The most efficient way to reduce unemployment is neither to cut checks nor to subsidize water in the desert. The thing is, the Jordanian policymakers did not say “we want to keep everyone having the same amount of income”, which is the problem you are getting at, and one other countries have attempted (with mixed results, see below). What the Jordanians said is “we want to keep urban unemployment down”. So subsidizing farms is a way to keep people from migrating, but the water provision is a terribly inneficient subsidy. Furthermore, from a “cause prioritization” standpoint its also really inneficient. Paying to keep unprofitable businesses alive is a less efficient way to reduce unemployment than, say, investing in infrastructure or even just subsidizing profitable business sectors.
Basically, picking winners is hard but its better than picking an existing loser and buying them an input good at 4 times its market value. The most efficient way to reduce So their stated argument “we want to reduce urban unemployment” is either not their real goal or they are very biased.
Some polities can cut checks reasonably efficiently, but the Jordanians cannot
Some political systems do a better job of cutting checks than others. The conventional wisdom is that most European countries have successfully preserved pastoralism through cutting checks without having to distort their economy with across-the-board subsidies. The conventional wisdom is also that the US attempt to cut checks for export job loss has failed. blah blah first-past-the-post blah blah pork barrel.
The Jordanians are probably very very bad at cutting checks. The best piece of evidence is that the GoJ expects to fail at cutting checks, and they would know. The second best piece of evidence is what happens when they open municipalities (patronage). I suspect USAID gets laughed out of the room when they say “the Danes did it, why can’t you”. So you are correct about that.
Question, if you know. What’s the Jordanian construction sector like? While building a pipeline may only weakly protect the jobs of the Amman farmers, are local companies/contractors involved in the pipeline’s construction?
Does the pipeline go to any other areas which may be exploitable in the future? Do you know what the relations were like with the Southern Desert families? This could be an attempt to push out a faction and install another.
Great questions! You questions highlight a few minor contributing factors.
While building a pipeline may only weakly protect the jobs of the Amman farmers, are local companies/contractors involved in the pipeline’s construction?
They actually contracted it to a Turkish company, GAMA, because they lacked the capacity.
Does the pipeline go to any other areas which may be exploitable in the future?
Not really. In theory it could be linked to western Disi but they left the farms there. They would probably just build a new pipeline to the Gulf of Aqaba to decrease energy cost bc Pythagoras.
Do you know what the relations were like with the Southern Desert families?
The GoJ exempted locally owned tribes, but it did become less popular locally. The central desert families north of Disi (Ma’an) are considered a strategic tribe and get special treatment, but the Disi tribes don’t. They get to flirt with a lot of tourist girls tho.
This could be an attempt to push out a faction and install another.
That was part of it. The farms which were closed were mostly owned by Palestinian elite families. So the rival transjordanian elites in the military were happy to see them go. But they would never pay a billion for that pleasure. See Keulertz.
You’ve raised a great question. Two comments.
Their stated goal is reducing urban unemployment
The most efficient way to reduce unemployment is neither to cut checks nor to subsidize water in the desert. The thing is, the Jordanian policymakers did not say “we want to keep everyone having the same amount of income”, which is the problem you are getting at, and one other countries have attempted (with mixed results, see below). What the Jordanians said is “we want to keep urban unemployment down”. So subsidizing farms is a way to keep people from migrating, but the water provision is a terribly inneficient subsidy. Furthermore, from a “cause prioritization” standpoint its also really inneficient. Paying to keep unprofitable businesses alive is a less efficient way to reduce unemployment than, say, investing in infrastructure or even just subsidizing profitable business sectors.
Basically, picking winners is hard but its better than picking an existing loser and buying them an input good at 4 times its market value. The most efficient way to reduce So their stated argument “we want to reduce urban unemployment” is either not their real goal or they are very biased.
Some polities can cut checks reasonably efficiently, but the Jordanians cannot
Some political systems do a better job of cutting checks than others. The conventional wisdom is that most European countries have successfully preserved pastoralism through cutting checks without having to distort their economy with across-the-board subsidies. The conventional wisdom is also that the US attempt to cut checks for export job loss has failed. blah blah first-past-the-post blah blah pork barrel.
The Jordanians are probably very very bad at cutting checks. The best piece of evidence is that the GoJ expects to fail at cutting checks, and they would know. The second best piece of evidence is what happens when they open municipalities (patronage). I suspect USAID gets laughed out of the room when they say “the Danes did it, why can’t you”. So you are correct about that.
Question, if you know. What’s the Jordanian construction sector like? While building a pipeline may only weakly protect the jobs of the Amman farmers, are local companies/contractors involved in the pipeline’s construction?
Does the pipeline go to any other areas which may be exploitable in the future? Do you know what the relations were like with the Southern Desert families? This could be an attempt to push out a faction and install another.
Great questions! You questions highlight a few minor contributing factors.
They actually contracted it to a Turkish company, GAMA, because they lacked the capacity.
Not really. In theory it could be linked to western Disi but they left the farms there. They would probably just build a new pipeline to the Gulf of Aqaba to decrease energy cost bc Pythagoras.
The GoJ exempted locally owned tribes, but it did become less popular locally. The central desert families north of Disi (Ma’an) are considered a strategic tribe and get special treatment, but the Disi tribes don’t. They get to flirt with a lot of tourist girls tho.
That was part of it. The farms which were closed were mostly owned by Palestinian elite families. So the rival transjordanian elites in the military were happy to see them go. But they would never pay a billion for that pleasure. See Keulertz.