Memorandum submitted by the Centre for
Alternative Technology (CAT)
THINK LOCAL:
A SOLUTION WE
CAN EAT
By the Centre for Alternative Technology (CAT)1.
1. The drivers
1.1 CAT's "Think Local" Initiative
was the result of several key drivers:
— crisis in agriculture resulting from
widespread foot and mouth disease;
— need for stability in the local economy;
— need to preserve local employment;
— meeting Royal Commission on Environment
and Pollution (RECP) climate change targets;
— impending reforms of CAP;
— need to internalise environmental,
social and economic externalities ie reveal the true costs of
our activities.
1.2 Although many organisations are doing
good work, this tends to be isolated within sectors ie Local Food
Links. The work of CAT's visitor complex over the past 25 years
has been multi-disciplinary, including human, biological and energy
technologies.2
2. The economic background
2.1 Anyone watching the news recently will
have seen pictures of despondent men and women pouring out of
factory gates as the company they have been working for has just
announced closure.
The news will usually focus on the devastation
this will cause to the local community, the disappointment that
Government officials could not convince the company to stay, and
the knock-on effects the closure will have on other local businesses.
Do we really have to be this fragile?
2.2 Ironically, the next news item could
easily be a politician or business leader asking us to grasp the
new opportunities within the globalisation of world markets. What
is rarely mentioned is that along with the opportunities of globalisation
comes an inherent instability. If a large company can simply close
and move to a lower wage economy why shouldn't it? If another
company can move away to an area with lower health and safety
standards for their work force, why not? This is the reality of
the "global free-market". Indeed, why are we so surprised
that a small town, over-dependent on one large employer, is suddenly
ruined by its loss?
3. What's the solution?
3.1 The solution to this problem is not
so far away; in fact it is literally on our doorstep. Re-localisation
is a complementary alternative to globalisation which provides
us with the means to choose which aspects of our lives we will
source locally and which parts we feel confident to trust to multi-national
commerce. Re-localisation is both a protection from the fragility
of globalisation and an opportunity to create robust and diverse
local economies.
3.2 In practice, it means raising the profile
of local produce with consumers; getting local farmers to work
with local shops to supply more locally produced food; getting
a community wind power scheme to include turbine maintenance by
the local garage mechanic; getting local engineering firms to
look into the creation of a sideline in manufacturing components
used by other local companies; or getting domestic organic wastes
turned into valuable compost for the garden centre. In short,
re-localisation is about making your local economy larger, more
robust and more diverse—truly sustainable development.
4. Too much complexity
4.1 Our food, clothes, shelter, drink, warmth
and power are now delivered to us by a complex web of interactions
between a great many very complex and fragile systems—it's
only when it goes wrong that we even notice how complex it all
has become. As management criteria go, resilience or robustness
hardly get a look in alongside such titans as "efficiency",
just in time delivery, best value and optimum returns on investment.
We have already seen some minor breakdowns: the fuel crisis, BSE,
salmonella, computer viruses, freak weather, Railtrack, and now
we have the foot and mouth disease outbreak. Imagine how today's
vital supply systems might cope with something more serious, such
as a runaway greenhouse effect situation. We may find that we
have lost the infrastructure, skills and knowledge base to provide
for ourselves in any meaningful way.
4.2 Without realising it, we have created
a house of cards, built on foundations of complexity. Worse still,
we treat it as if it were a fortress of stone. Clearly, our local
economies need to be stronger for today's problems as well as
tomorrow's.
(See paragraph 9 for an example of the complexity
we can face each day.)
5. Taking action
5.1 In more localised systems however—such
as those that Britain had in the past or those in less over-developed
parts of the world—there is much more inherent resilience
and robustness. Meeting local needs with local resources is an
inherently more stable system because:
— things do not travel so far, so they
need less preservatives and packing;
— they are based around the use of
locally available materials;
— they are made with local skills;
— the people involved know each other;
— they more fully understand the technologies
they use;
— the systems are not driven excessively
hard to compete;
— they do not require large amounts
of imported energy.
5.2 It is not necessary to re-localise everything
at once, nor is it necessary for re-localised alternatives to
become the only option. Globalised and localised systems can exist
side by side. Some items you may want to buy locally, on other
days you may not. The important thing is that the local options
are retained or re-introduced. Economic diversity, like biodiversity,
produces resilience in the systems. Looking today at any high
street in the UK, we see the dominance of large retailers. If
we want to complement their presence, we need to take action to
encourage a diversity of smaller independent retail outlets supplying
local produce. This diversity increases our economic strength.
6. Key outcomes of re-localisation
6.1 Changes in the way we produce and supply
food have brought considerable costs to the environment and to
human health. Although it is recognised that there are also positive
side effects of modern agriculture, the "de-localisation"
of food production does incur a great many additional costs which
are external to conventional agricultural economics, and are not
paid by producer or consumer. Re-localising production into "foodshed"
areas can be a powerful tool in decreasing the negative costs
and increasing the positive benefits.
(a) Decrease negative externalities:
Shortening the food chain from production to
consumption:
— reducing the spread of infectious
diseases in agriculture sector;
— reducing "food miles"4
or negative transport externalities (required to meet the climate
change targets suggested by the Royal Commission on Environmental
Pollution5).
(b) Increase the positive externalities:
Increasing resilience and stability in local
economies:
— supports economic diversity of local
supply chains;
— increased home and urban food production
"Allotments"6.
Increased sense of community:
— re-vitalising urban-rural or producer-consumer
dialogues;
— increased sense of citizenship;
— educational—allowing a greater
understanding of supply chains amongst schools etc.
(See paragraph 10 for further analysis of the
benefits of localisation.)
7. Conclusion
7.1 Within any regional economy there is
a sector which is driven through meeting local needs with local
resources. Although it may no longer be the majority share, this
sector is rapidly becoming increasingly significant in a globalised
world, as it is by far the most resilient. By its very nature
it cannot be transferred to new areas where labour is cheaper
or where the next round of subsidies is being unveiled. Of course,
there are some items such as spares for the car, computer hardware
and software, or hi-fi equipment, which it is quite acceptable
to source from trans-national markets. For other things, particularly
essential short durability items, we as consumers may prefer to
re-localise our supply claims. Some things could be tightly re-localised
to the town or surrounding area, other things could be sourced
from the region or county. We must not forget that collectively
we are in control—we just need to re-explore our options.
8. Recommendations
8.1 Suggestions for National Re-localisation
Initiatives include:
— research to optimise mix of global
knowledge based economy/re-localised infrastructure;
— funded research into best practice
in a variety of sectors in UK, EU and beyond;
— pilot projects in a range of differing
locations across the UK to produce data on costs/benefits; and
— use of ICT in re-localising supply
chains.
9. Consider a typical day:
We wake up in a house built by people we don't
know with materials of unknown origin. It is heated by fuel manufactured
and brought to us in ways we do not know, by a utility company
now owned in America. We have no fuel reserves beyond a couple
of weeks. The house is located in an area where we know few neighbours
and is mostly owned by a German bank. We breakfast on food grown
we know not where, by farmers we'll never know, using methods
we never see and cooked we know not where. Our food is brought
from shops that would be empty in three days without fuel. We
don't know where our waste travels to, to be treated in ways we
do not know, by people we will never meet. We pay for it all by
banking systems over which we have no control. We have become
trustingly dependent for our continued existence on increasingly
remote suppliers through ever expanding systems who know us not,
and would probably not care about us even if they did.
10. Some ideas on what to re-localise and
why:
Prioritise the essentials—short life consumables
where loss of supply will cause direct hardship. This will help
in:
— preserving or re-introducing economic
diversity;
— reducing the complexity of the production
system involved;
— reducing fossil fuel emissions;
— increasing local employment;
— adding value to goods and services;
— keeping money circulating locally;
— reducing consumer concerns; and
— preserving or re-introducing key
skills bases within the local area.
11. Food and Agriculture: a recipe for recovery?
Our farming industry is important—economically,
environmentally and socially. It's hard to believe the run of
bad luck currently being dealt to the agriculture sector. First
it was salmonella and eggs, then it was chickens, then came BSE
followed closely by diminishing fish stocks, and now we're back
to foot-and-mouth disease. This seems to be such a strikingly
significant run of misfortune that perhaps there's more to it
than just luck.
In agriculture, globalisation has brought about
incredible increases in complexity over the past few decades.
On the supply side, our farmers have been encouraged to borrow
money to buy new plant and machinery to meet production targets
or increase yields. On the demand side, large chains of out of
town supermarkets have had the economies of scale to drive local
traders out of business, thus removing supply chains for local
produce. Many of these changes are not introduced for the benefit
of the farmer or the consumer; they are made for the benefit and
profitability of the trans-national distribution chains and supermarkets.
All these increases in complexity to the food chain, which itself
is rooted in an industry that by its primary nature is already
biologically complex, must make us wonder about what control we
have left.
We may think that the food we buy today is basically
much the same as the food we bought in the 1970s. Nothing could
be further from the truth—the food, and more importantly,
the systems that provide it have changed almost beyond recognition.
Unsurprisingly, the hidden costs of the changes to food production
and distribution are not fully internalised, eg greenhouse gas
emissions, job losses, and public health scares. Vegetables that
could be grown locally are flown thousands of miles to reach our
dinner plates. Millions of animals are now moved vast distances,
held briefly in collective holding centres, then quickly moved
on to somewhere else. What we buy might be part of an English
sheep, slaughtered in Belgium, processed in France, part sent
to Canada and part sent to the UK. Although meat is an important
export market, if animals are fed on local feed, slaughtered locally,
and processed locally, not only do we significantly reduce the
risk of damaging problems across the industry, we also keep an
increased share of the value of the product in our local economy.
Re-localisation—even in this sector alone—would benefit
farmers, consumers, the economy and the environment.
25 April 2001
1 About the Centre for Alternative Technology
The Centre was founded in the early 1970s as
a living community dedicated to testing out the emerging alternative
technologies, in order to find out which ones worked and which
ones didn't. Opening to visitors in 1975, CAT set out to demonstrate
and prove, by a positive living example, new technologies which
would provide practical solutions to the problems that are now
worrying the world's ecologists.
CAT now acts as a bridge between those who are
seeking to explore a more ecological way of living and the store
of practical hands-on experience we have gained by working with
sustainable technologies for over 25 years.
We aim to inspire, inform and enable society
to move towards a sustainable future. Many of our ideas, previously
thought radical, are now commonly accepted. We continue to challenge
conventional wisdom with forward looking concepts. For more details
visit www.cat.org.uk.
2 Recent working examples of CAT's integrated
localisation include: a community composting scheme; a policy
of prioritising local and organic produce in our on-site restaurant
and café in Machynlleth; facilitating a community wind
power scheme in Pantperthog; the construction of AtEIC (CAT's
autonomous environmental information centre) using local materials,
labour and designed to generate its own power needs founding membership
of the Dyfi Eco Valley Partnership; and informing visitors to
CAT of the integrated nature of the choices they make as consumers
as part of our "Think Local" Initiative. CAT, is currently
seeking funds to further research initiatives linking re-localisation
of food, finance, energy, policing, public transport, housing
provision, building materials (recycled and new), sewage/waste
treatment, community support services, energy efficiency services,
credit provisions.
3 Foodsheds are defined as "self-reliant,
locally or regionally based food system comprised of diversified
farms using sustainable practices to supply fresher, more nutritious
foodstuffs to small scale consumers to whom producers are linked
by the bonds of community as well as economy" (Prof Jules
Pretty in Resurgence April 2001).
4 Food miles example: Welsh Lamb travelled
750 miles to end up 50 miles from original source—(Week
in Week out, BBC Wales March 2001).
5 Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution
report Energy—The Changing Climate (Stationery Office Cm
4749) suggests 60 per cent reduction on current emissions by 2050.
6 Allotments: There are 300,000 allotments
in the UK covering 12,000 hectares yielding 215,000 tonnes of
fresh produce annually contributing £561 million in value
to household comsumption. (Prof Jules Pretty in Resurgence
April 2001).
| 
