2015年-世界发展银行全球_Kurdistan_Region_of_Iraq___Economic_and_Social_Impact_Assessment_of_the_Syrian_Conflict_and_the_ISIS_Crisis_139页_2mb

Summary of the Economic and Social Impact Assessment of the Syrian Conflict and ISIS Crisis on the Kurdistan Region of Iraq (KRI)

Core Content

This report, commissioned by the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG), provides an Economic and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) of the Syrian conflict and ISIS crisis on the KRI. It evaluates the economic and social effects of the influx of Syrian refugees and internally displaced persons (IDPs) from the ISIS crisis and outlines the stabilization costs required for the year 2015.

Main Viewpoints

• Economic and Fiscal Impact: The KRI experienced a significant economic slowdown due to the combined effects of the Syrian conflict and the ISIS crisis. The GDP growth rate dropped from 8% in 2013 to 3% in 2014, a 5 percentage point decline.
• Fiscal Transfers: The KRG lost about 90% of its fiscal transfers from the central government in Baghdad due to political gridlock, which has been a major factor in the economic decline.
• Refugee and IDP Influx: As of February 2015, the KRI hosted 1.5 million Syrian refugees and Iraqi IDPs, a 28% population increase. Dohuk Governorate accounted for 60% of this population.
• Stabilization Costs: The stabilization cost for the baseline scenario in 2015 was estimated at US$1.4 billion. This includes both human development and infrastructure sectors.
• Human Development Sectors: The health, education, food security, and poverty sectors were heavily impacted. The poverty rate increased from 3.5% to 8.1%, and the KRI's recurrent and capital expenditures for these sectors rose significantly.
• Infrastructure Sectors: The electricity, water and sanitation, solid waste management, and transportation sectors faced major challenges. The electricity sector required additional investments, and the water and sanitation sector needed increased operational and maintenance spending.
• Debt Accumulation: To compensate for the loss of fiscal transfers, the Ministry of Natural Resources borrowed US$3 billion from both domestic and international sources, leading to concerns about fiscal sustainability and debt levels.

Key Information

Economic Impact

• GDP Growth: Declined from 8% in 2013 to 3% in 2014.
• Investment Decline: Foreign direct investment dropped by two-thirds in 2014, with many foreign enterprises affected.
• Fiscal Deficits: The report estimates that fiscal deficits for 2014 could be around 14-15% of GDP, due to quasi-fiscal deficits and reduced transfers.

Social Impact

• Poverty Increase: The poverty rate rose from 3.5% to 8.1%.
• Health Sector: Increased demand for health services and a significant rise in recurrent and capital expenditures.
• Education Sector: Higher spending on teacher salaries, school materials, and infrastructure rehabilitation.
• Food Security: Increased spending on agricultural and livestock livelihood support.
• Housing and Shelter: A large number of IDPs required shelter, with additional costs for non-camp housing.

Infrastructure Impact

• Electricity Sector: Increased operational and maintenance costs, and capital investments needed to stabilize services.
• Water and Sanitation: Increased demand for water and sanitation services, especially for IDPs in camps.
• Transportation: Decline in truck traffic through the Ibrahim Khalil customs post, and increased costs due to longer supply routes.
• Solid Waste Management: Increased operational and maintenance costs, and capital spending required to manage waste from the influx of displaced people.

Stabilization Costs

• Baseline Scenario: US$1.4 billion.
• Low Scenario: US$1.1 billion (30,000 Syrian refugees and 250,000 IDPs).
• High Scenario: US$2.47 billion (100,000 Syrian refugees and 500,000 IDPs).

Additional Resources Needed

• The KRG requires additional resources to stabilize the economy and provide essential services to the displaced population.
• The study highlights the need for improved data collection and coordination among stakeholders to better manage the crisis.

Structure and Methodology

• The report uses a macro-fiscal and sectoral approach to assess the impacts.
• It includes three scenarios to analyze the sensitivity of stabilization costs to different levels of refugee and IDP influx.
• The findings are based on data collected from various sources and integrated into a structured narrative.
• The report emphasizes the indirect costs to households, such as income loss and reduced access to public goods.

Conclusion

The KRI is facing a complex and multifaceted crisis that has significantly impacted its economic and social development. The stabilization costs are substantial, and the KRG needs additional resources to manage the situation. The report serves as a technical basis for designing and implementing strategies to address the crisis and ensure long-term fiscal sustainability.