Localist+Movements+in+a+Global+Economy.-+David+J+Hess.

LOCALIST MOVEMENTS IN A GLOBAL ECONOMY

DAVID J HESS



WIKIPEDIA PAGE

Contributors:

Emily Collins Ana Lares Dwight E. Pepper Patrick Ryan Suzanne Schuckman Sisteen M. Stripling

Introduction
The purpose of this book is to understand the underlying ideas and assumptions of localist movements in the United States. In understanding localism, this book also explores the environmental, economic and social challenges associated with localism as well as the issues that arise from current economic reform. Ultimately, positive growth in the United States relies on building connections with other reform movements.

=SUMMARY = Collapse scenarios of the twenty-first century are unfolding. The severity of climate change and the economic disasters that develop after are growing in frequency. The social effects that humans will face as a result will put countries and regions in a place of unmanageable public service. In light of this, localism can be part of the solution in which the public returns to a the local retailer, credit union, restaurant, city, government department, radio station, or nonprofit organization.

2. engage in a discussion of the book’s important points

CHAPTER 1
Global Problems and Localist Solutions

__ Liberalism and Neoliberalism __
 * Liberal policies insist that profit led corporate innovation and government sponsored regulations and incentives will bring in a new generation of clean technologies.
 * If social liberalism is integrated into new sustainable policies then the of issue global poverty may also be addressed.
 * Developing countries may achieve energy independence through sustainable policies which may yield a non-dependency of military control on natural resources.
 * The largest issues are which types of taxes, regulatory policies, government subsidies, and technology transfers are needed and which kinds of policy reforms are best.

__ Some Challenges for Mainstream Optimism __
 * The mainstream political debates are based on the the hope that the global economy can simultaneously undergo greening and continued economic growth without destroying the environment or plunging the world's poor into epidemics and starvation.
 * Five Deficiencies: 1) Sincerity and Pace of the Greening Industry, 2) Failure of Corporate Greening to Lead to a Decline in Environment Impact, 3) Continued Existence of Anti-Green Companies, 4) New Green Technology May Generate New Environmental Problems, and 5) the Definition of "Greening" Undergoes Dilution for Corporate Interests.
 * The debate is less about the technical capacity of the political and economic system to solve problems and more about its political capacity to realize its technical potential in a comprehensive and timely way.

__ Radical Alternatives __
 * The fundamental economic organization of modern society, the industrial corporation, was developed during an era when the society-environment relationship was focused on society.
 * Although the radical alternatives are politically quite marginal in the U.S., they are important for the purpose of understanding localism as political thought and action.
 * The emphasis on appropriate technology has been replaced by a more general concern with sustainability and community, and likewise the organizational focus is much more on small businesses than on employee-owned firms.
 * || **Socialism** || **Communalism** ||
 * **Environmental**
 * Problems** || Restriction of growth in environmental damage by government ownership of corporations with a dematerialization mandate || Restriction of growth in environmental damage by local, communal organization of society and use of sustainable technologies ||
 * **Social Problems** || Government ownership of large corporations to appropriate profits for redistribution to the poor and working class || Local sharing of wealth through collective decision making and ownership ||

__ Localism as a Political Ideology __
 * Any understanding of localism should take into account considerable variation.
 * The redevelopment of locally owned independent businesses can contribute to solving environmental and equality problems, localism alone cannot provide a complete solution.
 * Human life is sustainable if our use of global ecosystem resources is less than the ability of the ecosystem to replenish consumed resources, and if pollution and waste do not exceed the capacity of the global ecosystem to process them.
 * Sustainability and justice are social values that refer to general notions about they way the world should be organized.

__ Middle-Class Radicalism __
 * This means anti-corporate, but not anti-capitalism
 * Localism identifies a new political opportunity and a new possible configuration of political alliances
 * By avoiding the temptation to situate localism in a template of an existing political ideology, we are prepared to pose a different set of questions with new insights.
 * || **Mainstream and Radical Politics** || **Localism** ||
 * **Environmental Problems** || Reforming the government-economy relationship, via either more or less regulation (mainstream) or new forms of ownership (radical, communalist) || Building an alternative global economy to one based on the large industrial corporation ||
 * **Social Problems** || Distributive justice either via the state (liberal, socialist) or nonstate institutions (neoliberal, communalist) || Sovereignty in the sense of the right of self-determination of communities ||

CHAPTER 2
Economic Development and Localist Knowledge > //Localism ////can provide a hedge on economic development risk through diversification. // // Import Substitution and Economic Development Theory // //Import Substittution In American Cities//
 * Localist knowledge, lessons learned from manufacturing moving being outsourced to cheaper labor leaving void in local economy
 * High-tech clusters were thought to be good, but better alternative is high-tech green clusters
 * Two main drawbacks of high-tech clusters:
 * They create new forms of waste
 * They create a larger social-economic gap between the highly educated and the service industry workers needed to support a local economy of high-tech clusters
 * Import substitution was one method that developed, but with the following pitfalls:
 * "Buy-local" is often seen as a tariff
 * Communities become too dependent on exports for foreign exchange
 * Ruralism suffered and as displaced farmers flocked to cities, too many concentrated poor led to shantytowns
 * "Buy-local" critics argue that small businesses are inefficient and charge more, therefore, they do not deserve their share of the market
 * Localist argue that the "buy-local" tariff of higher prices only levels the playing field with box stores
 * Local businesses often sell more "hard to find" items and not just mass amounts of the same thing
 * Local businesses recirculate more money into their own community
 * ** The first wave ¨smokestack chasing¨ In United States local governments promote the nonlocal investments by offering incentives, attracting firms who will hire workers for lower salaries.
 * The second wave focused in the retention of existing firms and the incubation on new ones.
 * The third wave focused in clusters of firms and specification.
 * Technopole best suited to the world of high-tech manufacturing and information technology, where the pressures of industrial innovation require rapid growth, infusions of venture capital, and a quick transition from start-up company to an initial public stock offering or acquisition by a large corporation.
 * Localist economic development policies are considered more sustainable.
 * //Protective trade barriers for domestic industries were combined with government ownership of the manufacturing and mining industries.//
 * //Balancing the development of domestic industries with popular support for the industrial policies, leaders hoped to build up a new source of export earnings that would enable them to escape from dependence on agricultural and mineral exports as the primary source of foreign exchange.//
 * //Diversification of the economy.//
 * //Structural adjustment programs implemented and informal sector increased.//
 * //Outsourcing becomes more popular and USA firms find countries where labor unions where weaker and wages & environmental standars where lower, keeping low costs.//
 * // Project ¨Hommegrown¨ stirred up some opposition from economic development professionals, and ultimately the plan failed (1982) //
 * // Import substitutions in technological innovations generated big revenues. //
 * //¨Buy local¨campaigns are nontariff trade barriers; pro-local policies help level a playing field that includes much larger subsidies to the corporate retailers and high-tech manufacturers.//

CHAPTER 3
Can Localism Be Just and Sustainable?
 * Criticisms to the localism and arguments that they lack distributive justice:
 * Small businesses can bread and tolerate more sexism, racism, firm-size waging and nepotism
 * Local goods are packaged has higher quality and sometimes the poor can not pay the premium even if it is for a higher quality product
 * Wealthy communities content in their own world and more likely to turn their back on global issues
 * Growth of the suburbs have created geographical and political boundaries between the middle-class and the poor
 * Green consumerism has become a distinction between classes and dependable of the suburban areas.
 * Well-known ¨glass ceilings¨in the upper reaches of the management of large corporations women, ethnic minorities, and even white males without the right social background find that opportunities are closed.
 * Rebuttal to those criticisms:
 * Firm-size waging is basically negligible in retail industry (primary driver of localist movement)
 * Some high end products, but also evidence of affordable products for low income
 * Enclavism is a challenge, but dealt with by small businesses importing from like small businesses
 * Localism is non-partial and non-political, but rather metropolitan
 * Localism more sustainable, especially when you consider products like food and "food miles"
 * Local owners and workers are more concerned with environment if they live in the backyard
 * In the end, a delicate balance between localism, sustainability and social justice

CHAPTER 4
The Politics of Local Retailing







__HISTORY OF LOCALIST RETAILING VERSUS BIG BOX RETAILING__


 * 1930s- anti chain movement. Reformers convince 26 states and dozen of cities to impose taxes on chain stores.


 * Taxes can hurt chains bottom line so pushback from the stores (the chain store movement) reversed chain store tax shortly after. (No new states adopted chain store taxes after 1941)


 * Federal tax code of 1954 -tax deductions, depreciation coupled with federal investment in highway & suburbanization led to explosion in national chains (Wal-Mart target etc.). They spread through historically elusive markets including small towns, old urban neighborhoods and foreign markets.


 * Late 90s - second wave of anti-chain movement (zoning ordinances, franchise limitations)... trying to change perception of shopping to a “civic activity”


 * Institutions such as BALLE & AMIBA come about to promote and support local businesses

__CONFLICTS OF INTEREST?__

 * Localist movements can have a heavy focus on independent ownership but potential lack of emphasis on environmental or social justice goals


 * There is an ongoing conversation for nonprofit associations that wish to bridge local ownership and social and environmental responsibility. Some local businesses don’t want to be perceived as being affiliated with organizations that endorse politically sensitive campaigns that have nothing to do with creating opportunities for small businesses.


 * Local organizations hesitant to take political stands on issues that don’t directly represent the general interests of the members as local owners of independent businesses.

TRADEOFFS THAT OCCUR WITH RESPECT TO ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL JUSTICE GOALS:
AIBA (Austin Independent Business Alliance)


 * Blocked a Borders from being built-brought to a major city intersection in Austin. Opted to build a Whole Foods instead (Whole foods is based out of Austin).


 * Lobbied to prevent the construction of a Wal-Mart above the Edwards Aquifer.


 * Addressing social and environmental goals are stores like Goodwill & the Salvation army

REUSE FACILITIES-

What are they?


 * They reduce solid waste emissions by developing a market for the construction debris

Benefits?


 * When they were created they drew attention to fact that newer buildings need to be designed in ways that better facilitate dismantling.
 * Social - they provide affordable housing
 * Provision of supply materials (through donations to low-income housing organizations, worker training programs and neighborhood development progams
 * low cost material to consumers (70% below retail prices)


 * great hiring and training practices- well rounded training program.

THE MAIN CHALLENGE FOR OWNERS OF LOCALLY OWNED INDEPENDENT BUSINESSES:

 * ======to bring together the goals of environmental sustainability, local ownership, and distributive justice into a coherent whole.======

CHAPTER 5
The Challenges of Urban Agriculture



FOOD-a primary manner in which people understand localism
"Eating local"- a growing popular literature.


 * Civil society groups have a foot in sustainable agricultural communities but fare better on labor issues than some locally owned for profit farms.


 * The link between local farms and consumers through **co-ops**, and **farmers markets** is focused on middle class consumers.......


 * __**Community gardens**__, on the other hand, along side urban nonprofit farming and food security focus on urban working-class needs and the needs of the poor.

Trade off between localism and sustainability?

 * In other words there are varying degrees of convergence and divergence between sustainable food and local food. (IE. A local trap, or assumption that local food production is automatically more sustainable).


 * industrial organic agriculture-rapidly developed when farmers converted land to organic production due to positivesentiments towards future opportunities.


 * Cascadian Farms - a good example of integration of organic food production in the mainstream food industry



http://www.cascadianfarm.com/

Distribution of justice

 * Marginalized when the focus is on justice for family farms. Farmers don’t seem to voice a lot of concern for the effect that their direct sales farmers markets have on locally owned stores. They also don’t seem to be concerned with hazardous pesticide drift and waste byproducts of factory farms.

side note (Hess focuses on urban agriculture as opposed to rural)

**Community gardens**

 * Emphasized as another aspect of localism. They have [great synergy among the three types of organizational goals… localism, food, and agriculture]. They provides an "opportunity to understand better how localism functions in a civil society and the local state operated society".


 * Motivations for joining community gardens are not always centered on **food production**. (other factors-leisure, education, food production for sale, crime diversion and work training, healing and therapy, ecological restoration, etc.)

Benefits?

 * compost, avoiding synthetic pesticides and fertilizer.


 * **Social** - //Goes with the distribution of justice-// For working class and impoverished includes more issues than just food security—can lead to more cohesive safe neighborhood, better neighborhood ties. Reduced crime rate, promotion of public health


 * Hess researched community gardens in Boston Cleveland, Denver, Detroit, Philadelphia, Portland, Sacramento, San Francisco, and Seattle. He identifying urban farms that were the basis of additional inquiry into the relationship between localism and social justice.

Costs?

 * //Potential violation of distribution of justice//- **Land tenure**. They begin as vacant lots. Cities would retain the rights to the properties and reclaim the land once the value rose sufficiently.


 * Sometimes longstanding members took up more than their fair share of plots.

Devils advocate?

 * //Opposition's perspective: "//localism falls prey to devolutionary politics of neoliberalism which **shifts** **responsibility** for social welfare and environmental protection to **state and local governments** and often does so without providing adequate funding and authority."


 * Can also fall prey to the privatization and the politics of neoliberalism.

EXAMPLE: someone driving their hybrid vehicle to a co-op to buy fair trade products- you are seeing localism go from a political action to a marketplace orientation.


 * Generally the politics of food security in the US has become localized (not to be confused with localism as a movement) Partly cause by “devolution of welfare"- the state responsibilities from the federal level to the state and local levels.

NEW YORK EXAMPLE

 * New York goes bankrupt in the 70s and vacant buildings become the site of “guerilla” or squatter gardens. Led to Operation Green Thumb which offered leases for gardens.


 * In 1994, Giuliani was a big proponent of privatization of the gardens and put 114 community gardens up for public auction. Garden associations assembled citywide coalitions and filed a lawsuit against the city. The city **reframed** the issue as an opportunity to provide affordable housing to the poor. In the end the gardens were bought out by two non-profit organizations. This saved the gardens from true privatization which would have entailed real estate developers and likely destruction.


 * There have been similar battles in Boston, Sacramento, Seattle, Portland, Cleveland, Denver and Los Angela’s.


 * Boston-very developed field for community gardening.-2002 Garden Futures merged with the Boston Natural Areas Network.

Urban Farms

 * often occupies a highly specialized product niche that may include food processing.

//EXAMPLE: Zenger Urban Agricultural Park in Portland, OR. Part of land leased to local farmer, home to a youth program, & community garden for low-income immigrants. Scholarships in produce for those low-income immigrants.//

CHAPTER 6
Local Energy and the Public Sector.



Local Energy and Public Transit

 * Local owner ship in electricity and public transit differ from retail and agri-foods. There is much less of a “buy local” mantra here. Less push for a loyalist movement because primary organizations are already locally owned and controlled (In some cases it is a result of political battles that have already been fought and won).


 * The closest approximation is a push to cities with investor-owned utilities to bring the power back to the community


 * Overall, there is not a lot of literature in this area

=Wind Farms=


 * Direct correlation between local ownership and an acceptance of wind farms.
 * The most attractive source of new renewable energy.

**Opposition?**
//Grassroots opposition://


 * Negative effects on – property values, bird mortality, electricity rates, wind farms, marine sites, fishing etc.


 * Paradox? Low support for local acceptance of wind farms despite public support for renewable energy in general.


 * Local ownership can counter low public support (draws attention to the “role of local ownership in the facilitation of large-scale renewable energy projects). Also draws away heat generated by communities more concerned with land preservation.

//public versus private?//

 * Electricity providers in the US mostly publicly owned & cooperative entities and small. Investor owned utilities represent only a minority of electricity service providers in the US but located in populous cities and areas with high levels of concentrated populations

Battle between public and private sector for control

 * one opting for privatization and the other for federal control.


 * 1996 –deregulation took place. Some utility companies went bankrupt like Pacific Gas and Electricity because cost of gas of producing gas for the utilities companies began to cost more than the money they made selling it. Some gravitation toward public power organizations ensued.


 * Public power utilities companies provide twice the percentage of renewable energy as investor owned utilities. Just as with local farming, one needs to avoid the misconception that “going local” always corresponds with the greener option however.

Examples?
__Seattle City Light__


 * First “carbon neutral” electricity provider. To get it had had to continue to increase its wind power purchases. By investing in energy conservation it reduces a growth in energy consumption by its customers.


 * Keeps rates low for people of lower socio-economic status.


 * Other similar companies offered “benefits to low-income and restricted-income customers by converting to renewable energy resources with fixed long –term costs, (reduces future rate increases that ensue as gas as a resource grows more scarce.)

Municipally owned power
Benefits:

Control emissions from local power plants and shape broader transition to renewable energy sources. Use profits to develop more sustainable practices like low –income assistance programs and weatherization.

Roadblocks to municipal ownership: investor owned companies have been highly resistant.

Also publically owned power utility companies can incur significant debt, enticing the utility companies to try and solicit more consumption which is counterintuitive towards their original goals

Solutions?
Massachusetts- “**community choice” law**


 * Creating a communal single large aggregate “unit” that they power. (As a large “block” the communities get power all together at a better price.
 * As opposed to municipally owned utility companies that are apt to incur debt, community choice offers to only incur “debt associated bonds for new renewable energy construction projects that are built by the electricity service provider" (enhances local ownership).


 * Energy efficient utility**


 * **the purest form of sustainable localism.** – “substitutes imports with non-consumption-provides cost savings to the consumer over the long term"


 * revenue is contributed for energy conservation on low-income households and the small business sector.

//Conflict for both for profit and public energy companies- financial gain from energy consumption at the cost of striving toward sustainable conservation practices.//

First statewide energy efficiency utility.

 * public utility that **does not** sell energy. Provides advice & energy savings programs, and help with financing for all customers within the state. With a budget of $20 million and $20 million in participant expenditures the efforts contributed to a net savings of $40 million.


 * Other savings? --- 56.000 megawatt hours. Half the cost of purchased electricity

Public transportation
//Where sustainability and justice goals can unite.//


 * providing energy efficient and relatively inexpensive mode of transit (sustainable goals).


 * providing transportation for low-income citizens and ethnic minorities (civil rights and racism both have history with public transportation)

Sustainability efforts
//greening of public transit//


 * Combating diesel exhaust effects- Lobbying emerging from groups to shift to new fuel sources with lower emissions. (compressed natural gas for instance.)

//why?//


 * Carcinogens from fumes linked to the development of lung cancer, asthma etc.


 * regulatory policy at the federal level of government brought about Clean Air Act of 1990. A reformation for 22 cities that were “under-compliant” in regards to sustainability and clean emissions standards. Required to reach a 70% clean-fuel vehicle fleet by 2001.


 * 2000- EPA issued new standards for emissions. A challenge to meet the standards for diesel industry (logistically a design challenge for the manufacturers of the buses).


 * Clean-diesel- advantages? Up-front cost of vehicles, cost on depot.


 * **Biodiesel**? Not as effective as initially thought- **Seattle City Light**- they found better emissions benefits for older buses. Negligible for newer buses (might even void warranty on newer buses.)

Localism and the Media
 * CHAPTER 7**


 * There exist high levels of media consolidation, especially as a result of the Telecommunications Act of 1996
 * Print media was prior to WWII was 80% locally owned, post-WWII, 80% corporate media
 * Local media protects news content and programming to serve the needs of the local community
 * Public media must stay neutral to protect support from both political directions
 * Alternative national press is noncommercial, no large corporate advertisers
 * Community media is locally-owned and locally-oriented includes weekley chronicles, minority-owned radio, community radio, microbroadcasting and public tv
 * Internet promised to equalize, but there is still a great digital divide
 * Corporate media supports corporate message, not local or community cause
 * In terms of local media that survive longterm, they tend to be those that are nonprofit

Policies for an Alternative Economy
 * CHAPTER 8**


 * Localism alone is not enough to build an alternative global economy
 * Transition theory, meaning long-term approach to policing development
 * Accumulating the capital to build a local economy can be challenging
 * Most investments portfolios are global, not local. Buying local is one thing, borrowing local is a much bigger challenge
 * Some have tried local currency like BerkShares, Burlington Bread and Ithaca Hours, but they often require extreme committment by a few organizers and are not sustainable over time if those organizers tire or pull out
 * Very few options to invest tax-deferred at the local level
 * Programs like REIT (real estate investment trust) and RENEW(retirement to energy no penalty early withdrawl) offer some hope for the future for local investment
 * Upstream 21 serves as a holding company and invests in small companies committed to the environment and social justice
 * Employ ownership a good option when family-owned businesses have no heir
 * Robinson-Patman Act made it illegal for large corporations to leverage favorable treatment and discounts from suppliers, however, no real enforcement of this policy
 * Some hope in US for corporate reform through transparency and reporting of social and environmental records

Why is this book useful?
Localist Movements in a Global Economy is a highly useful asset to students, administrators, and those stakeholders in communities throughout our global community. The book presents interesting frames to view the ideas of sustainability, justice, and urban development as it is currently occurring in the United States. We feel this text is highly useful because of the all the solid examples and well researched instances of localism discussed in a variety of circumstances. Often localism is not a question of one policy, but a combination of public, private, and government policies intertwining to work towards a common goal. The examples described by Hess provide a wide range of detailed information which can be useful as a consultative resource to a public administrator, a nonprofit leader, or representatives of the business community.

We face uncertainties in tomorrow's world. All we know for sure are the issues of today. We know that our resources are depleted at an alarming rate. We know that the human growth rate is exploding exponentially. Food, water, and nutrients in soil are all being depleted and we are stuck with only ideas of how to fix the the problems at hand. David J. Hess understand these issues and confronts them head on in his book. He understands that if our global economy shuts down completely then our solutions will rely on local businesses and organizations. We will be dependent on the immediate local resources at hand. However, if we move to local resources as a precursor then we may be a step ahead of the game. Involving trending economic and political strategies with localist movements may save the United States and may even save the world.

Localist Movements in a Global Economy is also useful because of the ideas and out-of-the-box thinking it describes. Often we as individuals become engrossed in our own day to day activities and forget to reflect on our culture as a whole. One of the main points to reflect on in this text is to remember there is potential, for growth, for new incentives which will prove more efficient for our communities at a local level and ultimately at the global level. The cusp we find ourselves on as individuals in swelling pools of localism is that these pools will eventually overflow whether we are prepared or not. The it will be through diligence at the local level communities and individuals will be able to sustain themselves as the twenty first century continues to change and challenge how we use to live while motivating localists to move forward.