by Adrian Joseph, DBA
For 14 years, the Spicemas Corporation has acted as both the guardian and gatekeeper of Grenada’s most vibrant cultural expression: Carnival.
Established by Act No. 10 of 2011, known as “The Spicemas Corporation Act,” and assented to by Governor-General Sir Carlyle Glean, the Spicemas Corporation was created to transform Grenada’s foremost cultural and economic festival from a 3 month committee led by volunteer initiative (the Grenada Carnival and Cultural Committee) into a fully operational year-round corporation. This vision, by the government, spearheaded by then Minister for Culture Senator Arley Gill aimed to enhance the promotion and management of carnival, effectively turning it into the business of carnival.
The annual carnival celebration, with its electrifying Jab Jab traditions, evocative Short Knee masquerades, and incisive calypso commentary, represents more than just entertainment. I would quickly suggest that it is the living embodiment of Grenadian identity. As a government-backed entity, the corporation was meant to professionalise and elevate these cultural treasures while ensuring their preservation. However, as we approach the festival’s 14th anniversary under this structure, troubling signs suggest the model may be failing both its cultural mission and economic potential.
The current crisis manifests most visibly in the growing discontent among promoters and cultural practitioners. Where carnival was once seen as a viable cultural enterprise, many now view it as an extractive system. Veteran promoter Archie Max voiced a common frustration: “Instead of seeking creative, sustainable ways to raise revenue, it seems easier to assume promoters are rolling in profit.” This sentiment is echoed by fellow promoter Nyah Slived, who noted, “Hosting events for the season is just to put money in Spicemas and the Government pocket, while promoters take all the risk without any profit.” The numbers bear this out — some operational fees have increased by over 100% since 2019, while the current taxation structure (15% VAT plus 5% Spicemas fee on gross revenue) leaves little room for reinvestment or reasonable profit margins.
Governance challenges and structural flaws
At the heart of these issues lies a governance model that has failed to evolve with the festival’s growth. The original 3-stakeholder structure (mas, pan, and calypso) now appears increasingly anachronistic in an ecosystem that has expanded to include promoters, tour operators, content creators, and commercial sponsors. This outdated framework creates inherent conflicts, particularly when the same stakeholders who serve as directors help determine prize monies and subsidies for their own art forms. As one insider noted, “It’s a flawed business concept — I pay you for output (subventions) then I reward you for participating (prize monies).”
The corporation’s operational capacity also raises concerns. Unlike more successful regional counterparts, Spicemas lacks dedicated professional roles crucial for modern event management — production managers, logistics specialists, and events coordinators. These gaps could be addressed through short-term contracts during peak seasons (May–August), yet the organisation persists with a committee-style approach that often prioritises politics over professionalism. There’s a growing consensus that the corporation needs to transform into a true destination management organisation, mirroring the relationship between the Grenada Tourism Authority (GTA) promoter and the Ministry of Tourism, product developer.
Economic impact and equity concerns
While Spicemas undoubtedly boosts Grenada’s economy — with hotels, restaurants, and transportation services seeing significant seasonal bumps — the benefits are unevenly distributed. International visitors and large businesses reap substantial rewards, while the local creators and promoters who generate the festival’s authentic energy struggle under increasing financial pressures. This imbalance threatens the very cultural authenticity that makes Grenada’s carnival unique in a crowded regional market.
The path forward requires bold, systemic changes:
- Governance reform: Revisit the Spicemas Corporation Act to reflect the festival’s current ecosystem, with balanced representation across all stakeholder groups and clear separation between governance and competition judging
- Financial transparency: Financially, Spicemas Corporation operates with little transparency. While it benefits from government subsidies and corporate sponsorships, including major deals with its partners, there is minimal public accounting for how funds are allocated
- Professionalisation: Build a core professional team supplemented by seasonal specialists to improve operational efficiency
- Economic rebalancing: Review the entire taxation and fee structure to ensure cultural practitioners can thrive, not just survive
- Innovation investment: Develop digital platforms, international partnerships, and premium experiences to diversify revenue streams beyond local promoter fees
As Grenada positions itself in the competitive Caribbean tourism market, Spicemas represents both its greatest cultural asset and untapped economic potential. The choice is clear: evolve to empower all stakeholders while preserving authentic traditions or risk watching this cultural crown jewel become just another commodified tourist attraction. The time for change is now, before we lose both the heart and future of Spicemas.
During the Keith Mitchell administration, a ferry used to sail from Trinidad and Tobago to Grenada, carrying some 300 or so carnival enthusiasts who spent a week or so having fun and spending their hard-earned “Trini cash”. Needless to say, Grenada benefitted not only from the economic activities of those visitors but also from the free promotion of Grenada carnival in the “carnival Mecca” as the ferry operators engaged in the task of attracting passengers. However, because the administration failed to appreciate the trade off between the contribution by the “Trinbagonian” ferry operators and not requiring them to pay the berthing duties, the ferry operators stopped sailing to Grenada for the carnival and no one has to imagine who ended up being the big loser. The moral of the story then is that carnival revenues are derived in more ways than just monies collected by selling admission tickets to the various Spicemas Corporation-sponsored shows. And so, the authorities should try to think outside the box wherever possible.
Of course it’s another “commodified” tourist attraction….thought that was the reason it was moved from the two days before Ash Wednesday. You now have to do better than Antigua,StLucia,Barbados,St Vincent … ..how many more same same can be effective/ profitable….back to the drawing board.
Well written.
Surely several pages can be taken from Trinidad Carnival governance? Or not? As I’m unaware of the structure used in Trinidad to manage their festivities.