This book contains much that is important, interesting and true, but falls short in the attempt to integrate these things in a coherent framework.
Patel deals with issues that are fundamental to our survival and well-being on this planet: how to organize our political and economic life. His thesis is that we have let greedy markets and unresponsive governments run the show for too long. It is time to look for alternatives: autonomous community regulation and direct democracy, preferably combined. Patel gives many interesting examples how communities have been able to both govern their economic resources in a responsible way (relating to the work by Nobelprize winner Elinor Ostrom) and have set up direct democracy institutions to settle political issues (like the Zapatistas in Mexico). The book points out the (in my eyes relatively uncontroversial) fact that an unregulated market system has flaws. The most important perhaps being the existence of externalities. An externality exists if the price of a transaction does not cover all the social costs that are involved in it. One can think of buying a cheap airline tickets, which does not (fully) incorporate the environmental cost of air pollution.
Although there are valuable and interesting insights along the way, the book is only partly convincing at its central thesis. One main problem is that the book offers just community level examples. By contrast, the problems that Patel talks about (his main themes are climate change and environmental degradation) are problems that cannot be solved exclusively at a community level, but require national or global institutions. Patel does not dedicate a single word to the question of how his examples could be scaled up to such levels.
In fact, Patel hardly offers any concrete proposals, and is sometimes almost pathetically vague. After extensively blasting (on grounds that I think are wrong) cap and trade systems to emission reductions because they use a market, his alternative consist of nothing more than a vague reference to human tendencies for cooperation and fairness. Similarly, although it is a central theme of the book that markets are not able to value resources accurately, there are no clear ideas to what extent they should be replaced. In my view, history has shown that doing away with such a mechanism altogether leads to catastrophic economic failure and inefficiency. I suspect that Patel knows this, and in several places he actually admits that markets are a natural feature of human life that should and will continue to exist.
This brings me to my last criticism which relates to the book's anti-market leftwing tone. Patel often lambasts capitalism, imperialism and the market system in grand and sweeping terms. This will appeal to a relatively small leftist choir, but this hardly seems to fit his actual arguments, some of which may even sit well with libertarians (e.g. less central government involvement in local decision making). As I see it, the ideological angle of the book is one of choice, and obscures some of the beautiful common sense behind the examples that Patel lays out for us.
In sum, the content of this book is activist rather than intellectual. Patel made a good case that autonomous community regulation and direct democracy can and do exist successfully, and should be expanded. This made the book worth reading for me. How it will help us to solve the global problems that the world faces will need to wait for another volume.