Shopping locally isn’t as common in Assiniboia and other communities as it might’ve been in the early 1900s. When hunting trails transformed into highways and cars replaced horse carts, people in rural Saskatchewan no longer had to rely on their local shops to purchase goods and services as much as they had in a previous era. In the age of the vehicle, there are sound reasons to go driving off to Moose Jaw, Regina or elsewhere now and then, because smaller or longer trips away from a person’s doorstep can be a form of self-therapy. Yet, shoppers have an obligation to support local businesses, especially if they want their communities to continue flourishing. And there’s still more reasons to prefer local shopping over urban-derived commerce.
Writer Lori Starling has encouraged others to consider shopping at farmer’s markets, because these venues can provide greener options for consumers. In an article for One Green Planet, Starling listed the strengths of farmers markets from an environmental perspective. Farmers markets, according to Starling, can provide fresher produce than urban grocery stores like Wal-Mart, because the food in these markets usually originates from a specific farmer, meaning the produce at the stalls could’ve been picked within a week. Plus, the transportation route from the farmer’s field to the consumer’s table is shortened by several days when consumers buy produce, meats and other goods at farmer’s markets. Also, Stirling further noted there’s usually a lack of excess plastic involved whenever shoppers buy wares directly from farmers. Finally, adding to Stirling’s argument – local shopping, whether at a farmer’s market or not, reduces an individual’s carbon footprint.
Shopping locally also makes good economic sense and strengthens inter-community connectivity. The development of closer associations between consumers and business owners benefits those who shop locally. John Rampton, contributor for Entrepreneur, talked of the symbiotic relationships between local business owners that can develop whenever they patronize each other’s establishments. Also, local businesses strive to build and maintain closer trade relationships within a community. Yet big box stores, as Rampton observed, frequently receive their shipments from corporate warehouses, instead of sourcing goods from local suppliers. And although big box stores provide employment opportunities, they aren’t as inclined to be involved with the communities they’re established in.
Rampton’s strongest argument for buying local is cash related. A great percentage of spent dollars and cents remain in the community after they’ve been traded for goods and services. Rampton talked of a study conducted in Chicago to prove his point. The collected data from the research conducted in the Windy City demonstrated that with every $100 spent at a local business, $68 remained in the region.
The Institute for Local Self-Reliance developed another report further backing Rampton’s theory, confirming local spending’s integral role in the economics of America’s rural areas. The researchers said shopping locally produced what they referred to as the “local multiplier effect” as they examined the finances of many small U.S. communities in 2003. The Institute examined how dollars disbursed at local independent shops were re-spent in numerous ways within encircling districts. Dollars were added to payrolls, owners spent their profits locally and donations given from businesses and individuals helped to fund local charities. The Institute’s study concluded for each $100 spent at local small businesses, $45 was generated through secondary local spending, compared to $14 entering the community from money spent in urban big-box establishments.
