Robet Buddan, Contributor
NATIONAL DISASTERS, like those caused by hurricanes, test the capacity of states and the developmental policies they follow. States in countries as varied as Haiti, Jamaica, Grenada, Cuba and Florida have all been struck by hurricanes this season, suffered different levels of disaster, and are able to respond with different levels of effectiveness.
Of course, these countries also have different degrees of vulnerability. Florida is the richest of these states and has the additional benefit of a federal government that can provide immediate emergency relief. At the other end of the scale is Haiti, the poorest, with a state that is hardly competent for anything and which has suffered the most deaths and homelessness from what, in its case, was only a tropical storm. The Cuban state has organisations reaching into all communities from a strong centre, and is virtually constantly on emergency alert, ready for quick national mobilisation of its population. Grenada is a micro-state, with too narrow a range of state agencies to manage big disasters.
One official of Grenada said that the effects of Hurricane Ivan might set the island's development back by 20 years. Jamaica's Office of National Reconstruction is more confident that in six months there will be no trace left of the effects of that hurricane. Many Jamaicans are watching to see how quickly things get back to normal to assess the capacity and effectiveness of the state. This is as good a test of the reforms of governance pursued over the last few years as any. Good governance is effective, responsive and caring governance that includes the larger society. It is this that is being tested.
ADVANTAGES
Jamaica does have certain advantages over others like Cuba, Grenada and Haiti. It has a stronger private sector, NGO network, civil society, and diplomatic and international outreach. It has a strong disaster management committee and supporting state agencies. But even though we might not be as badly off as Grenada and Haiti, we have practices that reflect our failings in development and state enforcement, which magnify disasters and make recovery difficult. These include poor building and sheltering practices, criminality and weak neighbourhoods, and weak enforcement of laws.
REVISITING
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
In the 1990s, the term 'sustainable development' was popularly part of the new environmental consciousness. Unfortunately, after 2000, events like 9/11 and the general fascination with terrorism, George Bush, Saddam Hussein, Iraq and Osama bin Laden, have all distracted us from our real threats in the Caribbean. Hopefully, Hurricane Ivan will return us to what we should be focusing on, our own hurricane terrors.
We must build sustainable development practices into our overall development strategies because global warming promises to make natural disasters a constant challenge to development. When people build poor housing structures in flood-prone areas that are constantly damaged, the result is, as the Prime Minister says, a waste of resources. When parish councils do not enforce building codes, this compounds the problem and they should take the advice of the Minister of Local Government and Sports, Portia Simpson Miller, and enforce building codes more stridently. Weak enforcement reflects on the capacity of the state.
When we do not lay more of our electrical cables underground, households and businesses suffer from lack of power and water, and this sets back production. When we do not manage crime in normal times, criminals will use abnormal situations to exploit opportunities to loot and kill. Sustainable development means, at its simplest, practising policies that will best sustain a developmental momentum in the social, economic and political sectors over generations (not just electoral cycles) and during crises (not just normal times).
It is one thing to pursue economic growth but small economies are particularly volatile since one natural disaster can wipe out growth prospects for years. We must provide the economic and social sectors with the capacity to sustain themselves with minimum damage in times of disaster or be able to resume maximum productivity as soon as possible after a disaster.
UNSUSTAINABLE PRACTICES
We cannot stop the wind and the rain but we can insure ourselves better against them. I'll give two examples from a recent newspaper. J. Wray and Nephew estimates that damage to its three sugar estates could be as much as $500 million and could affect 30 per cent of next year's crop. But while the company had insured its crops for fire damage it had not done so for flood damage. This is almost unbelievable. It then says it will go to Government to get financial help. But Government has strict budget targets to stick to and if we overshoot those targets it will undermine our international credibility and hurt our sustainable economic prospects.
INDUSTRY-WIDE CATASTROPHES
Another report says Jamaica's coffee industry faces an estimated US$18 million loss from Ivan, or 40 to 50 per cent of the crop for 2004/5. It goes on to say, "The disaster comes just two months after the coffee stakeholders filed an injunction against the CIB (Coffee Industry Board) over the termination of individual insurance for farmers. Although CIB still offers coverage in the event of industry-wide catastrophes, the stakeholders felt that if a hurricane hit but was not defined as an industry disaster, farmers could be denied compensation."
Sugar, rum and coffee are major industries. Yet, for no good reason, they are not adequately insured. Furthermore, they suffer from an unreliable system of electricity. The report on J. Wray and Nephew said that its farms suffered from eight inches of rainfall but there was no escape for the water as there was no electricity to activate the flood control systems on the estates. In the case of the coffee industry, the president of the Jamaica Agricultural Society, Senator Norman Grant said, the pace at which electricity is restored and the clearing of blocked gully roads will determine how quickly the sector can rebound.
THE NEXT DEVELOPMENT
Development thinking has gone through a number of stages. At one stage it centred on capitalist versus socialist models of development. At a more recent stage it has come to focus on economic growth as development (economic capital) versus human development (social capital). Sustainable development really means economic growth, human development, and sustainable environments.
The September National Geographic devoted the entire issue to global warming showing that the problem continues to be real and is getting worse. Just this past week, on September 21, the international community commemorated International Day for the Preservation of the Ozone Layer to remind us of the gravity of this problem. The ultimate political lesson of climate change is that states need to build capacity to manage disasters.
To enhance the capacity of the Jamaican state, it might be useful to give permanent status to the Office of National Reconstruction (as the Office of Sustainable Management) in the Ministry of Land and Environment to identify potential disaster areas, enforce building codes in these areas and the laws against squatting and mining of mountains and rivers generally, seeing to the insurance of the country's assets, ensuring that roads, bridges and gullies are built and maintained according to standards of disaster management, and so on.
There will be another time when we are faced with natural disaster. The next developmental model must integrate capacity for prevention and recovery into our strategic plans. Parish development plans, for example, must do so.
Robert Buddan lectures in the Department of Government, Mona, UWI. Send your comments to: Robert.Buddan@uwimona.edu.jm or infocus@gleanerjm.com
