![]() |
Change in Cuba? The early August meeting of the Association for the Study of the Cuban Economy (ASCE), held in Miami, was different from some of the more recent ones. First, there were few, if any, papers presented on the "Transition" in Cuba. Partly because the Castro brothers rival Adenauer in longevity, partly because there is nothing novel left to say, and partly because the proposed governmental changes are more interesting, the academics, retired Bretton Woods institutional staff, consultants, bureaucrats, and others who make up the membership decided the Transition was not a priority. Secondly, there were far more defectors, at least recent ones, than before. It was jarring for me to encounter a Cuban who had been head of an agricultural brigade in the People's Republic of Yemen while I had been there on a World Bank mission. Some Cubans sent their papers via the internet, and there was even one--who presented an apolitical paper--who had been given an exit visa to attend the conference. There seemed to be far better information available on what was happening in Cuba, although the modelers and other theoreticians continued to successfully ignore reality when necessary. There are some important decisions among the trivial. First, the decision to downsize the public sector workforce by 500,000 has been validated by the Congress. While the timeline of March 2011, has not been met (only about 250,000 have been shed), the new timeline of end-2011 has been agreed to by the Congress. Indeed, further downsizing was also agreed, with a total of 1.8 million to be shed by end 2014. While all sorts of barriers can be foreseen--military objections (the military now run the majority of public enterprises), slow generation of non-state jobs, bureaucratic obstacles--the Cuban regime has decided that government employment will not be the answer. Thirdly, the Congress agreed to allow private ownership of housing; this to begin by the end of this year. This will obviously have a major effect, since mortgages, inheritance expectations, and construction will be massively affected if (IF!) the housing decision is liberally interpreted. Stay tuned for this one. Finally, the Congress validated and encouraged an acceleration of "usufruct" standing for farmers, whereby they can decide what, when, and how to produce on land they are granted tenure for. But there was no decision to grant title to the farmers, and the need to accelerate the turnover stems from the desultory process used so far. (One speaker asked how you translate "usufruct" into plainer English; I suggested "sharecropper" since the resemblance to that is amazingly close). But not all the Tea Party program has arrived; taxes have been increased. Many Cubans pay one third of their income in taxes, and "own account" workers pay far more. (The minimum salary--which is relatively close to the average-- is now about US$17-18 a month!) Now, on the face of it, these changes are both partial and disappointing. While Cuban data continue to show a relatively buoyant economy, independent estimates indicate per capita income is still below that of 1989, the fiscal position is abysmal, and the external situation even worse. Cuba's recent sugar harvest, for example, was the worst in a century. Tourism, the chief export earner, has been relatively stagnant for three years, as has Venezuela's financial support. In spite of the agricultural reform--begun two years ago--food production remains stagnant. Cuban debt arrears continue to grow, and the country is "off cover" for all but the Chinese, Brazilians, and Venezuelans. The only growth item comes from Obama's decision to allow unlimited remittances and visits by Cuban Americans. The economy confronts three major structural problems: the state enterprises are mostly dysfunctional; Cuba has extremely low, overall productivity; and gross investment--after years of being negative on a net basis--is still barely above depreciation levels. No sane person expects "taking in each other's laundry" will reverse these, let alone generate enough productive jobs to absorb the over third of the public workforce being fired over the next three years. To understand how irrelevant the VI Congress is, simply click on www.revolico.com and note the many homes "for trading." While you can barter homes for homes, it is illegal to include cash or other payments in the deal. This is done openly with no (yet) punishment. Given the tax burden on "own account" workers, few register or pay taxes; or rather they pay only nominal sums to the block warden of the "Committee for the Defense of the Revolution." Tips are now illegal in resorts patronized by foreigners. This is treated as a joke. Prostitution abounds; crime is rampant; education, health, and other vaunted public services are often provided only after bribes. A cynic would remind us (and one did) of the reforms of 190-85, and of 1993-95, when the economy confronted disaster. As soon as the challenges were ameliorated, the "reforms" (far more timid than those now underway) were reversed. But there now seems no savior in sight. Whatever happens to Chavez or Venezuela, it is obvious that Venezuelan subsidies will not increase. The state enterprises remain among the least productive in the world. The authorities have recently increased taxes on tourism. The declining infrastructure and desultory service mean that Cuban tourism sites are now fairly uncompetitive with other Caribbean spots, let alone the now cheaper Florida options. In spite of the agricultural reforms, including the closure of two-thirds of the (inefficient) sugar mills, agricultural production continues to fall. Then there is the recent and massive increase in immigrant remittances and travel by US citizens to Cuba. I did not write "Cuban-Americans" because it is clear the Obama Administration will let anyone travel to Cuba. In the last year of the Bush Administration there were 1500 citations sent to Americans for illegal travel to Cuba. Since Obama took office there have been 19. One of the student papers presented included anecdotes from a recent tourist trip to the island. Foolishly, I commented to some Cuban-Americans that the student must have been Canadian since she was not of Cuban origin and her trip was--as noted--pure tourism. I was immediately deluged with example after example of travel by ordinary Americans as simple tourists; the travel agencies which package the tours are often forgetting to include the "research" or other legal reason for the trips. Canada has replaced Spain and Italy as the most important tourist provider as Cuba increasingly deters "immersion" tourism (ie, city-tourism, where linguistically capable Italian and Spanish tourists can mingle with ordinary Cubans) and concentrates on resort tourism. And the US is fast becoming one of the top five tourist providers. Cuba is very likely to find significant deposits of oil. A Norwegian fifth-generation drilling vessel costing $750 million was launched in Singapore recently and hired to drill north of Havana by Repsol and other European (and Chinese) firms. It cost $450,000/day and will likely make five to seven attempts. You don't spend that kind of money unless you are reasonably certain something will turn up. But even the most optimistic estimate of Cuba's possible reserves indicates Cuba might become self-sufficient (it consumes under 150,000 bbl/day) in the longer term; and if oil is found next year it will be five years before it becomes available. The Venezuelans and Chinese are building two 150,000 bbl/day refineries: one on the south coast near Cienfuegos (actually, this is being renovated and expanded), another on the north coast for processing Chinese crude from South America. These, however, are projects that will both take a few more years to complete and offer few jobs and little foreign exchange (refining is the least profitable of petroleum activities; and off-shore ones are notoriously parsimonious to their hosts). Cuba now has agreements with over 90 countries to provide medical professionals. From Pakistan to South Africa, from Qatar to Bolivia, Cuban doctors and nurses labor at Cuban salaries (about $20/month) while the host governments pay 10 times or more to the Cuban government. (This, of course, violates a series of ILO agreements, but as usual the "international community" ignores it.) Most--probably 30,000 out of 50,000--are in Venezuela and likely ensuring Cuba receives free oil (in fact, Venezuela should charge $27/bbl, but since Cuba never pays it is free). Given the effect exporting doctors and nurses has had on the domestic health scene, Raul has announced he will be expanding Cuba's doctor-training capacity to 100,000/yr. (This compares to about 2/3 that in the US, and is probably as credible as the 10 million to sugar harvest attempted years ago!) Nevertheless, this income will likely grow in the future, although it will depend on finding new markets for the doctors/nurses... Finally, one question: Was concrete information presented in the conference showing that indeed 250,000 workers have been dismissed from the public sector? The last I have heard is that they have punted and extended the deadline for reducing the public sector payrolls a few years down the road. The "punting" was over the 500,000 downsizing target, which was supposed to be achieved by end-March 2011. The even more massive target--1.8 million--is supposed to be achieved by end-2014. One presenter noted that by the VI Congress (April 2011) the authorities had indicated only 200,000 to 250,000 had been downsized, so the timeline for the half-million was extended to end-2011. * Paul Meo is a former official of the World Bank with a very extensive experience in developing countries and a long term member of ASCE. August 12, 2011
|