In the aftermath of Hurricane Melissa, as Jamaica begins the difficult task of rebuilding, the Fair Trading Commission (FTC) reaffirms its commitment to fostering a fair and competitive marketplace for all citizens. The Government’s declaration of Jamaica as a Disaster Area is a critical first step, not only for coordinating national relief but also for activating a vital shield for consumers. Alongside this declaration, to protect consumers, the Minister of Industry Investment and Commerce signed the Trade (Sale of Goods During Period of Declaration of Threatened Area) (Tropical Storm Melissa) Order, 2025. This order states that no person whose business includes the retail sale of goods shall sell any necessary goods to another person at a price higher than the price charged immediately before the coming into force of the Disaster Risk Management (Declaration of Threatened Area) (Tropical Storm Melissa) Order, 2025. Essentially, this order places a price freeze on necessary goods.
The Jamaican Government’s use of a specific order to combat price gouging is a strategy mirrored in many nations. These orders or laws are designed to prevent exploitative pricing when consumers are most vulnerable and as the recovery period progresses. The emphasis on the link between preventing exploitation and promoting healthy competition has never been more critical.
Consumer exploitation undermines recovery efforts and distorts the principles of a fair market. It is imperative that all sectors of the business community view this period as a test of corporate citizenship. They should also understand that this type of business conduct during a disaster is not just a legal obligation but an investment in long term consumer trust and community goodwill. Businesses are being urged to compete on merits through better service, efficient logistics, and innovative solutions, rather than through abusive conduct or exploitative tactics which could also be a breach of the Fair Competition Act.
There should be a need for vigilance against anticompetitive behaviors such as collusion or coordinated conduct that can emerge under the guise of crisis. This is where competitors agree to fix prices or divide markets, artificially inflating prices. It is therefore crucial to be watchful for attempts by dominant suppliers to engage in exploitative practices, such as the hoarding of scarce products to create artificial scarcity and drive-up prices. Such actions are not only illegal but a direct attack on the nation’s recovery process.
However, while protecting consumers from exploitation is of high importance, it is crucial to distinguish between unjustified profiteering and price adjustments that stem from genuine economic pressures. The prices displayed on a supermarket or hardware store shelf are merely the final link in a long chain. A retailer’s final price is often a reflection of its own costs further up the supply chain. Following a hurricane, legitimate disruptions from damaged infrastructure and scarcity of raw materials can drive up wholesale prices. When a retailer pays more to restock its shelves, some of that increase will inevitably be passed on to the consumers to maintain business viability.
Nevertheless, this reality also creates a veil behind which anticompetitive conduct can hide. The real threat to a fair market can sometimes originate not at the retail level, but higher up the supply chain. Therefore, the focus should be on whether significant price hikes are the result of suppliers or distributors unduly exercising market power. In these situations, dominant players in the supply chain can engage in opportunistic pricing, imposing drastic cost increases on smaller retailers who have few alternative sources for essential goods. This creates a harmful ripple effect. The local store, with little bargaining power, is forced to pay the inflated wholesale price, which it must then pass on to the consumer. The inability for a retailer to pass on inflated wholesale prices could have the unfortunate effect of temporarily removing that retailer from the market, exacerbating the impact on consumers even more. The result is that the public bears the cost of what may be anticompetitive behavior, while the smaller retailer risks being perceived as the exploiter.
This distinction is the cornerstone of effective post-disaster market regulation. The goal is to foster a competitive environment where prices are determined by genuine supply and demand forces, and not by manipulation. A truly resilient economy is built on a foundation of robust competition, which in times of crisis serves as the consumer’s greatest ally. When multiple businesses operate competitively, this rivalry naturally checks prices, creates innovation in service delivery, and ensures efficient distribution of scarce resources. The post-hurricane landscape is testing this principle.
The challenges posed by Hurricane Melissa are significant, but it is an opportunity to renew the collective commitment to fair play. The FTC’s mandate to maintain and promote a competitive marketplace is central to building a more resilient and equitable Jamaican economy, and the FTC stands firm in its resolve to ensure that the recovery from this disaster is characterized by fairness and a competitive spirit in the marketplace that benefits every citizen of our resilient country.