Tweet
EDITORIAL - Plans and visions and the need for realism
published: Friday | November 2, 2007
The Planning Institute of Jamaica is to be congratulated on its launch of Vision 2030 - a National Development Plan for Jamaica. This is an important technical effort to analyse the social and economic needs of Jamaica with a view to enhancing the development process over the next 23 years. While this is not the first effort in this area - there was the excellent development plan produced in the early 1960s under Edward Seaga's watch with United Nations assistance - it is still to be welcomed.
This particular plan formulation process adopts some of the most sophisticated statistical modelling techniques developed by the Scandinavian countries to the needs of Jamaica. In the course of this process, several Jamaicans have been trained to a high level and have demonstrated an impressive mastery of these techniques.
At the same time, the planners have established a series of task forces which had broad civil society representation. What should emerge from this process, therefore, is a perspective on our economic and social problems which is objective and solidly based on fact.
The real value of this process is that it allows Jamaican society to reflect dispassionately on our economic problems and on the hard choices which we have to make in trying to achieve our development goals. The planning methodology can help us to understand what is realistic and what will not work. It should, therefore, have the salutary effect of taking some issues out of the sterile partisan political arena which dominates public policy discussions in Jamaica.
At the same time, we are concerned that the 2030 Vision should not raise false hopes or inspire a new round of government interference in the economy. The Jamaican economy is a market-driven one in which the decisions are made by investors, firms, employees, savers and consumers. This means that any plan can only be indicative and offer a general guide as to the trade-offs which we have to make.
It cannot attempt to pick winners or to discriminate against particular sectors. Because of our prolonged economic stagnation, some may be tempted to see in this plan the opportunity to speed up the process of development. This would be a fatal mistake and would jeopardise even the little which we have achieved over the years.
Likewise, the rhetoric around 'achieving First World status by 2030' - whatever that may mean - is not helpful. Already, the Government's campaign rhetoric around the economy has raised hopes for a rapid economic turnaround, which is completely unrealistic in the current gobal extent. Rather than further expectations, the 2030 Vision exercise should provide an opportunity to dampen down this irrational exuberance. While vision is important, our real need now is for hard-headed realism.
The opinions on this page, except for the above, do not necessarily reflect the views of The Gleaner. To respond to a Gleaner editorial, email us: editor@gleanerjm.com or fax: 922-6223. Responses should be no longer than 400 words. Not all responses will be published.
published: Friday | November 2, 2007
The Planning Institute of Jamaica is to be congratulated on its launch of Vision 2030 - a National Development Plan for Jamaica. This is an important technical effort to analyse the social and economic needs of Jamaica with a view to enhancing the development process over the next 23 years. While this is not the first effort in this area - there was the excellent development plan produced in the early 1960s under Edward Seaga's watch with United Nations assistance - it is still to be welcomed.
This particular plan formulation process adopts some of the most sophisticated statistical modelling techniques developed by the Scandinavian countries to the needs of Jamaica. In the course of this process, several Jamaicans have been trained to a high level and have demonstrated an impressive mastery of these techniques.
At the same time, the planners have established a series of task forces which had broad civil society representation. What should emerge from this process, therefore, is a perspective on our economic and social problems which is objective and solidly based on fact.
The real value of this process is that it allows Jamaican society to reflect dispassionately on our economic problems and on the hard choices which we have to make in trying to achieve our development goals. The planning methodology can help us to understand what is realistic and what will not work. It should, therefore, have the salutary effect of taking some issues out of the sterile partisan political arena which dominates public policy discussions in Jamaica.
At the same time, we are concerned that the 2030 Vision should not raise false hopes or inspire a new round of government interference in the economy. The Jamaican economy is a market-driven one in which the decisions are made by investors, firms, employees, savers and consumers. This means that any plan can only be indicative and offer a general guide as to the trade-offs which we have to make.
It cannot attempt to pick winners or to discriminate against particular sectors. Because of our prolonged economic stagnation, some may be tempted to see in this plan the opportunity to speed up the process of development. This would be a fatal mistake and would jeopardise even the little which we have achieved over the years.
Likewise, the rhetoric around 'achieving First World status by 2030' - whatever that may mean - is not helpful. Already, the Government's campaign rhetoric around the economy has raised hopes for a rapid economic turnaround, which is completely unrealistic in the current gobal extent. Rather than further expectations, the 2030 Vision exercise should provide an opportunity to dampen down this irrational exuberance. While vision is important, our real need now is for hard-headed realism.
The opinions on this page, except for the above, do not necessarily reflect the views of The Gleaner. To respond to a Gleaner editorial, email us: editor@gleanerjm.com or fax: 922-6223. Responses should be no longer than 400 words. Not all responses will be published.
Comment