By Audrey Jamal, University of Guelph and Heather M Hachigian, Royal Roads University | Part of our Always Canada. Never 51 series. | This post first appeared in The Conversation
Five years after the World Health Organization declared COVID-19 a global pandemic on March 11, 2020, Canada now faces a new challenge — unprecedented economic pressure from its closest trading partner, the United States.
Canadians are once again being forced to confront the country’s economic vulnerabilities. While the pandemic underscored the economic importance of place and social connections, economic aggression from the U.S. highlights the need for greater local autonomy.
Canada needs a new approach to economic development. Yet, as the government searches for solutions to bolster “Team Canada,” policymakers risk falling back on the same tired strategies: corporate bailouts, tax breaks for big business and top-down stimulus.
This played out during the pandemic. Policies favoured large corporations, leaving small businesses and workers struggling, despite their critical role in economic resilience. This time, Canada needs to do things differently.
A renewed approach to economic development
For Canada to build a more resilient economy, it must strengthen its communities by securing local assets, democratizing the economy and ensuring wealth circulates within communities rather than being extracted by distant, corporate interests.
A promising solution lies in community wealth building, a local-first approach to building the economy that emerged in the early 2000s. This approach offers a tonic to current economic policies that concentrate wealth into the hands of a small group of individuals, leaving communities vulnerable.
By prioritizing more inclusive and democratic ownership, investment and decision-making, community wealth building empowers communities to take control of their economic future. The strategy moves away from the current extractive economy, which prioritizes the exploitation of land, resources and people, toward one that builds wealth from the ground up.
5 pillars of community wealth building
The Democracy Collaborative’s community wealth-building framework offers five pillars for building strong local economies. These include progressive procurement, locally rooted finance, inclusive and democratic enterprise, fair work and the just use of land.
Many communities across Canada and globally are experimenting with one or more of these pillars. For example, social purpose organizations are experimenting with locally rooted financial instruments that flow profits back into their mission.
In Canada, community bonds allow social purpose organizations to raise capital from their community members to finance projects that benefit communities, such as affordable and green housing and regenerative food systems, among many others.
When locally rooted finance is combined with just use of land, and inclusive and democratic ownership, these initiatives can ensure wealth-generating assets — land, housing, infrastructure and businesses — stay in the communities so more people benefit from economic development.
Strengthening local economies
Canada has a history of inclusive and democratic enterprise, with many co-operatives and social enterprises owned by charities and non-profits. Now, Canadian businesses also have the option of transferring ownership to employee ownership trusts.
The diversity of ownership options challenges the false choice often presented when local businesses face closure: either shut down or be “saved” by an extractive investor.
Despite these positive developments, many community wealth building projects in Canada continue to exist as one-offs and sit on the margins of mainstream economic development policy. Local projects challenge the status quo and, as community-led projects, can struggle with governance and access to financing.
The federal government, non-profits and businesses all have the opportunity to shape a more resilient economic future for Canada by putting local businesses and local ownership first. But to transform local economies, action is needed across all five community wealth building pillars.
Through our research on community bonds, community wealth building in mid-sized cities and community ownership, we have suggestions for how Canadian governments and businesses can help communities understand what strategies work, and how they can adapt and scale them as needed.
This work is everyone’s business
Real progress in this area requires action from all levels of government, as well as from policymakers, businesses and community leaders.
As experience from Scotland and the U.S. shows, ground-up initiatives must be met with government support in the form of innovative policies, action and investments.
In practical terms, this means aligning government procurement policies and partnerships with local initiatives for new businesses, introducing legislation that supports inclusive and democratic ownership, and building wealth from local assets rather than importing it.
Local governments should commit to embedding community wealth building into their economic development planning. This is not a stretch, as many already support local business and entrepreneurship. The key is expanding on these efforts.
For instance, both large cities like Toronto and coalitions of smaller local governments are using their purchasing power to buy goods and services from suppliers that strengthen the local economy.
At the federal level, policy innovations like community right-to-buy legislation and related supports could give workers and communities the time, financing and expertise to compete with extractive investors and retain wealth and assets.
By investing in community wealth building, governments can help shift economic power, build Canada’s economic resilience and ensure communities have agency in shaping their economic futures.
Audrey Jamal, Assistant Dean, Strategic Partnerships and Societal Impact, University of Guelph and Heather M Hachigian, Assistant Professor of Business, Royal Roads University
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Share with a friend
Related reading
The problem with GDP per capita | West of Centre on CBC
New research by economist and SCP Fellow Gillian Petit estimates what Canada’s GDP per capita would have been over the past decade if Canada had kept our temporary resident numbers stable. On CBC political podcast West of Centre, host Rob Brown asks Petit to dissect the metric politicians love to wield. GDP measures total output, while GDP per capita divides that sum by the population. She explains that the simple math offers an easy snapshot, but can mislead when used alone. For a true read on prosperity, Petit argues Canada needs a broader economic dashboard that weighs productivity, fairness and long term well being.
Blame the denominator, not the economy
Over the last couple of years, there have been countless articles warning of Canada’s poor economic performance. The mic drop has increasingly been Canada’s poor performance relative to peer countries on “GDP per capita,” with growth rankings used to draw a variety of sweeping, negative conclusions about Canada’s economy. SCP CEO Matthew Mendelsohn and Policy Director Dan Skilleter draw on economist and SCP Fellow Dr. Gillian Petit's new research to explain why GDP per capita is a deeply flawed measurement for evaluating rich countries - and is easily influenced by a variety of factors having little to do with economic performance or economic well-being.
Non-Permanent Residents and their impact on GDP per capita | Summary
New research by economist and SCP Fellow Gillian Petit estimates what Canada’s GDP per capita would have been over the past decade if Canada had kept our temporary resident numbers stable. She also estimates the expected impact on GDP per capita in the coming years due strictly to planned reductions in Canada's intake of non-permanent residents. Among key findings: Canada’s GDP per capita is misleading and should not be used as if it were the sole indicator of economic well-being. Plus, if we had maintained our temporary resident numbers at two percent of the population in recent years, Canada’s GDP per capita would look much more like our peer countries: a little bit ahead of countries like Germany, the United Kingdom and Australia and a little bit lower than countries like Belgium, Sweden and France.