Like most of you this week—well-meaning though we are—I’ve had the world of a migraine in the face of major legislative changes in Barbados. In the grand scheme of things, it’s a minute issue. Even so, it mattered not, as most of the region now braces for a very active silly season. From a Barbadian point of view, we might as well be caught up in the carnival, as the implementation of the “tint law” and the “wiretapping act” rivals the best offered by Barnum & Bailey.
There’s an economic insight in all of this. I’m challenged to look at it from a bird’s eye view. Barbados seems to believe it must pursue all things rapid when it comes to implementation. “Rapid and progressive” might be more accurate now that I think about it. Sadly, both terms rarely yield sustainable results. And sustainability is the name of the game when your country is a price taker. Your actions must be nimble—flexible, even—but without an anchor in sustainability, or in your uniqueness in the global marketplace, you won’t remain rapid or progressive for long.
This quagmire reminds me of a concept from quantum physics: “quantum superposition”. It describes a state in which a quantum particle can exist in two places at once. Imagine a roasted breadfruit—the best you’ve ever made. The theory of quantum superposition would assume that the same breadfruit also exists over at your friend’s house. Except your friend lives in New York City, while you're about to dig in here in Barbados.
There have been experiments, notably at CERN in Switzerland last year, that confirm quantum superposition does exist—at the quantum level. Quantum particles, by nature, can’t be observed easily unless they interact with other phenomena. You can't see them unless you're looking, and even then, it takes expensive equipment just to try. The average person alive today will never see a quantum particle.
Sadly, economic policies are nothing like quantum particles. They do not behave similarly, nor yield comparable results across contexts. Yet, policymakers—politically influenced as they must be—often behave as if they do. Economic policies won’t produce the same results in two different places. Sustainable strategies may be rapid in implementation or progressive in outcome. But all three—sustainability, rapidity, and progressiveness—cannot be entangled in superposition. Perhaps two at a time, but never all three. It’s a case of choosing your poison.
I feel I’ve written this before. Take Singapore: it tries to be nimble, but with a long-term view and a very clear definition of success. Barbados, by contrast, has only one measurable ambition: how policymakers intend to reduce the Public Debt-to-GDP ratio. In my last article, I argued that the government seems to promote its own capital expenditure or incentivise that of the private sector. Buildings are springing up all over Barbados. But, pray tell—how do we plan to increase long-stay tourist arrivals to fill all these new hotels, especially when that market’s growth prospects have stagnated, or better yet, aged out?
Unless there’s a plan to target unconventional tourism markets and expect long-term returns, there’s only so much a “branded” hotel can achieve through international marketing campaigns. If foreign brand ownership indeed leads to growth in certain segments of long-stay arrivals, then I must point you to growing academic research suggesting this trend also correlates with increased foreign exchange inflows. Given that foreign exchange retention is critical to Barbados’ economic success—more so than is required for our nearest competitors—it baffles me that we expect similar strategies to yield similar outcomes here as they do in, say, Grenada.
For emphasis, I think back to the growing success of SpiceMas in Grenada. Our own Crop Over festival, in my view, suffers from an economic superposition when compared with what Grenadian policymakers have cultivated. Actually, it more closely mirrors the approach used in Trinidad and Tobago: a festival driven primarily by fetes, and less by cultural events year by year.
In Barbados’ case, I’ve always questioned what “culture” in our festival really means. For most of my 41 years alive, the end of the sugar crop has had less and less relevance to the festival’s character. The same could be said of Carnival in Trinidad and Tobago—though some would disagree when I say that Trini investment in our festival model is partly to blame.
What draws more and more people to Grenada is their deliberate preservation of what makes them uniquely Grenadian—beyond just the Jab. As a cheaper tourism experience overall, I’m certain their tourism spend during the festival season rises in tandem with growing interest in the event. What works in Trinidad and Tobago will not yield the same results here. But we can certainly learn from Grenada. Our culture is unique to us—and interesting at that. A long-term and deliberate effort to market it may produce greater tourist spend than ever before.
In contrast, the bland attempts to change the Kadooment route, limit the number of songs performed at “Pic-O-De-Crop”, or increase the emphasis on parties, do little to make our product unique. Throughout the rest of the year, especially during tourist season, I find myself asking the same core question.
Our GDP has increased rapidly—mostly due to recent surges in capital expenditure. The economy is being branded as progressive because of a shift to a more flexible regime of assembly-line lawmaking, catchy slogans, and late-stage innovations. Great. But none of this feels sustainable. There’s a reluctance to implement strategies that truly address our enduring problems. Instead, we import what’s already done elsewhere. Our policymakers are behaving like quantum physicists.
This didn’t escape me during the launch of BimPay last week. I admire the intent. But why launch a technology product without involving a cybersecurity expert to inspire confidence in the platform’s safety? Especially in a country like Barbados, where the public sector is increasingly targeted by cyberattacks. We practically lead CARICOM in this regard. The idea of using QR codes for fund transfers is particularly risky—most of the world is moving on from that practice. If ever there were a time to apply the concept of economic superposition, it would be here.