The 25×25 Reckoning: Why Caribbean Food Bills Remain High—and What Must Change Before the Next Drought

What the evidence allows us to conclude

CARICOM’s published trade data show that the nominal food-import bill for the participating countries covered by its regional totals rose from about US$3.49 billion in 2020 to US$5.12 billion in 2024—an increase of roughly 46.7 per cent. That does not, by itself, prove that regional food production fell or that the 25×25 initiative failed. The figures are current-dollar trade values, not a published measure of import volume, nutrition, affordability or domestic output.

CARICOM’s public programme material also does not state the baseline value, calculation formula, price treatment and complete country scope needed to reproduce a final target score. What the evidence does establish is that Caribbean households remain highly exposed to imported food, freight, fuel, foreign-exchange pressure and climate shocks.

The practical question for 2030 is therefore bigger than a slogan: can the region publish a transparent scorecard, lower avoidable import dependence, build reliable regional supply chains and make nutritious food more affordable?

What CARICOM promised—and what remains undefined

The 25×25 initiative sought to reduce the Caribbean Community’s food-import bill by 25 per cent by 2025. CARICOM Heads of Government subsequently agreed to continue the programme to 2030. Their confirmed decisions identify persistent obstacles: financing, rules of origin and tariff reform, private investment, non-tariff barriers, digitalisation, agricultural insurance and stronger cross-cutting policy.

Those priorities matter. Yet the public documents reviewed by Caribbean Issues do not provide enough methodological detail to independently calculate a definitive regional score.

CARICOM’s Agriculture Programme was asked directly to clarify the target definition, participating countries and commodities, price treatment and final 2025 scorecard. No substantive response had been received by publication time. Caribbean Issues will add any verifiable clarification through a clearly dated update.

• Baseline. Publish the formally adopted baseline year and value.
• Measure. State whether the target uses nominal value, constant prices, physical volume or another measure.
• Scope. Identify the participating countries, commodities and treatment of missing observations.
• Trade. Explain whether intra-regional trade is netted out or reported separately.
• Accountability. Publish the final result, revisions and responsible institution.

What the official trade figures show

CARICOM’s July 2026 summary workbook reports total food imports of US$3.490 billion in 2020 and US$5.121 billion in 2024. Over the same period, intra-regional food exports rose from about US$467.0 million to US$778.2 million, while the published intra-regional trade share increased from 20.6 per cent to 23.6 per cent.

Imports of cereals and cereal preparations rose from about US$642.3 million to US$877.6 million. Vegetable and fruit imports rose from about US$461.0 million to US$759.3 million. These are nominal values and should not be mistaken for physical quantities.

The figures support three careful conclusions. The nominal import bill remained large and rose materially; intra-regional food exports also increased; and continued imports in categories central to everyday diets demonstrate persistent exposure. They do not show how much of the change came from prices, quantities, freight, exchange rates or reporting changes.

On 8 September 2026, CARICOM’s Regional Statistics Programme confirmed to Caribbean Issues that Guyana’s 2024 data are revised and final and that the accompanying notes will be adjusted. It also confirmed that the country imports workbook’s introductory reference to food exports was an oversight: the figures refer to imports, and the wording will be corrected.

• Total food imports. US$3.490bn in 2020; US$5.121bn in 2024; nominal change of approximately 46.7 per cent.
• Intra-regional food exports. US$467.0m in 2020; US$778.2m in 2024; nominal change of approximately 66.7 per cent.
• Published intra-regional trade share. 20.6 per cent in 2020 and 23.6 per cent in 2024.

The unresolved Suriname discrepancy

The summary workbook’s 2024 footnote says Suriname is excluded. The accompanying country workbook contains a Suriname value, and its total appears to include that value.

CARICOM told Caribbean Issues that its Regional Statistics Programme does not currently have access to the disaggregated Suriname data required to compile food-trade classification information. It said Suriname is consequently absent from some available or published disaggregated datasets.

That response establishes a data-availability limitation, but it does not directly reconcile the summary workbook’s exclusion footnote with the country workbook value and apparent total. Caribbean Issues sought further clarification and had not received it by publication time. We have therefore retained CARICOM’s published regional total without independently altering it and do not treat the country series as fully comparable.

Why ‘the bill rose’ is not a complete failure statistic

If the region imports the same quantity of wheat but the world price, shipping charge and insurance cost rise, the import bill increases even though physical dependence is unchanged. Local production can grow while tourism, population or total demand grows faster. Conversely, a lower import bill caused by recession or food deprivation would not represent food-security success.

A serious 2030 scorecard therefore needs several measures rather than one headline value. It should report current- and constant-price import values, import volumes by food group, domestic and regional production, the share of demand supplied within CARICOM, retail affordability, diet quality, logistics performance and exposure to climate, energy and foreign-exchange shocks.

The household test

Food security is experienced at the checkout, in the kitchen and in the quality of a household’s diet. A CARICOM–World Food Programme survey published in 2025 estimated that 3.2 million people—42 per cent of the covered English- and Dutch-speaking Caribbean population—were food insecure, while 94 per cent of respondents reported recent food-price increases.

Survey coverage and methodology must be read with the report’s caveats, but the result warns that production announcements are insufficient if households cannot reliably afford nutritious food. The 2030 programme should publish an affordability dashboard alongside agricultural output: the cost of a healthy basket, the share of income spent on food, meal reduction and the availability of locally produced staples, fruit, vegetables and protein.

The drought, transport and energy tests

The University of the West Indies and the Caribbean Institute for Meteorology and Hydrology warned in August 2026 that strengthening El Niño conditions could increase heat and drought risks, with consequences for agriculture, water, energy and supply chains. That warning does not predict identical losses across the region. It shows why food policy must include water storage, irrigation efficiency, climate information, crop selection, insurance and emergency logistics.

Caribbean food prices also reflect small and fragmented markets, imported fuel, limited cold-chain capacity, port charges, inter-island transport constraints and border delays. Regional supply cannot compete reliably when food spoils in transit or an unpredictable route makes the delivered cost higher than an extra-regional alternative.

Success in 2030 should therefore be measured in shorter clearance times, fewer spoiled shipments, more predictable routes and lower delivered costs—not only announcements of acreage or investment.

A diaspora opportunity—with safeguards

The Caribbean diaspora can contribute market knowledge, technical skills, procurement relationships and patient capital. But ‘diaspora investment’ should not become a slogan that transfers risk to households abroad. Remittances used for family support are not automatically available risk capital.

Any investment vehicle should disclose governance, fees, currency exposure, project selection, reporting standards, exit terms and loss risk. Public institutions should not promote a named product until it has been independently verified.

Practical lower-risk starting points include expert registries, buyer–supplier introductions, transparent co-investment pipelines, technical mentoring and independently audited project data.

The public 2030 scorecard Caribbean citizens deserve

CARICOM should publish a machine-readable scorecard at least annually, with revisions preserved rather than overwritten. For every indicator it should state the definition, unit, baseline, target, country coverage, missing values, source, update date and responsible institution.

Transparency would not weaken the programme. It would make credible progress visible, distinguish structural setbacks from policy failures and allow farmers, businesses, researchers and citizens to act on the same evidence.

• Imports. Report price-adjusted value and physical volume by major food group.
• Production. Show which categories became less import-dependent and why.
• Regional trade. Publish how much food was produced and traded within CARICOM.
• Households. Track retail affordability and dietary quality.
• Logistics. Measure transport time, spoilage and border friction.
• Data quality. Identify provisional, missing and revised figures.
• Correction. State what action follows when an indicator is off track.

Sources, method and correspondence

All monetary comparisons use nominal US-dollar values reported in thousands by CARICOM. Caribbean Issues recalculated percentage changes from the published values and rounded them to one decimal place. The analysis does not infer physical volume, real purchasing power, nutritional outcomes or causal effects from nominal trade values.

Caribbean Issues submitted eight questions to the CARICOM Secretariat. Its Regional Statistics Programme answered questions 6–8 on 8 September 2026. Questions 1–5—covering the target baseline, measurement method, import scope, participating countries and commodities, and final 2025 scorecard—were referred to Programme Manager for Agricultural and Agro-Industrial Development Shaun Baugh. Caribbean Issues requested those clarifications directly and sent a final courtesy follow-up. No substantive Agriculture Programme response had been received by publication time.

The article will be updated if CARICOM supplies further verifiable information. Any change affecting the analysis or reported figures will be identified with a dated correction or update note.