Our thinking

What Trump-induced ‘buy local’ movements mean for emissions

25 April, 2025

From Denmark to Canada, consumers around the world have responded to Donald Trump’s trade war by doubling down on purchasing local goods. Now it seems that even Brits are finding themselves stirred to economic patriotism: recent survey data shows that 71% of UK consumers have said they’re more likely to buy “Made in Britain” products. It’s a natural response to rising prices and global uncertainty – but as consumers rush to support homegrown goods, it’s worth asking: does local always equal sustainable? 

It’s tempting to think so. Local products = shorter supply chains = lower emissions, right? Sometimes, yes. But in many cases, no. A tomato grown in Spain under the sun may well have a smaller footprint than one grown in a heated British greenhouse. A pound of lentils grown in India and shipped to the UK will always have lower emissions than a pound of British beef. Transport emissions often make up the smallest contribution to a product’s whole lifespan carbon emissions. So, while “supporting British business” is a worthy goal, it may not be the best thing for sustainability.  

What this really reveals is how hard it is to make the right choices. Consumers are being nudged into patriotic purchasing, but a nuanced picture of sustainable sourcing depends on how something is made, not just where. Buying local isn’t always the greenest choice – but it can be, if businesses commit to sustainable practices and clear storytelling. It’s time to raise the bar on what “Made in Britain” really means. 

And for all of us navigating increasingly murky waters: the goal isn’t just local or global. It’s low-carbon, ethical, transparent.  

By Louise Podmore