Search
Price Range

The Price of Permanence: What Jamaica Must Decide After the Storm

When a hurricane passes, it leaves behind more than debris. It leaves behind exposure.

Exposure of drainage systems that were adequate — until they weren’t.
Exposure of roofs that met code — but not reality.
Exposure of economic models that assume disruption is occasional, not cyclical.

Hurricane Melissa did not just damage infrastructure. It revealed assumptions.

And that is why the national conversation should not begin with, “Should Jamaicans pay more?” That is too small a question for the scale of what we are facing.

The deeper question is this:
Are we prepared to pay for permanence — or are we content to keep paying for repair?

Because those are two very different national strategies.

Disaster Is Not an Interruption Anymore

There was a time when severe weather events were described as once-in-a-generation occurrences. That language is fading. Consecutive years of significant storms have reshaped the timeline.

If disruption becomes rhythm, then recovery cannot remain improvisation.

Countries at war redesign supply chains. Nations struck by pandemics redesign healthcare systems. Economies hit by financial crises redesign regulatory frameworks. They do not simply restore what existed before. They recalibrate.

Jamaica must now confront whether it intends to recalibrate — or merely restore.

The Illusion of “Back to Normal”

“Back to normal” is emotionally appealing. It suggests stability. Familiarity. Safety.

But what if normal is structurally vulnerable?

Rebuilding a washed-out road to the same engineering standard that failed under predictable rainfall intensity is not recovery. It is deferred collapse. Replacing roofs with the same fastening systems that failed under sustained wind pressure is not resilience. It is repetition.

The temptation after disaster is speed. The responsibility after disaster is wisdom.

Speed rebuilds quickly.
Wisdom rebuilds differently.

And rebuilding differently requires investment.

The Question of Contribution

The word “tax” triggers resistance because it feels extractive. But national contribution is not inherently punitive. It becomes punitive when it is opaque, indefinite, or mismanaged.

Every functioning country funds its own continuity. The form varies — taxation, bonds, sovereign funds, levies, insurance mechanisms — but the principle does not.

If Jamaica chooses not to raise revenue domestically, the alternative is borrowing. Borrowing is simply taxation delayed — with interest.

So the real policy question is not whether money is required. It is how that money is structured, protected, and directed.

Temporary. Targeted. Transparent.

Anything else would erode confidence.

But avoiding contribution entirely would erode sovereignty.

The Strategic Shift: From Expense to Investment

Here is where the conversation must mature.

Disaster spending is often framed as cost. It is more accurately described as capital allocation.

When infrastructure is redesigned to withstand future storms, the country reduces future liabilities. When building standards are elevated beyond minimum code, private homeowners reduce lifetime repair expenses. When energy grids are decentralised and reinforced, economic continuity improves.

Reinvestment is not charity toward the present. It is protection for the future.

Dean Jones, founder of Jamaica Homes and Executive Director of Projects at Cranfield, puts it this way:

“If a country experiences two major shocks in two consecutive years and responds by restoring the previous standard, it has misunderstood the lesson. Minimum building regulation is not resilience — it is compliance. Resilience begins where regulation ends. Jamaica must now ask whether we are building to survive the last hurricane or preparing for the next one. Because if preparation does not guide policy, then repair will become our national habit.”

That is not alarmism. It is strategic realism.

Building Once — Not Rebuilding Repeatedly

There is a quiet economic principle at stake: lifecycle cost.

A roof built cheaply may cost less today, but more tomorrow. A drainage system designed to historical rainfall averages may function for years — until it fails catastrophically under new climate intensity.

When you build, you want to build once.

This is not about extravagance. It is about durability.

And durability demands standards that exceed compliance.

Jones expands on this national mindset shift:

“We cannot afford to treat resilience as a parish-specific issue. One side of the island may escape devastation while another absorbs it, but national vulnerability is shared. Reinvestment now is not about paying more for the sake of it; it is about paying intelligently so that we are not paying again and again over the next two decades. The real debate is not taxation versus no taxation. It is repetition versus reinvention.”

Repetition versus reinvention.

That is the axis of the conversation.

The Role of Leadership

Leadership in moments like this is tested in subtle ways.

It is easy to announce relief.
It is harder to redesign systems.
It is politically risky to ask for contribution — but it is more dangerous to avoid long-term recalibration out of short-term discomfort.

Finance policy cannot operate in isolation from climate reality.

If new revenue measures are introduced, they must be progressive, time-bound, and auditable. The most vulnerable must be shielded. Small enterprises struggling to reopen cannot carry disproportionate burden.

But equally, national planning cannot pretend that international aid or insurance instruments will permanently absorb escalating climate risk.

Leadership requires acknowledging that the financial architecture of the past decade may not be sufficient for the climate trajectory of the next decade.

Beyond Money: Standards and Culture

There is another dimension that rarely receives attention: culture.

Meeting building code is treated as success. But building code is the floor, not the ceiling.

Developers, homeowners, contractors — all must internalise a new ethic: resilience is not optional.

The strongest hurricane on record should not produce the strongest response in memory only to see complacency return within five years.

Institutional memory must outlast public anxiety.

A National Choice

If Jamaica contributes more now — wisely, transparently, strategically — it invests in permanence.

If Jamaica avoids structural change, it will contribute later through repair, insurance premiums, economic disruption, and human hardship.

The question, then, is not rhetorical.

It is generational.

Do we treat consecutive hurricanes as unfortunate anomalies — or as data?

Do we rebuild for headlines — or for decades?

Do we pay reluctantly for repair — or deliberately for resilience?

Because storms will come again. That is not pessimism; it is geography.

The only variable within national control is preparation.

And preparation has a price.

The real issue is whether we choose to pay it once — with intention — or repeatedly, without strategy.

That decision will not be measured in the next budget cycle.

It will be measured in the next storm.


Join The Discussion