Four researchers at the centre of a rift rocking a recently launched local think tank that goes by the name ‘Taking Responsibility’, have denied that their withdrawal from the group was over money.

According to Horace Levy, a part-time university lecturer who spoke on behalf of the four who comprised what was termed the Culture Group, their action was rooted in what he described as the “myopic and narrow” presentation document handed out at the think tank’s December 7 launch.

“Nonsense,” was how Levy responded to the argument about a money dispute. “When we agreed to participate, no one asked how much would be paid or when it would be paid. In fact, as far as we knew, only the research assistants would receive a stipend anyway, and we agreed to participate just the same.”

Levy said the four researchers – Anthony Bouges, professor of African Studies at Brown University and distinguished fellow at the Centre for African Studies at the University of Cape Town, South Africa; Sean Ffrench, lecturer; Obika Gray, professor of Political Science, University of Wiscon-Eau Claire; and himself – were disappointed with the final document presented by the Taking Responsibility group because it ignored the role of culture in the development process.

“Only the most myopic, narrow view of the society today, in a world where multi-disciplinary and cross boundary approaches are critical for understanding any society, could propose that what was necessary for transforming the Jamaican society were purely economic interventions,” said Levy.

The Culture Group, he said, had tabled its objection after a draft of the final document was presented.

The think tank was spawned from a group of friends who started meeting just over three years ago and who would agonise over why Jamaica has not done better economically, even though they knew the island could.

The rationalé for the project, the group said, was to raise the standard of public discussion on the economy in order to create the environment necessary for Jamaicans, armed with information on all options available to them, to demand challenging decisions from their leaders that will result in a better Jamaica.

At the December 7 launch inside Kingston’s Emancipation Park, the group, made up of 46 people from all walks of life, presented what it said were three key findings on which several points of consensus have emerged. They were that:

. the relative prosperity of the 1960s was somewhat illusory, as the gains were concentrated, resulting in an unstable political economy;

. the 1970s’ turn towards reform was a necessary tonic to these shortcomings; the turn to socialism by (former prime minister) Michael Manley, however, even if it was largely rhetorical, was a serious mistake; and

. the social opening provided by Manley in the 1970s was probably salutary, in that more Jamaicans apparently began to feel that their young state included them, but was largely derailed by the reckless radicalisation of their then prime minister.

The think tank blamed Manley’s democratic socialism ideology for “the largest contraction of economic activity in Jamaica since World War II”, resulting from a combination of price controls, restrictive trade policies, inflation, and socio-political programmes.

But shortly after the launch, the Culture Group issued a statement announcing its disengagement.

“.the project had, for us, a great potential and we pinned our hopes on it. However, it has not lived up to its multi-disciplinary promise and, in important areas, the promise of academic rigour.” Levy’s group said.

The think tank, he said, failed to give weight to the cultural dimension of colour or race in the Jamaican society, and its absence “reverberates throughout the document and reflects badly on a project that claims to be inter-, or trans-disciplinary”.

Levy, the rapporteur for the Culture Group, said among the absurdities presented was the suggestion that the 1970s and 1980s differed only by the rhetoric of the leaders of each decade – the socialist Manley in the 1970s and capitalist Edward Seaga in the 1980s.

However, Imani Duncan, executive director of the think tank, while corroborating Levy’s denial of a money dispute, suggested that the Culture Group delivered incomplete work to the project.

“.It became apparent that the Culture Group had not provided sufficient data-driven research to substantiate their conclusions,” Duncan had said in a statement to which she referred the Sunday Observer.

“Our commitment as the Taking Responsibility group is that all of our findings be grounded in evidence,” she said. “In August 2006, due to the absence of the required evidence-based research from the Culture Group, the executive of the project contracted additional researchers to tackle some of the substantive work. This new body of data currently accounts for 18 per cent of the body of the working paper…” Duncan’s statement read.

She said the group was disappointed at the exit of the four, but emphasised that the door was not closed to them.

“I believe we are somewhat disheartened, because we were all under the impression that the Culture team would participate in the planned discussions,” Duncan told Sunday Observer. “We were surprised when we saw the statement in the Press announcing their disengagement, when up to the day before we were of the view that they would participate.”

Duncan also took issue with the Sunday Observer’s report of the launch, saying that the newspaper’s interpretation was somewhat misleading as the blame for Jamaica’s poor economy in the 1970s was not laid at the feet of Manley himself.

“It was the policies that were pursued under his leadership and their consequences, many of which have set back Jamaica 30 years,” she said. “That was the recklessness we were talking about.”

Duncan said, however, that despite the split, a promised draft working paper will be presented to the public on January 26, 2007, with an interactive public forum to follow on February 27, 2007.

In the meantime, Levy said, he and his colleagues will instead concentrate on the Jamaica Nation Project, under the aegis of the Centre for Caribbean Thought.