I attended one of the town hall sessions for the preparation of the Comprehensive Land and Water Use Plan (CLWUP) for the U.S. Virgin Islands that was held on St. Thomas in February 2023. The organizers focused the attention of the participants on three main questions related to the physical attributes and the use of land and water in the territory:
- What should be preserved?
- What needs to be strengthened?
- What should be transformed?
The energy and level of engagement by the large number of attendants at the town hall was encouraging. The robust responses included answers to the three questions posed but also identified issues, such as inadequate enforcement of existing laws, that alluded to the state of the broader enabling environment.
The enabling environment is the framework of policies, legislation and rules, institutional arrangements and practices, governance arrangements, and capacities that underpins the development process. The usefulness of any development plan, medium-term or long-range, is determined by the enabling environment.
This question of what constitutes the enabling environment is important to the preparation of the CLWUP in several ways. First, comprehensive planning involves making choices between competing visions of development, between conflicting uses of resources and space, seeking agreement on development goals and strategies, and establishing strategies for good governance and effective governing systems.
In that context, it is important to note that the CLWUP is not a long-range comprehensive plan. The land and water use plan is the spatial translation of social and economic development strategies. In other words, a land and water use plan reflects how physical space (land, air, water, and associated environmental resources) are used to facilitate development of a community.
Referring to the CLWUP as the USVI Comprehensive Plan does not make it so.
It has been suggested that the USVI’s Vision 2040 sets the framework for development of the territory. Possibly because Vision 2030 and Vision 2040 plans are typically frameworks that guide development planning. For example, Jamaica states that its Vision 2030 identifies four national goals, with fifteen development outcomes which will be pursued through national strategies. Kiribati describes its vision for the period 2016-2036 (KV20) thus:
“This KV20 offers a consolidated framework for development through which the National Development Plans and Ministry Strategic Plans can be aligned by mainstreaming the KV20 strategies during the medium-term planning process in order to provide a meaningful development outcome as envisioned in the KV20. The KV20 fosters alignment between policy areas of respective ministries and paves an innovative path for government, stakeholders, donors and development partners to further collaborate to realise transformative development.”
The USVI’s Vision 2040 is described as “the most ambitious long-term economic strategy and action plan ever attempted in the U.S. Virgin Islands” (page 2). In that context, The USVI’s Vision 2040 is neither a development plan nor a framework for development planning.
In the USVI, the process for making choices between different visions of development is prescribed by law, which requires preparation of a long-range comprehensive plan, long-range functional plans, and a development program for the USVI every four years. By law, the purpose of the long-range comprehensive plan is to “provide long-range guidance for the physical, economic and social development of the United States Virgin Islands”.
Additionally, the 1991 guidelines for development of a long-range comprehensive plan require sector planning, planning related to quality of life (population goal), and planning for effective government. The land and water use plan (page 40 of 1991 guidelines) is stated as one goal within the comprehensive plan.
The pretense that the CLWUP is the long-range comprehensive plan is also implied by the content of the documents ‘Formative Issues’ and ‘Guiding Principles, Policy Directions & Working Strategies’. The two documents reflect some of the themes and objectives for the long-range comprehensive plan. However, proposed issues such as probate system reform, advocacy for federal funds, and design of financing mechanisms belong in the long-range comprehensive plan, the long-range functional plans, and the 4-year government development program. One would expect that the policies and strategies in the CLWUP would focus on land use policies, definition of development, standards for land management and development control, and guidelines for ensuring that land use supports the sustainable development goals of the USVI.
How does the CLWUP facilitate achievement of quality-of-life objectives in the absence of social development goals? The report on ‘Formative Issues’ resulting from the town hall engagement process lists “Improving and Maintaining Quality of Life” as an area of focus. Interestingly, the document implies that the CLWUP will set the policies and practices for quality-of-life issues instead of the CLWUP reflecting quality-of-life objectives as elaborated by development goals and strategies.
Guam is an example of a small U.S. territory that pursues development through a sustainability lens and framework. The Guam Green Growth Action Framework incorporates multiple goals, cross-cutting issues, and community values and integrates them within action pathways.
The process of setting the development goals for the USVI is another way in which the enabling environment is important for preparation of the CLWUP. If the enabling environment is a determining factor in achieving development outcomes, and the government is the primary actor that shapes the enabling environment, then a new CLWUP is of limited utility without public sector reforms necessary for effective development and delivery of public policy.
The need for public sector reform is implied in Governor Albert Bryan’s 2019 State of the Territory Address, which stated an objective of improving efficiency in program implementation in the public sector. The need for effective government is an objective of the planning law (requirement for a four-year development program) and is elaborated in the 1991 guidelines for development of the long-range comprehensive plan. The goal for Government Operations stated in the guidelines is to “Achieve reliable, efficient and cost-effective provision of community services and management of the public domain.”
Expectations for efficient delivery of community services and effective management of the public domain should reflect agreed social development goals and the strategies that will facilitate achievement of those goals. The practice of individuals using cities on the continental USA as examples when suggesting development possibilities for the USVI underscores the need for a shared understanding of both community and the development context of isolated islands.
The opening paragraph on the landing page of the website for the CLWUP states that “This plan sets a shared vision for the USVI’s future and a guide for how we can get there”. Have Virgin Islanders agreed on the future they want? From my perspective, the question of what type of community the USVI wants is an important starting point in setting development goals and determining what to preserve, strengthen, and transform.
The 175th Emancipation Commemoration Committee gave itself the task of “framing the narrative of the next 175 years”. The executive order that established the committee focused the work of the committee on celebration of Emancipation Day up to July 2023, but the term of the committee goes to December 31, 2023. Could “framing the narrative” for the future include coordinating a public conversation on imagining and building the USVI community? Would a vision of community add value to the CLWUP?
So Virgin Islands, what future do you want? It is not too late to have the conversation.
*Lloyd Gardner is an environmental planner and resides on St. Thomas.
