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 sectorexpanded 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.