Combatting Corruption in Jamaica by Studying 127 Peoples’ Perceptions of the level of Corruption is absolutely nonsense and a Waste of needed Resources that could’ve helped to Alleviate serious Problems in Jamaica.

As part of it’s monitoring, the United States Agency for International Aid (USAID) and Jamaica performed an evaluation study in 2015 towards the end of a corruption reduction project to ascertain what components of the project was successful and what areas failed. It examined what worked and what didn’t. The USAID was under the impression (which forms the ideological basis of the study) that the extent to which the program puts corruption on the national agenda contributes to public perception and demand for change. It makes a scathing generalization and an assumption here. The USAID and the Government of Jamaica (GOJ) conducted a study which examined Jamaicas project over three years (2013-2015) to combat corruption by questioning 127 random individuals. https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/Combatting-Corruption-in-Jamaica-Final.pdf). As if that represents national perception and agenda when any agenda is limited by capabilities. The study did not explore influence and obstacles to perception and levels of education. In effect it was limited. Combatting corruption in Jamaica by studying 127 peoples’ perceptions of the level of corruption is absolutely nonsense and a waste of needed resources that could’ve helped alleviate serious problems in Jamaica.

How does studying the perception of a few people who may be far removed or benefit from corruption combat corruption? Further, it would seem that the study’s bone of contention is defining what counts for corruption, based in perception and then drawing a correlation between the two. But the paper already presupposes the conclusion that directs it’s study and it’s assertions. It is absolutely nonsensical and counterproductive to spend time to study perception as a way to stymie corruption when the law already defines what constitutes corruption and provided some penalty for breaking such laws.  

Corruption is the abuse of power to advance a benefit for personal gain. It is always difficult to identify corruption because it is done in secret and within a complex web of connectionism.  Corruption is sweet to those who benefit from it and can get away with it. So, it is not perception that’s at issue; it’s the ability to apply effective means within society to guard against it. What the USAID and the GOJ needed to have done was to spend money to strengthen the abilities and capabilities of the National Integrity Agency (NIA) by deploying intensive capital—investments to fight against corruption. Instead, they produced a paper that does nothing more than pretending to be providing solutions to combat corruption when really it provides a diluted, weak and unrepresentative study about awareness of perception. And by the way, what did the report conclude: that of the 127 participants, 55 percent believed that corruption was either the same or worse. Ok, what does that have to do with combatting corruption? Is it that public perception will augment the states ability to enact and apply laws to prevent corruption? Well if so, the paper failed to achieve that; as it defines corruption and then tries to understand 127 Jamaicans perception of that predominant view. It does not explore peoples’ reactions toward corruption which we know is already high. Corruption is part of the roots of Jamaicas’ problems and Jamaicans are oppose to corruption. To say otherwise would suggest that Jamaicans are corrupt and the study would be based on an assertion of bias.  In 2012 Jamaica had already established a local integrity agency (NIA) to implement corruption mitigating strategies and to monitor Jamaicas corruption; which became law in 2013. Therefore, what was needed was more teeth and resources and capabilities to extend the NIA’s reach and ability to catch and root out corruption that is usually inconspicuous and done in dark. What was needed was for these funds to be given to the NIA as a way to lobby the GOJ to enact more stringent legislation and policies. The funding would rival outside groups with personal interests who are also lobbying the GOJ with their private funds.

Jamaica still has not learned its lessons. It continues to invest in Studies and reports that looks at reaction, awareness and perception without meaningful expansion of its capabilities to produce a sustainable good or service for international demand. Well except for our music, culture and hospitality which provide relative national gains. 
You see, I read in a paper just this week that Jamaica (Dr. Judith Mendez) was awarded 1.4 million US dollars to do what, study perception again — Jamaican reaction to the Covid. Not to work to produce a vaccine or money for vaccine or money to enhance Jamaicas capital—intensive capabilities for future expansion. In addition, in October of last year, the Pan-American Health Organization (PAHO) gave the GOJ $750, 000 US dollars for what? To help with Jamaica’s ability to procure items based on the priority needs outlined by the MOHW, including 15 intensive-care unit beds, 13 satellite phones, 5 scanners and over 2000 risk communication materials to educate and inform Jamaican healthcare workers in health facilities and international travellers at ports of entry. The funds were provided to scale up Jamaica’s capacity to prevent, detect, monitor and control outbreaks of COVID-19, and build international and national coordination and operational support, as well as enhance the ability of the heath system to care for those affected by the disease. But what about capability? We are investing in our dependency where our ability to care for Jamaicans hinges on aides to just provide consumer goods and services but nothing to beef up their own abilities to do so without always seeking aid or borrowing. Jamaicans need to now start thinking big, in terms of capital-intensive and not aid. Jamaica needs the right kind of investment that significantly overall its capabilities and abilities to provide for intensive care without always relying on handouts and studying attitudes that does nothing more than explore a basis for accessing and spending aid or loan package. 
Note: Jamaica has a corruption perception index of 44.00 and is ranked 69/144 countries. Corruption index is based on public perception of corrupt activities, activities defined by the USAID. The Corruption Perceptions Index ranks countries and territories based on how corrupt their public sector is perceived to be. A country or territory's rank indicates its position relative to the other countries and territories in the index. Further Reading and Sources:1. Jamaica Corruption Rank | 1998-2020 Data | 2021-2023 Forecast | Historical | Chart
2. PAHO Strengthens Jamaica’s COVID-19 Response - PAHO/WHO | Pan American Health Organization
3. Dr Mendes, who has worked in research and policymaking in multiple sectors and countries, received a €8,000 ($1.4 million) grant to conduct a study entitled ‘COVID-19 Evidence-to-Policy Pathways in Jamaica, a Small Island Developing State in Economic Turnaround’.https://www.loopjamaica.com/content/jamaican-scientists-win-international-awards