I will try and make this easy for you. If you are not interested in the future of Roatan and are not willing to look at the following concepts in an honest, open minded manner then click "DELETE" right now. You may not like everything you read but it should give you 'food for thought'.
www.spartanburgangels.com/paradigm.htm
The term "paradigm shift" has found uses in other contexts, representing the notion of a major change in a certain thought-pattern — a radical change in personal beliefs, complex systems or organizations, replacing the former way of thinking or organizing with a radically different way of thinking or organizing.
The phrase has been abused in "marketing speak", and is often considered a meaningless buzzword in this context. This is now so widespread that R. L. Trask lists it in his book Mind The Gaffe as a phrase never to use, and he advises caution when reading anything that contains this phrase.
That said; I am neither an economist nor a sociologist or biologist. But I am not stupid either. Everyone has an agenda that they follow. Some agendas are obvious and others not so obvious. Some agendas might not even be consciously recognized by those that harbor them. I am going to give you a list (It will not be a complete list) of agendas. See which ones apply to you and study the others and you will discover the REAL problems affecting and controlling the outcome of the 'Quality of Life' on Roatan.
"Change" is inevitable; but when change is 'rapid' it is referred to as a 'paradigm shift'. There is a paradigm shift occurring in Roatan at this time. What this shift will mean to you depends on your agenda and how you respond to the agenda of others. Therefore it pays to analyze your own agenda(s) and see how they fit with the agenda of others and that will give you a clue to what action you need to take to either fulfill your own agenda(s) or at least protect yourself should the opposing agendas of others supersede your agenda(s).
INVESTMENT OPPORTUNITES:
This would have to be divided up into three very basic categories. Immediate (Around 1 year term) Long term (Thought of as 10 years or longer.) and short term (The present out to 10 years.) Neither of these periods is cast in stone. Many variables (Some unknown) might affect the time frames. When you think of "Investment" you must define that as a 'profit motive'. That is clearly an agenda.
What this means:
Immediate – Build houses, condos, hotels, motels and similar where you finish the job and take your money and 'leave'.
Risk factors:
Immediate - Only the normal concerns with the investment meeting with demand. Concerns, minimal with the exception of meeting local laws (Generally insufficient to protect the environment, by US standards.)
Position and actions likely taken: Resist an upgrading of laws as that would likely increase investment costs and reduce either profitability or demand. Do not look for this person to be likely to want an increase in law enforcement unless they see it as increasing the demand for their investment. This calls for almost unbridled expansion of tourism which feeds these investments.
Near term – any investment where the payout would be 10 years or less. Normal for any business venture. I.e. Restaurant, dive operation or some similar business venture. Might include purchasing a home or house for rent for the short term investment. Value of the investment at the end of the period.
Position and actions likely taken: Support an increase in tourism and other activities that would increase traffic to your investment and demand for your services. Support an increase in law enforcement but not necessarily an increase in quality of services such as sewage treatment as it would be too expensive. Likely support a decrease in or a moratorium on the development of additional homes, etc. unless the investment is in undeveloped or underdeveloped land, the value of which would be reduced by such action.
Long term – dependent upon how the paradigm shift affects your particular investment. I.e. The demise of the reef would have a drastic effect on the desirability of a dive operation. Loss of affordable pure water would have a GREAT effect on almost every type of investment.
Position and actions likely taken: This could be a mix of the above two except that emphasis would be placed on protecting the reef if your investment is so oriented. Either controlled expansion or even a moratorium on additional construction would be likely to be supported since either would increase the value of 'in place' investments and lessen the demand for increased services which would increase their own expenses.
SECLUDED, QUIET LIFE STYLE:
Risk factor: Already drastically changing. With the increase of building on the island and more permanent and transient residents the quiet nature of the island is changing at a rapid rate. If this is what you are looking for; it is rapidly disappearing.
Position and actions likely taken: This position would likely be vehemently opposed to increased tourism; especially cruise ships which increase traffic congestion and place a burden on in place services. Would also likely support a decrease in tourism as that feeds demand for homes for permanent residence or rental. This person would likely be despondent about that they have lost. Therefore opposing anything that changes the status quo.
ECONOMICAL PLACE TO LIVE/RETIRE:
Risk factor: As the island becomes more commercialized and dependent upon the tourist influx the costs of normal services and expendables such as food are increasing. Where once you could hire a gardener or cook/housekeep/maid for mere dollars (US) the expected wages are increasing along with the costs, but at an even higher rate due to the difference between the original and the US standard.
Position and actions likely taken: The position this person would likely take would be similar to the previous scenario but would also put additional pressure on their decision of whether or not to consider moving there to live for an extended period or retire due the likelihood of increased expenses on the horizon.
I believe you can see from the above that there could be many interactions between these different agendas. While I am sure there are other 'agendas' I have chosen these three as the most prevalent in terms of affecting the desirability of the island in order to show how a person's agenda might affect their opinion and actions concerning other factors such as law enforcement, environmental protection, controlling the rate of change and upgrading the level of protections given to each of those areas of concern. But whatever your agenda you hold you need to become involved with like minded people and work for the change that favors your agenda.
I will state my position once again: I am not an economist, sociologist or botanist. I do not own any land in Roatan, have no relatives who live there nor any business interests there outside of my interest in the welfare of the indigenous peoples of Roatan, Honduras. What affects the island as a whole will have an even greater effect on that group of people.
My prognoses, which are only as good as my qualifications, which are minimal, are that the reefs will be essentially dead within 10 years. Beginning efforts to protect them are good and should not be given up as a lost cause; but the rate of change in the existing laws and the quality of law enforcement cannot come soon enough to save the reefs. My point of reference is Pennekamp Park in the Florida Keys. The loss of pure potable water is a matter of conjecture only in the sense that much of the natural water supply currently available is in serious question. The wells are being polluted at an increasing rate and cisterns are not an answer for high density housing, if suitable at all! Costs could sky-rocket due to the need/demand for a general sewer system and what it is going to cost to supply an ample quantity of pure water. Law enforcement in all areas is problematical but is even sketchier in 'third-world countries.
In the US, many beaches test the water quality for health concerns and close them if the water quality does not pass acceptable levels. I shudder to think what would happen if similar tests were done to the water off the beaches and other areas people swim, in Roatan??? My own research shows that there are better methods of waste disposal than open bottom septic tanks; but even though they output a higher quality of effluent, it is still not pure. Hence, ultimately the demand for a general sewer system.
How will this affect you, personally? It depends on what your overall expectations and goals are. As for me; I would love to live there but cannot afford a place to live. And at my age and state of health, I would not be looking at a long term investment. The dollar factor will continue to rule where new investments are concerned. A new community going in and meeting all Honduran laws affecting the environment says both a lot and only a little. Unless those laws are upgraded and enforced, Roatan will continue to experience degradation in the quality of the previously mentioned areas of concern. And how you upgrade previously allowed totally insufficient waste disposal is problematic at the least and prohibitively expense at the worse.
This is not meant to be a demeaning article about Roatan. I believe it is a beautiful place to visit and even to live but you have to consider the realities. Should anyone take exception to what is written here I welcome your response to:
achristianplace@charter.net
Robert Black
Robert Black has an Associate Degree in Business with many years as a retail manager. He has also had significant experience in diving the reefs off of Florida. His interest lies in the welfare of the indigenous peoples of Roatan, Honduras.
ไม่มีความคิดเห็น:
แสดงความคิดเห็น