My readers who don’t live in the state of Hawaii probably haven’t heard much about the Hawaii Superferry. I won’t bore them with the details. Yesterday, the Superferry announced it was suspending its Kauai service indefinitely, according to the Honolulu Star-Bulletin.
But the Economist published an article about this affair this week. That article was republished in the print edition of the Star-Bulletin’s Sunday editorial page.
That’s a bad sign. The Economist, a well-respected current affairs magazine with a worldwide audience, is questioning Hawaii’s ability to deal with change. This a weekly magazine that CEOs and top government officials read regularly in its print and web editions.
The Economist frames the Superferry debacle in the context of the Hawaii 2050 Sustainability Summit, which just concluded. The Honolulu Advertiser discussed the summit today, and I participated in the Hawaii Chamber of Commerce’s meeting on sustainability last Thursday.
The Advertiser published its own front page story today about the growing divide among the islands. The Superferry debate is only the most recent tipping point that has set neighbors against each other. It’s more than politics or business.
I just have one question.
If the Superferry traveled a regular route between Maui and Kauai without ever docking on Oahu, would there still be protesters, lawsuits and general governmental chaos?
Maybe the Superferry wouldn’t make as much revenue with that route – but they’re not making any money right now.
Keep the comments polite, please.
Tags: ferry, Hawaii, Honolulu, Kauai, Maui, Oahu, USA
