The Tortoise and the Hare: the story retold

By Renton de Alwis

Written in November 2010, this column examined the need for an alternative model for sustainable human development. Presented for your critical thought ....

At a recent conference held in Bangkok, on how Thailand can meet global challenges in progressing its economy, a speaker referred to the story we all learnt as kids of the tortoise and the hare and the race they took on to reach the goal post. Adopted from Aesop’s fables, it was one of the first to be learnt by all children, as a lesson for life. It established the virtue of being steady and solid on one’s progress. The hare was portrayed as being hasty, unsteady and complacent, in spite of its ability to run faster than the tortoise.

Innovation and courage

The position the speaker took is that the story and the virtues it presented were no longer valid in today’s world. “Not only will today’s hare never take a nap, but it will dig holes along the way to trap the tortoise. The only way a tortoise today, can win that race would be, if he was innovative and bold to climb a hill and roll down towards the goal post” he said. The obvious reference was of the need emerging countries had to be innovative and different. “Realising and understanding the advantages of one’s strengths” was the key. The tortoise had to realise that it had a hard shell that can withstand the impact of the fall and take advantage of it to win the race in a novel way. “But what is most important was to have the courage to jump, even when the outcome was not clearly known” he added.

Reconciliation needs

This indeed is an interesting way to strategise the skills and drive needed to get ahead in today’s world. And more interesting is the backdrop in which these remarks were made.

Thailand is a country that was shaken up by recent events where hearts and minds need to be reconciled, much like we have in Sri Lanka in the aftermath of our over twenty five years of the terrorist saga. This has happened in spite of that country having achieved unprecedented economic growth in the past few decades, sitting right at the epicentre of a growth region, among the Mekong dragons. Yet, there is unease and concerns about disparities in income distribution, access to resources and opportunities. Centralisation of power with the rich elite and marginalisation of the poor is also cited as a possible cause for the unrest, while others venture to call it pure political game-play.

Sufficiency Economy

Right now, things have returned to normal, and attempts are made to bring the rival groups together, it is stated. Another speaker referring to the socio-economic environment commented on the economic philosophy and model, The King of Thailand proposed some time ago for the country of the ‘Sufficiency Economy’. Based on principles of the Buddhist way of living, The King recommended that the Thai nation seeks to adopt a way of life, where the motive for gaining economic prosperity would not be satisfaction of greed. The King advocated “taking the middle path in life as the optimal route for personal conduct at all levels: individuals, families and communities. It counsels moderation, self-reliance, honesty and integrity, while exercising knowledge with prudence”.

Following the principles of ‘Sufficiency Economy’ posits that “an individual should be able to lead a reasonably comfortable life without excess or overindulgence in luxury. That is, if extravagance brings happiness it is permissible only as long as it is within the means of the individual” he said. His Majesty stated in a Royal Speech on December 4, 1998, “If one is moderate in one’s desires, one will have less craving. If one has less craving, one will take less advantage of others. If all nations hold this concept of moderation, without being extreme or insatiable in one’s desire, the world will be a happier place”. The speaker at the conference referred to “influences that have made Thailand’s efforts at adopting this philosophy bear lesser fruit than they should have” pointing to influence of the dominant western economic, social and business culture.

Moderation and resilience

Several Thai scholars and economists have attempted to present the ‘Sufficiency Economy’ model to fit the currently dominant global economic and social environment. In a paper developed on this aspect Medhi Krongkaew, professor of economics at the National Institute of Development Administration (NIDA) in Thailand states that “while certainly complementary to the nation’s Buddhist heritage, ‘Sufficiency Economy’ espouses a secular philosophy. It does not reject either economic theory or economic progress. Neither does it denounce globalization, as some have tried to interpret. Instead, the middle path in the king’s philosophy speaks of a lifestyle governed by moderation and resilience”.

He further adds that “it is possible to see ‘Sufficiency Economy’ as consisting of two frameworks. One is the inevitability of facing the globalised world in which economic efficiency and competition are the rules of the game; the other is the need for economic security and the capacity to protect oneself from external shock and instability. Thinking within the first framework—the basic tenet of mainstream economics—we must realise the opportunity costs involved in every decision we make. We gain from specialization and division of labor because the opportunity costs of doing everything by ourselves is much higher. The laws of comparative advantage and gains from trade are at work in today’s world. But it would be foolish to pursue all-out specialization without basic security, especially in food, shelter, and clothing. This is where the framework of the ‘Sufficiency Economy’ comes in. This concerns the basic capacity of the people of a country to look after themselves. The optimization principle applies when we seek to answer the question: How much of our time and energy should be devoted to the first and second frameworks, respectively? In other words, how much resources should be allocated to producing for trade based on comparative advantage principle, and how much for basic security? The best mix between the two allocations would represent the optimal state of affairs, both in mainstream and Sufficiency Economics”.

Whole new game

The tortoise in this model as in the story retold, will seek to win not necessarily by trying to outdo the hare at its own game, but by reinventing the game in total. It will not be a game of winner takes all. It will be a game of moderation, self-sufficiency, efficiency and of self-fulfillment through caring for others as much as the caring that goes for one-self. A model that Sri Lanka, as much as Thailand can benefit from and move on to being winning tortoises with all of its shell well intact and protected.