A Critical Appraisal of Education in the Caribbean and Its Evolution From Colonial Origins to Twenty-First Century Responses

On January 30, 2006 heads of government of six1 Caribbean Community (CARICOM) countries signed the protocol for implementation of the Caribbean Single Market (CSM). The realization of this seamless regional market, which facilitates the free movement of goods, services, capital and labour, has been heralded as the first tangible step towards a fully functioning Caribbean Single Market and Economy (CSME) in 2008.

Since 2002, the 15 member states of the Caribbean Community (CARICOM) have shifted human resource development reforms from focusing on providing basic, mass primary and secondary education and limited tertiary education toward diverting resources to Technical and Vocational Education and Training (TVET) to accommodate labor mobility. This shift fixated on facilitating the creation of the Caribbean Single Market (CSM) in 2006, which was premised upon the free movement of service, capital, goods, people, and the right to establishment (ability of any CARICOM national to establish a business). The motivation was to create an optimal frontier at the regional level to aid in the development of the ‘ideal Caribbean person.’ This article will examine how CARICOM members relied upon the non-economic policy process of functional cooperation and the policy tool of what I call ‘cooperative educational transfer’ at the regional level to move ideas and practices collaboratively to stimulate national education reform. A summative content analysis shows that the rise of cooperative educational transfer at the regional level was a direct consequence of dialectic, dynamic, and fragmentary effects of globalization, since emerging markets in the small (and micro) states of CARICOM cannot insulate themselves from global economic pressures individually. In an analysis of 13 national CARICOM educational policies, findings show that during the 2002–2010 policy period, decisionmaking was distrait, since national governments incorporated both national mandates and regional aspirations and commitments in their reform agendas.

This chapter is an exploratory piece to comprehend how national policies react to regional policy solutions designed to cope with the HIV/AIDS epidemic. It uses data from the national strategic plans for HIV/AIDS from 13 of 15 Caribbean Community (CARICOM) members to illustrate how they interpret the regional response to the pandemic. In drawing upon the existing literature on transfer, it focuses on what I term cooperative policy transfer – explore how policy concepts flow back and forth between the national and regional levels through cohesive harmonization – to understand how new policy trends emerge. A cross-sectional analysis based on a content analysis reveals the emergence of three new policy trends distinct to the region that guide HIV/AIDS education: (i) creating a multisectoral approach; (ii) setting international targets; and (iii) establishing regional benchmarks. These new trends are identified as what I call the rise of new mutualism in education. The chapter concludes that the national and regional policy responses to HIV/AIDS in CARICOM countries, centered on new mutualism, became a rallying cry based on the belief that the Caribbean Single Market and Economy (CSME) can only function if CARICOM countries combine their resources to reverse the effect of HIV/AIDS on national educational systems.

The current institutional arrangements which govern the Caribbean Single Market and Economy are fully realized based on attempts of preceding Caribbean economic integration. The first significant attempt was disastrous. With myopic dreams of unification, the West Indies Federation was formed in 1958 and consisted of 10 British West Indian territories, where Trinidad and Tobago, Jamaica, and Barbados were the principal members. Most of the Leeward and Windward islands, which were then under British control, were also apart of the federation. The seat of government was in Port of Spain, Trinidad who was then, slated for independence in 1962. Consequently, the federation saw little hopes of surviving its troubled infancy because it was an institution built on self interest, rather than symbiosis. Before Trinidad left, however, Jamaica, the most populous and prosperous member, voted (1961) to leave the federation, fearing that it would have to shoulder the burdens of the economically underdeveloped members. Trinidad and Tobago, inevitably, followed suit and the federation disintegrated in May, 1962. Further attempts date back 1968, with the establishment of the Caribbean Free Trade Area (CARIFTA) to serve the purpose of only removing the tariff and other barriers to intra regional trade in goods. This resulted in a reticent ten percent (10%) growth in intra- regional trade of the Caribbean economies. The integration process was later intensified through the Treaty if Chaguaramas which outlined directives to create a Common Market in the region. Added to the existing agenda of supporting liberalization on trade in goods, was the establishment of a common external tariff, intended to provide protection to regional industries. The 1973 treaty contained further provisions for the removal of restrictions in the establishment of businesses, provisions of services, the movement of capital and the coordination of economic policies. These stipulations barely made a difference to the volume of intra- regional trade which still lingered at 10% mark of total trade. It failed to catalyze new investments and though it intended to support regional import substitution, it miserably addressed evolving and pressing issues concerning international competitiveness and export penetration. In the following years the Caribbean economies, under the auspices of multilateral lending institutions, implemented structural adjustment programs that targeted of economic, financial and trade liberalization which surpassed their commitments as expressed by the treaty of Chaguaramas. By the end of the 1980’s, through precipitating trading blocs and the inception of economic globalization, there was ubiquitous face-lifting of economies. This accommodated the working of free and private market forces to construct robust capital and other factor flows, and to endorse an export oriented growth and international competitiveness. Henceforth, at Grand Anse Grenada, 1989, Heads of Government, being properly convinced of the necessity to reinforce and extend the Caribbean Community in all of its dimensions, decided to convert the limited Common Market as conceived in 1973, into a Single Market and Economy in as short a time as possible.

In a dynamic, rapidly liberalising and fiercely competitive international environment, Caribbean Community (CARICOM) countries see the pooling of their national efforts through the Caribbean Single Market and Economy as a central plank for overcoming their numerous constraints and advancing their economic growth and sustainable development. However, to succeed in the often challenging and fiercely competitive international setting, strategic and supportive external partnerships are vital. The region has therefore been exploring new relationships while it seeks to strengthen and deepen those that have existed for some time, to ensure that they make the intended contribution to helping the region achieve its goals.Caribbean countries are pursuing their trade and investment relations with their established partners while also expanding economic relations with hemispheric partners and other emerging global players. The shifting global trade landscape, however, has implications for the region and for its trade and economic policy.This discussion paper undertakes a preliminary exploration of some of the initiatives and relationships, both new and long-standing, that have an impact on the region’s trade and economic performance. These include the European Union and its economic partnership agreement with the Caribbean Forum, the USA (Caribbean Basin Initiative) and Canada (CARICOM–Canada free trade area negotiations). It will also look at the shifting global trade landscape, including the emergence of mega regional trade areas such as the proposed Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership Agreement.

This volume builds on the foundation laid by the 2005 report by focusing on the factors affecting the region's competitiveness and the critical role that the Caribbean Single Market and Economy (CSME) has to play as a driver of integration and economic development. In addition it highlights the potential of the Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA), if properly implemented, to significantly increase the region's competitiveness and to help it attain long-term sustained development. This potential, however, will only be realized if precise trade and competitiveness strategies are crafted to focus primarily on removing the constraints to competitiveness endemic in the region. In addition, and this is a critical element of any newly-devised strategy, is the necessity to revise regional institutional mechanisms and mandates to promote implementation and to take advantage of the market access opportunities presented by successive trade agreements such as the EPA. This report, while highlighting the need for immediate and concrete actions on the part of the Caribbean Community (CARICOM) member states, also recognizes the responsibility of the donor community in helping to play a catalytic role in supporting trade reform and macroeconomic stability. The aid for trade agenda must seek to address the weaknesses inherent in the formulation and application of international aid policies and implement new frameworks aimed at enhancing the ability of these small nation states to meet and overcome the challenges of global competitiveness.

This is a third paper, from ongoing research, examining the relationship between the enhancement of teaching quality and pupil learning in primary schools within a context of development planning and school improvement. The first paper (Broadhead et al ., 1998) argued for a dimensional approach to school development planning. This exemplified whole-school issues, teacher-development issues and pupil-learning issues as inter-related action domains. Similar conceptualizations are proposed by Southworth (1996) and Davies and Ellison (1998). Our study found that schools' priorities were focused on whole-school issues with little evidence in their plans of an intention to focus on pupil learning through class-based activity. A second paper (Broadhead et al ., 1999) drew attention to two initiatives subsequently impacting on development planning. This first initiative was the emergence of Education Development Planning (EDP) with an emphasis on the attainment of national targets related to numeracy and literacy. These targets are passed to Local Education Authorities (LEAs) from the DfES (Department for Education and Skills) and subsequently passed by LEAs, in individual negotiations with schools, as targets for increased levels in end of key stage test scores in literacy and numeracy, for children in their final year of primary school. The second initiative related to OFSTED’s (Office for Standards in Education - school inspectors) increasing inclusion of pupil-learning targets as Key Issues in the post-inspection report to schools. Framing Key Issues in this way was seen as having some potential for moving development planning towards this more challenging action-domain. This paper draws on our most recent study of approaches to school development planning. It uses documentary analysis and telephone interview data to illuminate current practices and to illustrate the levels and types of engagement schools are currently engaging with in planning for improvements in teaching and learning, leading on from the related initiatives outlined above. While schools can ill-afford to ignore government imperatives and while the focus on teaching and learning remains substantively driven towards reaching literacy and numeracy targets, there is nevertheless evidence to suggest that an engagement with teaching and learning is evident in development planning. It seems timely to consider how this engagement might be fostered and what this might mean for the evolution of development planning in primary schools.

Reviewed by: Civil Society Organisations, Governance and the Caribbean Community by Kristina Hinds Mayra Vélez Serrano Kristina Hinds. 2019. Civil Society Organisations, Governance and the Caribbean Community. London: Palgrave Macmillan. 200 pp. ISBN: 978-3030043957. The literature of regional integration and multilevel governance has mostly focused its attention on the case of the European Union. The process of societal cross-regional interactions is less studied in areas which have a long history of regionalization without formal regional organizations, or what Hettne and Söderbaum (2000) call the Regional Complex. The book Civil Society Organisations, Governance & the Caribbean Community by Kristina Hinds provides a much-needed analysis of the role that civil society has in the processes of regional integration in the Caribbean. This book is divided into eight chapters and three themes. First, the author introduces the concept of civil society for the Caribbean and a description of the Caribbean political culture, governance, and participation. The book later delves deeper into the areas in which civil society has been involved in regional governance in two regional organizations: the Caribbean Community (CARICOM) and the Organization of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS). Finally, Hinds uses two countries as a case studies to draw insights from the connection between civil society and governance in the countries of Barbados and the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago. In chapter two, Hinds provides a clear conceptualization of what the term Civil Society Organizations (CSO) means, especially in the context of the Caribbean. She clarifies that civil society organizations must be treated separately from those organizations that lie between the state, the market and civil society, such as organizations that receive funding from corporations or the state. Hinds explains the historical development of civil society in the Caribbean at the end of the Cold War. While civil society has been seen as the key to bringing about democracy, she argues that what we have observed is the “NGO-ization” of civil society. It is precisely these organizations that become the focus of the international development efforts in the 1990s. Organizations such as the United States Agency for International Development, the World Bank and the United Nations focused on providing assistance to these NGOs as a way of supporting economic development and good governance. However, such NGO-ization [End Page 176] requires the professionalization of civil society into highly technical and bureaucratic entities, undermining other manifestations of civil society. Caribbean civil society tends to lack the high degree of technical expertise that international agencies expect. One reason lies behind the development of society in the Caribbean, where the majority of the population was enslaved, and thus excluded from membership in “civil society.” However, other forms of less formal but vibrant expressions of civil society date back to resistance movements against slavery. Hinds explains that civil society in the Caribbean has challenged the notion of formal organizations or even “polite-civil” expectations. Meanwhile, formal CSOs represented the white planters and merchants’ interests. Hinds explains that during the colonial era, civil society functioned as a community-based organization to support formerly enslaved people. Labor unions were prescribed during colonial rule and trade unions did not emerge until early 20th century. However, early on, local movements engaged with wider international movements, such has the Garveyite Movement (which expanded from Jamaica, through the Caribbean and later Latin America), the United Negros Improvement Association, Pan-Africanism, and Black Power in United States. In the same vein, there was a development between local women organizations and regional organizations, such as the Caribbean Women’s Association. Hinds clarifies that civil society in the Caribbean varies greatly among the region’s countries. However, these descriptions apply mostly to the English-speaking Caribbean. In chapter three, Hinds provides a theoretical framework by which we can analyze the involvement of CSO in decision-making. Furthermore, she explains the historical context in which the incorporation of CSOs into governance has evolved. Hinds argues that CSOs are fundamental for a participative and collaborative style of governance. Since the 1990s, the international community has equated good governance with broader inclusion of civil society. For example, she posits that there are four stages of participation of CSOs in governance. The...

Initial investment for the funding agency will come largely from the region’s diaspora scientists, from corporate sponsors, and from development banks.

Abstract: This Chapter chronicles the evolution of the regional economic integration project from the Caribbean Free Trade Association (CARIFTA) to the Caribbean Community (CARICOM) up to the Caribbean Single Market and Economy (CSME) in light of its historical and political context. It then delineates the key institutional structures which underpin CARICOM and briefly reflects on the extent to which these structures hinder or facilitate deeper economic integration. This is followed by an appraisal of the legal architecture of the regional integration arrangement which captures both important advances towards deeper integration and critical areas where progress has stalled. Finally, given the importance of dispute settlement to the proper functioning of any regional integration arrangement, the Chapter undertakes a brief survey of the available modes of dispute settlement within CARICOM.

Covid-19 became a global public health problem of enormous dimensions. Latin American and Caribbean (LAC) governments reacted to prevent the spread of the virus unilaterally in most cases, but some responses were proposed at the regional and subregional levels. The region saw the pandemic emerge in a context of ideological polarization between governments, as a bad omen for its numerous and overlapping regional groupings, which already showed weaknesses and limitations. However, the broad impact of a public health crisis could give regional organizations the opportunity to push for the achieving of a collective agreement that might drive the process further. This paper focuses on the response of Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC), Caribbean Community (CARICOM), and Central American Integration System (SICA) in the face of the pandemic and beyond. Our main argument is that the public health crisis of Covid-19 entailed a potential for the relaunch of regionalism improving cooperation, unity and other advanced forms of regionalism. Case studies indicate that the active regional response to the coronavirus owed much to previously installed institutional and political capacity. In CARICOM and SICA, the political will of the presidents coincided with a semi-autonomous activation of the institutional response, leading to optimal results. Still, political leadership may compensate for institutional weakness. The experience of CELAC revealed that leadership in agenda-setting with a technical focus can help promote dialogue and cooperation in a context of ideological polarization.

This chapter examines the problem of childhood obesity from a regional perspective using the experience of members of the Caribbean Community (CARICOM). It explores whether CARICOM States’ regional and multilateral trade commitments constitute significant legal obstacles to regional efforts to tackle childhood obesity, and comments on the potential role of international human rights law in accelerating action in this area. The chapter focuses on CARICOM States’ obligations under the Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas, the WTO and the CARIFORUM-EU Partnership Agreement. It ultimately concludes while CARICOM States’ international trade obligations do constrain their choice of public health measures and how they implement them, sufficient policy space remains for CARICOM governments to take meaningful action to prevent and control childhood obesity. It also recommends leveraging international human rights and its enforcement mechanisms to push Caribbean governments to act more promptly and decisively, while still respecting their international trade obligations.

Innovation in a Small State: <scp>Q</scp>atar and the <scp>IBC</scp> Cluster Model of Higher Education

In this era of amplified regionalisation, the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean's (ECLAC) conceptualisation of ‘open regionalism’ is pertinent to examine the role of regional governance mechanisms in constructing what I call the Caribbean Educational Policy Space. With the aid of a latent content analysis of policy documents that focuses on the current wave of regionalism within the Caribbean Community (CARICOM) countries, I argue that open regionalism is the instrument that facilitates the expansion of education into a regional tradable commodity that is embedded and linked to the Caribbean Single Market and Economy (CSME). I suggest that open regionalism can be further finessed to consider the modalities that make the operationalising of the integrative project possible. In essence, open regionalism is used as a governance framework by CARICOM's states to enact national educational reform. I conclude by arguing that open regionalism is an approach that is driven by the knowledge-based economy, premised upon innovation and inventiveness, which facilitates regional entry into hemispheric relations, and focused on the deepening global relations.

Don’t Burn our Bridges: The Case for Caribbean Carriers argues that a tourism-dependent region comprised largely of a group of islands must, in its own best interest, retain ownership of key aspects of its air access in spite of the costs and challenges involved in so doing. Air transportation is the glue that cements the tourism market to the destination, but it is also the aerial bridge connecting the territories and peoples of a single market and economy. Often regional airlines are forced to offer a mixture of commercial and social routes, which makes profitability difficult. The social service they provide is critical, however, and public sector shareholders should not measure their return on investment simply in terms of the bottom line. Holder rejects a widely held view that Caribbean governments, should not support their own carriers financially. Instead, he argues that because of their overall contribution to development generally, the air transportation industry should be counted among those companies in the region which are too big (and important) to be allowed to fail. Don’t Burn Our Bridges documents the history of Caribbean airlines and attempts to demystify the complexities of such concepts as deregulation, yield management, hedging of oil prices, fare setting, fuel surcharges and a la carte pricing, while making the point that running successful airlines has defeated some of the world’s most brilliant business minds. Holder also explores the impact of the global economic meltdown of 2008–2009 on air transportation and Caribbean tourism, and proposes a way forward for air transportation in the Caribbean community. Co-published with the Caribbean Development Bank