A report in in US business magazine Forbes, the conclusions from which we published on Sunday, has said that of all sovereign countries with populations of at least 75,000, Guyana accounts for the biggest share of its native-born population – 36.4% − living abroad when compared to the rest of the world. In terms of world diaspora populations as a whole, Forbes listed Bosnia and Herzogovina in second place, Albania third, Syria fourth and Jamaica, with a score of 28.6%, fifth. It can only be remarked that it seems astonishing that a war-torn nation like Syria should rank in fourth place behind Guyana.
But it is not just war and displacement, said the magazine, which led to large diasporas, but also “economic stagnation and a lack of perspectives.” The report went on to say that, “While there are many reasons why someone might leave the place where they were born, small countries are most often affected by the phenomenon as they are inherently at a disadvantage when offering opportunities and chances to move within the country first.” It is no doubt for this reason that island nations dominated the top ranks of the list, with Polynesia having the highest overall diaspora percentage, followed by the Caribbean.
While the least developed countries in general lost the biggest proportions of their populations, some of these were severely mismanaged by their governments. In the last category the report cited Eritrea with an 18.5% diaspora share, and Venezuela with 16.6%. Perhaps it is something of an irony in the circumstances that Guyana has been a minor recipient of Venezuelan refugees.
What Forbes did not deal with, although it is known from other sources, is that the country with the largest diaspora also has one of the highest rates globally in terms of the emigration of qualified personnel. Some years ago, for example, the IDB estimated that Guyana exported 89 per cent of its people who had a tertiary education to OECD countries, the highest percentage in Caricom. Certainly where development is concerned, earlier this month the World Bank said that Guyana’s poverty rate was among the highest in Latin America and the Caribbean, since around 48% of the population lived below US$5.5 a day.
Giving a higher estimate than the Forbes diaspora figures, the World Bank reported, “The country experiences high emigration and brain drain, with 39% of all Guyanese citizens currently residing abroad and roughly half of all Guyanese with a tertiary education having emigrated to the United States.” It did have a caveat, however, commenting that while GDP per capita had been among the lowest in the region, this was now changing on account of the rapid development of the oil and gas industry. In 2021, it said, it was over US$9,300, having increased that year by 19.9%. Whether that will in the end lead to a dramatic decline in poverty levels remains to be seen.
Be that as it may, what will engage the minds of Guyanese both within Guyana and outside will be the reasons for this country having such a high migration level, and the largest diaspora percentage-wise in the world. After all, we are not an island state, and while poor, we are certainly not the poorest nation in the world. What is special about this country that causes so many of its citizens to seek to leave? There will inevitably be those who are quick to point to one government or another as responsible for the figures, but it has to be said that the emigration rates have been steady across all governments of whatever political complexion over many years.
Although there have been attempts since 1992 to train people in certain sectors – the teaching service comes to mind – once qualified the former trainees are able to use this as a means to migrate in the expectation of finding better paid work abroad. Why do so many of the best and the brightest (albeit not all of them) not stay and seek to use their credentials to effect change in the society? As with other places there is a lack of opportunity and a paucity of openings for the qualified to practise their skills, but that cannot be everything. Many of those who left were unqualified, but sought training in their new abode to upgrade their CVs. Those who didn’t were nevertheless famously industrious, so they could build greater financial security for their families and afford to educate the next generation.
One thing the generations since Independence will have been aware of is that although Guyana does not lack in natural endowments in contrast to places such as Singapore, no government has ever succeeded in exploiting our wealth in a beneficial, sustainable way – if at all. Yet it is Singapore with no natural wealth which is the economic success story of the former colonial territories. For our part we remained a primary producer, exporting the same products we did in colonial times. In other words, perhaps some generations saw no hope for progress.
If politics has played a role, it is the practice of politics in general and not just the flaws of any particular political party that is at fault – although they too have entered into the story. Our particular brand of ethno-politics has proved particularly damaging both at an individual and societal level, since neither side will meaningfully engage the other, in addition to which no space is allowed for criticism which is not politically aligned, and inside Parliament often even that which is. Every institution in the society becomes politicised as a consequence, and until very recent times there has been no civil society. It is a very suffocating environment which by its nature imposes constraints on individual endeavour, and represses imagination and creativity.
Government especially, and to a much lesser degree the opposition intrudes into every department of life, and has always done so, no matter which party has been in office. This is not a merit-based society; it is one which demands loyalty to one side or the other. As such, it is also not corruption-free, something which people find hard to accept. Since competence is not the primary requirement in positions of public authority, inefficiency and ineptitude are rife. Given that much employment is government based or associated with government agencies whether or not nominally autonomous, what latitude is there for someone with aspirations, let alone different ideas? And Guyanese are a people who nowadays have exposure to the world outside and its modes of thinking.
It remains to be seen whether in our current circumstances the drift to the north will continue. So far, at least, there seems to be no significant trend for members of the diaspora to return here – but then that is another matter. The present government clearly believes that with the development of the oil and gas industry, jobs will be created and Guyanese will stay home. Perhaps. But then again, President Irfaan Ali has shown no disposition to engage with members of civil society who seek discussions on the future direction of the nation, while his government has hammered (metaphorically speaking) all non-aligned critics no matter how knowledgeable or how carefully phrased their observations.
It is the same old political template in an oil-obsessed context. Will younger Guyanese consider that enough of a change?
