Deliberate identities: becoming local in America in a global age

Abstract

As the world becomes increasingly interlinked through the processes of globalization, many have argued that geography as a basis for identity is losing its resonance. However, the potentially homogenizing effects of globalization and corporatization have, in turn, spawned a notable move in the opposite direction in the United States. James “Pete” Shortridge has referred to this move as neolocalism, the conscious attempt of individuals and groups to establish, rebuild, and cultivate local ties and identities. The word “local” has, as a result, taken on renewed vigor over the past two decades, as it is actively embraced as a counter to globalism. But what does it mean, and how is it used? Because it is consciously cultivated, this idea of identity becomes much more than a statement of “who I am”; it becomes a broader political, social, and economic undertaking. This paper examines a wide variety of manifestations of neolocal identity building such as microbreweries, local food movements, and the local living economy movement, and argues that a distinctive American geography of neolocalism exists.

Keywords:

• local
• local economies
• neolocalism
• local food
• James “Pete” Shortridge

View correction statement:

Erratum

Notes

1. The term is now discussed in many of the standard introductory human/cultural geography textbooks (Fouberg, Murphy, and de Blij 2009; Fellman, et al. 2010; Greiner 2011; Domosh, et al. 2013). Although Shortridge first employed the term “neolocalism,” Raimondo Strassoldo (1992) used the term “new localism” in a similar fashion—referring to a deliberate response to globalization of rooting oneself in a locality—in his study of regionalism in Italy a couple of years earlier.

2. Although I focus here primarily on commercial manifestations of neolocalism, the urge for local connections encompasses many other phenomena as well. For example, the past twenty years have seen a large increase in numbers of local watershed associations. They often monitor pollution and water quality, promote understanding of plant and animal communities that depend on the watershed, and work to increase awareness of the relationships between people and the watersheds that support them, promoting a vision of place as one inextricably intertwined with the landscapes that we inhabit. The bioregionalism movement that began in the 1970s takes this concept even further, advocating a fundamental reorganization of society to create political structures and boundaries that are in line with biological regions that would be more responsive and sensitive to the geographical and biological realities of the landscapes they inhabit (Sale 1985).

3. The local living economies movement is a movement whose goals are to create viable networks of local businesses that are financially viable as well as ecologically and socially responsible.

4. An extended version of this discussion can be found in Schnell and Reese 2003. See also Flack 1997 for a discussion of the earlier development of microbreweries.

5. See Schnell 2007 for an expanded discussion of CSAs.

6. This number is actually 1) almost a complete fabrication, and 2) almost certainly way too small, an argument that I expand on in a forthcoming article.

7. Local eating has also become a mainstream part of the tourist industry. In a comparative study of state and provincial tourism guides, I examined changes in promotion strategies between 1993 and 2008, and one of the most notable shifts was to an emphasis on agritourism and local eating. Incidence of the word “local” in tourism booklets increased tenfold. Local foods and farms are now almost uniformly touted as a way to experience the real, authentic place, a marketing strategy that was barely present fifteen years ago (Schnell 2011).

8. See http://www.agriculture.state.pa.us/papreferred/lib/papreferred/documents/3-11-09_Revised_PA_PREFERRED_Agreement_Package.pdf for an example of the ways in which “local” is codified in such programs. See also Hinrichs 2003 for a discussion of the definition of “local” in the context of a “local” Iowa dinner.

9. Some studies have disputed this claim (see Saunders, Barber, and Taylor 2006 for the most notable example), and argued that in some circumstances, long-distance transport is actually more ecologically minded than local production. Such arguments typically rely on cherry-picked examples to try and leave a broader impression.

10. Some have argued that this idea is an oxymoron (Allen and Hinrichs 2007), but I disagree. Indeed, I would argue that the creation of a broader consciousness of localness is a vital part of creating a local food movement that more broadly penetrates all sectors of society.

11. A third is located in Disneyland Park in Paris—also an interesting choice, since Disney was the subject of much controversy when it first opened in Paris, accused of cultural imperialism by French activists.

12. See also www.patchworknation.org for fuller methodological explanations and for full-color maps detailing the distribution of these different county types.

13. Although it is a simplification to assign each county to a single type (my own county, Berks PA, is classed as “Monied Burbs” while being home to Reading, which was just named the city with the highest poverty rate in America), an analysis using each county's score in each of the twelve categories yielded similar results.

14. There is not space in this article to address this critique fully; I am addressing it at much greater length in a forthcoming article.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Steven M. Schnell

Steven M. Schnell is Professor of Geography at Kutztown University, 105 Graduate Center, Kutztown, PA 19530, USA. Phone: [phone]