In his article entitled ‘The implications of breadfruit-cassava flour’, published in the Jamaica Observer on July 13, 2022, Dr Michael Witter welcomed the move by the Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries to embark on a programme to produce flour using domestically produced raw materials.

The programme is being supported by the Cuban Government, and Dr Witter noted that similar efforts to engage with Cuba in the 1970s were dismissed as a plot to move Jamaica towards communism. Now that the Red Scare is no more, I suppose it is easier to deepen these relationships.

It is generally agreed that more research and development (R&D) is needed in Jamaica and the wider Caribbean. Due, in part, to significant and necessary expenditures on energy and security the R&D expenditure of Jamaican businesses is relatively low, increasing the need for Government to promote and engage in R&D.

What is ironic about the Cuba bashing is that the cruel United States embargo, arguably the most egregious example of a trade restriction, is conveniently ignored. Notwithstanding abysmal wages, shortages of various goods, and poor infrastructure, to name a few, Cuba does creditably well in terms of human development. According to the Human Development Index (HDI) 2020 report, Cuba moves 45 places up the rankings when its per capita income ranking (115) is juxtaposed against its HDI rank (70); this is the highest positive adjustment of any country on the HDI. Cuba’s exceptional adjustment between the two indexes is a result of its performance in the social sectors — education and health.

Dr Witter supports the view that Jamaicans should explore opportunities to eat what we grow and grow what we eat. This is not to be conflated with “don’t eat foreign goods”. To eat what we grow, on a practical level, is about reducing Jamaica’s reliance on food imports, freeing up foreign exchange to import other necessities, like medicine. It must be recognised that to eat what we produce can also lead to an increase in exports.

The novel coronavirus pandemic and the war in the Ukraine have disrupted the flow of food; some countries have resorted to hoarding food. Jamaica, a net importer of food, is better off than many developing countries, but cannot escape the significant price increases.

Dr Witter also considers the broader socio-economic implications for Jamaica, especially as they relate to young people.

Dr Ulric Trotz, deputy director and science advisor at the Caribbean Community Climate Change Centre, responded to Witter’s article by recalling experiments which were conducted in Guyana to reduce the wheat content in flour. Dr Trotz noted, too, that research done on the Mona Campus of The University of the West Indies (UWI) showed that cassava produces less glucose than wheat, the implication being that a diet of cassava products is less likely to lead to diabetes than a diet of wheat products.

Non-communicable diseases (NCDs), such as diabetes and hypertension, are major causes of death in the Caribbean. What we have are underdeveloped Caribbean economies relying heavily on imported food from the developed world, importing “rich world diseases” in the process.

Some are likely to dismiss Witter’s views as being anti-trade. It is sad that we waste time on “isms and schisms” instead of deeply interrogating the intersections of our ideas and ideologies, critically questioning received wisdom, and striving to find newer and better ways of organising ourselves economically, socially, and politically.

It is not uncommon, or bad economics, for domestic firms in developing countries to be protected and supported. Concerns about protection and support are really concerns about how best to execute such policies without causing undue distortions in the allocation of resources. It is the difficulty of avoiding distortions which undermine arguments for policies of firm protection and support. The World Trade Organization (WTO) supports the protection of agricultural output in developing countries. Interested readers should explore the WTO’s Aid-for-Trade initiative. Consider for a moment, too, what the Jamaican poultry sector would look like without protection.

The celebrated economies of East Asia were known to protect and support domestic firms through a system of contests. According to the famous World Bank report The East Asian Miracle: Economic Growth and Public Policy, which I found useful as an undergraduate student, “The key feature of each contest, however, is that the Government distributes rewards — often access to credit or foreign exchange — on the basis of performance, which the Government and competing firms monitor. To succeed, selective interventions must be disciplined by competition via either markets or contests.” I recognise that implementing these contests in other jurisdictions is not likely to be successful, given the incredible institutional effort needed. However, I cite this example to emphasise the point that policies of protection and support are not fundamentally bad.

Countries engage in trade primarily to import goods and services they either cannot produce or are costly to produce. Exports are necessary because imports must be paid for. To increase the production of food using domestically produced raw materials is not anti-trade, it is not insular; it is not anti-market, it is not anti-capitalist, rather, such initiatives can increase the range of products Jamaica can possibly sell to the rest of the world.

Some will say that Jamaica cannot competitively produce flour. The harsh truth is, everything produced on this rock can be produced elsewhere, and more competitively. Even Grammy-winning reggae music has been produced abroad. However, we can all agree that Jamaica must produce something. Jamaica must pay for its imports.

The question is: On what basis can a small country justify production of goods and services beyond considerations of subsistence production and the exporting of raw materials? The answer is culture. It is the infusion of Jamaican culture into Jamaican exports which sets them apart from imports. Therefore, to embark on the production of flour with a higher content of domestically produced inputs is about creating a Jamaican cultural product. If we carefully consider the types of food, drink, clothing, houses, entertainment, etc that we consume, they are largely driven by our assimilation of foreign cultures and foreign tastes. I am not suggesting that we should not engage with or consume the products and ideas of foreign cultures; indeed, choice is integral to economic development, to human welfare. At the same time, we too must contribute to the range of choices available to mankind. Consider a world without reggae music or the dance moves of Ravers Clavers.

In a 2014 Barbados Museum and Historical Society Lecture Series, celebrated Barbadian writer the late George Lamming gave an excellent lecture titled ‘The culture in agriculture’. To appreciate the profundity of the title we must first note that one definition of the word culture is related to the cultivation of plants. Observing Caribbean society, Lamming noted that, “[T]he minister of agriculture in our region, whether he knows it or not, is engaged in what is essentially a cultural problem… The problem is how do you decolonise the eating habits of a people who have surrendered their very palates to foreign control… There is also a sense in which the fisherman and the farmer may be regarded as cultural workers in their own right.”

It was refreshing to see our Caricom leaders agreeing to produce more of the food we consume. It is left to be seen whether the talks and plans will be translated into meaningful action. Indeed, it is not a question of whether the Caricom project has reached its limit, but rather, the question is: How can we realistically deepen and advance the project?

Professor Clive Thomas, in his contribution to the book Walter Rodney: A Promise of Revolution provides a thought-provoking perspective on Caricom. He notes that, “[S]o we argued then that the case for integration, although it had economic dimensions, was really a cultural case, a case based on our contributions to humanity.”

Dr Samuel Braithwaite is a lecturer in the Department of Economics at The University of the West Indies, Mona. Send comments to the Jamaica Observer or braithwaitesamuel@gmail.com.