Local Futures

The Economics of Happiness

Donate Now
  • Home
  • Media Room
  • Blog
  • Store
  • Contact
Menu
  • About
    • Our Mission
    • History
    • Who We Are
    • Close
  • Our Projects
    • Global to Local
      • International Alliance for Localization
        • IAL Members
        • Join the IAL
        • About being an IAL Member
        • IAL Historical Background
      • Planet Local
        • Culture
        • Eco Communities
        • Ecology
        • Health
        • Local Business & Finance
        • Local Energy
        • Local Food, Farming & Fisheries
        • Local Policy & Community Rights
        • Place-based Education
        • Sharing & Repairing
        • Planet Local Short Film Series
          • Week 1: Planet Local Short Food Film Series
          • Week 2 – Diverse Farming Systems
          • Week 3 – Local Food Webs – Exploring Systems of Distribution
          • Week 4 — Local Food Processors — AKA Making Delicious Food
      • Global to Local Webinar Series
        • All Recordings of Past Global to Local Webinars
        • Sacred Activism in a Post-Trump World
        • Talking Climate with Bill McKibben
        • People Power: Democracy and the Economy
        • Beyond Trump: The Path to Real Change
        • Bringing the Food Economy Home
        • A World Without ‘Free’ Trade: What it would look like and how to get there
        • Beyond ‘Free Trade’ – Alternatives to Corporate Rule
        • Education: Promises, Myths and Realities
        • Debt and Speculation in the Global Economy
        • A New Activism
        • Climate Change or System Change: Pathways Beyond Paris
        • Going Local
      • Local Bites Podcast
      • Roots of Change
        • Starting a Study Circle
    • Our Work in Ladakh
      • Experiences in Ladakh 2018
      • Experiences in Ladakh 2017
      • Learning from Ladakh Materials
      • Local Futures’ History in Ladakh
        • Women’s Alliance of Ladakh
      • Mindful Travel & Tourist Education Program
        • Mindful Trekking
    • The Economics of Happiness
      • The Economics of Happiness Film
        • About the Film
          • Directors’ Note
          • Media Resource / Image Gallery
          • About the Filmmakers
          • Voices from the Film
          • Awards and Film Festivals
          • Reviews
        • Host a Community Screening
        • Watch the Film Online
        • Buy the DVD
        • Translated Versions of the Film
        • Discussion Guide
      • DIY Economics of Happiness Workshop
    • Close
  • Events
    • Upcoming Events
      • Newkind Festival, Tasmania
      • Economics of Happiness Conference, Ladakh
    • Past International Conferences
      • Other Past Events
    • Calendar
        • « February 2019 » loading...
          MTWTFSS
          28
          29
          30
          31
          1
          2
          3
          4
          5
          6
          7
          8
          9
          10
          11
          12
          13
          14
          15
          16
          17
          18
          19
          20
          21
          22
          23
          24
          25
          26
          27
          28
          1
          2
          3
    • Close
  • Publications
    • Free Reading Materials
    • Local Futures Films
    • Books & Reports
    • Translations of Materials
    • Economics of Happiness Blog
    • Newsletters & Annual Reports
    • Proceedings
    • Close
  • Get Involved
    • How to donate
    • Share the Film
    • Join email list
    • Come to an Event
    • Organize a Screening
    • Volunteer or Intern
    • Close
  • Activist Tools
    • Links: Organizations for Change
    • Generate Alternatives
    • Become a Policy Changer
    • Films for Change
    • Recommended Readings
    • Independent Media Sources
    • Close
You are here: Home / Localization / To Leave or Remain: Dichotomy or Distraction?

To Leave or Remain: Dichotomy or Distraction?

October 10, 2018 by Helena Norberg-Hodge 1 Comment

Ever since the Brexit referendum was first announced, we have been bombarded by an array of starkly contradictory pronouncements – from the Leave camp’s now infamous claim that withdrawal from the EU would release £350 million a week for the NHS to the former Chancellor George Osborne’s assertion that Brexit would leave the UK “permanently poorer”. At first glance, the two sides seem to have almost nothing in common; these are polar opposites. Dig beneath the surface, however, and a fundamental similarity is revealed: both Leave and Remain are under the spell of the global market and see trade-based economic growth as the panacea for all our problems.

They are not alone. Governments worldwide – whether led by nominally left or right political leaders – are systematically encouraging more consumption, more trade, and more energy-dependent, job-destroying technology.

When we step back to see the bigger picture, it becomes apparent that the ‘free market’, far from being a solution to the crises we face, is actually a primary cause of them: it is widening the gap between rich and poor; hollowing out our democratic institutions; spreading job insecurity; exponentially expanding the number of economic and political refugees; depleting natural resources; and haunting us with the looming spectre of climate chaos.

The global economy affects even our life purpose, our wellbeing. It undermines community and individual identity while at the same time dramatically increasing competition. No wonder we are seeing a worldwide epidemic of depression and a rising incidence of teen suicide.   And yet the economy’s central role in these unfolding tragedies goes largely unnoticed. Instead, we are encouraged to blame ourselves, to believe that we are solely responsible — as individuals and as communities — for our growing misfortunes.

There is, however, real cause for hope. Around the world, ‘new economy’ movements are mushrooming as people become aware that our multiple crises are in fact linked; they are not all independently arising, but are rather the inevitable consequence of the same growth-at-any-cost economic policies. Change those policies, and a process of healing can begin – from the planetary to the personal.

Simply put, we need to move from the global towards the local: taking economic power away from vast, unaccountable corporations and banks and handing it back to communities and nation states.  Moving in this direction would have profound and widespread benefits: not least serving as a bridge between left and right, urban and rural, North and South, and yes, Leave and Remain.

Many people think that globalisation is about international collaboration and the spread of humanitarian values. But at its heart it is an economic process — one that has been central to economic planning since the end of World War II. In the name of  ‘development’, or ‘progress’, governments of every political colour have used taxes, subsidies and regulations to support the large and global at the expense of the small and local.  Today, many global businesses and banks are more powerful than nation states — to the extent that key trade treaties now include so-called ‘investor state dispute settlement’ clauses, in which governments agree that corporations can sue them if health and environmental standards threaten their profits.

Increasingly distanced from the institutions which make decisions that affect their lives, and insecure about their economic livelihoods, people around the world are becoming frustrated, angry, and disillusioned. Because the bigger picture has remained largely hidden, few people blame the de facto government of deregulated banks and corporations; instead, they point the finger of blame elsewhere – at particular political parties, at immigrants, or at residents who are ethnically or racially different.  From this perspective, the false and often hateful claims of xenophobic movements can appear reasonable, thereby giving them an unmerited foothold in the political arena.

In order to reverse these disturbing political trends, we need to move beyond left /right, Brexit / Remain thinking, and build a movement for economic change. Instead of allowing businesses to shape our future, we need to shrink their power and mobility – to insist that they be registered in a particular place and accountable to democratically determined rules. In other words, business needs to be ‘place-based’, or ‘localised’.

Essentially, localisation is about reducing the scale of economic activity, about bringing the economy home. That doesn’t mean pulling up the drawbridge and retreating into isolationism. Nor does it mean an end to trade, even international trade. But it does mean a fundamental shift of emphasis: away from the current obsession with exports towards a more diversified economy geared instead to local needs. Shockingly, countries across the world today routinely import and export identical products in almost identical quantities: butter in, butter out; wheat in, wheat out; industrial waste in, industrial waste out.  In an era of human-induced climate chaos, the subsidies and other supports that purport to make such practices ‘efficient’ and ‘profitable’ are little short of immoral, and need to be reversed.

The ecological argument for localisation is unassailable. But its logic doesn’t stop there. Among other things, localisation allows us to live more ethically as citizens and consumers.  In the global economy, it’s as though our arms have grown so long that we can no longer see what our hands are doing.  By contrast, when the economy operates on a smaller scale, everything is necessarily more transparent.  We can see if the apples we are buying from the neighbouring farm are being sprayed with pesticides; we can see if workers’ rights are being abused.

However, the huge corporations that profit from the current system wield immense power, and will use that power to prevent fundamental change. So how can a global-to-local shift happen? As the Brexit negotiations have made clear, it can be exceedingly difficult for a single country to disentangle itself from the established global economic order. The key is to pressure governments to join a ‘breakaway’ strategy, in which a group of nations collaborate to forge new trade treaties that limit the import of goods that could be produced locally. This collaborative approach would allow countries to protect jobs and local resources from the disruptive impact of international finance and transnational corporations.

At the grassroots, we can already catch glimpses of localisation in action.  Across the world, literally millions of initiatives are springing up—often in isolation one from another, but sharing the same underlying principles. The most important of these initiatives relate to agriculture—important since food is the only thing humans produce that we all require several times a day.  From farmers’ markets to community supported agriculture, from ‘edible schoolyards’ to permaculture, a local food movement is sweeping the planet.

We are also seeing the emergence of small business alliances, local banking and investment programmes and local energy schemes.  The Transition Network has captured the imagination of people in both the global North and South.  So too the Global Ecovillage network. Thousands of communities are attempting to lower their carbon footprints.

Local economies not only help to ensure greater job security, they also provide the framework needed to support strong communities, which in turn support the health of the individual – psychologically and physically. I call it ‘the economics of happiness’.

Ultimately, localisation renews our connections — to one another and to the living world around us. It satisfies our deep longing for purpose, belonging and a secure future for ourselves and our children.

Leave/Remain was always a false dichotomy.  The real choice is between a corporate economic system that systematically destroys livelihoods and undermines the environment and, on the other hand, a form of economic decentralisation that actively encourages both community and ecological renewal.  The British people weren’t offered that choice in the referendum. But it’s on offer out there in the real world.

 

To repost this or any other Local Futures blog post, please contact [email protected]

Share this:

  • Email
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn

Related

Why Growth Can’t be Green
How Circular is the Circular Economy?

Filed Under: Economic Growth and Degrowth, Free Trade and Globalization, Localization, New economy Tagged With: climate change, community, consumerism, corporate control, democracy, economic growth, globalization, localization, new economy, trade agreements, well-being

Author: Helena Norberg-Hodge

Helena Norberg-Hodge is founder and director of Local Futures/ISEC. A pioneer of the “new economy” movement, she has been promoting an economics of personal, social and ecological well-being for nearly 40 years. She is the producer and co-director of the award-winning documentary The Economics of Happiness, and is the author of Ancient Futures: Learning from Ladakh. She was honored with the Right Livelihood Award for her groundbreaking work in Ladakh, and received the 2012 Goi Peace Prize for contributing to “the revitalization of cultural and biological diversity, and the strengthening of local communities and economies worldwide.”

Comments

  1. PHIL FOGGITT says

    October 10, 2018 at 5:30 am

    I tend to agree that Brexit has been a huge distraction when we have such huge issues such as global warming to deal with. But Brexit could also have been an opportunity to consider what the EU has come to symbolise- and one thing that comes to mind is remoteness and its tendency to distance people from decision-making. Unfortunately British people were subjected by the media to a simplistic black/white version of reality which then opportunistic politicians exploited very effectively. Once out of the EU perhaps we can have meaningful discussions about local decision-making and how this might be compatible with a global vision without the dead weight of centralising bureaucracy.

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Subscribe to the Economics of Happiness Blog

Sign up for our email updates

Latest Blogs

  • Why the “Anthropocene” is not “Climate Change”

    February 6, 2019No Comments
  • Tosepan: Resistance and Renewal in Mexico

    January 26, 2019No Comments
  • Education, jobs and capitalism

    January 15, 20192 Comments
  • Old Mother Forest

    January 1, 20191 Comment
  • Groomed to Consume

    December 18, 20187 Comments
  • Degrowth: A Call for Radical Abundance

    December 11, 20187 Comments

Blog posts by Category

  • Climate Change (21)
  • Community (15)
  • Consumerism (1)
  • Development (12)
  • Economic Growth and Degrowth (22)
  • Economics of Happiness Conferences (4)
  • Education (6)
  • Environment (10)
  • Food and Farming (29)
  • Free Trade and Globalization (25)
  • Health (7)
  • Indigenous worldview (9)
  • Inner transformation (10)
  • Livelihoods and jobs (22)
  • Local energy (5)
  • Local finance (3)
  • Localization (31)
  • New economy (16)
  • Resistance and Renewal (14)
  • Technology (16)
  • The Economics of Happiness (22)
  • About
  • Contact
  • The Economics of Happiness
  • Take Action

Sign up for our email updates

Donate Now

International Society for Ecology and Culture © Copyright 2019 | site by digiflip
loading Cancel
Post was not sent - check your email addresses!
Email check failed, please try again
Sorry, your blog cannot share posts by email.