The case for local economic protectionism

If you've heard of it at all, you've probably heard of the term 'exfiltration' in a military context: the secretive removal of soldiers from hostile territory. But writers such as Cory Doctorow use the term to also talk about the exfiltration of data and capital. It's the latter I want to focus on in this short post, the kind of exfiltration that quietly drains local economies, with local taxes and investment which goes into  councils, charities, schools, hospitals, and other community organisations, being siphoned off by national and multi-national businesses.

When local businesses secure contracts from the council or local charities, it creates a positive ripple effect throughout the community. These companies, cooperatives, and non-profits are more likely to hire locally, contribute to local taxes, and support other local organisations. This translates to more jobs, increased spending in local shops, and a stronger overall local economy. It also provides local businesses with an opportunity to showcase their skills and expertise, which in turn can attract more people to start their own businesses in the area. It's a virtuous circle, boosting the local economy.

Some might argue that prioritising local businesses could lead to suboptimal deals or a lack of specialised skills. It's definitely a form of soft protectionism. However, smaller businesses often exhibit real flexibility and creativity in finding solutions. They can sometimes deliver projects for less, have better contextual knowledge, and have a vested interest in building a strong local reputation.

So the next time you're in a position of influence and involved in a decision about procurement or hiring, think local. Consider the broader impact and the wider holistic, systemic picture. By choosing a local business, you contribute to the vitality of your community, create jobs for your neighbours, and help create a more sustainable future for everyone.

Image: Sarah Agnew