SUFFiciENcy EcONOMy ANd GRASSROOtS DEvElOPMENt

The Meaning of Sufficiency Economy
International Conference
181
ponds, or other investments in the homestead that would increase self-sufficiency. In
order to resist mainstream materialist values, individuals must cultivate internal
fortitude to imagine and construct an alternative way of life.
Divergent conceptions of development that challenge the hegemony of global
capitalism may emerge from religious or cultural beliefs and ethics or the realities of
alternative economies. Thai social critic Sulak Sivaraksa advocates “true
development” from a Buddhist perspective:
Development must aim at the reduction of craving, the avoidance of
violence, and the development of spirit rather than of material things. . . . The
goal of increasing the quality of life is understood differently. From the
materialist standpoint, when there are more desires, there can be further
development. From the Buddhist standpoint, when there are fewer desires,
there can be further development. (1990:171)
While not necessarily explicitly Buddhist, SE facilitates this attitude
adjustment with its insistence on moderation and reasonableness, which can be
interpreted from a Buddhist perspective. Moderation is the quintessential Buddhist
notion of the Middle Way, the path of neither extreme asceticism nor extreme
luxury. Two Thai concepts relating to moderate consumption were articulated during
my research on the Santi Asoke Buddist Reform Movement (Essen 2005). The first
is mak noi, “to be content with little,” though various Asoke members cautioned:
“Use enough; don’t use little to the level that one is lacking—not a shortage” (Ah Oi
personal communication) because “the Buddha taught to support life by a proper
amount, not to be too needy and not too luxurious, but just right to be able to have
happiness” (Ah Jaenjop personal communication). How much is enough must be
found by each individual. Equally important is sandood, “to be satisfied with what
one has.” This relates to the Buddha’s second Noble Truth that desire—in this case,
wanting more than one already possesses—is the cause of suffering. According to
one Asoke member, “Being content with what one has is important because if [what
you have is] enough, you are richer, suddenly richer” (Ah Wichai personal
communication). Without this feeling of satisfaction, a livelihood may be
sustainable, but it cannot produce real wellbeing.
Of course, moderation is not an exclusively Buddhist notion; it is found in
economies all around the world that value frugality—economizing or minimizing
the means to a certain end. For example, economic anthropologists Gudeman and
Rivera (1990) observed in Columbia that in contrast with profit-driven capitalists,
swidden agriculturalists aim to “sustain” rather than “gain.” Gudeman and Rivera
theorize that subsistence-based economies strive to achieve a level of production
sufficient for the continual reproduction of their system; anything left over (the
surplus) is considered progress. The question remains: what should be done with that
surplus to generate genuine and lasting wellbeing for individuals, society, and
nature?