Working in the crisis
Examining practitioners’ perceptions of and responses to the COVID-19 pandemic
Jesse Sutton (Western University), Evan Cleave (Toronto Metropolitan University), Richard Casey Sadler (Michigan State University), John Hutchenreuther (Western University), Catherine Oosterbaan (Oosterbaan Strategies), & Godwin Arku (Western University)
While the COVID-19 pandemic was, first and foremost, a health crisis, it presented a profound challenge to local economies around the world. Day-to-day business was suspended, and employers were forced to adapt to rapidly evolving working conditions. An external, global pressure issued an abrupt shock to the economic system of communities. While certainly profound and currently the first-to-mind example of economic shock, it is just one of many global pressures that local economies have had to contend with. In the face of global forces, how do local economic practitioners react and empower their communities to shape their own economic destiny.
COVID-19 serves as an interesting case study due to the relationship between its shock (the pandemic itself) and the longer-term external pressures already pushing down on local communities (globalization). Our article draws on 37 in-depth interviews conducted with local economic practitioners (directors, managers, senior staff) representing 35 municipalities in Ontario, Canada. Practitioners act at the center of their local economies, carrying out the goals of politicians, local businesses, and community groups (Rubin, 1988). Local strategies were employed by practitioners to assist businesses with their operating costs and encourage consumer spending (Wilson et al., 2020). As such, their responses are vital in response to a shock. During our interviews, four main conversational themes emerged: (1) the impact of external government decisions on the local economy, (2) a changing focus brought on by the pandemic, (3) the need for action, and (4) a lack of preparedness.
In discussing the impact of external government decisions during COVID-19, practitioners noted their vulnerability to external forces, particularly the provincially-instituted pandemic containment measures. The closure of non-essential businesses was said to have ‘artificially crashed the economy because of regulation,’ and provincial announcements without matching informational support for municipal practitioners left them feeling helpless to intervene. This vulnerability was not evenly felt, however. Larger municipalities described a higher level of impact from global supply chain disruptions than smaller municipalities did. Practitioners also noted that the effect of these external forces was different from sector to sector. Entertainment and tourism were reported to have suffered market reductions of as much as 90% in response to federal and provincial containment measures. Meanwhile, real estate and construction experienced benefits due to people migrating from larger cities to smaller municipalities. Federal and provincial programs supporting businesses worked to forestall business closures within local communities. However, some practitioners noted concerns that some of these represented “zombie companies,” companies that were not viable and, under more typical situations, would have gone under. This creates a looming threat of business closures as “zombie companies” have a greater chance of collapsing when funding is withdrawn.
For local practitioners, there was a significant change of focus brought on by the pandemic. Containment measures from the province inspired a significant portion of the populace to leave larger metropolitan areas and settle in smaller municipalities, creating an increased demand for developable residential and employment land. This added fuel to the fire of a growing trend: higher-paid professionals leaving the city to work remotely in locations with more affordable housing, creating housing shortages in smaller municipalities. Practitioners also remarked on the large shift to remote work, as people moved to perform their jobs remotely rather than drive to an office. Furthermore, employees laid off during the pandemic showed a tendency to turn to entrepreneurialism and open their own businesses rather than find another job.
The pandemic was a time of action for practitioners. Local economic development departments were operating all-hands-on-deck to mitigate the damage being done. Employment loss was the central focus, but practitioners talked about the reverberations caused by these job losses. Additional pressures included increases in homelessness, crime, drug use, and mental health issues. Practitioners acted to link employers with job seekers, often resulting in employees moving from a sector that was suffering to one that was thriving. They also served as a link between businesses, helping businesses in need of PPE and other pandemic compliance needs link up with businesses that could provide those materials. What was less successful was keeping businesses up to date and engaged with government information and programs. Practitioners noted that fatigue set in during the pandemic, making it hard to keep businesses up to date on current practices or enroll businesses in programs to support them.
While municipalities in Ontario have demonstrated a trend toward proactive behaviour (Arku, 2015; Cleave et al., 2017; Leigh and Blakely, 2017), local governments found themselves unprepared for the COVID-19 pandemic. Practitioners commented that they hadn’t experienced anything as damaging, which exceeded the 2008 global financial crisis and the SARS pandemic. Instead of practicing from a well-planned playbook, practitioners were forced into a reactive stance and had to adapt on the fly. The duration of the pandemic only added to the confusion, as four waves of COVID-19 resulted in three province-wide business closures, each with its own messaging and policies. However, many practitioners expressed that at the time of the interviews, the full impact wasn’t apparent yet. Government interventions had successfully propped up people and businesses, but in two to three years, those supports fell away and he full economic damage of the pandemic was realized.
Taken as a whole, we can see that practitioners felt very much on the defensive. They perceived the situation as one shaped by global forces and the provincial government’s reaction to them. Without a developed contingency plan appropriate to the pandemic situation, practitioners were forced into a reactive stance. Despite this, practitioners felt they played an active role in protecting the well-being of their community and serving as key figures in their community’s economy.
Read the full UAR article here.
References
Arku G (2015) Economic development practices of cities in Ontario, Canada. Community Development 46(5): 604–615.
Cleave E, Arku G and Chatwin M (2017) Cities’ economic development efforts in a changing global economy: content analysis of economic development plans in Ontario, Canada. Area 49(3): 359–368.
Leigh NG and Blakely EJ (2017) Planning Local Economic Development: Theory and Practice. Sixth edition. Los Angeles: SAGE.
Rubin HJ (1988) Shoot Anything that Flies; Claim Anything that Falls: Conversations with Economic Development Practitioners. Economic Development Quarterly 2(3): 236–251.
Wilson DHE, Johnson BAM, Stokan E, et al. (2020) Institutional Collective Action During COVID‐19: Lessons in Local Economic Development. Public Administration Review 80(5): 862–865.
Jesse Sutton is a PhD candidate in the Department of Geography and Environment at Western University. His research focuses on economic development, plant closures, regional economic resilience, and path development.
Evan Cleave is an assistant professor in the Department of Geography and Environmental Studies at Toronto Metropolitan University. His work focuses on issues related to local economic development and urban governance.
Richard Casey Sadler is an associate professor in the Departments of Public Health and Family Medicine at Michigan State University. His research focuses on the intersection of urban planning and public health, including topics related to economic growth and resilience, and how this influence health.
John Hutchenreuther is a PhD student in the Department of Geography and Environment at Western University. His research interests are using GIScience, spatial analysis, and time series data to explore neighborhood dynamics and the urban form. Currently, he is focusing on the impacts of transportation on the evolution of neighborhoods.
Catherine Oosterbaan is the president and principal consultant at Oosterbaan Strategies.
Godwin Arku is a professor in the Departments of Geography and Environment at Western University. His research focuses on economic development, plant closures, immigrant integration, and developing economies.