Download here - Heterodox Economics Newsletter

Prayukvong, W. (2005) "A Buddhist Economic Approach to the Development of
Community Enterprises: a case study from southern Thailand," Cambridge Journal of
Economics, 29(6): 1171-1185.
Reviewed by Ulas Basar Gezgin, PhD, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam
Abstract: In this review, Prayukvong’s (2005) article on Buddhist economic
approach is discussed and is criticized mainly on the basis of ambiguity,
superficiality, reinstating ‘the rational man’, non-plurality of ethics, and the clash
of human beings and nature.
Keywords: Buddhist economics, ethics
Buddhist economics rejects the neo-classical model of rational and self-interested man.
People can be rational only if they have gone through a process of reflection. In Buddhist
economics, self-interest refers not only to the individual, but also to society and nature.
Thus, according to Buddhist economics, quality of life should also be considered instead
of maximization of consumption only. Hence, Prayukvong criticizes the measurement of
economic performance only by GDP and economic growth and promotes instead
sustainable development. The article presents a study of three communities that
supposedly practice Buddhist economics in Southern Thailand. However, the cases are
loosely related to Buddhist principles presented. They rather resemble communitarian
practices such as kibbutz. This poses doubt on usefulness and originality of Buddhist
economics.
A number of critiques can be directed to the idea of Buddhist economics and Prayukvong
(2005) in particular. First, there is no mention of the possible difficulties of applying a
doctrine dating back to 2,500 years ago to contemporary life. Moreover, since there are
many versions of Buddhism, it is not clear from the article whether Buddhist economics
is common to all of them or not Gezgin 2007). Finally, while the article says that
Buddhist economics focuses on ethics and quality of life, the issue of of plurality of
ethics and quality of life is not addressed--different views of ethics exist and the quality
of life is partially subjective. For example, there are many quality of life indices such as
Human Development Index and Genuine Progress Indicator, but the article ignores them
and instead, a non-empirical idea (Gross National Happiness) is proposed.
The article bases the idea of Buddhist economic community on self-sacrifice and altruism
and thus queries: “Are monetary incentives really able to increase the number of
altruistic leaders or not? If not, what can be done instead?” (p.1173). However, it does
not diagnose the problem correctly. While profit maximization is the main motive in
market societies, in many countries there are government bodies and NGOs are not
pursuing profits. Yet, the article does not discuss whether there is a categorical and
irreducible difference between these two and Buddhist economic practices. In addition,
the article states that the priority of Buddhist economic communities is ‘the needs of the
society’. But the Buddhist communities presented in the article are making profits for the
families involved, so it is not clear in what ways profits are spent for ‘the needs of the
society’ except the families involved. Finally, there is no dicussion of how a self-
1
sacrifice and altruistic Buddhist economic community deals with problems that do not
allow everybody in the community to ‘win’, such as in the case when human needs and
the protection of nature clash.
There is one last point which Prayukvong does not consider: how can Buddhist
economics be applied to non-Buddhist people, communities and societies? Emphasizing
that it is a ‘Buddhist’ idea may alineate people of other religions and atheists. The term
‘Buddhist economics’ may imply a religiously colonialist understanding. If the main idea
is a focus on ethics in economic behavior, the term ‘Buddhist economics’ is misnomer. It
may be replaced by ‘ethonomics’ or ‘ethinomics’.
References
Gezgin, U. B. (2007). Budaci tutumbilim (iktisat) ve toplumsal baris [Buddhist
economics and social peace]. Izinsiz Gosteri, 137 (April 2007).
http://izinsizgosteri.net/asalsayi137/ulas.basar.gezgin_137.html
Dr. Ulas Basar Gezgin, PhD is a lecturer of macroeconomics at RMIT International
University, Vietnam. He holds a regular column about Asia-Pacific Region at a Turkish
newspaper and among his 13 literary and academic books published mainly in Turkish is
‘Asian Essays’ (Izmir, Turkey: Ara-lik, 2007) which is a compilation of his ideas about
Asian development. His recent work involves Asian economies and Asian regional
integration efforts.
2