Arthur Lewis Plantation Economy Model

The plantation economy model also differs from the Arthur Lewis dual economy model by its focus on the potential within residentiary sector peasant production. Lewis however emphasizes dismantling the traditional sector and replacing it with a modern sector (Girvan, 2006).

The authors in the plantation school also believed that the way they represented Caribbean economies was superior to Arthur Lewis’ dual economy model of development. Girvan (2006) notes that in the Lewis model, the dynamic for growth lies in the capitalist sector, which reinvests its surplus and eventually absorbs the subsistence sector. On the other hand, in the plantation economy the capitalist sector is viewed as the source of the problem; it lacks a dynamic of its own

Lewis was described by Sankatsing (1989) as ‘pragmatic’, he took the existing economy as a starting point, and instead of questioning it he recorded and analyzed the problems and then developed a theoretical model geared towards the outline of an economic strategy.

The proponents of the plantation economy model on the other hand questioned the status quo, looked for the underlying causes in a historic, structural, institutional approach and focused on the evolution of the Caribbean economies. Their ultimate critique of Lewis was precisely that he overlooked the structural limitations of the economy.

Thus, while Lewis and the Radical Caribbean School coincided in questioning the status quo of economics, they differed in questioning the economic status quo. They had different focuses where Lewis looked towards the future with his strategy and the authors of the plantation model looked towards the past for underlying factors and structural characteristics that would impact on development.

While both economy models attempted to capture Caribbean experiences through history as in the Plantation Economy Model or classical approach like the Lewis model, both models failed to account for a good sustainable measure or model of development for the entire Caribbean

At the same time, Levitt (1979) stated that there was to be a model IV of the Plantation economy model that if it comes into fruitition would complete it. Thus I cannot effectively make a decision but can suggest adaptions from both models. We already know the history from the plantation model so now it’s about the way forward and industrialization by invitation cannot be all.

Many critics felt that the Plantation model did not account for many structural changes in the 19th century and that the model was limited in its ability to anticipate resource shortages relative to the growing populations of the Caribbean region. They made suggestions on how the plantation ought to work and highlighted the importance of industrial policy in order for the Caribbean to develop and compete on the global