UKH

I regularly see exhortations to "support local businesses" when away on trips. Most recently I saw it included on a sort of code of conduct displayed on a Northlink ferry to Shetland and I now see that Loganair are also running a similar campaign. Now clearly any business anywhere is going to be happy to have my custom, but I am struggling to see a moral case for me to spend money locally when I am away on a trip rather than at home or not at all.

So why should I feel some sort of obligation to buy my food while away on a trip rather than buying it all at home and chucking it in my car?

Why should I feel some sort of obligation to pay for local campsites, cafes or pubs rather than dossing roadside, making my own coffee and drinking from a winebox out of the back of my car?

Or is it really only meant to apply to stuff uniquely available in the location such as the locally drawn and produced greetings cards I bought in Shetland?

In reply to Robert Durran:

Because it's a nice thing to do and gives a warm fuzzy feeling? 

In reply to Robert Durran:

Very quick and perhaps naive answer(*) is that local business pays taxes (and the people they employ pay taxes locally) so this way you're somewhat covering the costs your presence is placing on local amenities (at least those paid from local budgets). I always think of roads, public toilets. Separately I see why "locals" would like to have the place "peaceful" and my presence as a tourist (walker / runner climber) is an "annoyance" to their peace (more traffic on the roads etc.). Allowing some of them make a living from my presence perhaps somewhat mitigates that. 

(*) One way in which this is naive is that taxes collected are distributed from a central budget that often ignores where they were collected. It's complicated and I don't know the details.

In reply to tmawer:

Well that probably applies to the greetings cards, but what about the things where I am simply spending money in location B rather than location A or just saving money to spend in other ways later?

In reply to Robert Durran:

I think of it as "spreading the love". I spend locally all year but somehow feel a little better about visiting a different area and spending a little there. This may not be terribly rational but at a feeling level works for me. 

In reply to dsiska:

If I need to compensate for the inconvenience of my presence somewhere, I think I'd rather pay some sort of "tourist tax" which can be centrally used rather than feel the obligation to spend money on specific things I neither want nor need.

In reply to tmawer:

I get the "fuzzy" thing, but I'm just trying to decide whether it is rational and/or worth paying for!

In reply to Robert Durran:

Perhaps a given amount of money spent in a poorer area, should you be visiting one, does more good than the same amount spent in a more affluent area? Perhaps in the better off areas it matters less. Think a poorer west Cumbrian Village rather than Grasmere. 

In reply to tmawer:

Fair point, but all other things being equal?

In reply to Robert Durran:

Part of the pleasure of visiting places is the local culture and society. This can only exist if the economy works. So it seems reasonable to support the local economy. Further, visiting somewhere costs that place money (roads, facilities etc.), So again it seems reasonable to support it economic.

In reply to Robert Durran:

Entirely agree there is a pernicious subtext that if you aren’t contributing to a local economy you are a problem.
Where does this end, what counts as local and what counts as contributing, and do those that contribute most get preferential treatment. For example many Highland Carparks are free, affluent Motorhomers could afford to outbid locals and other visitors alike; should we just turn them over to the money because they are contributing most ?

If the locally economy has goods and services that I want and at a price point I’m willing to pay, then I will give them custom. I wont enter into a transaction just because they feel I ‘ought to’.

In reply to MG:

Yes, if tourism is part of the economy. But, as a tourist, should I feel an obligation to pay for things I don't need - shouldn't the tourism economy be moulded to the needs of tourists?

I am happy to pay for facilities I use, especially if they are funded locally. Aren't roads funded nationally?

In reply to MG:

Those roads and many facilities are paid for by general taxation, money you pay to small business may have no through put as those business may very well have 100% rates relief, or be structured to pay little tax….

In reply to Robert Durran:

It's an interesting question. I'm with you on the part about buying provisions at home rather than at the location (mostly because I don't want to spend my leisure time messing about in a supermarket, and to be honest the supermarket profit goes to their central coffers rather than locally anyway), yet I'm quite happy to spend locally on campsites, cafes etc. I think it's mostly because I ascribe a certain value to those aspects of going away, their facilities, differences and the general service they provide. To me those are the things that actually make it worth going away from home.

I don't buy into the "they do a happy dance when you buy a muffin locally rather than at the national chain" diatribe, but I also feel uncomfortable at the idea of people visiting an area and not spending anything locally. Part of the current instangram vanlife fashion seems to encourage that, in my view.

In reply to ScraggyGoat:

Exactly.

In reply to Robert Durran:

Invariably as tourists, we visit touristy locations. In outdoors tourism these places often are remote or occupy a specific niche of interest. These areas often survive mostly on that tourism; anyone living and working there will be heavily dependent on your money as a tourist to live a good quality of life. So it’s nice to support that, there’s no obligation of course but if you enjoy the place and want to come back to it in a similar state then I think it’s worthwhile. 

In reply to rj_townsend:

Well, the opposite is true for me - I much prefer dossing in isolation out of the back of my car if possible.

My scummy existence on trips is very, very far from being instagrammable, but what has prompted me to think about this is that I have recently bought a very small van that allows me to go away for weeks at a time in squalor within the UK without needing to spend any money at all other than on diesel if I drive far enough.

In reply to Robert Durran:

It creates a diverse economic eco system. If, for example, a major retailer goes bust, the community has alternative sources. It also allows Darwinian evolution. All those big stores started small. The bookshop you buy from, might become the next amazon. It broadens your horizons "chips with cheese and gravy - genius". It might also be that the cafe you go to buys produce direct from the farmer. The farmer might get more and the food is fresher, with less food miles. And its nice. Popping into a local deli, and seeing obscure cheese or beer, made locally. Cakes made by some small bakery down the road, rather than being made hundreds of miles away, and shipped over a day or two to the location (See: supermarkets, ginsters pasties etc).

I can understand the logic of what you're saying, but thinking it through puts you in a dubious position. Would you go to <some country> and demand British food? "Do. You. Speak. Innglish, mate? Egg and chips and stella. None of that foreign muck."

In reply to Robert Durran:

As someone who grew up in a touristy area and watched friends and family get priced out of the market for property by people hoovering up second or third homes, anything that can help the locals maintain a viable way of life, keep a sense of community and see a local future for their kids would be helpful. Contributing to small businesses, sole traders, community and voluntary organisations can do that.

Of the people I grew up with, a couple of the farmers, one kid whose parents owned a campsite and the kid from the post office stayed. Everyone else left.

In reply to dig26:

But if those people only live there because of a tourism industry, should I feel obliged to support them when I would be quite happy to go there (possibly happier) if they and their services were not there? It all seems a bit circular to me.

In reply to Robert Durran:

There's a staggering lack of empathy on show here. Norman Tebbit would have approved. Maybe all the people in the way of your enjoyment should get on their bikes and find work elsewhere?

In reply to Robert Durran:

You go to the local shop, chippy, pub. Spend some money, have a chat, be friendly. If locals don't want you around, they can very easily make things less convenient and welcoming for climbers.

Climbers do enough to wind up locals; pissing in plain sight, leaving rubbish, having campfires, parking across access and gates. A lot of it might not be climbers but some of it definitely is, and as a visible culprit we get our fair share (or more) of blame. A once blind-eye to someone dossing in a cave becomes a call to the police. A friendly interaction about directions becomes a cold stare. A pub kitchen cooking you up something when you ran in soaked 5 minutes after the kitchen closed becomes a "sorry."

The nicer we are and the more money we spend locally, the nicer our interactions with the locals will be, the more facilities will be provided, and the more welcomed we will be. There's also supply and demand. Rental prices in nice areas are higher than others. If we want business to be there and provide a service, we should support them. Fair enough if you don't want a pint or a curry after a day of climbing but some people do and if we don't spend the money then those places aren't viable and soon enough they're gone. 

There's a pub (now reopening!) in Woodcroft in the Wye Valley. There aren't enough locals to sustain that business as it's only a small place but there are loads of climbers going there all the time. It was closed for years and I was always gutted I couldn't walk out of Wintours and have a pint and debrief. If climbers spend their money there, it is more likely to thrive and that will be an option again. Yes you could always go and have a pint back where ever you drove from but it's not the same, is it, and my enthusiasm for it has usually waned by the time I've driven back. 

In reply to dread-i:

But should I feel I ought to buy the cheese and cakes out of  a sense of charity rather than because I'm hungry and they taste nice and are culturally interesting to me?

No, I would happily go with what is available.

In reply to compost:

No, I'm just not convinced I should feel obliged to pay for their services if I don't need them just because other people do so.

In reply to ScraggyGoat:

Only main roads. Local roads are funded via councils.

oney you pay to small business may have no through put as those business may very well have 100% rates relief, or be structured to pay little tax….

They mostly pay a rates and employees pay taxes locally 

In reply to Robert Durran:

No, but presumably you eat, buy fuel etc?

 - shouldn't the tourism economy be moulded to the needs of tourists?

Well yes, hence local shops etc.

In reply to PaulJepson:

Well, yes, but that depends on the premise of wanting the services. 

It seems a recipe ultimately for more wannabe Amblesides or Aviemores. I suppose it depends whether that is a good thing or not.

In reply to MG:

Yes, I will obviously eventually have to restock with food and buy diesel.

Yes, but my point is whether I should feel obliged to use and pay for local services just because they have sprung up in response to the needs of other people.

In reply to Robert Durran:

Well OK, I read more as why you should buy anything (rather than take it with you).  I agree, there should be, and I don't think there is, pressure to buy T-shirts or whatever if you don't need them.

In reply to Robert Durran:

Keeping money in the local community is a good thing, be that your own community or one that you are visiting as a tourist. There is perhaps an argument about which local community you support, but you are visiting an area, using facilities funded through local taxation etc, so it only seems fair to share some of that local spend.

In reply to Robert Durran:

I never mentioned charity. I mentioned interesting food, freshness and food miles. Do you believe it's you being benevolent, spending an extra 50p on a cake, rather than buying similar from asda?

I'm sure you could get English food many places, if you asked loudly enough. if you should, is a different question. You're saying you'd go with what's available, just not what's locally available.

Your supermarkets sell curry. So there is no point going to a curry house. You can get a photo of a view, so there is no point going there to experience it yourself.

I appreciate you're trolling for humour to a certain extent. But it does kind of play to a national ignorance of culture we, as a nation, are famous for.

In reply to compost:

No, but I am sure we can all think of places which have been "spoiled" by tourism and its infrastructure.

In reply to Robert Durran:

I think it's certainly a consideration for climbing/walking club hut visits. If others are anything like the one I still belong to most people shop at home bring all food and drink with them with ittle interaction with the surrounding economy.  I tend to either go to the pub/take-away and/or buy food nearby if I can. (Whether its a commitment to the local economy or laziness is a moot point!)  However, that's not so easy with places like Capel Curig for example not having a shop any more.   

In reply to dread-i:

Yes, if they and the experiences of eating them are indistinguishable. I do appreciate that the experience of a cafe rather than Tesco's car park might be considered worth paying for.

When abroad, if eating out, I would generally eat local food (sorry, that is what I meant by "locally available", perhaps unclearly).

Occasionally I will pay for the experience of a curry house. I generally try to live frugally in other ways so that I can afford to travel and see (and photograph!) places for real.

No, I am not trolling at all. It is a genuine question I have been pondering recently and I am interested in the responses.

I think it is unfair to make that extrapolation. The local culture can be a big part of trips abroad for me. But I don't think that is the same as buying in to a tourism industry. And anyway, I was really only thinking of climbing/walking trips at home.

In reply to Robert Durran:

By people trying to scrape a living, mostly within the (legitimately harsh) restrictions of the national parks? Very few people make a lot of money from tourists, and many people whose livelihoods depend on tourism have been in those places for generations.

For me, what "spoils" places is lines of queuing traffic and cars dumped on narrow roadsides. Maybe more infrastructure is needed. But then visitors get creative - they'd rather park on the verge in Malham, obstructing farm gates, than pay £4 to park in the YDNP car park. 

To me, your position comes across as 'what's best for me right now' rather than 'what's best for us as a collective'. It's similar to the standard personal freedom/ antivax/ gun lobby arguments in the US. Do you align with those positions too?

In reply to Robert Durran:

I get the living frugally bit. Paying extra for artisan bread and cheese or an extra 20 miles in the tank, is a real consideration. Also, some may not be able to afford the extra for the local version. Then there's the whole live to eat, or eat to live thing, that may be more or less important, depending on disposable income. The impression I got is that you can afford to buy local, but consider if you should. Not that you're skint, and cant.

Sorry, I should have added a But isnt tourism, tourism? You parked up in a layby, is as much tourism and that coach load, wandering the flesh pots, taking selfies. Local culture desnt start when the the plane lands. There some to be had in the uk (though its an acquired taste, in some cases.)

In reply to compost:

Absolutely. That is just the sort of thing I was thinking of (The "Fairy Pools" on Skye is perhaps the worst example). A place, for one reason or another, gets on the tourist trail and then, to cope with the weight of tourists, infrastructure becomes necessary and the experience of being there is a pale shadow of what it once was. 

I'm in no way condoning blocking narrow verges or obstructing gates. If I do go to the sort of place that happens I would park responsibly and pay to park if ned be. But I'd rather avoid that sort of place altogether. As I said, they have been spoiled for me.

Don't be absurd!

In reply to The New NickB:

Or another way to look at it is isolationism, generally considered a bad thing. Put simply if you can only buy potatoes where they are grown is this good? I like eating rice but they don't grow much around here.

No local area exists on local taxation except London.

In reply to dread-i:

No, I'm not skint. It's just a matter of how I choose to spend money. 

Yes, of course tourism is tourism, but being a "tourist" doesn't necessarily mean spending money (especially on stuff set up as part of a infrastructure). 

In reply to jimtitt:

Reductio ad Absurdum. Or in English, bollocks.

No local area exists solely on local taxation, including London. However, it plays an important role in all communities. 

In reply to Robert Durran:

To my mind I'd consider shopping locally for a few reasons.

Because endless duplicated high streets populated with the same big chains, supermarkets and fast food restaurants sucks the soul out of places that were once nice and interesting to spend time in.

Because many small and remote communities can no longer depend on traditional industries or practices to sustain themselves and thus rely on tourism. If tourists spend no money either then places descend into disrepair and deprivation which typically detracts from the holiday experience.

And finally because sometimes you want the service or expertise of a good small and specialist business, and if you buy everything on Amazon you'll discover that nice shop round the corner no longer exists when you need it.

In practice I tend to go for a balance between spending money locally and taking things with me; quite what that balance looks like depends on my current circumstances/budget.

In reply to Stuart Williams:

Yes, I get that. I presume that local businesses will then evolve to meet the needs of tourists. All I'm really saying is if or when they do not meet my needs (I am probably not a typical tourist), should I feel any pressure to use them anyway? 

I think that is a rather different question. But anyway, shopping is clearly moving online and I think physical premises will evolve to serve specialist needs which cannot be met online. It may take a while but I'm not sure we can't have the best of both worlds

In reply to compost:

There is nothing unusual in that though. Happens in large parts of the country. 

In reply to Robert Durran:  I live in Norway, and very often I see threads on here whinging that it's expensive and people take all their stuff.  However they still clutter up the roads, use hospitals, and a whole bunch of other facilities , often to my inconvenience.

If they're not contributing to the local economy, then to be blunt they can stay at home and stop sponging.  And that sentiment is now being acted on as , for example, various places are starting to say no thanks to various cruise ships, that really only add pollution, and strictly limiting numbers and conditions for landing.

In reply to Robert Durran:

Because it’s nice to go on holiday somewhere with a functioning economy.

Is it a functioning society/economy (delete as you please) if there aren’t willing sellars and willing buyers?

I guess Roberts is getting at the attitude that people should not be at ‘x’ (commonly the Highlands) if they are ‘not contributing’.

To my mind that attitude is entirely wrong as it reduces everyone to their ‘economic worth’ and ultimately says if you are poor your aren’t welcome/worth anything.

It has to come back to willing Sellar/willing buyer. If some People are willing for other reasons than price/service all well and good. If people aren’t willing buyers because like Robert they aren’t commonly catered for, for example a cheap campsite, it’s up to a ‘Sellar’ to work out if they can supply a product that makes Robert ‘willing’.

Otherwise we get into petty politics of exclusion; which can work out against locals as much as tourists .

When do you become a ‘local’ and start having to ‘contribute’?

In reply to wbo2:

It is expensive! The last time I went to Norway I loaded up my car at home with food for six weeks (apart from fresh veg) and stayed completely off alcohol. But I did pay for camping.

Would you make a distinction between foreigners and Norwegian tax payers?

Sounds like there is a strong case for a tourist tax for the likes of cruise ships.

In reply to Robert Durran:

I suppose I wouldn’t spend money for the sake of it if there was nothing worth spending it on, but I would generally budget to have a meal or two out and stop for the odd coffee/pint if there is somewhere nice looking. Although in truth that’s mostly because I like doing it rather than specifically aiming to shop locally while I’m away.

Although as I typed that I realised I perhaps do feel a bit of pressure to spend a few quid locally in some places I visit, and I do this happily. Kalymnos comes to mind as somewhere that I’ll always plan to have a few meals out and buy a few bits and bobs, partly to put a bit of money into the local economy. One of the things I like about it is how welcoming and friendly it feels, and I suspect part of that is because tourist money is a really tangible benefit to the local economy. If spending a few euros that I don’t strictly have to helps maintain the sense of goodwill towards visiting climbers then that seems worth it to me.

Other places, where the local atmosphere is less of a part of my reason for visiting, I’ll be less bothered about spending money.

In reply to wintertree:

Ok, so there seems to be a consensus on here that if the local economy depends on tourism then I should contribute to it. So if I am spending money anyway (which basically means food), then perhaps I should go to the inconvenience and probably greater expense of buying it locally rather than loading up at home.

But should my obligation extend to additional expenditure probably at least partly just  for the sake of it such as cafes, pubs and campsites? And, if so, how often should I go to a cafe, pub or campsite to have a clear conscience?

As I said earlier, a fair tourist tax leaving me to get on with what I came for would be a lot less faff!

In reply to Stuart Williams:

Well yes, I am really thinking of places I go for the outdoors and wildness away from other people.

In reply to Robert Durran:

Because if you don't use independent local businesses for occasional purchases they won't be there when you forget something, or something breaks and you really need them.

In reply to Robert Durran:> Would you make a distinction between foreigners and Norwegian tax payers?

Yes.  Magic word is tax payers.  If you're not contributing to the local economy then why should I support you.

Bear in mind that earlier it was stated that local spending comes from a central government pot.  I don't believe that's true in the UK? I thought a lot of stuff was local with a government addon (that's been reduced over recent years).  Who pays for a lot of the local stuff that you use?

In reply to ExiledScot:

So are you saying that, when on a trip, I should make a few purchases of things I havn't forgotten or broken, so that the demand and supply is there for later visitors who have forgotten or broken them?

In reply to ScraggyGoat:

pretty much my opinion too. Just back from the Valais and the brewpub saw a fair bit of our custom because it was good and the prices acceptable. It was a business well worth supporting. Helped keep the amount of beer consumed down too.

Bought all the shopping over the border apart from bread though.

In reply to Robert Durran:

No, but if say you plan to replace a harness, buy a certain guidebook, some new slings... then deliberately do it when away, then perhaps the next year when you forget your nut key, belay device, or climbing shoes etc.. they'll still be in business to help you.

In reply to Robert Durran:

TBF I don't think you're the demographic the buy local campaign is aimed at.

Its more for the second homers etc who buy out small towns and villages and then arrive every weekend with a Range Rover full of supermarket goods in the back.

The local shops and businesses close, because there are no locals left to buy anything, during the week.

In reply to artif:

Many book a supermarket delivery for a few hours after they arrive at their holiday cottage, so the local village shop won't even manage to sell them a single pint of milk. 

In reply to ExiledScot:

True, but it will be the same service used by the locals. I think the days of most people doing their "big shop" in a local store are long gone

In reply to artif:

The one I referred to was for Orkney and Shetland. I'm not sure if there are a lot of second homes there. Maybe.

In reply to ExiledScot:

Fair enough if you are sure you can get what you need locally.

In reply to Robert Durran:

I don't feel a need to spend unnecessarily when I'm away but generally speaking, if I've made an effort to travel somewhere for leisure purposes then I'm going to want to enjoy myself while I'm there.

So I'm not going to doss down in the back of a van in a layby, not because I feel some sort of guilt for not giving to the local economy but because I've reached a point in life when I am prepared to spend on luxuries for my own comfort and satisfaction while I'm away. Likewise with food, on one hand I don't want to be spending my holiday trapesing around poorly stocked local shops for every meal so I'll bring day to day stuff with me, but on the other, I also want to enjoy some nice meals out and not have to cook and prepare everything, meaning I'll spend in local pubs and restaurants more than I would at home.

There is never a situation where I'm going to buy an "I love (insert town here)" mug just to keep a pointless shop in businesses, but I will buy things I deem to be of genuine value to me if I desire them. If a local business is not offering genuine value to its customers and is instead relying on tourism guilt then it deserves to fail because it fulfils no purpose.

In reply to Robert Durran:

It's not obligatory to buy local. But if no-one buys local the shop / petrol station / pub close down. Then, when you (or anyone else) is miles from home and without food, fuel or fancy a pint, you (or they) are screwed. HTH

In reply to Robert Durran:

There are plenty independents scattered around the national parks, who'll try to stick it out through thick and thin, when the big chains will pull out if turnover falls. Testing times ahead as surplus funds of many tourists is likely to fall. 

In reply to wbo2:

Well, ideally all I want to use are the roads. The odd public toilet perhaps (which I am happy to pay for or make a donation if the option is there).

In reply to Lord_ash2000:

I'm not sure our outlooks could be more different really!

My stage of life is that I've just retired (a bit early) and upgraded my car to a small van in which I can be very self sufficient. I am largely free to push off up north whenever I feel like it and I intend to do so. On the other hand I am aware that I need to tighten my belt a bit if I am to be able to sustain my freedom to travel and still do the big trips. Hence my preference for frugality on my home trips. Fortunately I am never really happier than when living the scummy itinerant lifestyle out of the back of my car. I honestly feel no desire for luxuries, pubs etc.

We agree on that then.

In reply to Robert Durran:

says everyone tearing round the NC500

In reply to daWalt:

Ouch!

But they (or at least many of them) are there for the purpose of tearing round the roads. Not quite the same thing.

In reply to Robert Durran:

Just spend some money on your essentials locally, which I’m sure you will do.

In reply to Robert Durran:

I spend time mainly in 2 very different and distinct holiday areas. One I live in, the other I holiday in.

Devon is a massive tourist destination and do people need to support local businesses? No, not if they don't want to.  In fact this time of year, visitors using local shops = bare shelves and massive queues at the chippie.

I holiday in the Lakes, and do I use local shops? Yup I do. Poorly stocked? No, on the contrary,  generally very good and although the fella isn't around this year, there is a certain store in a certain village on Ullswater that I would make a point of visiting, only to see the most miserable chap ever, serving there, bless him. Great shop.

Only other places visited regularly are far flung bits of your homeland. Yes, I make a point of not having a full tank of fuel when I arrive in Islay,  so the best little garage in the UK gets that bit more business this year. If I can buy local haggis on the islands, rather than affect the fuel consumption in my van by having it rammed with grub, then why not?

You don't feel obliged to shop local and neither do I, but I chose to do so anyway.

BTW if you were to visit Dawlish, can you especially not shop local in the Siew May please.  The wait in the best Chinese in Devon is long enough already.  Thanks.

In reply to Robert Durran:

Presumably if everyone in the UK only bought local the Shetland economy would be fūcked because nobody would buy their oil.

Presumably the whole economy would also be fūcked as professionals in London tried to grow vegetables rather than buying food from farms outside the area. Lincolnshire farmers would be loosing yield as they stopped buying farm machinery produced in the Midlands and made do with oxen.

In reply to The New NickB:

Yes, fresh fruit and veg and diesel on a longer trip. 

In reply to Brown:

Good point. And here was I thinking that if I ever had the misfortune to be in the south of England again, I'd be sure to check with the motorway service stations that their diesel is locally sourced before making a purchase.

In reply to Robert Durran:

The Num Nums normally like to go to local shops to try stuff on for size. Then we order them online for much cheaper. Amazon is good, and they deliver for free mainly. Local business is only good for trying on services. And toilets, if you need a wee.... but don't buy anything there... best to nick stuff if nobody's looking.

If you go to local cafes etc. it's best to just order the cheapest drink and then eat your own butty under the table and top up your coffee from your flask

In reply to Robert Durran:

If you are visiting a small community tourists spending dosh there can help make the businesses viable which can improve convenience for the locals (such as having a village shop selling food staples) and provide jobs in the local area so that young people aren't forced out of the community to find employment elsewhere.

I will freely admit to buying much of what I need before I leave on a trip, however I do top up on fresh things in local shops as required. 

Thanks for all the considered replies (I expected the deluge of dislikes for questioning the orthodoxy!). I think I am persuaded that I should probably make some effort to spend locally more of what I am going to spend anyway (ie on food and fuel), but don't really think I should feel any obligation to go to cafes, pubs or campsites more than I want to (ie not a lot). There are sometimes arguments for using campsites, but not for the reasons being discussed here.