Clarke

At a special meeting at People's National Party (PNP) headquarters in the mid-1980s, I awaited the arrival of the great doyen of the Third World Awakening, Julius Nyerere, with eager anticipation. It was not long after my entry into politics, and I was anxious to learn what I could from the great African leader. His presentation revealed him to be a man of extraordinary charm and affability.

Disappointingly, his personality was far more impressive than his presentation. He was passionate and eloquent in describing the unfairness of the terms of trade between the developed world and the developing, which resulted in ever-increasing volumes of agricultural raw materials produced in the poor countries being required to buy the industrial goods produced by the rich.

The dilemma was clear: more and more tons of sugar cane or bananas to buy one tractor; but at the end of the meeting he had offered no better solution than his oft-repeated mantra: we must create a "trade union of the poor" to pressure the rich northern countries to provide greater equity in their trade with the South. I remember musing in quiet bewilderment: why don't we simply learn to produce tractors? Why not set our sights on producing industrial goods instead of just raw materials? But the doctrine of the perennial "sufferer" was so deeply entrenched at the time that I thought it would have been heresy to suggest a different approach. It was my later exposure to Robert Lightbourne that helped to reinforce my belief that only industrialisation could transform us from a sufferer nation to a prosperous one.

industrialisation strategy

Subsequent developments in two countries which would have been candidates for membership in Nyerere's trade union of the poor, Malaysia and his own Tanzania, would vividly demonstrate the superiority of the industrialisation strategy over that of the agriculture led model. In 1980, both countries were essentially agricultural economies. At that time, Malaysia was held up as a model for efficient agricultural production. However, having witnessed the growing industrialisation and rapidly increasing prosperity of Singapore, its former junior partner in the Malaysian Federation, Malaysia changed course towards industrialisation. The result has been a near nine-fold increase in its GDP, taking it to over US$221 billion today. Tanzania on the other hand has remained steadfastly focused on agriculture, which now represents over 80 per cent of its economy. And although its economy has registered some growth in recent years, Tanzania's people still remain mired in poverty as the country's economy lags at US$21billion, one-tenth that of Malaysia, with a population more than 50 per cent greater.

My concern about the Jamaican Government fixing its focus on agriculture and away from industry is not only the fact that agriculture-led economies are generally poor, but that over the years, agricultural output has been insufficient to provide adequate incomes to lift Jamaica's rural population out of poverty. The rural poor have been and will continue to be impoverished because there is far too little value created by agriculture and far too many people who have to depend on it for an income. At present, 17 per cent (about 220,000) of our workforce is engaged in producing the approximately US$700 million agriculture contributes to our GDP, resulting in a contribution of approximately $3,000 per worker from which the worker could command no more than US$1,500 as personal income, to support his two or three dependents. Industry's contribution to GDP is US$4.5 billion with each of its approximately 250,000 workers contributing an average of approximately US$20,000.

Clearly, there is an urgent need to lift the earnings of agricultural labour. To do this, Government has to create alternative employment options in the other, more productive sectors of manufacturing and export services. And at the same time bring more capital, science and technology to the service of agriculture to increase its output. The end result would be that agricultural labour would become more productive, and incomes in the sector would increase. But neither of these approaches will be possible unless there is growth and expansion in the manufacturing and export-services sectors.

As I said in my last article, agriculture is essential to mankind's, and by extension, to Jamaica's existence. But neglecting industry to promote it would only lead to agriculture's ultimate decline. Jamaica's agriculture is valuable for a number of very important reasons. But our development goal must go beyond merely keeping our people fed. Modern Jamaicans expect to have a more diversified and fulfilling life. And this expectation can only be met with production of a value far beyond their need for food. An industrially driven development path is the only means by which this can be done.

The drive towards industrialisation will require a new relationship with the key elements of modern economic organisation: capital, energy and people. Competitively priced capital and energy are essential and I hope to address these in future articles. But the most urgent priority demanding the focused attention of government is the productivity of our people.

A recent public forum 'discovered' a fact which has existed for at least the last 20 years and should have been recognised a very long time ago (certainly several of my previous articles have highlighted it): Jamaica's labour productivity is substantially lower than that of our trading partners. Many attribute this to the low level of education and training of our workforce and believe we must first train and educate our people before we will be able to increase national productivity and production.

Though it cannot be denied that a better-trained and educated workforce would be more productive, it is also true that no person is without productive capacity. Government's first task must, therefore, be to engage the productive capacity of our workforce at its present level of training and fully employ its present productive potential. At the same time, Government should be organising and mobilising our educational institutions, including HEART, to prepare a workforce with the education and skills needed for an industrialising economy, anticipating the skills needs of industry and providing the level of trained personnel to keep our productive activities going and growing as we move closer towards industrialisation.

Our policymakers should be engaged in attracting investments and activities in the areas in which the highest economic value can be created, and this is essentially in manufacturing and high-value export services like quality tourism attractions. The approach adopted by many successful economies has been either import substitution or export-led development, or a combination of both.

Import substitution is still a worthwhile and workable development strategy but there is no logic to limiting the strategy to agricultural imports. This limitation will only serve to hold back the benefits of import substitution to the economy. The total potential for replacing agricultural imports is a mere fraction of the potential for manufactured imports of almost US$5 billion. Why then shouldn't we apply our import-substitution strategy to manufactured imports? Is it that we believe our people are not capable of manufacturing? Or do we think we are destined to be poor? Have we bought into the idea that "one Chinie can do five smaddy wuk"?

If Jamaicans, when abroad, can produce with the best in all fields, Jamaicans at home with the right motivation are also capable of producing at the highest level. It was at a clothing factory in South Korea that a Jamaican trade delegation of which I was a part was surprised by the presence of two Jamaican workers, who we were later informed, were there on an exchange programme and were among the plant's top producers. The challenge to our current leaders is to create the environment, policies and motivation to inspire our Jamaican workers to perform at the same high level of those two Jamaican workers in that South Korean factory.

economic output

Our development strategy must begin with the simple but fundamental belief that the Jamaican people are both capable and worthy of the highest level of economic output. We cannot limit our people's potential by shackling our expectations to the lowest end of the economic value chain when we can so easily be active at much higher levels of that chain in manufacturing and export services.

Were this government serious about development, it would have come to office with an unambiguous commitment to this objective. It would by now have been able to present a credible development plan to the public anchored in its national budgets. There would not only have been targets set for employment growth in high-value jobs in manufacturing and export services, but it would have laid out the pathways on which these targets would be achieved. The enabling policies and institutional changes would have been engaged and we would have already been on the road to economic recovery and development, as all our Caribbean neighbours are.

In the meantime, the Opposition, instead of challenging the Government on its failure to show any inclination towards real economic development, is preoccupied with defending the indefensible: its past ruinous policies, with which the country is still burdened. Development seems to have become the blind spot on the retina of both our political parties. And it seems to have made them oblivious of their responsibility to chart a course towards the country's development and our people's prosperity.

Forty-seven years after Independence, this sightlessness has left us unable to decide whether we should strive to become a prosperous country, or cling to our long-held position as a 'member' of the trade union of the poor.

Claude Clarke is a former government minister and manufacturer. Feedback may be sent to columns@gleanerjm.com.

Donald Johnson tends to his cabbages on his Tangle River-based farm along with his friend Oren Ramsay. Neglecting industry to promote agriculture will only lead to agriculture's ultimate decline. - Photo by Claudia Gardner

Petronas Twin Tower - Kuala Lumpur City Centre, Malaysia.

Nyerere