Aug 5, 2025
Can Syria rebuild its economy from the ashes of war?
Faek Menla Ali, University of Sussex
More than a decade of devastating conflict has left Syria’s economy in tatters, its infrastructure in ruins and its population deeply fragmented. The fledgling transitional government in Damascus, which came to power following a lightning rebel offensive in December 2024, often speaks of a “new Syria”. But the pressing question remains: how long will recovery take?
The numbers are stark. In 2011, the year war broke out, the World Bank estimated Syria’s GDP at around US$67.5 billion (£50.7 billion). Its most recent estimate, for 2023, puts GDP at US$20 billion – a drop of more than 70%. And these figures don’t tell the whole story. Inflation and currency collapse make it difficult to compare over time.
Some organisations offer rough inflation estimates for Syria, but these are obscured by currency depreciation. The Syrian pound has lost more than 99.5% of its value against the US dollar since 2011, falling from 50 pounds per dollar to around 10,375 pounds per dollar today. This severe depreciation distorts the real domestic price picture.
To get a better sense of on-the-ground price trends, I recently conducted an informal survey of non-tradable goods and services across Syria. It included things like rent, haircuts and private clinic fees. The results of this exploratory approach suggest that, in US dollar terms, prices for such items have risen by about 50% since 2010.
In other words, inflation in Syria has been real and significant – not just a side effect of exchange rate collapse. Patterns varied sharply across the country. While prices have increased in areas of relative stability and refuge, they stagnated or declined in cities devastated by war.
Syrian troops patrolling a neighbourhood in Damascus in 2018. Youssef Badawi / EPA
With this inflation adjustment, I estimate that Syria’s real GDP in 2024 – measured in constant 2010 US dollars – is closer to US$13.3 billion, an 80% drop from its pre-war level. This figure more accurately reflects the economy’s actual performance, including wellbeing, living standards and productivity.
To put this figure in context, Syria’s GDP would now be around US$121.3 billion – excluding the anomalous pandemic year – had the economy continued growing at its pre-war average of 5% per year. The gap between this counterfactual and current output reflects the immense toll of the war.
Rebuilding Syria’s economy will be a monumental challenge. At a high growth rate of 7% per year, it would still take over 30 years for Syria to catch up to its pre-war trajectory. Even with exceptionally strong growth of 10%, the process would stretch over two decades.
Jump-starting growth
The causes of Syria’s economic collapse are well known. The war resulted in the destruction of much of its physical capital, the displacement of labour, the erosion of institutions and the imposition of sweeping international sanctions.
Some US and EU sanctions have been eased. But this alone won’t be enough to reverse Syria’s economic decline. Meanwhile, the Trump administration in the US has announced 41% tariffs on Syrian imports, hindering future trade with the US.
The Syrian government is betting heavily on foreign direct investment (FDI) to jump-start growth. This approach comes with risks. In weakly regulated markets, FDI can raise both operating and consumer costs – particularly in monopolistic or oligopolistic sectors such as utilities, telecommunications and ports. This may contribute to rising inflation and worsening inequality.
Syria’s pre-war economic model, which was characterised by crony capitalism and limited competition, raises further concerns about whether FDI will genuinely broaden opportunity or simply entrench existing elites. Without transparent policy frameworks, there is a danger that liberalisation could crowd out local firms, undermine capacity building and fail to diversify the economy.
The privatisation of state-owned enterprises in Syria is already underway, though the future of the social safety net remains unclear. Greater openness may attract capital and expertise, but it will also expose Syria to global market volatility. This is an unfamiliar dynamic for a country that has long been insulated.
Agriculture was a major driver of the Syrian economy before the war. Mohammed Badra / EPA
The critical question is whether the Syrian government’s strategy can generate an export-driven recovery. A stronger current account and healthier foreign currency reserves would boost the capacity of Syria’s economy to withstand future economic shocks.
Agriculture, once a major contributor to GDP, should be a policy priority. So too should revitalising Syria’s once-globally competitive manufacturing sectors, such as the textile industry in Aleppo.
The oil and gas sector, which historically underpinned fiscal revenues, will also play a key role if stability returns. Other possible growth areas include boosting the tourism sector and positioning Syria as a powerhouse for light manufacturing.
Yet FDI, and the broader surge in capital inflows, cannot deliver financial stability on their own. Many post-conflict countries experience balance-of-payments pressures and renewed economic crises if capital flows are not well managed.
Research on global capital flow dynamics over the past four decades has provided strong evidence of boom-bust cycles in these flows, especially in developing and emerging market economies.
Rebuilding effective institutions, the rule of law and accountability mechanisms in Syria will thus be critical. These are essential not only to attract investment, but also to prevent the corruption and rent-seeking that often characterise post-war transitions.
A credible path forward must also include the active mobilisation of Syria’s diaspora – a deep reservoir of capital, skills and entrepreneurial energy. Approximately 400,000 Syrians have returned from neighbouring countries since December 2024, most from Turkey. This has included a handful of prominent businessmen.
A final point is that any sustainable recovery depends on political inclusion, especially given Syria’s ethnic and religious diversity. Economies that embrace pluralism tend to be more resilient and prosperous. Long-term prosperity will depend not only on sound policies but also on the kind of state Syria chooses to rebuild.
The coming years will be decisive. Syria’s economic trajectory hinges on whether it can strike the right balance between opening to global markets and protecting vulnerable domestic economic sectors from the shocks of rapid liberalisation.
With prudent policymaking, transparent governance and inclusive political solutions, Syria can begin to lay the foundation for long-term economic recovery. Much depends on the choices made in this pivotal chapter.
Faek Menla Ali, Associate Professor in Finance, University of Sussex
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
*
*
Like this:
Like Loading...
Jul 25, 2025
Image Science Day 2025
Unlocking tomorrow’s scientific solutions today for SDGs at a time when multilateralism is under pressure and the global community faces overlapping crises from climate disasters to biodiversity loss, geopolitical tension and misinformation.
.
.
Unlocking tomorrow’s scientific solutions today for SDGs
At a time when multilateralism is under pressure and the global community faces overlapping crises from climate disasters to biodiversity loss, geopolitical tension and misinformation, science continues to emerge as a reminder of the urgent need for collective action in advancing the Sustainable Development Goals.
This became clear at a global Science Day held on 15 July at the United Nations Headquarters in New York, the third edition of a shared initiative held on the sidelines of the United Nations High Level Political Forum for Sustainable Development, or HLPF 2025.
It was convened by the International Science Council, the Stockholm Environment Institute, the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), the Sustainable Development Solutions Network, and the UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs.
Held under the theme “Unlocking Tomorrow’s Solutions Today”, the event served as both “a problem-solving platform and a horizon-scanning forum”, bringing together scientific communities, UN agencies, policymakers, Indigenous leaders, and civil society in a globally inclusive dialogue.
Stronger science-policy coordination needed
Amid growing concern that progress on the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) is lagging – particularly on implementation – speakers called for stronger science-policy coordination and a paradigm shift in how science is funded, governed and embedded into decision-making processes.
The event was structured around three critical objectives: accelerating SDG implementation through transdisciplinary science; confronting the gaps in implementation, including financial and political investments in science; and exploring science’s role in shaping the post-2030 development agenda.
“As the international community approaches the final stretch of the 2030 Agenda, there is widespread recognition that progress across many of the SDGs remains alarmingly slow. This is especially true in areas such as financing, capacity and institutional coordination,” said UNDP’s Babatunde Adebayo during the opening remarks.
Adebayo made the presentation on behalf of George Gray Molina, head of inclusive growth and chief economist at the UNDP.
He noted that Science Day 2025 provided an opportunity to take stock of these challenges while highlighting how science that is transdisciplinary, inclusive, and attuned to local realities can help overcome them.
“While implementation of the current SDGs must remain a global priority, early thinking is beginning around the shape of a future sustainable development agenda.
“The 3rd Edition of the Science Day aims to explore how science is supporting SDG implementation today, where systemic gaps remain, and what kinds of science-policy collaboration will be needed to advance sustainable development in the years to come,” Adebayo stated.
Integrating science into institutions
Ambassador Carlos Fuller, permanent representative of Belize to the United Nations and a member of the Climate Security Expert Network, noted that 2025 was the midpoint of the United Nations Decade of Ocean Science for Sustainable Development pegged between 2021 and 2030.
“At the heart of our ocean ambition lies a simple truth. Science and knowledge must lead the way. The Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction (BBNJ) agreement represents a transformative opportunity for science.
“It provides a comprehensive framework for marine scientific research, integrating both scientific understanding and traditional knowledge.
It seeks to enhance international cooperation, improve our understanding of marine biodiversity, and ensure the equitable sharing of benefits from marine genetic resources and digital sequence information,” he said.
The BBNJ is a legally binding instrument for the conservation and sustainable use of marine biological diversity areas beyond national jurisdiction.
Fuller added that by design, the BBNJ agreement has the potential to reshape ocean governance, ensuring it is informed, inclusive and equitable.
“Crucially, it enshrines capacity building and technology transfer, particularly for developing countries, and establishes a scientific and technical body to guide decision-making with the best available science,” he noted.
James Waddell, a science officer at the International Science Council, a global NGO that brings together the natural and the social sciences, representing over 250 international scientific bodies, further highlighted the importance of implementing and integrating science into institutions.
“Science, when it’s grounded in local realities and when it’s structured for action, can really help shape the future. We are not lacking science or knowledge; we are lacking the means to implement it where it matters most,” he said.
Re-balancing knowledge systems
Case studies presented during the event reflected the fundamental role of science in driving sustainable development, bridging knowledge systems, and navigating increasingly complex environments.
Dr Mary Blair, associate director of the Centre for Biodiversity and Conservation at the American Museum of Natural History in New York, presented a case led by the International Centre for Reindeer Husbandry, in which Sami Indigenous herders used both satellite data and traditional knowledge to monitor pasture degradation.
She called for new ethical protocols for research in Indigenous territories, including binding agreements and co-developed governance structures.
“We flipped the relationship between Western science and Indigenous knowledge, putting Indigenous needs and voices at the forefront,” she stated.
“This case study showcases indigenous-led models of scientific research. We emphasise the importance of halting land degradation to enhance the resilience of mobile pastoralist systems, and that includes addressing issues such as land fragmentation and encroachment while monitoring the cumulative impacts on biodiversity and ecosystem services,” she said.
In Asia, several interventions emphasised the importance of scaling scientific capacity in the Global South, not just for innovation, but for participation in global governance and standard-setting around science, technology, and sustainability.
Representatives from the Sustainable Development Solutions Network (SDSN) discussed examples of novel data tools and digital platforms that have enhanced evidence of use in national and regional SDG implementation efforts.
Science-policy integration is crucial
A case from Germany’s national dialogue between scientific advisory councils to inform the 2025 Voluntary National Review, emphasised how science-policy interfaces are being used to inform national reporting.
Marianne Beisheim, senior researcher at the German Institute for International and Security Affairs, discussed the work of a biannual science advisory dialogue involving over 20 scientific councils, which was designed to foster coherence across ministries and align with SDG targets.
Although this has helped during moments of high political attention, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, Bisheim underscored the importance of integrating science with policy.
“Coherence at the advisory level can provide a solid foundation, but it is no guarantee for policy coherence. Politics matters,” she stated.
Dr Pamela McElwee, a professor in the department of Human Ecology at the State University of New Jersey, gave a presentation of the IPBES Nexus Assessment report, which illustrates how biodiversity, climate, food systems and health are interlinked.
“Our crises are connected, but our solutions are not. We already have over 70 actionable, integrated responses, and many are low-cost and scalable,” she said.
The assessment is groundbreaking for its inclusion of early-career researchers and Indigenous knowledge systems and its emphasis on systemic thinking, not siloed disciplines.
Grounding science in context and community
From the African continent, leaders emphasised that scientific advancement must be locally relevant and forward-looking.
Dr Lamin Baba Diba, a representative of The Gambia, underscored the importance of embedding science into national development planning, especially in climate-vulnerable countries. He highlighted how The Gambia is integrating scientific research with Indigenous and local knowledge systems to bolster community resilience.
“In The Gambia, for example, blending Indigenous knowledge with modern climate modelling has enhanced early warning systems, while mobile-based health surveillance has significantly improved disease monitoring in remote areas, particularly during pandemic recovery,” he explained.
Comprehensive training programmes were needed to equip educators, researchers and students with essential digital competencies. These included practical instructions in the use of digital tools, cyber security awareness, and online research methods, enabling all participants in the scientific ecosystem to contribute meaningfully to sustainable development.
Said Diba: “Although there are promising examples of science-informed policies, these remain fragmented and uneven. Our institutions are under-resourced. Our scientists are underrepresented. These disparities are symptomatic of broader development challenges that must be addressed to translate ambition into meaningful action”.
A strong call also came from Ghana, where institutions are working to decolonise science policy by ensuring that research agendas are aligned with national priorities rather than externally driven frameworks. Ghanaian representatives pointed out the disconnect between donor funding cycles and long-term scientific development, calling for enduring investments in institutions and people.
A ‘triple science crisis’
During the broader discussions on science, academic experts warned of a ‘triple science crisis’ of undervaluation, underfunding and underuse of science in decision-making. The need to democratise knowledge production, rebuild trust with citizens, and support scientists from marginalised regions was described not just as moral imperatives but as essential for planetary survival.
Assistant Director General for Natural Sciences at UNESCO, Shamila Nair-Bedouelle, reminded participants that science is a global public good, and its benefits must be equitably shared.
“We cannot afford to continue with business-as-usual approaches. The future of humanity depends on science, not just the science of technology, but the science of cooperation, dialogue, and systems change.”
*
*
Like this:
Like Loading...
You must be logged in to post a comment.