A Difference of Political Objectives; the Applicability of Knowledge

By: Terri Ann Ragoonanan

The first article in this series supplied a general overview of the aims and faculties of Asian think
tanks while part two detailed the functioning apparatuses of several regional institutions. It was noted that the constituent disparities between the economic prosperities of these two regions could not be as a result of a lack of brain trusts in either. The Caribbean contains an impressive panoply of organizations seemingly dedicated to providing policy makers with constitutionally relevant and contemporarily applicable information. South Korea, China and Singapore each developed into competitive global markets because of the emphasis placed upon knowledge as a fuel for economic strategies established within their political agendas. The issue of politics or governance with respect to its reactive measures towards the information production of the citizenry is an important one, hitherto not discussed in this series. However, in this final installment, politics will be addressed as the possible deciding factor that differentiates the Asian tigers from our regional states.

Think tanks ostensibly exist to generate valuable information gleaned from research on pertinent, salient topics for the purposes of affecting policy creation. Therefore, it seems reasonable to conclude that the theoretical suggestions of their output should be aligned with the practical objectives of the policy makers who seek to utilize the information. Which leads to the question, what is the ultimate objective of those in authoritative positions who have the power to shape the economy? Any government’s main principles should involve some feature of providing basic needs for citizens within their purview; such as access to food and amenities or a transparent legal and judicial system to ensure equality and justice within society. These fundamental aspects of internal welfare fall under a government’s domestic policy. However, since individual nations do not exist in a vacuum, international relations are an imperative concern for politicians. Maintaining lucrative diplomatic ties with the right countries is part of a government’s foreign policy. Ideally, foreign and domestic policies are supposed to complement each other, wherein there is a mutual exchange of ideas, products and aid which benefits both the economies and populations of all nations in collusion.

Therefore, politicians may draft policies, treatises and legislations with the intentions of facilitating a balance between fulfilling domestic obligations whilst upholding or adhering to an international standard or in consideration of a beneficial trade arrangement with a certain country. In the first article of this series, the transition from impoverishment to comparative success by three Asian nations was examined. A common denominator between them, apart from geographic proximities, is the fact that their economies are principally based on manufacturing; they are known throughout the world as producers of ubiquitous goods and products. Labor or rather manpower may be viewed as the most profitable resource and the nature of the most respected think tanks reflects this notion. The Chinese Academy of Social Sciences is predominantly focused on research and developments in humanities and philosophy, the study of mind and behavior, thus providing information about the country’s main resource to its policy makers. This crucial confluence between theoretical deductions and practical applications may be seen as a contributing factor towards economic success for the Asian tigers.

Conversely, the Caribbean is hardly a manufacturing zone; however, this does not mean that the region is doomed to perpetual economic stagnation and a consistent third world designation. The majority of Caribbean nations are service economies with tourism being the chief source of income. Trinidad and Tobago is the leading regional producer of oil and gas, petrochemicals, steel, aluminum, and plastic, thanks to its natural resources and refineries; therefore it is set apart from the other territories in terms of what constitutes the main revenues and expenditures of its economy. Think tanks in the region do not necessarily produce relevant information for our policy makers within the context of the Caribbean’s global contributions and impacts. Part two in this series outlines the stated goals and functions of various institutions, all within the region. CARIRI and CARDI, each based in Trinidad and Tobago, are the two most industrially and technologically focused of the institutions discussed. Most other think tanks express the desire to foster regional integration and bolster trade and development and do in fact devote time to research and make suggestions about these areas. However the lack of diversification within the region makes a stark contrast to the flexibilities of a manufacturing based economy. Any amount of dialogue and innovative reasoning projected by these think tanks will ultimately be a futile discussion since no policies are being created to transform the situation.

Governments within the region appear to be resistant to novel ideas about economic growth and expansion, especially those with the aim of integration and co-operation amongst the nations. Individual countries are more concerned with their own political agendas that still promote outmoded solutions to recent problems. Think tanks amass contemporary data that may offer new concepts about trading and investments that these governing bodies could utilize to revolutionize the way they operate their internal systems. The onus may be on the institutions themselves to assertively disseminate their findings not only for public consumption, but for the relevant authorities to take into consideration. Perhaps a position may be created within the cabinet of a liaison, or an intermediary between the government and knowledge based sectors in order to weave fresh ideas and information with domestic and international policy formation, thus ensuring that present day problems are not being tackled with antiquated mindsets.

Knowledge is an important facet for economic and social development, and when it is not valued by decision makers as an elemental tool for creating policies that should propel society forward there is no progress. Therefore, if the leaders of Caribbean nations want to ascend the world’s platform they should strive to create a future based on knowledge.