Hurricane Melissa has left indelible lessons for Jamaica. The parish of St James has done commendably well in recovery thus far, with agencies mobilising to restore water, clear roads, and stabilise public health facilities. Their efforts deserve recognition. However, Melissa also revealed a deeper structural issue that reform must confront: The fragmentation of local governance responsibilities across ministries and agencies, away from the local centre of Government.

This dispersal of authority poses coordination challenges that undermine efficiency, leaving parishes dependent on external actors, rather than empowered to lead. If resilience is to be real, Jamaica must strengthen the fiscal and administrative capacity of local government itself.

The current model of decentralisation has restricted financial and administrative capacities. Local governments are given mandates but not the institutional autonomy to execute them fully. Responsibilities that should be coordinated at the parish level remain embedded in central ministries, creating a system in which local authorities are accountable to citizens but lack the tools to deliver.

Public finance scholarship warns against this mismatch: Decentralization without administrative authority produces symbolic institutions, unable to act decisively in crises. Resilience depends as much on fiscal and administrative capacity as on physical infrastructure.

In New Orleans, post-Hurricane Katrina reforms created municipal financing instruments that accelerated recovery by placing resources directly in the coffers of local authorities. In Fiji, councils receive earmarked climate adaptation transfers, embedding resilience into everyday budgeting. These examples show that, when local governments are equipped with robust financing systems and administrative authority, they can act swiftly and equitably.

Jamaica’s system, by contrast, remains fragmented, with parishes dependent on central transfers that are often delayed and donor aid that bypasses local institutions. The result is a governance structure in which responsibilities are devolved in theory, but centralised in practice, creating bottlenecks that slow response and weaken accountability.

Hurricane Melissa revealed that, while some disaster funds exist, they are too anaemic to meet the scale of modern emergencies. What Jamaica requires is a more robust system: Parish-level contingency reserves that are substantial, guaranteed, and transparent; modernised revenue bases that provide sustainable financing for municipal management; and legal frameworks that ensure rapid disbursement of emergency funds directly to local authorities.

Reform must also address the fragmentation of responsibilities, consolidating functions within the local centre of Government to improve coordination and accountability. Without this, financial reform alone will not suffice.

The commendable recovery in St James demonstrates the capacity of agencies to act under pressure, but it also highlights the limits of a system that disperses responsibilities away from local government. A stronger local governance system would not replace these agencies, but rather integrate their efforts under a coherent parish-led framework. This is the best outcome for everyone: Citizens gain faster, more accountable service; agencies operate within clearer lines of coordination; and local governments fulfil their democratic mandate with real authority.

Category 5 Melissa was a warning, but also an opportunity. Jamaica must move beyond fragmented decentralisation and build a system in which local governments are not symbolic, but substantive, and equipped with the financing and administrative authority to lead.