Kristy A. Belton 5. Conclusion The Anglophone Caribbean is placed in the position of navigating a weighty colonial history with the fluctuations of the modern-day movements of peoples (whether as tourists, second home buyers, or the forcibly displaced). Several countries’ citizenship provisions fall short in treating their female and male citizens equally in the transfer and extension of citizenship, and the majority do not provide adequate protections against statelessness or pathways to citizenship for them or refugees. Where some countries have been more open is in providing pathways to citizenship for those who invest in the country. The degree to which other countries in the subregion become more open to providing pathways to citizenship (or at least permanent residency) through investment may become greater with the increased risk of natural disaster occurrence in the future. With a few exceptions, the Anglophone Caribbean is generally consistent in its approach to citizenship acquisition and loss, especially in the Independence-era period. Differences arise in the post-Independence period, largely with regard to the treatment of those who were not born on the soil or of citizens. Thus, differences exist as pertains to pathways for citizenship for noncitizen spouses or those UNHCR would consider “populations of concern,” such as refugees, the stateless and the forcibly displaced. The countries of the subregion only express slight variance in the requirements for naturalisation (such as whether knowledge of English is needed or whether government service is an acceptable substitute for residency). Moreover, when citizenship provisions are non-existent in one country, they are generally non-existent throughout the subregion. For instance, no country has provisions for citizenship acquisition for those individuals who have a cultural affinity with the country or who have contributed special achievements to it. Where the largest difference currently exists, however, is in the arena of citizenship by investment. Some have strong and established CBI programmes, whereas others have nothing. Despite this difference, the subregion’s laws on citizenship acquisition and loss are generally consistent, especially regarding its ius soli provisions (with only small differences among some in their ius sanguinis provisions). RSCAS/GLOBALCIT-Comp. 2020/3 - © 2020 Authors 31