Road repair too haphazard

by Dennis Morrison

A big issue in the Jamaica Development Infrastructure Programme (JDIP) controversy is the charge of a lack of transparency with respect to the criteria by which roads were selected for inclusion in the programme. People's National Party (PNP) members of parliament who are dissatisfied about the small size of allocations to their constituencies attribute this to inequity in the sharing of state resources. If their charge is justified, this could well fit into the distorted interpretation of Harold Laswell's definition of politics as being "... about who gets what, where and when".

Laswell was, however, not commenting on politics as a tribal activity to distribute 'scarce benefits and spoils'. Rather, he was referring to the process of decision making by which societies establish priorities and determine how limited resources are allocated. Since every need cannot be met at once, a method for assessing competing claims is required. This is the role played by the political process, but not to meet partisan ends.

And so applying this logic to a programme such as JDIP, where not every road in every constituency or community could be included, there would need to be a process with clear criteria for determining the allocation of the funds.

Hard to plan for long term

The long-standing tension and tribalism in decision making about roadworks in Jamaica has made it difficult to plan on a long-term basis. State resources are deployed not according to transparent criteria for road selection, budgeting and timetables, but often by political expediency. This is made worse where budgets change drastically from year to year. Given the scale of the resources of JDIP, it held the promise that at last there could be a systematic approach to road maintenance.

But the problems with JDIP, if they have done nothing else, have brought into sharp focus the urgency and necessity of instituting a framework for road development and maintenance in Jamaica. The essence of this framework must be a set of criteria to underpin long-term decision making. Such criteria would not only cut down on the political wrangling over 'scarce benefits and spoils' and costly misallocation of public resources that is involved.

More broadly, it would mean that infrastructure works could be synchronised with the country's development plans. Road infrastructure supports both economic and social priorities, and, therefore, should not be dictated by the political cycle.

The distortions in resource allocation for roads are not explained only by partisan politics, as can been seen from the chronic neglect of road infrastructure in the eastern parishes of St Mary, Portland and St Thomas. For the past 22 years, electors in these parishes have voted for the party in power but were at the bottom of the list in the allocation of funds.

After successive hurricane-related disasters in the 1990s and 2000s, and with no serious rehabilitation being carried out on roads, agricultural production in these parishes has fallen sharply. Clearly, the process that directs funding for infrastructure has put a low priority on the resuscitation of this part of the country.

Untapped potential

In the case of Portland, the running down of its roads has virtually crippled the once-vibrant tourist industry. Meanwhile, the potential of the parish to attract investment in high-end and nature-based tourism and contribute to the broadening of our product is untapped.

The completion of the Ocho Rios to Port Antonio segment of the North Coast highway is a first step. But that must now be followed by the upgrading of the Port Antonio to Harbour View main road if Portland's tourist industry is to be revitalised.

My bet, though, is that decision making will remain haphazard, and hence the allocation of road funds will continue to be biased towards the other resorts.

The physical infrastructure of St Thomas is even in a worse state, and its parochial economy has suffered with the closure of the Goodyear factory and the decline of the sugar and banana industries. While significant works were done to some main roads in the 1970s and 1990s, there has been no major road upgrading undertaken in the parish since Robert Lightbourne held Cabinet rank some 40 years ago. And until the North Coast Highway project, the same was true for Portland, where major improvement was carried out under Ken Jones during his stint as a minister in the early 1960s.

If these parishes are not to be left to slide further into economic and social decay, there will have to be a re-examination of their ranking in the priorities for spending on roads and drainage, etc, under JDIP. This consideration should supersede partisan political wrangling and the impulse to share 'scarce benefits and spoils'.

Dennis Morrison is an economist. Email feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com.