Governance quality is the variable that most consistently explains the difference between Caribbean nations that have developed relatively successfully and those that have not. The evidence for this is not primarily theoretical. It is visible in the comparison between specific countries.
Barbados and Jamaica are the starkest comparison, addressed in detail elsewhere on this site. But the pattern holds more broadly across the Caribbean. Nations that have maintained relatively stable democratic institutions, controlled corruption, and invested consistently in education and health have generally done better than those that have not, regardless of the specifics of their colonial history.
Saint Kitts and Nevis, Antigua and Barbuda, and the Cayman Islands, which benefit from British Overseas Territory status, have achieved relatively high living standards within the Caribbean context. Trinidad and Tobago, despite governance challenges, has used its oil revenues to achieve above-average Caribbean development outcomes. These successes have not relied on reparations. They have relied on policy choices and institutional quality.
Conversely, Haiti, Belize, and Jamaica have governance challenges that correlate closely with their worse development outcomes. The correlation between governance quality and development outcomes in the Caribbean is stronger and more consistent than the correlation between colonial history and development outcomes. This is what the evidence shows.
