The Importance of Thinking and Acting Locally

Food producers and farmers of Vancouver Island struggle to compete with corporate agriculture that floods the market with cheap, imported food. If a food secure and self-sustainable island is the goal, local initiatives and solutions must be supported by the community. I have used Estava's and Prakash theory of local vs. global to support my argument of local action. This theory has serious concrete consequences for the success of movements like food security.

Gustave Esteva and Madhu Suri Prakash’s, From Global Thinking to Local Thinking examines the importance of thinking and acting locally and debunks the fantasy of successful global action. Global thinking is rooted in parochialism, and the centralization of power. It is important to understand the weaknesses of global thinking and its horrible consequences. The article lays out the fallacies in thinking and acting globally, and proves the necessity, the possibility and the potential success, of local action. Individuals lack the centralized power to ever change issues on the global platform; therefore, it is significant and imperative that readers of the article understand that major change must occur at an appropriate scale.

The local thinking and action argument is important to climate change solutions. Global solutions to climate change homogenize the issue and ignore individual locations that have different circumstances. Our society has become disempowered and disengaged; it expects the powers highest up in the hierarchy to find solutions, yet reacts unenthusiastically to top down solutions from the government, like the carbon tax. Furthermore, the illusion that one can know the world is a dangerous and impossible argument. Human knowledge is limited and “We can only think wisely about what we actually know well…” (pg279). Global thinking and action are unattainable and dangerous for a number of reasons. The world is too large and mysterious for any human to claim full knowledge and expertise; moreover, it is foolish and dangerous to dictate others actions relying on an individual’s delusion of universal understanding. The consequences of this form of thought manifest in the homogenization of developing communities’ ways of living, and the consequences of universalism in regards to human rights. By addressing the consequences of global thinking, local action becomes evident as the only successful vehicle of change.


Esteva and Prakash do not deny the reality of the internationalization of the economy, but reject the illusion that all people are becoming ‘globalized’. Recognizing this statement is important since it supports local action and addresses issues of resource distribution. The pressure on developing communities to become systematically more like western societies is not only impossible but is socially and environmentally destructive. The universal fantasy of the consumer lifestyle, or for lack of a better term, ‘the American dream’, cannot be sustained in a finite system like the earths; resources will run out long before. Instead of being globalized, those who can not keep up are being marginalized. Local action and thinking offers the chance to turn away from unrealistic visions and global pressures that create uncertainty and social unrest, by returning to their local culture and land. Returning to local thinking allows for alternative discussions and solutions that are tailored to specific sites and circumstances. Global proposals do not account for local issues and therefore will never be as productive as local ones that fully grasp the situation.

It is significant that Esteva and Prakash clarify what thinking and acting locally entails. Critiques of the argument claim that local initiatives are too small to tackle the global forces that invade our lives. But, if local groups formed solidarity and shared the commitment to oppose global action and thinking, global forces can be broken down by local organizations dissent. Local thinking does not happen in a vacuum, local action works to solve problems at a local scale while understanding global forces, while communication between rooted groups encourages pluralism rather than parochialism.

Successful solutions to environmental issues will occur at local levels where the community is mobilized to find solutions to their problems. By empowering people and grassroot initiatives at local scales, solutions will have the commitment of the community to succeed and the proper level of understanding to work. By decentralizing the power, struggles are moved from the global ring and into local contexts where effective change transpires. Environmental issues are complex and faith in global thinking and action has brought us to the tipping point. The environmental movement must remain concrete in local initiatives, since individuals have the power to create a patchwork of solutions that will hopefully lead to a path of recovery.