The rentier state and the Dutch Disease are two common theories
used to describe the problems with Iraq’s economy. They are similar hypotheses
that argue that the country’s oil dependency starves the rest of the economy
and leads to authoritarianism. Bassam Yousif, an economics professor from
Indiana State University had an alternative explanation
pointing to bad state planning, lack of capacity in government institutions,
and the decline of human capital since 1990s as the cause of the nation’s
economic woes.
The Dutch Disease and the rentier state are commonly used to
explain the political economy of oil dependent countries like Iraq. The Dutch
Disease theory holds that a strong oil sector draws away labor, capital and raw
materials from other parts of the economy. The high petroleum revenues then
increase the value of the domestic currency making imports less expensive,
which in turn undermines domestic production. The rentier state concept argues
that governments that make large amounts of money from natural resources makes
them less dependent upon taxation and the public. That gives birth to
authoritarian governments because the political class feels that they control
everything and are thus not accountable to the public.
Yousif posits an alternative explanation based upon the
decline of the state’s capacity and human capital since the 1990s as the reason
why Iraq’s economy has performed so poorly. Institutional capacity is the
state’s ability to plan and carry out its policies and provide services. Human
capital is the skills and experience of the population. The two are connected because
when the government has a qualified staff it operates better. This is
especially true in countries like Iraq where most of the revenue goes to the
state making it the dominant force in the economy. According to Yousif, Iraq’s state
has been in decline since the 1990s starting with the United Nations sanctions
all the way to the present day preventing any kind of serious development.
The international sanctions imposed on Iraq for its 1990
invasion of Kuwait caused “irreversible” damage to Iraq’s economy according to
Yousif. The government wasn’t able to maintain law and order, skilled Iraqis
began leaving the country, Baghdad wasn’t able to carry out its policies, and
its oil revenue collapsed. In 1990 Iraq earned $10.31 billion from the sale of
oil. From 1992-96 it only averaged $531 million per year, much of which came
from smuggling through Jordan and Turkey. The government responded by cutting
consumption and subsidies, while printing more money that led to hyper
inflation. That in turn led to a huge exodus of around 4 million Iraqis fleeing
the country by 2002. That included half of the nation’s technical and skilled
hospital staff and managers, and 40,000 teachers. The lack of oil money meant
that the government had no funds to rebuild all the Gulf War damage. Services declined
and so did the development of future generations as the health and educational
sectors both collapsed. The sanctions led to a rise in crime and loss of
authority by the state as it turned over power in some regions to tribes.
Finally, corruption spread to all sectors of the state and society. The ability
to carry out sound planning and policy and the staff to carry it out almost
disappeared during this period. The economy spiraled downwards as a result.
The 2003 invasion did not reverse this negative course, but
only continued it. First, deBaathification hit skilled workers and civil
servants. The lack of security also continued the brain drain out of Iraq. A
2007 survey of Iraqi refugees in Jordan for example found that 46% of them had
bachelor’s degrees. Violence also deterred investment in Iraq. Corruption
actually expanded after the overthrow of Saddam eating away at government funds
and undermining development. That meant that Iraq’s human capital was not being
developed. Literacy amongst Iraqis aged 15-24 for instance declined from
2000-2009. In turn, the state didn’t have the skilled staff it needed for
effective planning and implementation of its policies. The Oil Ministry didn’t
have the personnel to monitor contracts, while the Electricity Ministry lacked
people to supervise its budget and projects. Even when security greatly
improved after the 2007 Surge, the government didn’t have the capacity to do
much. In 2008 investment increased, but the state couldn’t complete many
projects. It wasn’t uncommon for most of the government’s capital budget to go unspent.
What most of the oil revenue went into was expanding the state payrolls by
hiring more public workers as part of the ruling elite’s patronage networks. To
add to that many of these new employees did nothing, and extracted more from
the public with petty corruption like demanding bribes for everything. By 2012,
60% of all full time workers were civil employees. That also diverted Iraq’s
increasing oil revenue away from development to keeping up with the state’s
increased costs of maintaining its new workforce. Macroeconomic figures showed
that Iraq’s economy was growing during this period, but that was driven by
rising oil prices rather than real development. From 2004-212 per capita GDP
adjusted for inflation only went from $1,305 to $1,607, and from 2007-2012
poverty barely declined. The Iraq War decreased the state’s capacity to operate
effectively even more. It lost more skilled personnel, which mean that it
couldn’t carry out the strategies it wanted to, and the ruling parties were
more interested in using the government to stay in power than to foster
development anyway.
Today the war with the Islamic State and the decline in
petroleum prices have only exacerbated these long term trends. The government
is running a huge deficit and almost all development projects have ceased over
the last two years. Young people and professionals continue
to leave the country. More importantly, the current crisis has not spurred any
real reforms. The governing elite are still more interested in maintaining the
status quo rather than changing it. As Yousif pointed out, in the 1970s Iraq
had huge economic growth along with development of its human capital and state
capacity. There were more people in school, industry was growing, life
expectancy expanded, etc. This was all due to good strategizing by the
bureaucracy. That was derailed by the Iran-Iraq War, and then everything fell
apart with the invasion of Kuwait. The 70s provides an example of what could
happen, but until the government changes its priorities these dilemmas will
continue.
SOURCES
International Crisis Group, “Fight or Flight: The Desperate
Plight of Iraq’s “Generation 2000,”” 8/8/16
Yousif, Bassam,
“Iraq’s stunted growth: human and economic development in perspective,”
Contemporary Arab Affairs, 3/31/16
No comments:
Post a Comment