COMPARING GOVERNANCE IN THE NON-INDEPENDENT CARIBBEAN

Report of a seminar held at the University of Liverpool , November 26, 2007

Left to Right: Dr Luz del Alba Acevedo , Professor Justin Daniel, Dr Amanda Sives, Dr Efrén Rivera-Ramos, Dr Emilio Pantojas-Garcia and Professor Paul Sutton

The first event of the Caribbean Politics Specialist Group was held at the Institute of Latin American Studies , University of Liverpool on November 26, 2007. Funded by the Political Studies Association, the CPSG was also supported by the School of Politics and Communications Studies as well as the British Academy Latin-American Caribbean seminar programme.

The event was launched by Professor Jon Tonge, Chair of the Political Studies Association and Head of the School of Politics and Communication Studies.

The first two papers were given by Professor Paul Sutton of London Metropolitan University and Professor Justin Daniel of the University of the French Antilles and French Guyane, Martinique . Professor Sutton focused on the relationship between the British Government and its overseas territories in the Caribbean and examined issues which have caused tensions between the central government in the UK and the governments of the territories since the 1990s. These included: accountability, resource allocation, and the balance between governance responsibilities and political control. Professor Sutton concluded by arguing that while some overseas territories are dissatisfied with the level of control by the UK government, the economic benefits of the relationship swing the balance away from independence and toward the maintenance of the relationship.

In contrast, Professor Daniel discussed the multi-layered levels of democracy in the French Caribbean territories of Guadeloupe and Martinique . In his paper he explored the impacts of decentralization processes carried out by the French state since the 1980s. He highlighted how the proliferation of government institutions (at the levels of Europe, the state, region, department, communes) has undermined representative democracy and made it increasingly difficult for citizens to identify decision-making bodies (and therefore to enforce a level of accountability). This, in turn, has led to growing citizen apathy towards the political process and a diminishing status and role of politicians. In conclusion, Professor Daniel argued that while increasing decentralization has led to the revival of local initiatives, it has also led to the growth of multiple and complex layers of governance which have undermined democratic representation. He proposed that the institutional landscape should be simplified and local powers and autonomy should be reinforced. Both papers provided a very interesting comparison between approaches to governance which have taken place between the British and French metropoles and their overseas territories and highlighted the tensions and challenges which have emerged with the implementation of forms of governance from the centre.

The second section of the workshop focused on issues of identity and governance in Puerto Rico . The first speaker, Dr Emilio Pantojas-Garcia, from the Center for Social Research at the Graduate School of Business, University of Puerto Rico, (and an alumni of the University of Liverpool), discussed trade liberalization and economic development in Puerto Rico. In his paper, Dr Pantojas-Garcia explored the extent to which globalization processes are having an impact on the economic development of Puerto Rico . He examined how six key competitive advantages of the territory (common market, currency, citizenship, defense, direct subsidies and special tax regimes) have been affected by trade liberalization. Whilst Puerto Rico has maintained some economic advantages through its relationship with the United States , Dr Pantojas-Garcia argued that a number of issues of economic governance need to be addressed to ensure the future economic development of Puerto Rico . These include issues such as: markets being forced open to competing economies (such as Mexico , Dominican Republic ), forced membership of regional economic blocs (NAFTA, CAFTA) and the inability to enter other regional economic blocs (such as CARICOM).

Dr Efrén Rivera-Ramos, Professor and former Dean of the Law School , University of Puerto Rico , gave a fascinating insight into the constitutional relationship between Puerto Rico and the United States . He began his presentation providing a historical context to the current constitutional arrangements between the two countries. Explaining that Puerto Rico is officially an ‘unincorporated territory’ meaning that it belongs to, but is not part of the United States , Dr Efrén Rivera-Ramos convincingly argued that the relationship remains, at its core, an imperial one. The key issue that needed to be resolved, he argued, was that the normative framework governing the relationship needed to be reassessed. As recently as 2005, a presidential task force had concluded that the current legal terms would allow the US to cede Puerto Rico to another country, if it chose to do so. Dr Rivera-Ramos concluded his paper stating there is a general dissatisfaction within Puerto Rico at the obvious manifestations of US political power. While the two papers addressed the issue of governance from different perspectives, they both sought to underline the centrality of the relationship between the metropole and its territory in determining economic and political development. Dr Pantojas-Garcia saw a measure of economic benefits in the relationship whereas Dr Rivera-Ramos was very clear in calling for a debate on the very framework which has underpinned relations since 1898.

Amanda Sives

Convenor of the CPSG, University of Liverpool

asives@liv.ac.uk