Displacement Capitalism in Barbuda: A Story of Greed, Resistance and Hope

This short blog by a Barbudan community advocate examines how the Government of Antigua and Barbuda cynically forced the evacuation of Barbuda during Hurricane Irma in 2017 to make way for a luxury real estate development project catering to the exclusive private lifestyles of millionaires. Declaring the island ‘uninhabitable’, the government used threats and dubious legal procedures to confiscate all Barbudan land and prevent Barbudans from asserting their right to live on their land and island. Eight years on, Barbudans, led by community representatives and activists, continue their struggle. As the author notes, their challenges have strengthened the resolve of the people of Barbuda and helped forge alliances with other communities facing similar injustices.
Published on December 18, 2025
John Mussington | idrp, IDPs, Disaster, Development-driven

Coco Point, Barbuda. 2022 © John Mussington

The reality of people and even whole communities having to move due to adverse conditions has become one of the consequences of the present climate emergency. Although displacement, particularly evacuations intended to save lives, is justified in many situations, there are instances where displacement is used as ‘cover’ for something else. A catastrophic event in Barbuda, triggered by the 2017 Hurricane Irma disaster, provides insight into this other side of displacement.

“For the first time in 300 years, there’s not a single living person on the island of Barbuda”. These were the words of Ronald Sanders, the ambassador of Antigua and Barbuda to the United States. He made this statement in the aftermath of Hurricane Irma and proceeded to make the case that the hurricane caused extensive damage, rendering the island, in his words and those of the administration he represents, “uninhabitable”. This conclusion, that an entire island was not fit to support its people, was arrived at even before official assessments were made by the relevant international agencies. 

Examining the haste to condemn an entire population to move reveals the true motives behind the forced removal. The ambassador’s statement was, in fact, false. It was untrue that there was not a single living soul remaining on the island. While the real motive behind the mandatory evacuation order was, indeed, to ensure not a single living Barbudan person remained on the island, many Barbudans became suspicious and remained, despite efforts by armed security personnel to remove them. The other pertinent fact was that during this period of mandatory evacuation, others, including potential investors, construction workers and military personnel, were all allowed free, unrestricted access to the island – something which Barbudans were not permitted until they challenged what was happening. Even then, as a result of speaking out, Barbudans were eventually only allowed access to the island for a few hours per day to clean up and remove personal items from their homes. After their visits, they were forced to return to the ferry to be taken back to Antigua under threat of arrest or worse. 

With regard to habitability, neither the ambassador nor the administration which he represents were qualified to make such a determination on behalf of a community without even seeking their opinion on the matter. Yet this was just the opening salvo, a crafted narrative for justifying what was to come. The central government administration of Antigua and Barbuda was, in fact, preparing to invoke the discredited doctrine of colonialism: terra nullius, “land belonging to nobody”. It sought to impose on Barbuda another version of modern colonial extractivism: displacement capitalism.

The policy decisions taken regarding recovery in the aftermath of the 2017 hurricane did not include adequate consultation with or input from the people directly affected by the crisis. Instead of focusing on the needs of the Barbudan community, the focus shifted to their land. Efforts were made to use Parliament to change laws so the land could be utilised for redeveloping the island for the benefit of others. The stated intent was to create a luxury real-estate market catering to the exclusive private lifestyles of millionaires. The pathway had to be cleared for this to happen. People had to move. Displacement paved the way to declare terra nullius

Here, we see the ‘dark’ side of displacement. The collective vision of the People of Barbuda for a sustainable future, based on the collective rights and equitable access to the island’s resources, was to be brushed aside and replaced with the vision of a “Jumby Bay on steroids“. Jumby Bay is a privately owned offshore island accessible only to its millionaire homeowners and the workers who maintain their establishments. The prime minister of Antigua and Barbuda used these very words while speaking publicly about ‘his’ plans for Barbuda, which in his mind, would be a version of exclusivity that surpassed that of Jumby Bay.

The Barbudan community resisted the central government’s deracination agenda by refusing to accept or conform to the official, manufactured narrative. The voices from the ground demanded to be heard and included in the decision-making process. The community was not prepared to quietly accept others’ ideas of habitability. It projected its voices through the “BarbudaSilentNoMore” page on Facebook and other social media sites. “BarbudaSilentNoMore” also engages with local and international media workers. 

Eight years later, Barbudans continue their resistance through legal challenges and other means, starting with the judicial review of the circumstances surrounding the construction of an international airport. The matter reached the Privy Council after 7 years in the lower courts. A precedent-setting decision was handed down in favour of the Barbudan claimants, paving the way for the initial challenge to continue in the lower courts. This was followed by a challenge to the building of private residences purportedly for the British royal family on Cedar Tree Point in the internationally recognised and protected Frigate Bird Sanctuary zone. The matter has been heard by the judge, and a decision is pending.

In May of 2024, the central government administration ploughed ahead with its agenda by declaring the whole of Barbuda to be an adjudication section to finally force through land privatization. In 2023, it used its majority in Parliament to amend the Land Adjudication Act so that the law could apply to Barbuda. This was done without any input from the people of Barbuda. In effect, it declared that land in Barbuda was equivalent to land in Antigua and therefore subject to a common land management system.  A constitutional challenge was launched in the courts to stop this in its tracks, and the majority of Barbudans have refused to participate in the process. In January 2025, as ancestral farmlands were cleared, purportedly for a housing scheme which Barbudans knew nothing about, riot police of the special security unit were deployed to Barbuda, heavily armed with assault weapons to deter any protest and guard heavy-duty equipment.

Most recently, the administration announced plans to relocate the island’s only port to make way for the construction of a private marina to facilitate a luxury real estate scheme covering over 150 acres, with around 77 real estate units for sale. No other justification was provided for the relocation of the port facility. This, too, is being resisted by the Barbuda Council and the people of Barbuda. 

This year’s 8th anniversary of the Hurricane Irma disaster was marked by a community that has still not fully recovered and continues to battle the larger disaster the event precipitated. The challenges have strengthened the resolve of the people of Barbuda and helped forge alliances with other communities facing similar situations. It is now clear that we are much stronger together (https://www.strongercaribbeantogether.org) and that displacement capitalism is best resisted by building awareness and working from a common front.

John Mussington is a retired Educator, marine biologist, naturalist, community advocate and master beekeeper. He has been involved with increasing public awareness of conservation issues, taking ideas and concerns to local media outlets and to international organizations and audiences. He advocates to influence public policy in Barbuda as a leader in organizations such as the Barbuda Council, Barbuda Farmers Cooperative and Barbuda Land Rights & Resources Committee. Mr. Mussington advocates to promote awareness of sustainable development issues in order to influence policies that conserve the natural and built environments.

KEYWORDS: Barbuda, Displacement, IDPs, Disasters, Development, Antigua and Barbuda

DOWNLOAD PDF VERSION

Selected Bibliography

BOAS, I., WIEGEL, H., FARBOTKO, C., WARNER, J. & SHELLER, M. 2022. Climate mobilities: migration, im/mobilities and mobility regimes in a changing climate. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 48 (14),  3365-3379.

FARBOTKO, C., BOAS, I., KITARA, T. & ANISIMOV, A. 2024. Climate Mobility Justice, the Right to Stay, and the Problem with Mobility Regimes. Researching Internal Displacement. Available: https://researchinginternaldisplacement.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/Farbotko_Climate-Justice_190624.pdf

GEORGE, E. 2023. ‘Jumby Bay on steroids’: PM unveils plan to develop Barbuda into luxury island. Observer.

THE GUARDIAN. 2023. ‘Billionaire club’: the tiny island of Barbuda braces for decision on land rights and nature. The Guardian.

HOW TO CONTRIBUTE

Researching Internal Displacement publishes engaging and insightful short pieces of writing, artistic and research outputs, policy briefings and think pieces on internal displacement.

We welcome contributions from academics, practitioners, researchers, officials, artists, poets, writers, musicians, dancers, postgraduate students and people affected by internal displacement.

By Adam Lichtenheld and Abbey Steele | Mar 26, 2026
This is the fourth volume in our series on ‘Internal Displacement in a Changing World Order’. It examines how state policies addressing internal displacement have evolved since the Cold War, analysing 588 policies across 86 countries adopted between 1989 and 2022. The authors find that policy adoption surged during the peak of the liberal international order, particularly in the 2000s and 2010s, driven by major displacement crises, international advocacy, and normative frameworks like the 1998 UN Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement, the 2006 Kampala Convention, and the IASC Durable Solutions Framework. While most countries address displacement through broader vulnerable population frameworks, the content of IDP-specific policies has shifted over time. Provisions establishing camps and granting formal IDP status have declined since 2018, whereas service provision guarantees expanded dramatically between 2003 and 2018, likely reflecting state-building efforts in conflict-affected nations. As the liberal international order weakens, the authors question whether policy adoption will slow without international pressure and normative consensus, while suggesting that existing policies may serve as valuable tools for domestic advocates to hold governments accountable.
By Deborah Casalin | Mar 23, 2026
This is the third volume in our series on ‘Internal Displacement in a Changing World Order’. It argues that in the face of escalating pressures on international cooperation, resources and norms – which in turn aggravate the situation of IDPs and their societies – it is crucial to keep consolidating the internal displacement legal regime, as well as strengthening and building on it further to address the growing and evolving challenges of internal displacement situations. The first part outlines some features of the internal displacement legal regime which may be leveraged to safeguard existing progress. These include its foundations in international human rights law and international humanitarian law; its multi-level anchoring; and its broad contextual relevance. The second part indicates some ways in which this legal regime can be reinforced and developed in the longer term: in particular, by consolidating existing protections at different levels; clarifying and further elaborating norms where needed; and gathering and analysing relevant legal data to track evolution and application of the internal displacement legal regime, as well as how this may still need to develop.
By Geoff Gilbert | Mar 19, 2026
This second volume in our series on ‘Internal Displacement in a Changing World Order’ considers whether the global policy framework of the 2018 Global Compact on Refugees (GCR) adequately addresses the situation of internally displaced persons (IDPs). The GCR was designed by states participating in the Formal Consultations hosted by UNHCR to be limited to 1951 Convention refugees. Nevertheless, there are some express references in the GCR to internally displaced persons and forced internal displacement. Furthermore, the nature of acute crises globally is that in many instances there is both cross-border and internal displacement within one state with mixed populations, such that the GCR’s explicit inclusion of ‘host communities’ incorporates IDPs in the GCR. This means that both expressly and implicitly, IDPs need also to be factored into GCR work ‘to operationalize the principles of burden- and responsibility-sharing to better protect and assist refugees and support host countries and communities’.