Economist Joel Bhagwandin has argued that Guyana’s unprecedented oil wealth has fundamentally changed the standard by which the current administration should be judged, saying greater spending and bigger budgets are not enough to demonstrate successful governance.
In an analysis titled The Legacy Behind the Abundance, Bhagwandin contended that the government is operating under conditions vastly different from those faced by previous administrations, particularly the Bharrat Jagdeo administration.
According to him, Guyana has shifted from an era in which governments were forced to operate under severe financial constraints to one where petroleum revenues have significantly expanded the resources available to the State.
As such, Bhagwandin said the present administration must be measured primarily by what those resources actually produce.
“The incumbent’s metrics must therefore be implementation speed, project quality, value for money, diversification, productive capacity, stronger institutions, broad opportunity and the conversion of temporary petroleum wealth into durable national capability,” he wrote.
Bhagwandin argued that while previous governments had to contend with limited fiscal space, heavy debt burdens and other economic constraints, the present administration benefits from petroleum revenues, stronger state capacity and greater international interest in Guyana.
He pointed to the country’s expanded financial position, including the accumulation of billions of US dollars in the Natural Resource Fund, alongside increased reserves, growth in the domestic financial system and higher non-oil revenues.
However, he cautioned that the expansion of the economy and government finances should not automatically be interpreted as evidence of economic transformation.
“Nominal expansion is not proof of productive transformation, which depends on real growth, productivity, diversification, exports and institutional depth,” Bhagwandin stated.
It is against this backdrop that he believes the government’s performance should be assessed differently from administrations that governed before the oil boom.
“The historical judgement remains open. It will turn not on budgets or announcements, but on whether unprecedented resources produce unprecedented results,” he said.
Bhagwandin warned that the availability of significantly greater resources also carries risks, including waste, economic overheating, concentration and pressure on the country’s institutions.
Rather than lowering expectations of government, he argued, the country’s improved financial position should increase scrutiny of how effectively public resources are being converted into lasting development.
“Abundance brings risks of waste, overheating, concentration and institutional overload, but removes the principal constraint faced by earlier administrations. It raises—not lowers—the standard of accountability,” he wrote.
Bhagwandin drew a distinction between what he described as Jagdeo’s challenge of rebuilding an economy under scarcity and the task now confronting the current administration.
He argued that the present government’s central challenge is implementation at scale.
“If projects remain delayed, procurement concentrated and productive capacity lags behind demand, allocations and announcements are no answer. The abundance-era test is outcomes,” he stated.
According to Bhagwandin, the government should therefore not be judged simply by whether it is spending more than its predecessors, since earlier administrations did not have access to comparable financial resources.
Instead, he said attention should be placed on whether projects are completed quickly and effectively, whether Guyana receives value for money, whether the productive sectors are expanding and diversifying, and whether institutions are becoming stronger.
