Havana,
Florida was once a thriving agricultural area that caught its namesake from the thriving cigar trade in
Havana, Cuba. This little area in
Gadsden County maintained particular expertise in quality shade grown tobacco which was used for the cigar wrappers (which is where most of the flavor in a cigar comes from). Some of the old barns used in the shade grown process still stand, but, that industry has passed
Havana by. Also, Havana has recently shut down a mushroom farm that only a short time ago employed around 300 people. In addition, the many antique businesses that were once frequented by folks coming from
Tallahassee on the weekends now receive less business in an uncertain economy. People buy less luxury items when they have fallen on hard times.
In many ways, Havana, FL is not unlike a rural area in a developing country. Positioned in Gadsden Country (one of the poorest counties in Florida), they are a sizable drive away from the nearest population center: Tallahassee and very much in need of jobs that will provide stable income for their family. In developing countries what has tended to happen is that people migrate away from rural areas to seek employment in the high population areas where there is enough of a market to support a business.
***Unfortunately, I do not have the data on the migration patterns into and away from Havana. Additionally, my time in the field has been limited, but, I will say that when I made this suggestion at a presentation in Havana, many people were nodding their heads in agreement that there were not many jobs to be had in this rural area.***
This information is an important part of our conversation about decentralized justice. The context of the people we are trying to help should give us a clue about what types of activities we should pursue, but, we still need more information. What are the needs of people? Food assistance? Transportation? Learn more marketable skills? Childcare? In order to improve the quality of the lives of the poor and meet their needs, we must know what their needs are first. How will we find out? And, that may be different too for different population groups. A good friend of mine who also has a blog The Thin Veil posted recently about Social Justice projects he hopes to get underway in Orlando. They will be using the internet to coordinate activity. Unfortunately, many in Havana do not have the internet so we will need some other way to coordinate activity and match needs with ability.
In order to match those needs with abilities and resources means that at some point someone must share private information with someone else so that the resources can flow to the person in need. But, so many needs are very private and people feel ashamed to talk about them –in fact, we prefer they are kept confidential. But, as the Pastor at First Presbyterian Havana, Bill Bess, pointed out, “Jesus did not seem too concerned with confidentiality. In fact, he searched out the woman who touched his cloak and didn’t let her get off the hook.” We are not called to be a confidential people but we are called to share each other’s burdens. We are called to confess to each other so that others may pray for us, healing may happen, and perhaps material resources given.
Most astonishing from this exchange was the uneconomic conclusions gleaned from it. We don’t share our burdens with others because we fear we will be gossiped about. We do not share our burdens with others because we fear they will judge us. We fear they will judge us because they are not humble people with wisdom. And so on. It seemed that so much of the justice that could happen is stifled by our lack of belief in each other. If I can go out on a limb, it may even be true that by not putting on the clothing of God we are indeed stumbling blocks to the more wonderful outcomes that could happen if we possessed more humility, wisdom, and love.
I’m still learning a lot more about the community and this is only one facet of the conversation, but, I will post more on this conversation at First Presbyterian Havana in the future. Also, if you have any thoughts please comment.
2 comments:
Didn't realize you guys were taking your ideas into the field. I'd like to pose an idea that you can feel free to elaborate on here or talk amongst ourselves when we meet up.
The phrase "social justice" has an obvious appeal to emotional and/or spiritual senses. From an economic perspective, though, I'm not convinced that it's an always appropriate consideration---at least not fitting if we start with free-market assumptions.
Take the case of Havana (or any other undeveloped region in the U.S. or abroad). The knee-jerk reaction from social groups is to figure out hwo to help the people in that community. We want to provide them with goods or services that help them get through tough times. We want to provide them with guidance and hope. We want to provide them with education or job training. But what is a major thing they lack? Jobs. Businesses aren't going into the region because either there is an information asymmetry whereby they don't know about the hidden opportunities or the location is no longer profitable. When railroad transportation began to fade away, Havana lost its locational advantage that had transitioned it from tobacco to tomatoes and on to other agricultural crops. For many years, cities have formed because they were located close to rivers, lakes, oceans, transportation hubs, borders with other states/nations, or proximity to other major trading centers. The economic idea is that one of those geographic properties provides a return to scale in productivity and there are external benefits to the people and businesses locating in those areas. With the high cost to rail transport, Havana no longer possesses one of those advantages and its population is probably too large for its market scope.
Now, Havana may offer several historic sites and antiques, but those businesses cannot sustain the entire community. The best option isn't for social institutions to continue subsidizing the people living in that region. Just as people may vote with their feet to obtain public services, the entrepreneurial folks should move to find new jobs and opportunities. For those that are unwilling or unable to relocate, they may miss out on the benefits and may suffer some penalties, such as limited jobs and resources.
Why should social institutions use up resources to subsidized these people? If anything, these groups should encourage relocations to nearby thriving places, job training that could be used in those nearby areas, and maybe even carpooling that could bring those workers to the outskirting markets until workers can relocate themselves.
I imagine that your readers and the people in Havana don't want to hear that "their city is dead" or that they must move out. Such statements might be too harsh, anyway. Nonetheless, the debate definitely deserves a hint of skepticism about whether the donations from social\religious institutions create perverse incentives. If businesses are not choosing to relocate in the area, there might be a reason. We might actually help out the people of Havana even more by encouraging them to look at compatible places, such as Tallahassee or Marianna. By relocating a portion of the population, the moved persons will benefit and those that remain could also turn out better off (if the population approaches more of an optimal size that the local economy could actually support).
What do you guys think? I know people at my church are constantly donating to causes in the Quincy and Havana areas. They have tried to get me involved, but I am forever hesitant because the programs have been around for as long as I can remember (at least back into the mid-90's). To me, that represents social welfare, which is not one-in-the-same with social justice. The recipients aren't getting any better, but the donors probably feel good about themselves...and that is why I politely refuse to participate.
Didn't realize you guys were taking your ideas into the field. I'd like to pose an idea that you can feel free to elaborate on here or talk amongst ourselves when we meet up.
The phrase "social justice" has an obvious appeal to emotional and/or spiritual senses. From an economic perspective, though, I'm not convinced that it's an always appropriate consideration---at least not fitting if we start with free-market assumptions.
Take the case of Havana (or any other undeveloped region in the U.S. or abroad). The knee-jerk reaction from social groups is to figure out how to help the people in that community. We want to provide them with goods or services that help them get through tough times. We want to provide them with guidance and hope. We want to provide them with education or job training. But what is a major thing they lack? Jobs. Businesses aren't going into the region because either there is an information asymmetry whereby they don't know about the hidden opportunities or the location is no longer profitable. When railroad transportation began to fade away, Havana lost its locational advantage that had transitioned it from tobacco to tomatoes and on to other agricultural crops. For many years, cities have formed because they were located close to rivers, lakes, oceans, transportation hubs, borders with other states/nations, or proximity to other major trading centers. The economic idea is that one of those geographic properties provides a return to scale in productivity and there are external benefits to the people and businesses locating in those areas. With the high cost to rail transport, Havana no longer possesses one of those advantages and its population is probably too large for its market scope.
Now, Havana may offer several historic sites and antiques, but those businesses cannot sustain the entire community. The option shouldn't necessarily be for the social institutions to continue subsidizing the people living in that region. Just as people may vote with their feet to obtain public services, the entrepreneurial folks should move to find new jobs and opportunities. For those that are unwilling or unable to relocate, they may miss out on the benefits and suffer some penalties like limited jobs and resources, but that is the beneficial feedback that the market provides to encourage them to move elsewhere. A city of the size of Havana has a limit as to how much population it can successfully support.
Why should social institutions use up resources to subsidized these people? If anything, these groups should encourage relocations to nearby thriving places, job training that could be used in those nearby areas, and maybe even carpooling that could bring those workers to the outskirting markets until they can relocate themselves.
To say "their city is dead" or that all the people of Havana must move out is too harsh. Nevertheless, the debate deserves a hint of skepticism about whether the donations from social/religious institutions create perverse incentives. If businesses are not choosing to relocate in the area, there might be a reason. Trying to support the people that stay might not solve any long-term problems. We might actually help out the people of Havana even more by encouraging them to look at compatible places, such as Tallahassee or Marianna.
What do you guys think? I know people at my church are constantly donating to causes in the Quincy and Havana areas. They have tried to get me involved, but I am forever hesitant because the programs have been around for as long as I can remember (at least back into the mid-90's) and I have yet to attempts to measure the success of any programs. Perhaps that is purposeful because there seems to be a lack of improvement. To me, the continued poverty and programs represents a form of social welfare, which is not one-in-the-same with social justice. The recipients aren't getting any better, but the donors probably feel good about themselves...and that is why I politely refuse to participate.
Post a Comment