Download As PDF

I received the following comment in relation to one of my pieces:

Cities are the opposite of localism and cannot be made “local”. They are concentrations of the fruits of worldwide industrialism and cannot stand on their own. In the rich world, over 80% of people live in cities. They will do everything they can to keep them liveable as long as possible and when cities are no longer liveable they will die.

I believe that localism will apply to cities, but in a different way from the countryside.

Localism is not a choice. It will happen as the economy contracts. Supply chains will shorten. Imports will fall. The industrial systems that feed and support cities will become less reliable.

In villages, localism will feel positive. Small shops and services will return. Food will be grown nearby. People will rely more on their neighbours and less on distant suppliers. Communities will adapt.

In cities, the change will be harder. Large populations depend on constant supplies. When these fail, people will have to reorganise how they live. We are likely to see:

• Growing pressure on food, water, and energy.
• New sharing and trading networks within neighbourhoods.
• More urban farming, using gardens, rooftops, and open spaces.
• As a first step to moving out some will commute out to farming and food related activities out-of-town..

Some cities will manage the transition. Others may struggle and decline. Localism in cities will not mean independence but survival through smaller, self-supporting communities.

The countryside and the city will move in the same direction but at different speeds. Rural areas will regain more control and resilience. Urban areas will face harder choices. Both will be shaped by the same shift – from a global industrial economy to smaller, place-based systems.

---