Developing Municipalities in Syria: Is the Turkish Model Applicable?
Executive Summary:
Syrian municipalities under the Assad regime were long plagued by deep institutional dysfunction. They were exploited for political purposes, burdened by bureaucracy, and riddled with corruption, depriving citizens of essential services such as sanitation, infrastructure, and urban planning. With the outbreak of the revolution, civil and armed opposition fractions sought to establish alternatives through local councils, which—whether appointed, formed by consensus, or through limited electoral experiments—attempted to provide basic services despite their limited organizational capacity, mounting challenges, and the constraints of war.
Following the fall of the Assad regime, building an effective municipal model has become one of the cornerstones of state reconstruction. In this context, the report presents the Turkish municipal system as a pioneering example of local administrative governance. Legally, Turkish municipalities are granted broad authority that encompasses urban planning, infrastructure services such as roads, sewage, and sanitation, as well as cultural and social events, green space management, and emergency response. Additionally, Turkish municipalities enjoy considerable financial autonomy through local taxation, service fees, external loans, and partnerships, making them effective and competitive service providers, as well as central instruments in partisan competition for voters through local performance.
The Turkish model further demonstrates how municipalities can expand their roles to include supporting education (e.g., establishing learning centers and offering courses), providing social welfare (such as nurseries, student housing, and financial assistance), delivering healthcare services (including first aid, community clinics, and mental health programs), and even offering services for animals and environmental protection. The report highlights the vital role of municipalities in organizing religious and cultural events, as well as promoting artisans and small businesses through support and marketing of local products.
Despite these advantages, the report cautions against some pitfalls in the Turkish model, including the central government’s dismissal of elected mayors and the appointment of trustees in their place, as well as municipal project deadlock caused by partisan disputes between mayors and municipal councils—as witnessed in Istanbul and Ankara between 2019 and 2024.
In the Syrian context, the report stresses the compatibility of this model with Syrian realities, particularly as many Syrians have lived in Turkey and gained familiarity with its administrative culture, thereby creating opportunities for knowledge transfer. Turkish municipalities have already begun sending delegations to cooperate with emerging Syrian local administrations, paving the way for city twinning initiatives and technical partnerships that could facilitate reconstruction.
The report concludes by recommending that Syria draw upon the Turkish local governance model in restructuring its municipalities during the reconstruction phase, granting them expanded administrative and financial authority. However, it warns against uncritical imitation; instead, it advocates selective adoption tailored to the Syrian context, with emphasis on strengthening service provision and community participation. It further recommends the initiation of twinning projects and technical cooperation between Syrian and Turkish municipalities to accelerate the transfer of expertise in reconstruction and effective municipal planning.
To read the full report click here (Arabic)
بكالوريوس في قسم الفلك وعلوم الفضاء من جامعة أنقرة، مهتم بالشأن التركي وعلاقته بقضايا اللاجئين السوريين، ونشر وشارك في إعداد عدد من التقارير والمقالات حول هذا الموضوع ضمن الوحدة المجتمعية في مركز الحوار السوري
