Syria ROLE OF GOVERNMENT
A suspension footbridge over the Euphrates River
at Dayr az Zawr
Unavailable
Figure 9. Government Expenditures by Sector, 1985
Source: Based on information from Syria, Central Bureau of Statistics, Statistical Abstract 1986, Damascus, 1986.
During the rapid economic development preceding and following
independence, government played a minor role. Expansion resulted
primarily from private sector investment in agriculture and
industry. Although the economy grew rapidly, benefits were not
shared equally. Many people's incomes were very low, and most of
the rural population lacked amenities; electricity, education,
health care, and an adequate diet were available almost
exclusively in cities and in a few towns. In the 1950s,
disparities of income and social inequality contributed to the
rise of political leaders favoring a much stronger economic role
for the government, including some leaders who demanded state
ownership of the means of production. Economic conditions,
primarily the need for large investments in roads, ports, and
irrigation, also required more active government participation
(see Radical Political Influence
, ch. 1).
Between 1958, after the union with Egypt, and 1965, a series
of laws were enacted that resulted in progressive socialization
of the economy. By 1961 the state had acquired control of the
development of natural resources, and land reform measures had
been introduced, although not effectively implemented. Also, a
new economic plan that emphasized large public sector investments
had been formulated and the banking system had been moved toward
nationalization through what Syrians called "Arabization." In
1961, while Syria was still the junior partner with Egypt in the
United Arab Republic, widespread nationalization was decreed, but
Syria withdrew from the republic before completion of the
nationalization measures
(see United Arab Republic
, ch. 1). Not
until March 1963 did the socialist transformation make headway.
Between 1963 and 1965, a socialist economy was erected,
although some laws enacted later extended and refined the public
sector. In 1963 agrarian reform stripped large landowners of
their estates and much of their political power, provided some
land to landless farmers, and improved conditions for farm
tenants and sharecroppers
(see Agriculture, this ch.).
In
1963 commercial banking and insurance were completely
nationalized, and in 1965 most large businesses were nationalized
wholly or partially. By 1966 the public sector included
development of natural resources, electric power, and water; the
bulk of industrial plants, banking, and insurance; part of
transportation; and most international commerce and domestic
wholesale trade. In addition, the government was responsible for
the bulk of investments, the flow of credit, and pricing for many
commodities and services, including a substantial part of wages.
By 1986 the situation remained essentially unchanged. As a
result of these earlier measures, the government dominated the
economy--accounting for three-fifths of GDP--and exerted
considerable influence over the private sector. However,
President Hafiz al Assad had liberalized the structure somewhat
to encourage more private sector activity and investment. For
example, the government relaxed exchange controls and permitted
private traders to import more goods, although over 100 of the
most important foreign commodities were still exclusively
imported by state trading organizations. In addition, the
government established six free trade zones where local traders
and manufacturers could import, process, and reexport commodities
freely. Also, private investment (domestic and foreign) in
portions of manufacturing and tourist facilities was encouraged
through such measures as tax exemptions and cheap credit. The
post-1970 measures were more a rationalization of the economy to
promote greater private sector development than a dismantling of
government controls and ownership. As a result of these measures,
the private sector dominated agriculture and retail trade and was
important in light industry--particularly fabrics and clothing--
and construction, transportation, and tourist facilities.
Cotton, the country's most important export before 1974,
provided an extreme example of government involvement in the
economy. Areas put into cotton cultivation were controlled by
government licensing of individual farmers. A government bank
supplied the credit, most of which went to cotton farmers; much
of the credit was in kind, with the bank purchasing, storing, and
distributing the approved seeds, fertilizers, and other items.
Government organizations purchased and graded the cotton,
operated the gins and spinning mills, and marketed the products
internally and abroad. The government established the price for
cotton at all stages and subsidized prices for such inputs as
credits, seeds, fertilizers, and fuel to run the irrigation
pumps.
The effect on Syria's economy of the socialist measures of
the 1960s was significant. First, there was a substantial exodus
of trained personnel and capital from the private sector, a trend
that continued in the 1970s, although the exodus was of a smaller
magnitude and occurred for different reasons
(see Industry, this ch.).
The other major consequence was a rapid expansion of
government responsibilities, even though the government had few
trained people, limited funds, and inadequate organization and
procedures. The political instability of the 1960s and the small
number of trained people in the country further hampered
development of effective organizations. Government services,
including defense, became the main growth sector of the economy
in the 1960s as people were added to the payroll, but effective
expansion was slow.
In the mid-1980s, observers characterized the government and
its activities as inefficient and excessively bureaucratic. Much
of the criticism was caused by the continuing shortage of trained
and competent officials. Part of the criticism reflected
continuing deficiencies in organizations and practices.
Government organizations were still trying to catch up with the
huge additional responsibilities that had been imposed on
inexperienced government personnel. By 1986, budgetary procedures
and financial controls had steadily improved, but they were not
as good as the situation required or as officials desired.
Proposals for evaluations and implementation of projects were
deficient, but progress had been made, and the government sought
advice and help from outside experts for more improvements.
When the socialist transformation was taking place in the
1960s, the rationale was to promote economic development for the
benefit of all. Although some direct redistribution of income
occurred, redistribution was effected largely by way of pricing,
subsidies, and tenancy legislation rather than by taxation,
although in 1986 data were insufficient for a conclusive opinion.
Although growth afforded job opportunities at higher incomes, it
had the negative effect of attracting even more workers to
already crowded urban areas. However, economic development did
provide gradual improvement of living standards; considerable
investments were made in roads, ports, schools, irrigation, and
the Euphrates (Tabaqah) Dam that would facilitate future growth.
Nonetheless, the economic wrenching of the 1980s restrained
development; incomes of most Syrians remained low by world
standards, and substantial income gaps between various groups
persisted.
Data as of April 1987
|