Does the local application of Doughnut Economics distort the Planetary Boundaries framework? (Western Europe)
Abstract
Downscaling the Planetary Boundaries framework faces a paradox: purely biophysical approaches preserve scientific rigor but have little influence on local action. Doughnut Economics, which adds a social foundation to biophysical boundaries, has spread widely among European local governments since 2018. This article examines whether this additive socio-biophysical architecture maintains the systemic nature of the Planetary Boundaries framework, assessed through its absolute scope (binding thresholds) and its systemic function (a unifying goal). The analysis compares five European initiatives: one purely biophysical approach (Sud-Loire) and four Doughnut applications (Brussels-Capital, Amsterdam, Grenoble, Cornwall). The results reveal an operational dilemma. The purely biophysical approach better preserves this systemic nature, but its usual top-down quantification creates obstacles to local operationalization, or fails to remove them. Doughnut applications, more widely recognized locally, all dilute this systemic nature to a similar degree, despite contrasting resources and contexts. Three mechanisms account for this dilution: democratic trade-offs that favor tangible social goals, an economistic capture enabled by linking the social foundation to the Sustainable Development Goals, and an institutional selectivity shaped by administrative jurisdictions. The comparison supports the hypothesis of an architectural origin: juxtaposing two normative frameworks of different natures without an operational hierarchy tends to weaken the more restrictive of the two. The article also outlines an integrative architecture, in which the social dimension would derive from the transformations required to stay within biophysical boundaries, and a contextualization method that combines top-down conceptual rigor with bottom-up democratic construction.
Related
- Towards post-growth policymaking: Barriers and enablers for wellbeing economy and Doughnut economics initiatives
- Current aviation roadmaps are not within planetary boundaries
- A generic framework to compare Local Climate Zone mapping workflows: application to the Paris Region
- Reframing Mangroves as Socio-Ecological Coastal Infrastructure: Development and Application of a Six-Pillar Socio-Ecological Infrastructure Framework
- A single framework for assessing flash flood and landslide susceptibility: an application to the Mediterranean Liguria region, Italy
BibTeX
@article{rieutor2026does,
title = {{Does the local application of Doughnut Economics distort the Planetary Boundaries framework? (Western Europe)}},
author = {Damien Rieutor and Guillaume Mandil and Gwendoline de Oliveira Neves},
journal = {VertigO : La revue électronique en sciences de l'environnement},
year = {2026},
month = oct,
doi = {10.4000/17186},
url = {https://hal.science/hal-05850377v1},
note = {CC BY-NC-ND 4.0},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Does the local application of Doughnut Economics distort the Planetary Boundaries framework? (Western Europe)
AU - Damien Rieutor
AU - Guillaume Mandil
AU - Gwendoline de Oliveira Neves
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/10/29
JO - VertigO : La revue électronique en sciences de l'environnement
DO - 10.4000/17186
UR - https://hal.science/hal-05850377v1
AB - Downscaling the Planetary Boundaries framework faces a paradox: purely biophysical approaches preserve scientific rigor but have little influence on local action. Doughnut Economics, which adds a social foundation to biophysical boundaries, has spread widely among European local governments since 2018. This article examines whether this additive socio-biophysical architecture maintains the systemic nature of the Planetary Boundaries framework, assessed through its absolute scope (binding thresholds) and its systemic function (a unifying goal). The analysis compares five European initiatives: one purely biophysical approach (Sud-Loire) and four Doughnut applications (Brussels-Capital, Amsterdam, Grenoble, Cornwall). The results reveal an operational dilemma. The purely biophysical approach better preserves this systemic nature, but its usual top-down quantification creates obstacles to local operationalization, or fails to remove them. Doughnut applications, more widely recognized locally, all dilute this systemic nature to a similar degree, despite contrasting resources and contexts. Three mechanisms account for this dilution: democratic trade-offs that favor tangible social goals, an economistic capture enabled by linking the social foundation to the Sustainable Development Goals, and an institutional selectivity shaped by administrative jurisdictions. The comparison supports the hypothesis of an architectural origin: juxtaposing two normative frameworks of different natures without an operational hierarchy tends to weaken the more restrictive of the two. The article also outlines an integrative architecture, in which the social dimension would derive from the transformations required to stay within biophysical boundaries, and a contextualization method that combines top-down conceptual rigor with bottom-up democratic construction.
SN - 1492-8442
ER -