What do you think?
Rate this book
Buddhist Economics: An Enlightened Approach to the Dismal Science
In the tradition of E. F. Schumacher's Small Is Beautiful , renowned economist Clair Brown argues persuasively for a new economics built upon equality, sustainability, and right living.
" Buddhist Economics will give guidance to all those who seek peace, fairness, and environmental sustainability." ―Jeffrey Sachs, author of The Age of Sustainable Development.
Traditional economics measures the ways in which we spend our income, but doesn't attribute worth to the crucial human interactions that give our lives meaning.
Clair Brown, an economics professor at U.C. Berkeley and a practicing Buddhist, has developed a holistic model, one based on the notion that quality of life should be measured by more than national income. Brown advocates an approach to organizing the economy that embraces rather than skirts questions of values, sustainability, and equity. Complementing the award-winning work of Jeffrey Sachs and Bill McKibben, and the paradigm-breaking spirit of Amartya Sen, Robert Reich, and Thomas Piketty, Brown incorporates the Buddhist emphasis on interdependence, shared prosperity, and happiness into her vision for a sustainable and compassionate world.
Buddhist economics leads us to think mindfully as we go about our daily activities, and offers a way to appreciate how our actions affect the well-being of those around us. By replacing the endless cycle of desire with more positive collective activities, we can make our lives more meaningful as well as happier. Inspired by the popular course Professor Brown teaches at U.C. Berkeley, Buddhist Economics represents an enlightened approach to our modern world infused with ancient wisdom, with benefits both personal and global, for generations to come.
" Buddhist Economics will give guidance to all those who seek peace, fairness, and environmental sustainability." ―Jeffrey Sachs, author of The Age of Sustainable Development.
Traditional economics measures the ways in which we spend our income, but doesn't attribute worth to the crucial human interactions that give our lives meaning.
Clair Brown, an economics professor at U.C. Berkeley and a practicing Buddhist, has developed a holistic model, one based on the notion that quality of life should be measured by more than national income. Brown advocates an approach to organizing the economy that embraces rather than skirts questions of values, sustainability, and equity. Complementing the award-winning work of Jeffrey Sachs and Bill McKibben, and the paradigm-breaking spirit of Amartya Sen, Robert Reich, and Thomas Piketty, Brown incorporates the Buddhist emphasis on interdependence, shared prosperity, and happiness into her vision for a sustainable and compassionate world.
Buddhist economics leads us to think mindfully as we go about our daily activities, and offers a way to appreciate how our actions affect the well-being of those around us. By replacing the endless cycle of desire with more positive collective activities, we can make our lives more meaningful as well as happier. Inspired by the popular course Professor Brown teaches at U.C. Berkeley, Buddhist Economics represents an enlightened approach to our modern world infused with ancient wisdom, with benefits both personal and global, for generations to come.
224 pages, Hardcover
First published February 21, 2017
57 people are currently reading
1076 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 45 reviews
June 24, 2017
I had hoped to like this book more. After all, the blurbs on its back cover from Nobel Laureate Amartya Sen, Former Labor Secretary Robert Reich, Columbia University economist Jeffrey Sachs, and environmentalist Bill McKibben, all sing its praises. My own view is more mixed, however.
First, let me outline what I liked about the book. The author, University of California-Berkeley economist Clair Brown, correctly diagnoses our society’s greatest errors and failings: its fostering of obscene levels of economic inequality, its despoliation of the planet, its single-minded focus on generating wealth rather than on expanding human well-being and flourishing, and its economic model of corporate obligations to shareholders but not stakeholders. Dr. Brown offers many sensible alternatives and solutions to these problems, providing reasonable guidelines for reducing wealth inequality, putting the global economy on a sustainable footing, preserving the planet, and maximizing human happiness and potential. If we followed the author’s exhortations, I have no doubt that our world would be a much better place. I would very much like to live in the world she prescribes.
Now for the things I didn’t like about the book.
First, to my mind, the title doesn’t make any sense. There is no such thing as “Buddhist Economics,” just as there is no such thing as Buddhist Astrophysics or Buddhist Quantum Mechanics. Economics is economics, plain and simple. It’s a social science that tells us how to get from point A to point B: Here’s what one ought to do if one wants to constrain inflation; Here’s what one ought do if one wants full employment; and so on. It tells us the correct means to reach desired goals. What it doesn’t do is tell us what our goals ought to be. That field—the one that tells us what we ought to desire—is ethics rather than economics. What Clair Brown is really arguing for is not a better economics, but a better ethics. She is suggesting a different set of human goals to aim at, rather than a different type of means to get there.
Second, there is nothing in Clair Brown’s ethics that is particularly or uniquely Buddhist. Pope Francis could probably agree with most of the goals she emphasizes. So could most secular humanists. Her vision of the well-lived life is more traditionally Aristotelian than it is traditionally Buddhist. Classical Buddhism had little, if anything, to say about reducing economic inequality or preserving the planet. Now it happens that many if not most Buddhist modernists would endorse a set of ethics that is in accord with secular humanist, liberal Protestant, Conservative, Reform, and Reconstructionist Jewish, and Post-Vatican II Catholic ethics when it comes to issues of preserving the planet, reducing inequality, and fostering human flourishing. That’s because modern humanist ethics are in the air, up for grabs by all, and not because they’re deeply rooted in the Buddhist past. Now there are several traditional Buddhist themes that resonate deeply with modern humanist ethics, including the Buddhist emphases on lovingkindness, compassion, non-greed, non-harming, non-ego aggrandizement, interdependence, and saving all beings. That is the reason why Buddhist luminaries such as the Dalai Lama and Thich Nhat Hanh espouse them. These ideas are the common heritage of modernity and not uniquely Buddhist
Third, this book was written during the Obama presidency when it was still possible to dream the “liberal dream”—that with just a little more effort we could head in the right direction. We are now plunged into a new Dark Age in which selfishness and greed are valued above all else by those in charge of the national government. We have pulled out of the Paris climate accord and are on the verge of ending our imperfect experiment with universal healthcare. In the despair of the moment, I’m reminded of these lines written by the philosopher Richard Rorty some three decades ago:
“I do not think that we liberals can now imagine a future of ‘human dignity, freedom and peace.’ That is, we cannot tell ourselves a story about how to get from the actual present to such a future. We can picture various socioeconomic setups which would be preferable to the present one. But we have no clear sense of how to get from the actual world to these theoretically possible worlds, and thus no clear idea of what to work for…. This inability to imagine how to get from here to there is a matter neither of loss of moral resolve nor of theoretical superficiality, self-deception, or self-betrayal. It is not something we can remedy by a firmer resolve, or more transparent prose, or better philosophical accounts of man, truth, or history. It is just the way things happen to have fallen out. Sometimes things prove to be just as bad as they first looked.…This bad news remains the great intransigent fact of contemporary political speculation, the one that blocks all the liberal scenarios.” (from Contingency, Irony, and Solidarity, 1989, p. 181-182)
In the end, what Clair Brown fails to do is give us a road map that would tell us how to reorder American politics so that sensible economic proposals, such as the one she is making, can be given a chance. We can guess what some of those political changes would involve—an end to Citizen’s United, an end to gerrymandering, genuine election finance reform, and so on. But how is one to accomplish those things? Today, the kind of transvaluation of values that would be needed before meaningful political change could occur seems farther off than ever. That is what those of us on the “religious left” toil for with little hope and against heavy odds. It’s easy to think up solutions to most of our problems. The problem is, they never live to see the light of day.
To sum up, if you’re interested in suggestions for how to reorder our economic system so that businesses are more socially responsible, so that everyone is guaranteed a living wage, so that our economy is carbon neutral, so that the gap between rich and poor nations is reduced, and so that developing human potential and well-being are more important than growing economic productivity, then this is an excellent book. If you, like me, happen to be a Buddhist modernist, you will find much that you like and agree with. I am one of those who happen to think our economy ought to be constrained by the emerging universalist humanist modernist ethics, which we as Buddhist modernists share with modernists of other faiths. The problem is, we still need a roadmap of how to draw those who view things differently into the conversation. I suspect there are no shortcuts, that the road will be hard, that there will be many defeats along the way, and that there is no guarantee of either eventual success or planetary survival.
But try we must.
First, let me outline what I liked about the book. The author, University of California-Berkeley economist Clair Brown, correctly diagnoses our society’s greatest errors and failings: its fostering of obscene levels of economic inequality, its despoliation of the planet, its single-minded focus on generating wealth rather than on expanding human well-being and flourishing, and its economic model of corporate obligations to shareholders but not stakeholders. Dr. Brown offers many sensible alternatives and solutions to these problems, providing reasonable guidelines for reducing wealth inequality, putting the global economy on a sustainable footing, preserving the planet, and maximizing human happiness and potential. If we followed the author’s exhortations, I have no doubt that our world would be a much better place. I would very much like to live in the world she prescribes.
Now for the things I didn’t like about the book.
First, to my mind, the title doesn’t make any sense. There is no such thing as “Buddhist Economics,” just as there is no such thing as Buddhist Astrophysics or Buddhist Quantum Mechanics. Economics is economics, plain and simple. It’s a social science that tells us how to get from point A to point B: Here’s what one ought to do if one wants to constrain inflation; Here’s what one ought do if one wants full employment; and so on. It tells us the correct means to reach desired goals. What it doesn’t do is tell us what our goals ought to be. That field—the one that tells us what we ought to desire—is ethics rather than economics. What Clair Brown is really arguing for is not a better economics, but a better ethics. She is suggesting a different set of human goals to aim at, rather than a different type of means to get there.
Second, there is nothing in Clair Brown’s ethics that is particularly or uniquely Buddhist. Pope Francis could probably agree with most of the goals she emphasizes. So could most secular humanists. Her vision of the well-lived life is more traditionally Aristotelian than it is traditionally Buddhist. Classical Buddhism had little, if anything, to say about reducing economic inequality or preserving the planet. Now it happens that many if not most Buddhist modernists would endorse a set of ethics that is in accord with secular humanist, liberal Protestant, Conservative, Reform, and Reconstructionist Jewish, and Post-Vatican II Catholic ethics when it comes to issues of preserving the planet, reducing inequality, and fostering human flourishing. That’s because modern humanist ethics are in the air, up for grabs by all, and not because they’re deeply rooted in the Buddhist past. Now there are several traditional Buddhist themes that resonate deeply with modern humanist ethics, including the Buddhist emphases on lovingkindness, compassion, non-greed, non-harming, non-ego aggrandizement, interdependence, and saving all beings. That is the reason why Buddhist luminaries such as the Dalai Lama and Thich Nhat Hanh espouse them. These ideas are the common heritage of modernity and not uniquely Buddhist
Third, this book was written during the Obama presidency when it was still possible to dream the “liberal dream”—that with just a little more effort we could head in the right direction. We are now plunged into a new Dark Age in which selfishness and greed are valued above all else by those in charge of the national government. We have pulled out of the Paris climate accord and are on the verge of ending our imperfect experiment with universal healthcare. In the despair of the moment, I’m reminded of these lines written by the philosopher Richard Rorty some three decades ago:
“I do not think that we liberals can now imagine a future of ‘human dignity, freedom and peace.’ That is, we cannot tell ourselves a story about how to get from the actual present to such a future. We can picture various socioeconomic setups which would be preferable to the present one. But we have no clear sense of how to get from the actual world to these theoretically possible worlds, and thus no clear idea of what to work for…. This inability to imagine how to get from here to there is a matter neither of loss of moral resolve nor of theoretical superficiality, self-deception, or self-betrayal. It is not something we can remedy by a firmer resolve, or more transparent prose, or better philosophical accounts of man, truth, or history. It is just the way things happen to have fallen out. Sometimes things prove to be just as bad as they first looked.…This bad news remains the great intransigent fact of contemporary political speculation, the one that blocks all the liberal scenarios.” (from Contingency, Irony, and Solidarity, 1989, p. 181-182)
In the end, what Clair Brown fails to do is give us a road map that would tell us how to reorder American politics so that sensible economic proposals, such as the one she is making, can be given a chance. We can guess what some of those political changes would involve—an end to Citizen’s United, an end to gerrymandering, genuine election finance reform, and so on. But how is one to accomplish those things? Today, the kind of transvaluation of values that would be needed before meaningful political change could occur seems farther off than ever. That is what those of us on the “religious left” toil for with little hope and against heavy odds. It’s easy to think up solutions to most of our problems. The problem is, they never live to see the light of day.
To sum up, if you’re interested in suggestions for how to reorder our economic system so that businesses are more socially responsible, so that everyone is guaranteed a living wage, so that our economy is carbon neutral, so that the gap between rich and poor nations is reduced, and so that developing human potential and well-being are more important than growing economic productivity, then this is an excellent book. If you, like me, happen to be a Buddhist modernist, you will find much that you like and agree with. I am one of those who happen to think our economy ought to be constrained by the emerging universalist humanist modernist ethics, which we as Buddhist modernists share with modernists of other faiths. The problem is, we still need a roadmap of how to draw those who view things differently into the conversation. I suspect there are no shortcuts, that the road will be hard, that there will be many defeats along the way, and that there is no guarantee of either eventual success or planetary survival.
But try we must.
November 4, 2021
I was very very excited for this book. I think economics is a field that is in need of new theories so I had hoped this would be eye-opening.
Alas, this book is simply disappointing. It offers nothing. Buddhist Economics starts with a very basic summary of some world issues. Brown spends a remarkable amount of time discussing the environment. Basically, it is the information you can find by googling climate change. She then discusses poverty. Along the way, she describes why economics finds these challenging and how Buddhism would be so much better.
However, mentioning these issues isn't really that Buddhist in any particular way. Many people are concerned about the environment and poverty. Many economists have much theory on how to resolve these issues. So what's Buddhist here? How is this not humanist economics?
Moreover, none of Brown's solutions are in any way related to Buddhism. They also don't challenge economics as we know it. Mostly, she suggests more regulation. This isn't a bad solution but it also isn't an interesting one.
The reason I find this book such a let down is that I do believe a Buddhist economics theory could exist and could be interesting. I wanted an answer to the question, "what does an economic system inspired by Buddhism look like?".
As someone who does not have a good grasp on Buddhism or on economics, I have so many questions. What does a utility function look like when the joy of consumerism is offset with the damage to the environment? What does a market look like when companies are seeking mutual fulfillment as well as profits? What happens in an economic model when consumers care about the people's welfare? What if consuming is viewed negatively? How does that shape the market? Can a market be cleared if the premises of the demand and of the supply were different? What do isoquant curves look if we were to also consider the environment?
And on a macro level, what if banks cared about improving other people's lives because they viewed people as connected? How would the global economy look if we all genuinely cared about the wellbeing of others, if this also played a role in our decision making? Could globalism work with Buddhist economics? Could international trade work in the same way when sweat shops exist?
If Buddhism understands suffering as a tendency to crave or desire things, how would that shape economic policy on a state level? Can Buddhist inspired economic policy still support welfare, even if one is responsible for their suffering?
Or, in other words, if we accept Buddhist premises, what happens to our economical systems?
Economists has recognized that much of the premises of economics aren't actually reasonable or based in reality and yet, we still often assume them to be correct (or at least, we're willing to go with them for the sake of models). As an exercise, why not remove those assumptions and for a moment, consider Buddhism as true? This is what I wanted from this book and wow, it was not what I got.
My least favorite part was when Brown talks about world peace. We all want world peace. That's hardly a big statement. However, Brown's "Buddhist economics" solution to reach world peace is to fight the global weapon trade. She presents it as a barrier to world peace.
Like everything else in this book, my response is, "okay, cool". I mean, yes, the global weapons industry is a contributing force to wars but also, that's hardly a solution. It doesn't change the global world order that creates weapon's industries. It doesn't address the core issues.
For those of us who live in conflict areas, Brown's 4 pages on world peace come across as almost insulting. Israel is the #1 arm exporter per capita and 8th in the world with 3% of the market share. I would love for us to stop but I simply can't understand the thinking that the global arms trade is the problem, rather than a symptom.
To conclude, I can't recommend this book.
What I'm Taking With Me
- My 2 star rating is because I am so here for calling economics a dismal science
- I've genuinely never read a book that was such a let down, such a fantastic idea but so little content. I can't believe this is recommended by Amartya Sen.
- the Buddhist parts of this book were also quite lacking, I don't get how it's a book about Buddhist economics yet it doesn't bring anything really for either one.
- But heyy, at least this book was so frustrating that it woke me up from my review slumber.
-----------------
This book is such a disappointment, I feel cheated. Review to come!
Alas, this book is simply disappointing. It offers nothing. Buddhist Economics starts with a very basic summary of some world issues. Brown spends a remarkable amount of time discussing the environment. Basically, it is the information you can find by googling climate change. She then discusses poverty. Along the way, she describes why economics finds these challenging and how Buddhism would be so much better.
However, mentioning these issues isn't really that Buddhist in any particular way. Many people are concerned about the environment and poverty. Many economists have much theory on how to resolve these issues. So what's Buddhist here? How is this not humanist economics?
Moreover, none of Brown's solutions are in any way related to Buddhism. They also don't challenge economics as we know it. Mostly, she suggests more regulation. This isn't a bad solution but it also isn't an interesting one.
The reason I find this book such a let down is that I do believe a Buddhist economics theory could exist and could be interesting. I wanted an answer to the question, "what does an economic system inspired by Buddhism look like?".
As someone who does not have a good grasp on Buddhism or on economics, I have so many questions. What does a utility function look like when the joy of consumerism is offset with the damage to the environment? What does a market look like when companies are seeking mutual fulfillment as well as profits? What happens in an economic model when consumers care about the people's welfare? What if consuming is viewed negatively? How does that shape the market? Can a market be cleared if the premises of the demand and of the supply were different? What do isoquant curves look if we were to also consider the environment?
And on a macro level, what if banks cared about improving other people's lives because they viewed people as connected? How would the global economy look if we all genuinely cared about the wellbeing of others, if this also played a role in our decision making? Could globalism work with Buddhist economics? Could international trade work in the same way when sweat shops exist?
If Buddhism understands suffering as a tendency to crave or desire things, how would that shape economic policy on a state level? Can Buddhist inspired economic policy still support welfare, even if one is responsible for their suffering?
Or, in other words, if we accept Buddhist premises, what happens to our economical systems?
Economists has recognized that much of the premises of economics aren't actually reasonable or based in reality and yet, we still often assume them to be correct (or at least, we're willing to go with them for the sake of models). As an exercise, why not remove those assumptions and for a moment, consider Buddhism as true? This is what I wanted from this book and wow, it was not what I got.
My least favorite part was when Brown talks about world peace. We all want world peace. That's hardly a big statement. However, Brown's "Buddhist economics" solution to reach world peace is to fight the global weapon trade. She presents it as a barrier to world peace.
Like everything else in this book, my response is, "okay, cool". I mean, yes, the global weapons industry is a contributing force to wars but also, that's hardly a solution. It doesn't change the global world order that creates weapon's industries. It doesn't address the core issues.
For those of us who live in conflict areas, Brown's 4 pages on world peace come across as almost insulting. Israel is the #1 arm exporter per capita and 8th in the world with 3% of the market share. I would love for us to stop but I simply can't understand the thinking that the global arms trade is the problem, rather than a symptom.
To conclude, I can't recommend this book.
What I'm Taking With Me
- My 2 star rating is because I am so here for calling economics a dismal science
- I've genuinely never read a book that was such a let down, such a fantastic idea but so little content. I can't believe this is recommended by Amartya Sen.
- the Buddhist parts of this book were also quite lacking, I don't get how it's a book about Buddhist economics yet it doesn't bring anything really for either one.
- But heyy, at least this book was so frustrating that it woke me up from my review slumber.
-----------------
This book is such a disappointment, I feel cheated. Review to come!
March 6, 2021
This was tremendously disappointing, and I was amazed that it was published by a scholar at a respected institution. It was a mishmash of gross generalizations, muddled terminology, and lazy thought. It was, for example, much less theoretically well-grounded than other things I have read recently on Christianity and capitalism. _The Economy of Desire_, for instance, had a deep and helpful investigation of the kinds of desire capitalism cultivates in its subjects, versus the kinds of desire called for by Christian theology (and that author was specific about _which_ Christian theology he was referencing, whereas here, everything from the Dalai Lama to Zen seemed to count as Buddhism, in a way I found odd in a scholarly work). Such a deep reflection on the kinds of desire fostered by various forms of capitalism, versus the way in which desire is handled in Buddhism, might have been quite useful and interesting, but the treatment was surface-level and quite fleeting.
The author also used current capitalist economic terms in an uncritical way, referring to "free market" economics, for example, and defining it as "human nature is self-centered and that people care only about themselves as they push ahead to maximize their incomes and fancy lifestyles." I don't even really know where to start to unpack this. "Free market" economics is a neo-liberal frame for capitalist practices that shunt power to corporations at the expense of individual people and communities, externalizing many costs, but she doesn't acknowledge that there are different varieties of capitalism (mercantile, Keynesian, neoliberal, global financial, to name only a few). "Human nature is self-centered," is indeed one of the core tenets of Adam Smith's economic thought, and there are many helpful books that explore the intersection of certain brands of Protestant thought and their constitution of subjects that supported this conception of reality (which is, in fact, only a conception versus reality). Under the neoliberal version of "free market" she defines, I would argue that most actors don't work to "maximize their fancy lifestyles" but to maintain any position in the precariat at all. To frame life for the majority of people under neoliberal capitalism as a greedy quest for luxury is an absurd caricature -- though it is certainly that for the uber-rich under the gross inequity fostered by global financial capitalism.
And so it went -- an exhausting romp through surface ideas, half-formed concepts, and WEIRD (Western, educated, industrialized, rich, democratic) examples from her Ivy League students, who do indeed seem to be making economic choices around the margins of luxury.
There are certainly some helpful points about the ways in which Buddhist actors would seek to be with the pain of life rather than salve it with consumer purchases, and the ways in which interdependence is contrary to capitalism's conception of human beings as individuals first -- again, the first would need to be carefully unpacked to differentiate between the implications for the 90% of the precariat and the 10% of the wealthy, while the second would need to look into the importance of the kinds of subjects capitalism creates and requires.
Anxiety does nag at "us" as human beings -- yet the "us" she posits is those who have "too many choices" (29) -- a definite minority of the population in the United States and around the world. IN this world "we are still running for dear life to satisfy our wants," vs. working as wage slaves and (if we are lucky) insurance whores trying to salve our Fear of Falling.
She talked about freedom being "the capability to live a fully developed and meaningful life, free from the suffering that comes with kleshas, or harmful thoughts and actions, and being interdependent with others and the earth." All this without any reference to the absolutely central notion of freedom and its recent redefinition in the United States in a reactionary way (Lakoff), or even an interesting nod to Kim Stanley Robinson's far-more-developed notions of Buddhist alternatives to history, in which we are now not at the end of human history, but will not even reach the beginning of it until all human beings do have the opportunity to live "a fully developed and meaningful life."
Minimum wages across state borders, M. Reich, Review of Economics and Statistics, 2010.
The author also used current capitalist economic terms in an uncritical way, referring to "free market" economics, for example, and defining it as "human nature is self-centered and that people care only about themselves as they push ahead to maximize their incomes and fancy lifestyles." I don't even really know where to start to unpack this. "Free market" economics is a neo-liberal frame for capitalist practices that shunt power to corporations at the expense of individual people and communities, externalizing many costs, but she doesn't acknowledge that there are different varieties of capitalism (mercantile, Keynesian, neoliberal, global financial, to name only a few). "Human nature is self-centered," is indeed one of the core tenets of Adam Smith's economic thought, and there are many helpful books that explore the intersection of certain brands of Protestant thought and their constitution of subjects that supported this conception of reality (which is, in fact, only a conception versus reality). Under the neoliberal version of "free market" she defines, I would argue that most actors don't work to "maximize their fancy lifestyles" but to maintain any position in the precariat at all. To frame life for the majority of people under neoliberal capitalism as a greedy quest for luxury is an absurd caricature -- though it is certainly that for the uber-rich under the gross inequity fostered by global financial capitalism.
And so it went -- an exhausting romp through surface ideas, half-formed concepts, and WEIRD (Western, educated, industrialized, rich, democratic) examples from her Ivy League students, who do indeed seem to be making economic choices around the margins of luxury.
There are certainly some helpful points about the ways in which Buddhist actors would seek to be with the pain of life rather than salve it with consumer purchases, and the ways in which interdependence is contrary to capitalism's conception of human beings as individuals first -- again, the first would need to be carefully unpacked to differentiate between the implications for the 90% of the precariat and the 10% of the wealthy, while the second would need to look into the importance of the kinds of subjects capitalism creates and requires.
Anxiety does nag at "us" as human beings -- yet the "us" she posits is those who have "too many choices" (29) -- a definite minority of the population in the United States and around the world. IN this world "we are still running for dear life to satisfy our wants," vs. working as wage slaves and (if we are lucky) insurance whores trying to salve our Fear of Falling.
She talked about freedom being "the capability to live a fully developed and meaningful life, free from the suffering that comes with kleshas, or harmful thoughts and actions, and being interdependent with others and the earth." All this without any reference to the absolutely central notion of freedom and its recent redefinition in the United States in a reactionary way (Lakoff), or even an interesting nod to Kim Stanley Robinson's far-more-developed notions of Buddhist alternatives to history, in which we are now not at the end of human history, but will not even reach the beginning of it until all human beings do have the opportunity to live "a fully developed and meaningful life."
Minimum wages across state borders, M. Reich, Review of Economics and Statistics, 2010.
February 24, 2024
I find that Clair Brown and I share many visions of what the world should look like, but what I find myself wondering is how we could get there, or the details of what that world might actually look like. Unfortunately, this book did not answer any of those questions for me. While I think that the values and worldviews she espouses are those we should aspire to, there is painfully little economics here. Instead, it's more of a little primer in some basic Buddhist ideas and how climate change is bad.
I was hoping that this book might be able to answer or at least open the dialogue to a few things. For example, how can we expand or challenge the fundamental assumptions of current methods of economic analysis in a way that can take into account other aspects of human nature than a self-interested rational consumer? Or, what are alternative ways to model or evaluate economic performance in a way that takes into account the finite resources of the natural world? Or, to take more of a policy stance, how can we restructure our markets with finite resources in mind?
The only thing that was really discussed was some alternative metrics of economic performance. So for example, rather than using GDP and income growth as a way to measure economic health, to use something more like GPI which takes into account ecological health. She also mentioned that we should also treat nature's resource cap as a hard cap in our cost-benefit analysis instead of overlooked or something that can be worth it as long as the tradeoffs are worth it. But I still found this discussion rather surface-level. And this was the ONLY chapter that I felt had any (even tenuous) relationship to economics.
Instead, she makes a lot of statements like this: "Buddhist economics calls on nations and the business economy to lead the way in creating a sustainable economy with shared prosperity." (There are many statements like this throughout the course of the book.) But there are so many questions and this really such a vague aspirational statement. If you are simply asking people to be more mindful of their purchases and lifestyles, as she does often, then this book should be titled "How to Live Sustainably." If you are asking businesses like Exxon to care about sustainability, then you should give up because it's not going to happen. Either way, this has nothing at all to do with economics!
Anyway, I wasn't expecting a paradigm-shattering theory, but I did want something that could reasonably be called a discussion on economics. The only reason I finished (well, skimmed) this book is because it was so short - I don't recommend it at all. I'm still very interested in the idea of how we can view or change the market/economy through a lens of sustainability, but this did not deliver at all.
I was hoping that this book might be able to answer or at least open the dialogue to a few things. For example, how can we expand or challenge the fundamental assumptions of current methods of economic analysis in a way that can take into account other aspects of human nature than a self-interested rational consumer? Or, what are alternative ways to model or evaluate economic performance in a way that takes into account the finite resources of the natural world? Or, to take more of a policy stance, how can we restructure our markets with finite resources in mind?
The only thing that was really discussed was some alternative metrics of economic performance. So for example, rather than using GDP and income growth as a way to measure economic health, to use something more like GPI which takes into account ecological health. She also mentioned that we should also treat nature's resource cap as a hard cap in our cost-benefit analysis instead of overlooked or something that can be worth it as long as the tradeoffs are worth it. But I still found this discussion rather surface-level. And this was the ONLY chapter that I felt had any (even tenuous) relationship to economics.
Instead, she makes a lot of statements like this: "Buddhist economics calls on nations and the business economy to lead the way in creating a sustainable economy with shared prosperity." (There are many statements like this throughout the course of the book.) But there are so many questions and this really such a vague aspirational statement. If you are simply asking people to be more mindful of their purchases and lifestyles, as she does often, then this book should be titled "How to Live Sustainably." If you are asking businesses like Exxon to care about sustainability, then you should give up because it's not going to happen. Either way, this has nothing at all to do with economics!
Anyway, I wasn't expecting a paradigm-shattering theory, but I did want something that could reasonably be called a discussion on economics. The only reason I finished (well, skimmed) this book is because it was so short - I don't recommend it at all. I'm still very interested in the idea of how we can view or change the market/economy through a lens of sustainability, but this did not deliver at all.
Read
August 25, 2017Good book with great beginner info for Buddhist principles and economics. A great feature of the eBook is the backlinking and external links to resources she's citing. That is a fantastic interactive function of technology. However, upon reading the actual text, I discovered I'm already pretty well versed in most of the things she's talking about. Not the economists she's quoting, which I enjoyed, but rather the principles of both basic economics and the teachings of Buddha, so I don't really feel like renewing it. I might and finish it up, but I'm good for now.
September 6, 2016
I always find this genre to be the most difficult for me to embrace however, this approach is one that I can definitely resonate with. It's a newish style of economics that concerns sustainability, mindfullness and integral living. It provided much insight and global meaning.
October 21, 2018
Good insights and thoughts on how we must strive on Mother Earth.
Already following Buddhist principles and sustainable methods to live hence renewed them with good insight on economics
Already following Buddhist principles and sustainable methods to live hence renewed them with good insight on economics
September 25, 2017
I was quite disappointed by this book. It's not that it's a bad book, per se--aside from a few obvious errors, her analysis is basically correct and well-argued. The problem is that there's very little that's distinctively Buddhist about said analysis. With only minor changes, this could have just as easily been titled "Progressive Economics" or "Egalitarian-Environmental Economics".
So if you're already familiar with economics, particularly modern leftist/environmental economics, there's not much that will be new here. But if you're not especially familiar with economics, and want a better version of it than you would typically encounter in the media and popular press, this would definitely be worth a read.
So if you're already familiar with economics, particularly modern leftist/environmental economics, there's not much that will be new here. But if you're not especially familiar with economics, and want a better version of it than you would typically encounter in the media and popular press, this would definitely be worth a read.
February 28, 2017
I won an Advance Reader's. Copy of this book from Bloombury Publishing through the Goodreads Giveaways program.
It took me a while after finishing this book to write this review, primarily because I really want to word the review in such a way that it will encourage readers, many readers, to read the book.
The word “economics” in the title can discourage many people, as can the word “Buddhist”, because it seems to define the type of book it is—either too complex (economics) to understand or want to; or too one religion oriented to appeal to Christians, Jews, Muslims etc. However, the book is, in my view, just a common sense explanation and comparison of two different approaches to economics. And, in explaining economics Brown makes it clear that economics=politics=life as we know it in 2017. Many of us think only of the economics of our own job, household etc. But economics really drives almost all of the decisions made by everyone and every country throughout the world. Brown does an excellent job of explaining 1. Where we are with the common “Free Trade” economics theory and, 2. where we could be with Buddhist economics. She spends quite a bit of the book explaining the current situation in the US and in the world and relates to economics in a way that can be understood by lay people. She then explains how “Free trade” economics works in this world. Most people, if asked about Free Trade, will hear the word “free” and think “Ah…a good thing” and politicians have used that to push a certain type of economics. But, again, most people individually, if asked if they think we should love our neighbors or care for the poor or downtrodden would think “Yes, that is the Christian/Jewish/Muslim/right thing to do. Brown explains how “free trade” and caring for our neighbors are actually antagonistic.
She focuses quite a bit on climate change and issues surrounding climate change because, as she explains, all economics are based upon the resources of this planet in one way or another and it is important that we understand that.
What I took away from the book is the understanding of the two economic approaches and “how each assumes the world works” (pg 2). Simply by giving the reader another way to see these economic systems and a way to understand the point of many economic decisions from two different perspectives, Brown opens a window of opportunity and a method of critical thinking when it comes to economics and to current day politics and issues. From this standpoint, then, knowing how to act becomes much easier.
I am very grateful to Bloomsbury Publishing and Goodreads for the opportunity to read and review this book.
It took me a while after finishing this book to write this review, primarily because I really want to word the review in such a way that it will encourage readers, many readers, to read the book.
The word “economics” in the title can discourage many people, as can the word “Buddhist”, because it seems to define the type of book it is—either too complex (economics) to understand or want to; or too one religion oriented to appeal to Christians, Jews, Muslims etc. However, the book is, in my view, just a common sense explanation and comparison of two different approaches to economics. And, in explaining economics Brown makes it clear that economics=politics=life as we know it in 2017. Many of us think only of the economics of our own job, household etc. But economics really drives almost all of the decisions made by everyone and every country throughout the world. Brown does an excellent job of explaining 1. Where we are with the common “Free Trade” economics theory and, 2. where we could be with Buddhist economics. She spends quite a bit of the book explaining the current situation in the US and in the world and relates to economics in a way that can be understood by lay people. She then explains how “Free trade” economics works in this world. Most people, if asked about Free Trade, will hear the word “free” and think “Ah…a good thing” and politicians have used that to push a certain type of economics. But, again, most people individually, if asked if they think we should love our neighbors or care for the poor or downtrodden would think “Yes, that is the Christian/Jewish/Muslim/right thing to do. Brown explains how “free trade” and caring for our neighbors are actually antagonistic.
She focuses quite a bit on climate change and issues surrounding climate change because, as she explains, all economics are based upon the resources of this planet in one way or another and it is important that we understand that.
What I took away from the book is the understanding of the two economic approaches and “how each assumes the world works” (pg 2). Simply by giving the reader another way to see these economic systems and a way to understand the point of many economic decisions from two different perspectives, Brown opens a window of opportunity and a method of critical thinking when it comes to economics and to current day politics and issues. From this standpoint, then, knowing how to act becomes much easier.
I am very grateful to Bloomsbury Publishing and Goodreads for the opportunity to read and review this book.
July 8, 2017
Although longer than it needs to be, this is an important body of work. The premise of the book is that major worldwide challenges, such as global warming and income inequality, are profoundly influenced by economics--economic policy--and that our current economic policies (and primary measure--GDP) are failing to address, --no, they are exacerbating--the problems we face.
Near the end of the book, Brown offers economic policy prescriptions that CAN positively influence climate and income. But Brown has significant (insurmountable?) hurdles to overcome for her ideas to be embraced. The first hurdle is to get American readers to even read the book. With a title like "Buddhist Economics," millions will be turned off before they even get to page 1 – i.e., making assumptions about what the book is about based on their perceptions or knowledge of Buddhism, which is likely little, or perhaps nothing at all.
The second major hurdle is that many Americans don't understand basic economics, making this book a difficult read for many. This is the more tragic of the two hurdles. How can we make good decisions about our country, policies, and leadership if we don't even understand the basic principles of economics?
My recommendation for the author (an author?) is to write a "prequel" of sorts on basic economic principals—easy, "digestible" education for "everyman." It's gotta be wholly interesting; a page-turner would be even better. Surely this is doable! My second recommendation is to relaunch the book under a new title, not because the current title is bad, but because it is alienating. "Buddhist" is a loaded word and so is "economics." A title that diffuses, instead of sparks, emotions, bias, and (mis) perceptions, is going to go a lot further to getting American readers to embrace ideas that are worthy of embracing.
Near the end of the book, Brown offers economic policy prescriptions that CAN positively influence climate and income. But Brown has significant (insurmountable?) hurdles to overcome for her ideas to be embraced. The first hurdle is to get American readers to even read the book. With a title like "Buddhist Economics," millions will be turned off before they even get to page 1 – i.e., making assumptions about what the book is about based on their perceptions or knowledge of Buddhism, which is likely little, or perhaps nothing at all.
The second major hurdle is that many Americans don't understand basic economics, making this book a difficult read for many. This is the more tragic of the two hurdles. How can we make good decisions about our country, policies, and leadership if we don't even understand the basic principles of economics?
My recommendation for the author (an author?) is to write a "prequel" of sorts on basic economic principals—easy, "digestible" education for "everyman." It's gotta be wholly interesting; a page-turner would be even better. Surely this is doable! My second recommendation is to relaunch the book under a new title, not because the current title is bad, but because it is alienating. "Buddhist" is a loaded word and so is "economics." A title that diffuses, instead of sparks, emotions, bias, and (mis) perceptions, is going to go a lot further to getting American readers to embrace ideas that are worthy of embracing.
June 4, 2017
At first this book seems like pie in the sky--yes we should be more loving to one another; yes we are all interdependent; yes we have to trammel greed in order to thrive on this earth without ruining it any further. But then when you get to Brown's section on climate change, you start to learn stuff, to your distress, about how bad the situation really is. And when you go further you learn a lot about what various countries and the UN and some companies are actually doing about it. By the end you realize this isn't just an idealistic vision; it is the imperative of our time. We have to turn this corner. There is no other choice.
January 20, 2017
With trepidation I tried to read this book. I actually got 10 pages into it before I had to quit. This book is an attempt to push the typical liberal economic view of the world under the guise of Buddhist teachings. I am not an expert on Buddhism but know in general it teaches that the way to peace is to control your yearnings. Clair Brown's approach seems to be to indulge the liberal yearning to use the government to take from the rich and give to the poor. She would have been much better served using Robin Hood as her inspiration for this type of agenda.
December 14, 2017
Generally inspiring, althugh having read many economic books, there was not a lot of new information for me. However, the book was very well referenced and full of useful resources. The chapter on alternative economic indicators to the GDP was the most useful to me.
I would have preferred that references had been given via footnotes in the usual style, rather than having to continually check the back section to find them.
I would have preferred that references had been given via footnotes in the usual style, rather than having to continually check the back section to find them.
August 10, 2017
This book challenges free market economics and provides a blueprint for economics that puts people and planet first. Rampant consumerism, income inequality, and climate change are pressing problems that concern us all. This book shows us a better way.
August 27, 2017
Great theory based book and well researched. There are some extreme theories presented but the underlying message is great. Anyone with an open mind could learn a lot from this book even if they don't agree with many of its principles.
March 2, 2024
Saw this book on the shelf when I was picking up a similar themed book and recognized the title from my to-read list at the request of my daughter (Berkeley Econ grad) so thought it was time to finally read it. Loved it! Buddhist economics, similar to ecological economics is based on the premise that humans are part of and interdependent with Nature. As health and weather suffer due to climate change people will fight more for limited resources causing a threat to national security and is now considered the world’s most fearsome weapon of mass destruction.
In Buddhist economics we regard future generations as being as important as we are, as are natural ecosystems such as an unpolluted atmosphere and biodiversity. Nature’s ecosystems require strong sustainability and must be protected. Free market economics uses weak sustainability which assumes that use of natural resources is interchangeable with the use of machine or human capital in the production process. The suffering of one person is connected to the suffering of all people. Interdependence provides us with powerful mandates. How can our governments support policies that benefit everyone in a sustainable way. Happiness is a free market economy means personal pleasure and avoidance of pain. While Buddhist economics believes happiness comes from self-realization and living a worthy and moral life. We can make a living - not at the expense of the planet. There is a difference between real happiness and a temporary happiness built around money and never ending desires. Prosperity is not equated with market goods and services as in a free market, instead prosperity is having dinner with friends and family, sitting quietly enjoying your surroundings, reading a good book. In Buddhist economics income is just one element used to measure a person’s prosperity. More important is how a person is able to use resources to create a meaningful life. When psychologists study what makes people happy they find that being kind to others makes people happier. When you do a kind deed you become happier. Happiness comes from practicing compassion. Buddhist economics focuses on activities and experiences that don’t have a price tag. Once our basic needs are satisfied we evaluate consumption in terms of how it enables us to fulfill our human potential and the quality of life. The more we enjoy life, the more the idea of using consumption becomes silly.
The Buddhist way of handling negativity is to sit mindfully and to allow thoughts to come and go without getting caught up and distracted by them. We then become more aware of the beauty of the present moment and quit worrying about the future and the past. We first must learn compassion and kindness by looking inward and connect to our true nature. Once you transform your life you can have a positive impact on others. Let thoughts flow by without any judgment.
Happiness and quality of life are related to a country’s level of income inequality, but not it it’s average income. Plato thought that both poverty and extreme wealth have negative consequences for individuals and society. Nonviolence is at the heart of Buddhist economics, which advocates using compassion rather than violence to resolve conflict.
Inequality causes people to feel less well off and a more equal distribution of income improves social welfare and status consumption is replaced by basic consumption.
In Buddhist economics we regard future generations as being as important as we are, as are natural ecosystems such as an unpolluted atmosphere and biodiversity. Nature’s ecosystems require strong sustainability and must be protected. Free market economics uses weak sustainability which assumes that use of natural resources is interchangeable with the use of machine or human capital in the production process. The suffering of one person is connected to the suffering of all people. Interdependence provides us with powerful mandates. How can our governments support policies that benefit everyone in a sustainable way. Happiness is a free market economy means personal pleasure and avoidance of pain. While Buddhist economics believes happiness comes from self-realization and living a worthy and moral life. We can make a living - not at the expense of the planet. There is a difference between real happiness and a temporary happiness built around money and never ending desires. Prosperity is not equated with market goods and services as in a free market, instead prosperity is having dinner with friends and family, sitting quietly enjoying your surroundings, reading a good book. In Buddhist economics income is just one element used to measure a person’s prosperity. More important is how a person is able to use resources to create a meaningful life. When psychologists study what makes people happy they find that being kind to others makes people happier. When you do a kind deed you become happier. Happiness comes from practicing compassion. Buddhist economics focuses on activities and experiences that don’t have a price tag. Once our basic needs are satisfied we evaluate consumption in terms of how it enables us to fulfill our human potential and the quality of life. The more we enjoy life, the more the idea of using consumption becomes silly.
The Buddhist way of handling negativity is to sit mindfully and to allow thoughts to come and go without getting caught up and distracted by them. We then become more aware of the beauty of the present moment and quit worrying about the future and the past. We first must learn compassion and kindness by looking inward and connect to our true nature. Once you transform your life you can have a positive impact on others. Let thoughts flow by without any judgment.
Happiness and quality of life are related to a country’s level of income inequality, but not it it’s average income. Plato thought that both poverty and extreme wealth have negative consequences for individuals and society. Nonviolence is at the heart of Buddhist economics, which advocates using compassion rather than violence to resolve conflict.
Inequality causes people to feel less well off and a more equal distribution of income improves social welfare and status consumption is replaced by basic consumption.
December 17, 2024
I've recently tried to correct two mistakes I made in college. The first was in assuming that economics was a) esoteric and b) only for "money people" - business school types, in other words. The second was in failing to pay significant attention in a class I took on Buddhism (my teacher once called me out on the fact that my copy of our class' sole book had clearly never been opened). Clair Brown's "Buddhist Economics" approaches both of these reputedly ineffable subjects with simple, clear, and powerful language.
Simply put: the tenants of Buddhism - the acknowledgement that we are interdependent beings, that much of our suffering is derived from our desire to gain more wealth, more possessions, more status, more experiences - are shown to be relevent when making decisions at a personal and societal level to promote happy, full lives.
Meanwhile, the book stresses that economics is not, and should not be, the sole domain of wonks and businesspeople. Commerce, the flow of resources, our value for labor - all of these things matter to everyoneregardless of socioeconomic status. Our economic decisions directly impact the quality of our lives and the health of our planet, and it's reasonable for us all to be engaged in economic decisionmaking.
"Buddhist Economics", then, applies Buddhist principles to economic policy and describes steps we can take to create a more pleasant and sustainable world. Brown discusses everything from indicies for measuring economic growth to tax structures, as well as steps we can personally take to realize this goal.
I'll also add that I appreciate the focus on climate and sustainability. I've spent the past few years obsessed with climate, sustainable development, regenerative agriculture, and any number of other "green" issues. The health of the environment is a major focus of the book, and is discussed both from a Buddhist perspective (the acknowledgement of the interconnectedness of all living things) and an economic perspective (descriptions of "natural capital", for example.)
Good read. I recommend.
Simply put: the tenants of Buddhism - the acknowledgement that we are interdependent beings, that much of our suffering is derived from our desire to gain more wealth, more possessions, more status, more experiences - are shown to be relevent when making decisions at a personal and societal level to promote happy, full lives.
Meanwhile, the book stresses that economics is not, and should not be, the sole domain of wonks and businesspeople. Commerce, the flow of resources, our value for labor - all of these things matter to everyoneregardless of socioeconomic status. Our economic decisions directly impact the quality of our lives and the health of our planet, and it's reasonable for us all to be engaged in economic decisionmaking.
"Buddhist Economics", then, applies Buddhist principles to economic policy and describes steps we can take to create a more pleasant and sustainable world. Brown discusses everything from indicies for measuring economic growth to tax structures, as well as steps we can personally take to realize this goal.
I'll also add that I appreciate the focus on climate and sustainability. I've spent the past few years obsessed with climate, sustainable development, regenerative agriculture, and any number of other "green" issues. The health of the environment is a major focus of the book, and is discussed both from a Buddhist perspective (the acknowledgement of the interconnectedness of all living things) and an economic perspective (descriptions of "natural capital", for example.)
Good read. I recommend.
March 8, 2019
I read this book as part of my education in thinking about alternatives to our current approach in implementing capitalism. The book is a quick read (if you don't get distracted by other things). After explaining what constitutes a Buddhist approach toward economics in the first 6 chapters, Chapter 7 ("Leap to Buddhist Economics") provides a laundry list of things that could be done to change the direction of our existing neoliberal implementation of capitalism towards a version of economics that improves the wellbeing of not only ourselves, but the planet as well. The US Declaration of Independence states:
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness."
Opinion: Buddhist Economics at its core is about proposing an economic system whose objective is to improve the happiness of all people. It has a scientific basis in its proposals but what is needed is a willingness and eagerness to challenge the status quo and produce conflict to achieve its ends. Western trained Buddhist converts (the author is one) as a group are peace loving people who eschew conflict. A practice of peaceful conflict through activism and civil disobedience is likely the only way forward if these principles are to be achieved. Can Western Buddhists lead a movement which requires conflict and civil disobedience? If not, others will have to use the principles outlined in the book to achieve its goals.
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness."
Opinion: Buddhist Economics at its core is about proposing an economic system whose objective is to improve the happiness of all people. It has a scientific basis in its proposals but what is needed is a willingness and eagerness to challenge the status quo and produce conflict to achieve its ends. Western trained Buddhist converts (the author is one) as a group are peace loving people who eschew conflict. A practice of peaceful conflict through activism and civil disobedience is likely the only way forward if these principles are to be achieved. Can Western Buddhists lead a movement which requires conflict and civil disobedience? If not, others will have to use the principles outlined in the book to achieve its goals.
November 29, 2021
I was hoping for more out of this book, but it was still a worthwhile read. Brown's final chapter was the most effective; in it she prescribed changes to economic practices that would help move us (primarily the U.S., but also other nations) toward a more equitable, ethical society. The principles outlined are not particularly Buddhist in nature, outside of that they explore social and environmental responsibilities that are not considered in the typical equation of free market economics. Brown spends the majority of the book presenting the case that classical economic models have left the world (and again, the United States in particular) with an immoral capitalist society that has ignored environmentalism and care of the most vulnerable in favor of output and production as measured by GDP. But the only real "argument" to be made here is on the immorality of these economic choices. Otherwise, is there any question that we (we = Americans) have sacrificed justice, equity, and environmental care for the sake of economic growth based on production and output? Anyone with even a basic knowledge of free market economics should need no convincing that the United States (and others) have historically "chosen" output over sustainability, or the opportunity of wealth for a few over the wellbeing of most; that's economic fact. It's only the morality of these choices that is in question. I would have liked to have seen more Buddhist-leaning interpretations of economic principles, or the prescriptions of the final chapter stretched throughout the book, for depth.
April 19, 2021
pretty str8forward read, advanced knowledge of buddhist principles or economic theory unnecessary
while i agree with the principles laid down in this book (environmental sustainability, wealth distribution, etc.) the buddhist connection seems fairly surface level and the roadmap to effecting meaningful change seems flimsy / overly directed toward middle-upperclass individuals (individual carbon footprint etc.) which i believe to be a harmful / misleading argument. while economic policy is discussed at a corporate and governmental level there seems to be no clear way for us to actualize the principles brown lays down
i would recommend to people who dont know much about either topic identified in the title that would be interested in what alternative capitalist structures could look like in the future in the face of looming environmental collapse :-)
while i agree with the principles laid down in this book (environmental sustainability, wealth distribution, etc.) the buddhist connection seems fairly surface level and the roadmap to effecting meaningful change seems flimsy / overly directed toward middle-upperclass individuals (individual carbon footprint etc.) which i believe to be a harmful / misleading argument. while economic policy is discussed at a corporate and governmental level there seems to be no clear way for us to actualize the principles brown lays down
i would recommend to people who dont know much about either topic identified in the title that would be interested in what alternative capitalist structures could look like in the future in the face of looming environmental collapse :-)
December 27, 2020
After reading Small is Beautiful, where Schumacher mentions Buddhist economics, I could hardly wait to get my hands on this book. Unfortunately it reads like a doctoral dissertation or scholarly journal article, and a poorly edited one at that. The one chapter I found worthwhile was Measuring Quality of Life, but even that came up short.
Brown asserts throughout that "Buddhist economics argues this," and "Buddhist economics wants that" (which makes no sense to me), but she doesn't show how Buddhist economics is any different the progressive approach that's been argued for for years. Very disappointing.
Brown asserts throughout that "Buddhist economics argues this," and "Buddhist economics wants that" (which makes no sense to me), but she doesn't show how Buddhist economics is any different the progressive approach that's been argued for for years. Very disappointing.
October 21, 2022
so, a couple other econ books I was reading referred to this one. So, decided to read it. It's interesting - pretty thin conversation with very limited support for the idea. She demishes traditional econ considering the good of the whole community because for traditional econ to destroy their customers will result in a worse long term result.
anyhow, she makes her point in the first couple chapters and then just starts repeating it. I was done with two days scheduled to finish the book. I regerted not stopping when I was done reading the last book. so, maybe I'm not being as fair but whatever.
anyhow, she makes her point in the first couple chapters and then just starts repeating it. I was done with two days scheduled to finish the book. I regerted not stopping when I was done reading the last book. so, maybe I'm not being as fair but whatever.
June 3, 2017
Before this book, I had never read a book on economics from cover to cover -- and I still haven't. I skimmed the last few chapters. The author has something important to say, but I am not one for figures and statistics. I also am rather pessimistic about how successful she could be in generating support for this concept. After all, Buddhism is not the dominant religion in the United States --Free Market Capitalism is.
July 31, 2017
I'm not sure what I expect from this book, but it didn't really work for me. It didn't tell me anything I didn't already know, or offer any new perspectives. I don't think I was the target audience. But those who would benefit most from reading it (i.e., those who lead the world on its current winner-take-all economic trajectory) probably never will.
July 22, 2020
Very readable and enjoyable
I’m sure people who read books written by economists have a wide variety of expectations. I was hoping for a general introduction to Buddhist Economics, and this book delivers. It does a good job of defining the approach, considerations, values, tools, and methods that separate Buddhist Economics from traditional western GDP-based economics.
I’m sure people who read books written by economists have a wide variety of expectations. I was hoping for a general introduction to Buddhist Economics, and this book delivers. It does a good job of defining the approach, considerations, values, tools, and methods that separate Buddhist Economics from traditional western GDP-based economics.
August 1, 2017
accessible and interesting. good perspective on alternative to capitalism
September 17, 2017
Lovely book. Fit two of my favorite topics together quite nicely.
October 19, 2017
Wasn't really covering new ground but Dr. Brown had a very insightful tone when looking at humanity, happiness, and one's relation to the earth.
June 13, 2019
Wish this had been written as a textbook with more quatitative models.
September 23, 2020
I really enjoyed the beginning of the book and have recommended it to a few people. However, the rest of the book reads like an economics textbook - which I tend to avoid since uni.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 45 reviews