Inadequate infrastructure

Despite significant increases in infrastructural development in the country over the last decade, less than half of the population is convinced that the infrastructure has got better.

Approximately 45 per cent of the 1,015 respondents in the Don Anderson-led Market Research Services Limited (MRSL) survey are of the view that there has been some improvement in the infrastructure such as water, roads, etc, in their area over the last 10 years.

On the other hand, approximately 38 per cent of the respondents feel that the infrastructure has got worse while 17.2 per cent asserted that there have been no changes over the years.

The poll, which was conducted between November 24 and December 7 last year, was designed by MRSL with financial support from what the company describes as a group of senior corporate executives of a publicly listed entity.

Only persons aged 18 years and older and registered to vote were included in the islandwide sample. The margin of error was plus or minus three per cent at the 95 per cent confidence level.

A breakdown of the results found that 9.9 per cent asserted that the infrastructure was better while 34.9 per cent said that it had got a little better.

Twelve point seven per cent answered that the infrastructure has got a little worse while 25. 2 per cent said that it had got much worse.

Delving deeper into the result, pollster Anderson said that of the total number of respondents, more men were of the view that things had got better.

“Forty-seven per cent of the men say things have gotten better, which is better than the 45 overall, while 43 per cent of the women say that things had gotten better.”

Of note, he said that the majority of persons who were between the ages or 45 and54 and 55 and64 believed that things have got better.

However, he said: “When you look across the age groups, the younger persons are not overly convinced because for the persons 18-24, only 39 per cent of them believe that things have gotten better as against 45 per cent overall.”

Interestingly, he noted that the oldest group, 65 and over, felt the same way as the youngest group as only 37 per cent of them were of the view that infrastructure is getting better.

Urban planning specialist Carol Archer said that while major works have been done over the years, she is not surprised by the results as there is a serious deficiency when it comes to maintenance.

“The data, even though I would question how it is presented and I would need to do a deeper dive, it somewhat reflects a general sentiment of how the population feels about infrastructure, the lack of inclusivity in our design, the poor maintenance, the limited attention to sustainability,” she noted.

“What the data is showing is that yes, work has been done, but I think we need to do further investigation to find out how people feel about the quality of the work, and we need to disaggregate with the different types of infrastructure because when you aggregate the road with water, with light, with sewer, then it’s not the best way,” she explained.

Additionally, Archer said a breakdown of the data with respect to the different types infrastructure as well as the data for the respondents from the rural area versus the urban would have given a better picture of what is happening and how the population feels.

However, she said: “My experience is that infrastructure is poorly maintained. Even the ones that were built within the last 10 years, you will see them fall into a state of disrepair.”

Another issue, Archer pointed out, that may have accounted for the negative results is poor workmanship.

“Let’s look at downtown Kingston, all of the waterfront they have improved. They have put up a seawall ,then what happens when you go two, three streets over? You have to hop, skip, and jump over broken sewer mains. So whatever gains that would have been made by improving the waterfront would have been completely negated by the poor maintenance of the sewage system.”

Similarly, “With the gullies, whatever improvement would have been made, the increase in garbage in gullies which lead to the sea, which cause fishkill, will offset the improvements that are there,” she said.

On the issue of roads, she noted that the development is not comprehensive as it is designed primarily for motorists and not for children, the elderly, and the disabled, who usually have a hard time navigating some of the newly built roads.

Advocate for the built and natural environment Dr Patricia Green also agrees with the results that infrastructure has improved.

“I would agree with the overall percentage,” she said.

She, too, said that the survey should have given a breakdown of the results for the different types of infrastructure and also captured the results from the rural respondents separate from the urban areas.

“In my opinion, this seems to be an emphasis on an urban environment, so even if they were doing the country, I don’t know if they went to Anchovy. They probably did Montego Bay, so that’s why you have to think about the rural as opposed to urban,” she said, adding that persons in the rural area would have a totally different view as they have a number of varying issues with infrastructure in their communities.

In the urban areas, she said that a lot of multifamily developments are being built, which needs to be plugged into a sewage system, but in the absence of the systems, “they are going to be giving up the roads to put it in, and there has traditionally been a lot of problems, neighbourhood after neighbourhood.”

Asked what recommendation she would make, she said, “There is a driver for development, and the driver for development is having a sewage system into which developments should be plugged in.”

tanesha.mundle@gleanerjm.com