A Model of a Sharing Society based on the Sufficiency Economy Philosophy
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
The research aimed to (1) analyze the concepts and principles of the Sufficiency Economy Philosophy and the concept of a sharing society from a philosophical perspective, and (2) synthesize a model of a sharing society based on the Sufficiency Economy Philosophy. The study employed philosophical research methodologies, including Socratic dialectics, hermeneutic analysis, and reflexive analysis. The findings revealed that the two concepts were aligned in terms of development that emphasized balance and supportive social relationships, and could be integrated into a holistic conceptual framework. The synthesized model was characterized as a dynamic, process-oriented model grounded in the principles of moderation, reasonableness, and self-immunity, with “sharing” functioning as the central mechanism. The model consisted of four key components: (1) inner development, (2) collective learning, (3) participation, and (4) supportive relationships. These components were systematically interconnected and contributed to balanced development across economic, social, and mental dimensions. The new knowledge derived from this study was the formulation of a sharing society model based on the Sufficiency Economy Philosophy as a conceptual framework for sustainable social development.
Downloads
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
References
เกษม วัฒนชัย. (2550). ปรัชญาของเศรษฐกิจพอเพียงกับการพัฒนาที่ยั่งยืน. กรุงเทพฯ: สำนักพิมพ์แห่งจุฬาลงกรณ์มหาวิทยาลัย.
พระธรรมปิฎก (ป.อ. ปยุตฺโต). (2546). เศรษฐศาสตร์แนวพุทธ. กรุงเทพฯ: มูลนิธิพุทธธรรม.
สำนักงานคณะกรรมการพัฒนาการเศรษฐกิจและสังคมแห่งชาติ. (2544). ปรัชญาของเศรษฐกิจพอเพียง. กรุงเทพฯ: สำนักงานคณะกรรมการพัฒนาการเศรษฐกิจและสังคมแห่งชาติ.
สำนักงานสภาพัฒนาการเศรษฐกิจและสังคมแห่งชาติ. (2564). รายงานภาวะสังคมไทย. กรุงเทพฯ: สำนักงานสภาพัฒนาการเศรษฐกิจและสังคมแห่งชาติ.
Belk, R. (2014). You are what you can access: Sharing and collaborative consumption online. Journal of Business Research, 67(8): 1595–1600.
Botsman, R., & Rogers, R. (2010). What’s mine is yours: The rise of collaborative consumption. New York: HarperCollins.
Chambers, R. (1997). Whose reality counts? Putting the first last. London: Intermediate Technology Publications.
Fukuyama, F. (1995). Trust: The social virtues and the creation of prosperity. New York, NY: Free Press.
Lessig, L. (2008). Remix: Making art and commerce thrive in the hybrid economy. New York, NY: Penguin Press.
Nussbaum, M.C. (2011). Creating capabilities: The human development approach. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the commons: The evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Piketty, T. (2014). Capital in the twenty-first century. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Putnam, R.D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.
Rifkin, J. (2014). The zero marginal cost society: The internet of things, the collaborative commons, and the eclipse of capitalism. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Schumacher, E.F. (1973). Small is beautiful: Economics as if people mattered. London: Blond & Briggs.
Sen, A. (1999). Development as freedom. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.
Stiglitz, J.E., Sen, A., & Fitoussi, J.P. (2009). Report by the Commission on the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress. Paris: Commission on the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress.
United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). (2010). Human development report 2010: The real wealth of nations: Pathways to human development. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Wilkinson, R., & Pickett, K. (2009). The spirit level: Why more equal societies almost always do better. London: Allen Lane.
World Bank. (2020). Thailand economic monitor: Inequality, opportunity, and human capital. Washington, DC: World Bank.
Zsolnai, L. (2007). Buddhist economics. Society and Economy, 29(2): 145–153.
