









































728

Integrating Buddhist Concepts into Global Citizenship Education to 

Promote Sustainability

 Nisara Wangratanasopon
Chiang Mai University

E-mail: nisara.wang@cmu.ac.th

Abstract
This paper explores the integration of Buddhist concepts into Global 

Citizenship Education (GCED) to promote sustainability and foster interconnect-

edness. By examining Arne Naess’s deep ecology (1973), Schumacher’s Buddhist 

economics (1973), and P.A. Payutto’s writings on economics in a Buddhist way 

(2023), the study demonstrates how these philosophies offer a comprehensive 

framework for nurturing global citizens who are aware of their responsibilities 

toward both people and the planet. Naess’s deep ecology advocates the in-

trinsic value of all living beings--a paradigm shift from an anthropocentric to an 

eco-centric worldview. Central to deep ecology is its spiritual dimension, which 

resonates closely with Buddhist teachings on the interconnectedness of all life. 

Schumacher’s Buddhist Economics, outlined in his seminal work, Small Is Beau-

tiful, advocates for economic models that prioritize human well-being and en-

vironmental sustainability over mere profit and growth. His ideas of the ‘middle 

path’ and the ‘right livelihood’ challenge conventional economic practices. He 

urges a shift towards community-centered development, ethical consumption, 

and the pursuit of meaningful work. P.A. Payutto’s writings of Buddhist econom-

ics emphasize moderation, mindfulness, and ethical consumption. His teachings 

encourage a balanced approach to material wealth, advocating for mindful 

consumption, the reduction of harmful desires (lobha) and the cultivation of 

skillful desires (chanda). Integrating these Buddhist concepts into GCED not only 

nurtures global citizens who are equipped to address environmental challenges 

but also fosters a worldview rooted in interconnectedness, non-violence, ethics, 



729

and sustainability. This comprehensive approach can contribute to the develop-

ment of a more just, peaceful, and sustainable global society. 

Keywords: Global Citizen Education, Deep Ecology, Buddhist Economics 

Introduction
The UN’s Global Education First Initiative wrote that the function of 

education is not just to teach people how to read, write, and count; instead, its 

duty is to assist people in bringing justice, peace, tolerance, and inclusiveness 

to our communities—an ideal that becomes the primary goal of Global Citizen-

ship Education (GCED) to “nurture respect for all, build a sense of belonging to 

a common humanity, and help learners become responsible and active global 

citizens” (United Nations).

To achieve this, what core competencies should individuals develop 

to be “proactive” and “engage” with global issues? What values are needed 

to cope with the challenges of the 21st century? GCED aligns with Target 4.7 of 

the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDG 4 on Education)—Education 2030 

Agenda and Framework for Action—which urges international communities to 

ensure that all learners are educated with the knowledge and skills to promote 

sustainable development, such as “sustainable lifestyles, human rights, gender 

equality, promotion of a culture of peace and non-violence, global citizenship, 

and appreciation of cultural diversity and of culture’s contribution to sustainable 

development” (United Nations).

In other words, GCED is significant in our contemporary society be-

cause it is a teaching/learning approach for young learners to become global cit-

izens who live together peacefully on one planet. According to UNESCO, whose 

work aligns with the UN framework, Global Citizen Education can be developed 

within four key areas:

1.Adjusting curricula and content of lessons to provide knowledge 

about the world and the interconnected nature of contemporary challenges 



730

and threats, 2. Nurturing cognitive, social, and other skills to put the knowledge 

into practice and make it relevant to learners’ realities, 3. Instilling values that 

reflect the vision of the world and provide purpose, such as respect for diversity, 

empathy, open-mindedness, justice, and fairness for everyone, and 4. Adopting 

behaviors to act on their values and beliefs (UNESCO).

Being aware of the significance of GCED, the bachelor’s program in 

English, Faculty of Humanities, Chiang Mai University, developed ENGL424 En-

glish for the Global Citizen as a major elective course for fourth-year students, 

focusing on English skills, exposure to various texts and media, promotion of 

critical literacy, and knowledge about global citizenship and a sustainable world. 

This led to the course learning objectives, which aim at students being able to 1) 

develop integrated skills in English to communicate as a global citizen with cul-

tural creative awareness, 2) analyze various texts of global themes using critical 

literacy, and 3) discuss issues with critical, creative, and collaborative thinking. 

The course content covers key concepts of global citizenship, new paradigms for 

sustainability, communal spirit and common humanity, interaction with local, 

national, and international communities, and becoming a global citizen with 

cultural creative awareness.

The content concerning new paradigms of sustainability are the core 

concepts of the course. This unit opens possibilities for incorporating knowledge 

from various disciplines such as life science, philosophy, history, literature, etc., to 

find a paradigm shift for our sustainable world. New paradigms of sustainability are 

neither about promoting environmental awareness nor finding a scientific solution 

to world problems, but adopting the right attitude toward the way of the world 

among young learners through learning about intrinsic values. The objective of 

this study is to explore Buddhist-related concepts or knowledge with a spiritual 

dimension that can be incorporated into the course to introduce learners to intrin-

sic values necessary to become global citizens. The scope of the study includes 

philosophical ideas from Arne Naess’s Deep Ecology (1973), E.F. Schumacher’s 

Buddhist Economics (1973), and P.A. Payutto’s Economics in a Buddhist Way (2023).



731

Theoretical Background

Arne Naess’s Deep ecology

Arne Naess (1912–2009) is a Norwegian philosopher, mountaineer, 

and activist who was an important intellectual and inspirational figure within 

the environmental movement of the late twentieth century. According to Open 

Air Philosophy, Naess is Gandhian and holds on to Gandhi’s notion of active 

non-violent resistance and strongly believes that non-violent communica-

tion can solve any human conflict.    

In his essay “The Shallow and the Deep, Long-Range Ecology Move-

ments: A Summary,” published in 1973 in the journal Inquiry, Arne Næss coined 

the term “deep ecology.” 

Naess (2005) distinguished “deep ecology” from what he called “shal-

low ecology” as follows:

The shallow ecology movement is concerned with fighting against 

pollution and resource depletion. Its central objective is the health and afflu-

ence of people in the developed countries. The deep ecology movement has 

deeper concerns, which touch upon principles of diversity, complexity, autono-

my, decentralization, symbiosis, egalitarianism and classlessness. (p.1)

The term “shallow ecology” is derived from his concern over devi-

ations from the deep ecology movement. When ecologists have adopted “a 

one-sided stress” in solving the environmental issues, they concentrate on spe-

cific aspects of an environmental issue without considering broader impacts or 

industrial practices that cause it. Without a deeper ecological or systemic view 

of the root cause of the problem, individuals will opt for surface-level solutions 

that can lead to unexpected consequences. 

The core concepts of deep ecology have been elaborated in detail 

in this article. The movement recognizes organisms as knots in the biospherical 

relationship; believes in the equal right to live, not to disregard our dependence; 

contends that survival of the fittest refers to live together, not to destroy, use, 

and control; adopts an anti-class stance as opposed to any class structures; fights 



732

against pollution and resource exploitation with ethics of responsibility, rather 

than causing any ill effects; embraces complex and intricate values, rather than 

unwanted and complicated factors; and promotes self-government, not a hier-

archy in decision-making process (Naess, 2005, pp.1-3).

In 1984, during an Easter vacation in Death Valley, California, Naess 

and Sessions formulated the core concepts of deep ecology and called 

them the basic principles of deep ecology which are as follows:

1) The well-being and flourishing of human and non-human life 

on Earth have value in themselves. These values are independent of the 

usefulness of the non-human world for human purposes, 2) Richness and 

diversity of life forms contribute to the realization of these values and are 

also values in themselves, 3) Humans have no right to reduce this richness 

and diversity except to satisfy vital needs, 4) The flourishing of human life and 

cultures is compatible with a substantial decrease of the human population. 

The flourishing of non-human life requires such a decrease, 5) Present human 

interference with the non-human world is excessive, and the situation is rap-

idly worsening, 6) The dominant socio-political living situation must therefore 

end. This will affect basic economic, technological, and ideological structures. 

The resulting state of affairs will be deeply different from the present, 7) The 

ideological change is mainly that of appreciating quality (dwelling in situations 

of inherent worth) rather than adhering to an increasingly higher standard of 

living. There will be a profound awareness of the difference between big and 

great, 8) Those who subscribe to the foregoing points have an obligation di-

rectly or indirectly to participate in the attempt to implement the necessary 

changes. (p.5)

With a central theme revolving around inherent values, deep ecology is 

believed to be a concept that can lead to a radical shift in our consciousness, lead-

ing to a fundamental change that can help us cope with the environmental crisis.



733

According to Fritjof Capra, who views himself a life scientist, “deep 

ecology” is related to the term “ecological view” that he elaborates on in his 

book, The Web of Life: A Synthesis of Mind and Matter (1997), as it holds that 

humans are not separated from the environment and the world is not a cluster 

of single objects but a phenomenal network that is “interconnected and inter-

dependent”. 

Capra (1997) discusses further the differences between deep ecology 

and shallow ecology. The former is eco-centric--it accepts the intrinsic worth of 

all living beings and regards humans as only a strand in the “web of life” while 

the latter is anthropocentric or human-centered--humans are above or outside 

nature, are a source of all values, and attribute instrumental value to nature. 

Capra (1997) emphasizes that deep ecology is spiritual or religious awareness; it 

is perceived as the mode of consciousness. 

It is, therefore, not surprising that the emerging new vision of reality 

based on deep ecological awareness is consistent with the so-called ‘perennial 

philosophy’ of spiritual traditions, whether we talk about the spirituality of Chris-

tian mystics, that of Buddhists or the philosophy and cosmology underlying the 

Native American traditions. (para 5)

The concept of deep ecology has a spiritual dimension and aligns 

with the Buddhism concepts of compassion (karuna) and non-harm (ahimsa) 

towards all beings. The principle of compassionate action extends to all forms 

of life. Both deep ecology and Buddhism advocate for the interconnectedness 

of life and the respect for intrinsic value of all beings, and they opposed killing 

or suppressing. Practices such as meditation cultivate spiritual development, 

awareness, and mindfulness, which can lead to greater ecological sensitivity 

and compassion. 

By adopting deep ecology principles, students learn to develop an 

ecological view, foster a profound respect for the environment and all life forms, 

cultivate a sense of interconnectedness, and understand the urgent need for 

sustainable practices, which correspond to GCED’s objectives.



734

E.F. Schumacher’s Buddhist Economics
E.F. Schumacher (1911–1977) was a German economist and journalist 

who is best known for his proposal for human-scale, decentralized, and appro-

priate technologies, his advocacy of community-based economies, and his call 

for an end to excessive consumption. The term “Buddhist economics” was 

coined by E. F. Schumacher in 1955, when he travelled to Burma as an eco-

nomic consultant. The term was used in his essay, which was first published in 

1966 in Asia: A Handbook and republished in his influential collection Small Is 

Beautiful (1973).

According to Schumacher (1973), Buddhist way of life is marvelous 

in its rational pattern in which--small yields an extremely satisfying outcome. 

Thus, the characteristics of Buddhist economics are simplicity and non-violence 

as it applies Buddhist concepts such as middle way and detachment. It calls for 

technology that is “born of non-violence” (ahimsa) and “a relationship of man 

to nature.” He argues that technological production leading to endless con-

sumption of our limited natural resources and deprivation of future generation’s 

benefits is not a viable solution. He emphasizes that what we truly need from 

people in scientific and technological fields include: 

… methods and equipment which are cheap enough so that they are 

accessible to virtually everyone, suitable for small-scale applications, and com-

patible with human’s need for creativity. (Schumacher, 1973, p.35)

Schumacher (1973) discusses the conflicting views between modern 

economists and Buddhist economists regarding the degree of consumption. He 

elaborates that, for modern economists, “standard of living” is measured by 

what they annually consume; therefore, more consumption is better than less 

consumption. In contrast, Buddhist economists view consumption as a path to 

well-being, and thus, we should aim for higher well-being with lesser consump-

tion (Center for New Economics, 2024, para. 12).   

Schumacher emphasizes the different approaches to consumption 

between these two groups. Modern economists claim that consumption is the 



735

ultimate goal of all economic pursuits; therefore, production resources such 

as land, labor, and capital are considered the means to achieve this goal. They 

optimize their satisfaction through consumption while Buddhist economists 

enhance consumption through productive effort (Center for New Economics, 

2024, para. 13).   

In his essay of “Buddhist Economics,” published online on the Center 

for New Economics website, Schumacher asserts that, “simplicity and non-vio-

lence are closely related” (para. 14).  Schumacher considers the optimal pattern 

of consumption is higher satisfaction from lower consumption. The modest use 

of resources to satisfy one’s need enables Buddhist economists to live without 

much pressure as they adhere to the Buddhist principle of “cease to do evil; try 

to do good,” unlike the modern economists (Center for New Economics, 2024, 

para. 14).   

Self-sufficient local communities are another important trait asserted 

by Schumacher in his essay. Buddhist economists view that relying on production 

from local resources for local needs is the most rational practice of economic life 

while a lifestyle dependent on resources from afar--typically seen among mod-

ern economists--is a sign of failure (Center for New Economics, 2024, para. 15).  

The main distinction between these two is the attitude towards the 

use of renewable and non-renewable energy. Modern economists do not differ-

entiate between renewable and non-renewable energy; both are treated equally 

and quantified in unit and prices. On the contrary, Buddhist economists contend 

that we should use non-renewable energy in the case that it is necessary, with 

the utmost care and an emphasis on preserving nature. Wasteful and excessive 

exploitation is considered a violent action (Center for New Economics, 2024, 

para.18).

To conclude his essay, Schumacher criticizes modern economists that 

their way of life is not a sustainable living practice: “…a population basing its eco-

nomic life on non-renewable fuels is living parasitically…such a way of life could 

have no permanence…is an act of violence against nature...” (Center for New 



736

Economics, 2024, para. 19). Schumacher (1973) also gives an alarming message 

to Buddhist countries, not to ignore their eastern legacy of spiritual values while 

adopting the western values of materialism from modern economics. 

We can conclude that Buddhist economics has originated from Bud-

dhist concepts and practices. Schumacher views the world and see through 

our negligence and ignorance. With an economist’s eyes, he provides a lens to 

adjust our mindset using eastern philosophy of right livelihood to change our 

view on economic life. The approach incorporates Buddhist concepts such as 

non-violence and the Middle Way, inherent values that can guide students 

to foster sustainable living practices and provides them insightful thoughts 

on comprehensive economic systems. The key concept of the approach also 

resonates with the goals of GCED as it promotes economic systems that are 

both just and sustainable. 

P.A. Payutto’s Buddhist Economics
Somdet Phra Buddhaghosacariya (P.A. Payutto) (1939-present) is an 

honorary Tipitaka Scholar from Navanalanda Mahavihara, India. He teaches Bud-

dhist studies and gives lectures at various universities in Thailand and abroad. He 

has written many books and proposed his theory of Buddhist economics from 

the perspective of a Buddhist monk.

According to Ven. Payutto (2023), his theory examines the psychology 

of the human mind and the emotions that guide our economic activities. His 

Buddhist economics aims to clarify harmful practices and beneficial ones across 

the range of human activities involving the production and consumption of 

goods and services, with the hope to teach human beings to become ethically 

mature.

In his book Buddhist Economics, 15th edition, Thai version, which was 

revised and reprinted from the 7th edition, a special section was written. This 

section is the focus of this paper. From the perspective of a Buddhist, economics 

and other streams of knowledge cannot be separated--economics is part of a 



737

concerted effort to solve the problems of humanity, while Buddhist economics 

works with it to reach a common goal of sufficiency in society, the individual, and 

the environment (Payutto, 2023).

Central to Ven. Payutto’s economics is the concept of “wise con-

sumption” or “skillful desire” (Chanda) which contrasts with ”unskillful desire” 

(Lobha/Tanha), which advocates for mindful consumption that respects eco-

logical views and promotes sustainability. This concept can be incorporated into 

GCED to introduce students to learn Buddhist economics from a perspective of 

Thai Buddhist monk and to encourage students to adopt more responsible and 

ethical consumption practices. These principles can guide students in making 

conscious choices as a global citizen, contributing to both individual and collec-

tive well-being.

Integrating Buddhist Concepts into Global Citizen Education
 Effective teaching strategies for integrating ecological views from 

Arne Naess’s Deep Ecology to Schumacher’s and Payutto’s Buddhist Economics 

include collaborative learning, critical reflection, experiential learning and case 

studies. Collaborative learning environments are provided where students can 

study global initiatives and sustainability challenges together before an oral 

report. Working in groups can enhance understanding of the new paradigms as 

well as their role as a global citizen. Critical reflection encourages students to 

critically reflect on their own values and actions upon interacting with philosoph-

ical ideas. Discussions in a controlled setting, such as pinwheel, round robins 

and fishbowl, are an effective strategy to comprehend “deep ecology” together 

with classmates and reflect their opinion. Reflective essays can help students 

ask “deeper” questions, connect the theories they learn to their personal 

and professional lives. Presentations of social enterprises that adopt Buddhist 

economics is a good means to demonstrate their critical skills. Case studies 

introduce students to companies that have successfully integrated ethical and 

sustainable practices into their operations, making abstract concepts concrete, 



738

tangible, and applicable. Experiential learning from community-based projects 

and site visits complete the circuit of learning about mindful consumption and 

right livelihood. The observation of ecological view in real-world scenarios can 

enrich their learning experience.

Conclusion
The intrinsic values in the Buddhist-related concepts explored in 

this study can be integrated into global citizenship education, as they foster a 

worldview rooted in interconnectedness, non-violence, and environmental eth-

ics—an inherent value that an active citizen should possess to promote a more 

just, peaceful, and sustainable world. This corresponds to the goal of GCED. By 

incorporating an ecological view from these Buddhist-related concepts, students 

can develop an eco-centric attitude and a deeper understanding of their role 

as active citizens in global society. As global citizens who are part of the deep 

ecology movement and embrace the stance of a Buddhist economist, they will 

be better equipped to address the environmental and social challenges of our 

time with these new paradigms.

Challenges and Suggestions
First, it is essential to approach Buddhist teachings with cultural sen-

sitivity and respect for diversity. Educational programs should acknowledge the 

diverse interpretations and practices within Buddhism, as learners come from 

various backgrounds and beliefs. Second, ensuring that theoretical concepts 

can be effectively translated into practical applications is challenging. Educators 

must find ways to make abstract principles tangible for students. A dynamic 

classroom environment is necessary for learners to understand philosophical 

ideas and enhance critical thinking skills. Lastly, gaining institutional support for 

incorporating Buddhist concepts into the curriculum may require advocacy and 

demonstration of the benefits of such integration. 



739

It is suggested that, apart from incorporating ecological views, we 

can move forward to include posthuman concepts in the GCED classroom. This 

might involve considering how technology, artificial intelligence, and biological 

enhancements could fundamentally alter human identity and experience.

References
Britannica. (2024, September 5). Arne-naess.https://www.britannica.com /ex-

plore/savingearth/arne-naess

Capra, F. (1997). The web of life: A new synthesis of mind and matter. Flamingo. 

Center for New Economics. (2024, September 5). Buddhist Economics.  

https://centerforneweconomics.org/publications/buddhist-econom-

ics/

Naess, A. (1973). “The shallow and the deep, long-range ecology movement:  

A Summary.” Inquiry  16(1), 95-100.

Naess, A., & Sessions, G. (1984). “Basic principles of deep ecology.” Ecophiloso-

phy, 6, 3-5.

Payutto, P.A. (2023). Buddhist economics. (15th ed.) (in Thai – เศรษฐศาสตร์แนว

พุุทธ).

Schumacher, E.F. (1973). Small is beautiful: A study of economics as if people 

mattered.  Harper&Row.

United Nations. (2024, September 5). Global citizenship education.  h t t p s : / /

www.un.org/en/academic-impact/page/global-citizenship-education

UNESCO. (2024, September 5). What you need to know about global citizenship 

education? https://www.unesco.org/en/global-citizenship-peace-ed-

ucation/need-know


