Local vs. hyperlocal: Why the distinction matters in fashion justice and beyond
Centering rightsholder agency
The first time I encountered the term “hyperlocal” was during a dialogue with Simon Ferrigno, the highly empathetic and brilliant mind behind almost everything I know about the interconnections of global cotton. We were discussing the deeply rooted inequities in the global cotton supply chain, and Simon used the term to describe solutions that emerge from the specific cultural, social and environmental contexts of a community in Burkina Faso. It struck me then, as it does now, that hyperlocal approaches are not just a methodology: they are a philosophy. They demand that we actively listen to those most affected by the industry’s injustices and center their agency in their fight for autonomy and sovereignty.
This short piece is my attempt to unpack why I felt compelled to write about this and why the distinction between local and hyperlocal solutions is so critical. It’s also an opportunity to clarify my positionality. As someone from the Global North, basically everything I express here is rooted in what I’ve learned from my friends and comrades in the Global South. They are the experts, the ones living and resisting the injustices of the fashion industry every day. While most of them have chosen not to be named here, this emergent piece is a tribute to their wisdom, resilience and leadership.
Much of my thinking on this topic has been further shaped by my ongoing dialogues with Nandita Shivakumar, a friend and a fierce advocate for labor rights and local and hyperlocal solutions. Nandita’s and her community’s work have been a constant reminder that true progress in due diligence and sustainability cannot be achieved through one-size-fits-all approaches. It requires us to listen to rightsholders (workers, informal sector actors, and grassroots organizers) who are disproportionately affected by the industry’s practices but are often excluded or limited-by-design from the conversation.
Why this matters
The fashion industry loves to talk about “solutions.” Whether it’s recycling programs, ethical certifications, or due diligence frameworks, there’s no shortage of initiatives claiming to address the industry’s quest for solutionism (although the root-causes of the problems are oftentimes ignored and or just not yet understood). But too often, these solutions are designed in boardrooms and conference halls, far removed from the realities of workers, informal sector actors and grassroots organizers (whom they shall serve, that is at least what we are told).
How I have come to understand it, is that it is not just a failure of imagination; it’s a failure of justice. When we fail to distinguish between local and hyperlocal approaches and when we co-opt the narratives of those most affected without centering their agency, we risk perpetuating the very systems of exploitation we claim to dismantle.
Local vs. hyperlocal: What’s the difference?
Let’s start by trying to define these terms, because the distinction matters.
Local solutions are often regional or national in scope. They might involve partnerships with local governments, NGOs, or trade unions to address issues like labor rights, waste management, or supply chain transparency. These solutions are important, but they can still fall into the trap of being overly broad (because scalability is at the center of these approaches a.o.), failing to account for the unique needs of specific communities.
Hyperlocal solutions, on the other hand, are deeply contextual. They emerge from the lived experiences of rightsholders, those who are directly impacted by the industry’s practices. Hyperlocal approaches are rooted in place-based knowledge, cultural practices and community-led initiatives. They prioritize the agency of those most affected, ensuring that solutions are not just for them, but by them.
The difference is not just semantic; it’s political. Hyperlocal solutions challenge the power dynamics that have long dictated how the fashion industry operates. They reject the notion that change can be imposed from the outside and instead insist that those with the most at stake must lead the way.
The risk of co-opting rightsholder perspectives
One of the most insidious trends in the sustainability and development movement is the co-opting of rightsholder perspectives. Too often, the voices of workers, informal sector actors and grassroots organizers are cherry-picked to lend credibility to global initiatives, only to be sidelined when it comes to decision-making. This tokenism not only undermines the agency of rightsholders but also perpetuates the very inequalities we claim to address.
A simple example: consider the rise of “ethical” certifications and due diligence labels and frameworks. While these initiatives often claim to “empower” workers and communities, they are frequently designed and implemented by Global North actors, with little input from those they purport to help. The result? A system that prioritizes marketability over meaningful transformation and that often excludes the very people it claims to uplift.
Examples of hyperlocal solutions in action
To understand the power of hyperlocal approaches, we need to look at examples where rightsholders are leading the charge.
1. Social: The Tamil Nadu Textile and Common Labour Union (TTCU)
In Tamil Nadu, India, the Tamil Nadu Textile and Common Labour Union (TTCU) is a powerful example of hyperlocal organizing. Led by women workers in the garment and textile industries, TTCU has been at the forefront of fighting for labor rights, fair wages and safe working conditions. Their work does not stop at the factory door, it goes beyond traditional union activism; they address hyperlocal issues like caste discrimination, gender-based violence and access to education for workers’ children. TTCU’s approach is deeply rooted in the lived realities of its members, proving that true progress comes from solutions designed and led by those most affected.
2. Environmental: The Kantamanto market in Ghana
In Accra, Ghana, the Kantamanto Market is a hub of hyperlocal innovation. Here, informal sector workers have developed a thriving circular economy, repurposing and reselling second-hand clothing from the Global North. While The Or Foundation has played a significant role in amplifying the voices of these communities and advocating for systemic change, it’s crucial to recognize that the true foundation of Kantamanto lies in the grassroots players—the local traders, sorters and artisans who have built this ecosystem from the ground up. Their agency, resilience, and ingenuity are what keep this market alive, despite the overwhelming influx of textile waste from the Global North. This resilience was on full display recently, when devastating fires broke out at Kantamanto. In the aftermath, it was the locals, the very people who depend on the market for their livelihoods, who led the cleanup efforts. They worked tirelessly to rebuild and restore what was lost, demonstrating once again that hyperlocal solutions are not just about survival but about community-led resilience in the face of systemic neglect.
3. Cultural: Aguayo weavers in Bolivia
In Bolivia, the aguayo, a traditional Andean textile handwoven by Indigenous women, stands as a powerful example of hyperlocal solutions. These vibrant, intricately patterned fabrics are more than just cultural artifacts; they are a living expression of Indigenous identity, resistance and resilience. For centuries, aguayo weavers have passed down their knowledge through generations, using natural dyes and traditional techniques that are deeply tied to their land and heritage. Today, collectives like Ayni Bolivia are working with these weavers to create sovereign livelihoods, ensuring that their craft is not only preserved but also valued in the market that clearly marginalizes Indigenous traditions. This is hyperlocalism at its finest: solutions rooted in cultural identity, led by the very communities they serve and resistant to the erasure of globalization.
Why hyperlocal solutions matter
Hyperlocal solutions matter because they center the agency of rightsholders. They recognize that those most affected by the fashion industry’s practices are not vulnerable victims to be saved, but experts with the knowledge and power to drive change.
Yet, hyperlocal approaches are often overlooked in favor of more scalable, marketable solutions. This is a mistake. If we are serious about transforming the fashion industry, we need to move beyond tokenism and invest in the leadership of rightsholders. This means:
Funding hyperlocal initiatives directly, rather than funneling resources through intermediaries (yes, I am talking INGOs and Global North NGOs here).
Amplifying the voices of diverse rightsholders in global forums and decision-making processes.
Challenging the power dynamics that prioritize profit over people (this is a very old one).
If we are serious about due diligence, sustainability and justice, we need to start by listening to those most affected. We need to distinguish between local and hyperlocal solutions and we need to ensure that rightsholders are not just included, but centered in the conversation. As my friends have taught me, “Real change is hyperlocal: it’s about creating space for those most affected to lead the way, on their terms, in their contexts.”
To those working in global frameworks and standards: this is your call to action.
It’s not enough to create policies and checklists that look good on paper. If we want meaningful stakeholder engagement, we need to move beyond tokenism and truly center the voices of rightsholders. This means combining standards and frameworks with relational approaches, building trust, listening deeply, and ceding power to those who have been systematically excluded. It means recognizing that hyperlocal solutions are not a threat to global nor local progress, but the very foundation of it. If we’re serious about justice, we need to stop speaking for others and start stepping aside. Let’s stop centering ourselves and start following the leadership of those who have been fighting this fight long before it became a trending hashtag.
If you’re inspired by these examples and want to learn more - or if you’re ready to take meaningful steps toward integrating hyperlocal solutions into your work - feel free to drop me an email (lavinia.muth@posteo.de). I’m available for interventions, consulting and collaborations, depending on the seriousness and intentionality of the request. And if the request aligns with the needs and priorities of my wider network, I’m happy to connect you - provided that capital streams are clarified and directed in ways that truly support the communities leading these efforts.
Lavinia 🌹
Note on research and literature:
While research was conducted on the topic of local versus hyperlocal solutions, it became evident that there is a lack of published literature or scholarly work specifically addressing these concepts within the context of the realities discussed. As a result, no footnotes are provided, as no directly relevant academic sources were identified. The analysis presented is based on observations, contextual understanding, and reasoning in the absence of formal academic references on this particular subject.