Economic development in Sudan has been facing more challenges than ever before in 2011 after South Sudan gets independence, where Sudan lost 75% from oil revenues. As a result, Sudan underwent structural reform that favored the concentrating in non-oil sector. Considering that agriculture has been largely contributing to the GDP, it seems that the main drivers’ of economic growth. One of the most important questions regarding the New Structural Economics framework is (a) why industrialization becomes one the most determinants of country’s economic development, (b) has Sudan’s economic structure change over the years from 1980-2015, and (c) what the nature of that change? The purpose of this work is to identify the priorities of agro-industry commodities that Sudan has to focus on. It develops theoretical framework to investigate the sectoral composition trends of output and employment, and discusses these on the New Structural Economics framework. This study adopted two empirical models to analyze the collected data, which are obtained from different sources. Many of the hypotheses were supported. Major findings of this study are as follows. The analysis of RCA and PAM revealed that Sudan had lower costs in producing of agricultural and agro-industries commodities, except textiles manufacturing. The share of industrial sector in total employment and total output has declined during 2001 and 2015 period. Further analysis reveals that structural change has a negative impact on Sudan’s economy and growth of labor productivity, the share of service in output has steadily increased, reflecting reallocation of employment away from agriculture towards service and trade activities. This study finds evidence of negative structural change on Sudan’s economy and the share of value added manufacturing sector has decreased dramatically.
This paper aims to study the role of trade policy on industrial development and productivity growth. We analyze the relationship between trade policy and productivity growth of manufacturing firms in Sudan. For this work, we evaluate the previous trade policy instruments that implemented between 2000 and 2015. The study finds that Sudan trade policy has significant positive effects on manufacturing firms’ productivity. The study finds also reveals that manufacturing firms offer the largest scope for productivity gains through trade policies aiming at enhancing economic growth. The study also found there was a weak support for investment promotion and tariff protection. This study recommends that building a proper trade policy to support manufacturing firms to adapt new technologies and focusing on labor intensive industries is the key success to sustain productivity and exports.
Numerous studies focus on the Islamic banking performance, banks’ growth. There are, however, very little is known about the drivers’ growth of Islamic banking. The paper attempted to fill this gap. To achieve the objectives of the study, we consider government financial strategies for Islamic banking in Malaysia (Master Plan financial services 2000-2010 and Blueprint financial sector plan 2011-2020) and interviews the policy makers and regulators from BNM and selected banks. In this context, we explored the drivers’ growth Islamic banking industry in Malaysia for the period 2002-2012. The findings of the study revealed that the government strategies, high skilled banker’s human resources, financial stability, foreign banks, innovative products, awareness of the customers and quality of the financial and regulatory reforms were main drivers’ growth of Islamic banking in Malaysia. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3126/ijssm.v1i4.10626 Int. J. Soc. Sci. Manage. Vol-1, issue-4: 122-128
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.