Globalization: Trade And Investment In Egypt, Jordan And Syria Since 1980 - Statistical Data Included

For international equity issues Egypt has been the only real player of the three. Outside of Kuwait it is the largest floater of international equity issues in the Middle East and North Africa. Before 1996 there were almost no international flotations from Egypt. There is still zero in Jordan and Syria. In 1996 there were $233 million in international equity issues from Egypt. That was over 50% of the international equity issues in the entire MENA region.(78) The first and second quarters of 1997 saw over $200 million more international equity floats.(79) These were using GDRs and ADRs.

When it comes to catching at least part of the wave of globalizing investments Egypt seems to be the real winner and potentially the biggest winner of foreign FDI, FPI, and international equity floats of the three. Jordan, however, should not be counted out. It still has chances of being the most agile economic "tiger" of the Arab world. Comparatively, Egypt is in a much stronger position for many reasons. Egypt's FDI stock are now over $4 billion. Egypt's pension funds bring in about $700 million annually and have a net worth of about $10 billion. There are real opportunities to develop global investing in Egypt.(80)

There are various free zones being set up in all three of these countries. Foreign investors may find more business-friendly, and more profitable, environments in these areas than in other parts of the three countries.(81)

CONCLUSIONS AND LESSONS LEARNED

Knowing the amounts, directions and types of trade of this group of countries gives us a part of the globalization to development puzzle. Knowing the amounts, sources and type of FDI, FPI, international floats and other types of international investments into these countries gives us yet more keys to the puzzle. Knowing the typologies of how trade and investment affect development is another part of the puzzle. Knowing the connections of trade and development to the government policies of these countries is yet another part of the same puzzle. Knowing the connections and linkages between trade and investments and development of the key sectors of the economies of Egypt, Syria and Jordan is one of the last pieces of the puzzle. What will help to finish off the puzzle of development from these perspectives is an understanding of the synergistic and holistic natures of development. One cannot just throw money at a country's problems and expect development to happen. Integrative and holistic approaches are needed.

Domestic policies must correspond with international ones - or at least not contradict them. A pro-development and pro-economic freedom environment helped along by the government is best - with the usual legal and regulatory constraints that are often needed to take care of market failures, public goods, and so forth. Then trade and investment can have their greatest impact on development.

Egypt seems to be doing the best job in this regard. Jordan comes in second. Syria is a miserable third. From the result we have seen in this essay we can conclude that for these three countries development requires some form of globalization. The question is not whether to globalize or not, but when. These countries need to improve their trade environments and their trade-development connections. They could benefit from considerably increased investments in those industries that are most connected with development, employment, and increasing the standard of living, health, in other words overall development, human development, of their countries. These three countries could have used their development funds a bit better in the past. The question of the future is whether they will use those future funds more effectively toward development.