Regional Energy Index Puts St. Maarten Near the Middle, Not in the Clear

CARIBBEAN REGION--Respected Economist Marla Dukharan’s newly published Caribbean Energy Price Index offers a rare regional comparison of electricity costs across 34 Caribbean jurisdictions, and for St. Maarten the findings are mixed. On the surface, the Dutch side does not appear to be among the region’s most expensive electricity markets. The index places SXM (Dutch) at 0.99, meaning nominal electricity prices are roughly 1 percent below the Caribbean average, while jurisdictions such as Bermuda, Saba, Montserrat, Turks and Caicos, the U.S. Virgin Islands and Curaçao rank higher on the nominal   cost scale.

That result, however, should not be mistaken for energy strength. One of the report’s most important findings is that St. Maarten’s renewable electricity production is listed at 0 percent of total electricity production in 2023, placing it among the weakest performers in the region on the shift toward domestic renewable energy. By contrast, several territories with much stronger renewable output, including Belize, Guadeloupe, Martinique, Suriname and French Guiana, sit much lower on the cost index. Dukharan’s second chart points to the larger pattern: across the Caribbean, countries with higher renewable electricity production generally tend to have lower energy prices, while countries with limited renewable production tend to face higher prices, with Trinidad and Tobago as the main exception because of its use of subsidized domestic natural gas.

For St. Maarten, the island may be hovering around the Caribbean average in nominal electricity prices today, but it remains structurally exposed because it is still closely tied to imported fuel and global transport costs. In practical terms, that means St. Maarten’s energy position is not defined only by what consumers are paying now, but by how vulnerable the country remains to oil market shocks, shipping disruptions and wider geopolitical instability.

The report becomes even more interesting when it adjusts electricity prices for purchasing power. In that ranking, Dutch St. Maarten scores 0.84, below the Caribbean average of 1.00, suggesting that electricity is less financially burdensome in St. Maarten than the regional average once broader domestic price levels are taken into account. Dukharan explains that this adjusted measure is meant to show the real financial burden of electricity by factoring in local purchasing power and the relative cost of goods and services, including the kinds of basic expenses that shape everyday affordability. A lower score means electricity is relatively more affordable and less financially burdensome.

Still, that should not be read as proof that energy is a minor issue on St. Maarten. The more careful conclusion is that the island’s near-average nominal score does not erase the wider affordability strain that residents and businesses face. Electricity is only one part of the monthly squeeze. In a high-cost, import-dependent economy, even average power prices can add pressure because energy costs flow through almost everything else, from groceries and restaurant bills to transport, rent, operating expenses and the final prices paid by consumers. Dukharan’s own explanation of the purchasing power-adjusted index makes clear that the burden of electricity cannot be viewed in isolation from other cost-of-living drivers such as food prices, housing costs and taxes.

The index does not show that St. Maarten has a worse-than-average electricity burden once purchasing power is factored in. It does, however, support the argument that average nominal electricity prices should not create false comfort. A country can sit near the middle of the regional ranking and still face serious affordability pressure when the broader cost of living is already high and when the economy remains dependent on imported energy.

The concern also fits closely with warnings already being made at the monetary union level. In its March 2026 outlook, the Centrale Bank van Curaçao en Sint Maarten said both countries remain vulnerable as small, open and highly import-dependent economies, and stressed that a key policy priority is reducing structural dependence on imported energy and external transport costs. The CBCS also warned that any renewed rise in inflation would hit vulnerable households hardest and said governments should consider targeted support measures to cushion cost-of-living pressures while preserving fiscal stability.

That broader picture is especially relevant for St. Maarten because local energy prices have already shown how closely they move with external conditions. The March 2026 CBCS Economic Bulletin noted that in Sint Maarten, the category “housing, water, electricity, gas and other fuels” has a major impact on overall inflation due to its large weight in the consumer basket. Even when electricity prices declined in 2025, the Bank still identified electricity, fuel and food as key drivers of inflation on the island.

French vs Dutch

Although the island is often discussed as one destination, Dukharan’s index shows a notable gap between the French and Dutch sides when it comes to nominal electricity costs. SXM (Dutch) is indexed at 0.99, or about 1 percent below the Caribbean average, while SXM (French) is far lower at roughly 0.48, placing the French side among the cheaper electricity jurisdictions in the region. The renewable energy picture is also different. The Dutch side is listed at 0 percent renewable electricity production in 2023, while the French side is shown at about 15.8 percent, suggesting that the French side already has more diversification in its power mix than the Dutch side.

That contrast points to a structural difference, not just a pricing difference. The Dutch side may sit close to the regional average today, but it remains far more exposed to imported fuel costs because it has no renewable electricity production reflected in the index. The French side, by contrast, appears to benefit from both lower nominal prices and a stronger renewable base. One important caveat is that Dukharan’s purchasing power-adjusted chart, which is meant to show the real burden of electricity after factoring in local cost of living, includes SXM (Dutch) at 0.84 but does not show a separate result for SXM (French), so the comparison is strongest on nominal prices and renewable energy, not on the full affordability burden.

For St. Maarten, then, Dukharan’s index is more than a regional scoreboard. It offers a useful reminder that the island’s energy challenge is not simply whether current tariffs are above or below average. The bigger issue is that St. Maarten has not yet built a stronger domestic renewable energy base, even as it remains exposed to imported fuel costs and a wider cost-of-living problem that touches nearly every household and business. Being close to the Caribbean average on paper may offer temporary reassurance, but with zero renewable electricity production recorded in the index, the island remains exposed to exactly the kinds of shocks that are becoming more frequent.

The lesson from this first-of-its-kind index is therefore not that St. Maarten is doing badly on electricity prices, nor that it is doing especially well. It is that average prices, by themselves, do not tell the full story. In St. Maarten’s case, affordability, resilience and energy security remain tightly linked, and until the island reduces its dependence on imported energy, the risk will remain that a global shock quickly turns an average electricity market into a much bigger cost-of-living problem.

‍