Two economists are walking when they see a frozen lake. The first economist says to the other, "I'll pay you £100 to dive in." The second economist takes the £100 and dives in. He then turns to the first: "I'll pay you £100 to come and join me." So the second economist dives in and snatches the £100 back off him.

As they walk home, desolateVery sad, or a place that is bleak and empty. and blue with cold, the first economist looks at the second and remarks "I gave you £100 to dive in there, and then you gave me back the same £100 to dive in too. Was it all for nothing?"

"Not at all," replies the second economist indignantly. "We increased GDPShort for Gross Domestic Product, the measure of all the goods and services produced inside a country. by £200!"

So goes the longstanding joke: economists want economic growth, even if that growth is bad for us, and even though resources are finite. But in recent decades many have begun to question whether we can balance economic growth with sustainability.

For daring thinker Kate Raworth, economic growth has not helped us at all. It has not improved our living standards or our wellbeing. And it has put our climate at risk.

Raworth asks us to imagine the economy as a ring doughnut. The hole in the middle is where people do not have enough of what they need, like food, clean water or access to healthcare. The outer edge of the doughnut is the limit of what our planet can handle without being destroyed, such as pollution or deforestation.

The goal is to live in the doughnut, in between the outer edge and the hole, where everyone has what they need without harming the planet.

Though Raworth acknowledges that her ideas are unorthodoxUnusual or unconventional. , she believes that all we need is a bit of hope. After all, she says, "sometimes the best form of protest is to propose something new".¹

Can hope alone create a better world? The new Labour government is set to reveal its first budget in the autumn, and few expect a radical programme on "social and ecological wellbeing." But should we accept anything less?

Is hope more powerful than solutions?

Yes: So many of us feel like we cannot understand economics because we are not experts. But sometimes the best solutions are the most intuitive, and of course we should prioritise a happier and healthier planet over endless growth.

No: Unfortunately, it is never as simple as it seems. If we opted for degrowthA theory that argues economic growth should be replaced as the central measure of economic development with economic, environmental and social justice., it is possible that millions or even billions would be plunged into poverty. Our standard of living relies on GDP growing at a reliable rate.

Or... We cannot build a politics based entirely on hope. Ultimately, we need people with expertise to strategise and move us in the right direction at a gradual, sustainable pace.