
cators (relative to social thresholds) for over 140 countries (Table 1).
We also used these data to estimate dynamic statistical forecasting
models within each country, which act as empirical constraints on
a simple ‘business-as-usual’ projection of current trends for each
social and biophysical indicator, out to the year 2050.
The 11 social indicators include 2 measures of human well-being
(self-reported life satisfaction and life expectancy) and 9 need satis-
fiers (nutrition, sanitation, income poverty, access to energy, educa-
tion, social support, democratic quality, equality and employment).
To assess social performance over time, we compared these indica-
tors with the minimum threshold values identified by O’Neill et al.2,
with some adjustments and caveats (Table 1 and Methods). Since
the social support indicator series does not begin until 2005, only
ten indicators were considered in total for cross-national compari-
sons over the 1992–2015 analysis period.
The social shortfall and ecological overshoot
of nations
Andrew L. Fanning 1,2 ✉ , Daniel W. O’Neill 1, Jason Hickel3,4 and Nicolas Roux 5
Previous research has shown that no country currently meets the basic needs of its residents at a level of resource use that
could be sustainably extended to all people globally. Using the doughnut-shaped ‘safe and just space’ framework, we analyse
the historical dynamics of 11 social indicators and 6 biophysical indicators across more than 140 countries from 1992 to 2015.
We find that countries tend to transgress biophysical boundaries faster than they achieve social thresholds. The number of
countries overshooting biophysical boundaries increased over the period from 32–55% to 50–66%, depending on the indica-
tor. At the same time, the number of countries achieving social thresholds increased for five social indicators (in particular life
expectancy and educational enrolment), decreased for two indicators (social support and equality) and showed little change
for the remaining four indicators. We also calculate ‘business-as-usual’ projections to 2050, which suggest deep transforma-
tions are needed to safeguard human and planetary health. Current trends will only deepen the ecological crisis while failing to
eliminate social shortfalls.
NATURE SUSTAINABILITY | VOL 5 | JANUARY 2022 | 26–36 | www.nature.com/natsustain
26
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved
