Local development in Jordan has not failed, but it has not been entirely successful either. Structural obstacles and challenges persist despite the state's efforts over successive decades. The question here is: when, how, why, and what is the solution?
Local
development is the process of improving economic, social, and service
conditions at the governorate and municipal levels by relying on local
resources, community participation, decentralization in decision-making, and
equitable distribution of development between the central government and the
regions. In other words, local development is development from the ground up.
During the
period 1946–1967, the state's efforts focused on building central institutions
such as the army, education, and administration. Development was centralized
and directed from the capital. The administrative and service-oriented role of
municipalities and governorates was limited. Furthermore, security and
stability were prioritized over local economic development, resulting in
political stability but an early developmental disparity between the capital
and the rest of the country. The efforts led to domestic political stability in
a turbulent region.
During the
period (1967–1989), the era of the welfare state and the public sector, the
state's role as a primary employer through the public sector expanded
significantly. Local development was partially achieved through government
employment and service projects (roads, schools, health centers), with a heavy
reliance on foreign aid and remittances, coupled with weak domestic productive
investment. Consequently, there was a relative improvement in services that was
coupled with unsustainable development. The period did not foster genuine local
economic growth.
Then came the
"economic reform" phase (1989–2010), which involved "Economic
Adjustment Programs" in cooperation with the International Monetary Fund
and the World Bank. This period saw a decline in the state's direct role in
employment and the introduction of discussions on balanced development,
decentralization, and private sector incentives. However, investment became
concentrated in Amman, Aqaba, and certain qualified industrial zones. The
result was economic and financial growth driven by regional changes, but it
also widened the gap between the Capital Governorate (Amman) and other
governorates, leading to higher unemployment in the latter and internal
migration to the capital.
The succeeding
phase, the formal decentralization and local development phase (2011–2020),
during which the government established governorate councils and enacted the
Decentralization Law (Law No. 49 of 2015) with the intent of involving local
communities in setting priorities and allocating a portion of capital spending
to the governorates. While there was a superficial improvement in
participation, its developmental impact was limited due to restricted powers,
insufficient funding, and the continued centralization of decision-making.
Why has local
development been delayed in Jordan? Several factors contribute, including
excessive centralization, the concentration of financial and investment
decisions in the capital, and the lack of genuine authority, administrative
flexibility, and independent funding mechanisms in the governorates.
Furthermore, municipalities suffer from high levels of debt, weak revenue
collection, and near-total dependence on the central government. Furthermore,
most governorates lack manufacturing and rely on traditional agriculture or
government services, with the absence of local value chains and the fact that
most projects are small, sporadic, and not linked to an economic strategy. This
led to a weak local production base, pushing young people to migrate to Amman
or overseas, thus draining the regions of human capital and entrepreneurial
initiatives.
Despite these
challenges, relative successes have been achieved in certain cases. These
include Aqaba, where special powers were granted to a relatively independent
administration and an encouraging legislative framework for the special
economic zone. Extractive industries (potash, phosphate) also provided
employment and infrastructure in specific areas, but they remained economic
islands disconnected from the broader local economy. Domestic tourism in Petra,
Wadi Rum, and Ajloun offered development opportunities when coupled with
infrastructure and marketing, but weak integration with local communities
limited its multiplier effect.
The lesson from
the above is that local development does not succeed through services alone,
nor through spending alone, but rather through a productive local economy,
genuine authority, and clear accountability.
The phase of
the Economic Modernization Vision, from 2021 until now, has come with a strong
return to the development discourse, an emphasis on developing the
governorates, the introduction of major projects (water, transport, energy),
local employment, with a focus on value chains and local industries, and
partnership with the private sector with executive programs and accountability
in performance. The Vision, Jordanians hope, will bring local development to
all twelve governorates.
* The writer is
a former Minister of State for Economic Affairs in Jordan.
Published in Jordan Times/ 17/01/2026
https://jordantimes.com/opinion/yusuf-mansur/the-path-challenges-and-opportunities-of-local-development-in-jordan
No comments:
Post a Comment