IT is hardly necessary to say it, but for emphasis, the economic recovery of the Caribbean Community must be a priority among the myriad problems and issues on the agenda of the Caricom Heads of Government meeting taking place in Port of Spain, Trinidad and Tobago.

The national economies of Caricom as a whole have exhibited low rates of economic growth in recent years, both in real terms and compared with other regions, but particularly Africa, Asia and Latin America.

The economic stagnation is a result of a combination of long-term factors and short-term cyclical events. The small, undiversified economies of the region suffered an adverse impact from the dismantling of the preferential trade arrangements for sugar and bananas entering the European Union.

Admittedly, the Caricom producers were among the highest cost suppliers and did not become sufficiently competitive to survive in a free market. This was an exogenous event over which the region had no control, but the truth is that most governments did not do enough, on a timely basis, to become competitive or switching to other exports. Some countries managed to do so, eg St Lucia expanded tourism to replace bananas.

The vulnerability consequent on the openness and structural features of Caricom economies was exposed by the exigencies of the global economic crisis since late 2008. Our regional economies have not recovered or are only now showing nascent signs of growth in contrast to Asia, Africa and Latin America that have either maintained or resumed economic growth.

For example, in 2012, world output increased by 3.2 per cent and Latin America grew by 3.0 per cent. Economic growth in the Caribbean countries in 2012 was within a range of 0.1-1.2 per cent in Barbados, Eastern Caribbean Currency Union, Curacao, Jamaica, St Maarten, and Trinidad and Tobago; 2.5-3.0 per cent in The Bahamas and Haiti; and 4.5-5.3 per cent in Belize, Guyana and Suriname.

Individual governments tried to stimulate their economies, in isolation, by debt-funded expansionary fiscal policies only to compound their debt problem. While individual national recovery efforts are essential, because of the specificity they apply to local economic circumstances they can be amplified if they are conducted within the framework of a regional economic recovery strategy.

It is our view that, in a regional strategy, the countries experiencing the highest growth rates would have a multiplier effect on the rest of the territories. This is one of the potential benefits of regional economic integration.

If this mixed performance is to be turned into sustained rates of high economic growth then the region needs to formulate a regional strategy — a step it failed to do when the global economic crisis began. We note, of course, that several papers were commissioned on a regional strategy of economic recovery but were rejected by the Heads of Governments.

It is a task which still needs to be done and implementation commenced in earnest, as soon as possible, if Caricom is not to miss the boat once again.