The Built Environment Budget 15/16 | An Analysis of Spatial Justice in Egypt

  • Published on 19 November 2016

Introduction[1]

Have you ever wondered whether the government was spending enough on transport? Or whether your governorate got its fair share of public expenditure? Or how strong national policy favoured New Cities?

The Built Environment Budget series, starting with an analysis of the Financial Year (FY) 2015/16, seeks to answer these questions and more, by focusing on public investments in six sectors that make up Egypt’s built environment: housing; urban development; water; waste-water; electricity, and transport.

The BE Budget 2015/16 analyses these sectors by looking at both National and sub-national (governorate) level spending, to investigate spatial equity. It also gives a picture based on Egypt’s particular duality of local administration. On the one hand, this picture is based on examining the mainstream municipalities that run the Existing Built Environment (Existing BE) where over 98 percent of Egyptians live. On the other it is based on looking at the Ministry of Housing affiliated New Urban Communities Authority (NUCA), a large public corporation that builds and manages so-called New Cities that have been part of the government’s policy to redistribute population growth to the desert over the last four decades.[2]

Executive Summary and Key Findings

The BE Budget analysed the investment budgets (Chapter 6) of four ministries and 27 governorates, as well 14 agencies affiliated to them. These investments totalled 98.9 Bn EGP, of which only 37% was part of the General State Budget, while the rest were investments by state-owned enterprises (Table 1).[3]

 

Table 1: Investments in the built environment by administration (‘000s EGP)

Administration State-owned Enterprises General State Budget Total
Ministry of Housing, Utilities & Urban communities 29,885,183 21,384,689 51,269,872 51.8%
Ministry of Electricity 25,303,400 0 25,303,400 25.6%
Ministry of Transport 6,840,000 11,694,800 18,534,800 18.7%
Ministry of Local Development 0 650,000 650,000 0.7%
Governorates 362,735 2,765,536 3,128,271 3.2%
Total 62,391,318 36,495,025 98,886,343 100.0%
63.1% 36.9% 100%

 

 

Total investments represented 3.6% of GDP, while the General State Budget expenditure represented almost half of total Chapter 6 expenditure by the Treasury this year. The largest investor by far was the Ministry of Housing, Utilities and Urban Communities (MoH) with a little over half the budget.  The second largest investor was the Ministry of Electricity at a quarter of the budget, followed by the Ministry of Transport with a share of less than 20%. The governorates and Ministry of Local Development administer less than 4% of the built environment budget.

 

Duality of Managing the Built Environment: an Unexplained Contrast

Around 59% of the BE Budget is spent on local projects (housing, water and waste-water plants and networks, local electricity networks, local transport and urban development), while the rest is spent on projects that cross regional borders (railroads and power stations and grids) (Fig. 1). The BE Budget reveals the stark and unexplained contrast between how a single agency, the New Urban Communities Authority, is responsible for almost a third of the overall built environment budget, and half of the investments in local projects. It invests in all six sectors and operates in 19 governorates through 31 local branches.[4] On the other hand, the other half of local project spending goes to the Existing BE across the same six sectors, but is scattered among nine national-level agencies based in three ministries, and 27 offices in 27 governorates, in addition to two local governorate-based agencies.[5]

 

1-admin-total

 

Fig. 1: Total BE Budget by Administration

 

 

Favouring Real Estate over Social Investments

This duality has also meant that public spending on the local level has favoured investments in real estate, as well as politically informed rather than needs driven urban development (Fig. 2). The analysis has found that 7% of the BE Budget has been directed solely to two New Cities. The first is the New Administrative Capital in Cairo (5 Bn EGP),[6] a government city being built from scratch despite there being no demonstrably urgent need to do so. The second is New Alamein in Matruh (2 Bn EGP), a large coastal tourist resort.[7] These investments are comparable to local investments for all sectors in Cairo’s Existing BE (5.8 Bn EGP), and are double those in Matruh (0.9 Bn EGP). They are also one and a half times more than the total investments for much needed waste-water infrastructure across Egypt  (4.8 Bn EGP), and over two and a half times more than investments in water plants and networks for millions of Egyptians deprived of them (2.7 Bn EGP).

 

02-admin-nc-vs-ebe

Fig. 2: Investments in local projects; New Cities versus the Existing BE

 

 

Spatial Inequality between New Cities and the Existing BE

Besides the stark regional inequality in public spending, there seems to be a conscious decision by officials to spend very little on the Existing BE in regions where there are New City projects. Per capita spending on Greater Cairo more than doubles when New Cities are factored in, while spending rises 70% in Alexandria, 50% in Upper Egypt and 40% in the Delta when New Cities are added (Table 2).

 

However, in spite of the added spending on New Cities in these four regions, they still lag in per capita terms behind the Suez Canal and Frontier regions’ Existing BE investments, where expenditure on New Cities has only been introduced this year. The difference also grows once New City expenditure is added.

Table 2: Effect of investments in New Cities on per capita spending by region (EGP/person)

Regions Existing BE (EGP/person) Existing BE & New Cities

(EGP/person)

Ratio
Grater Cairo 63 140 2.2
Alex. 44 73 1.7
Suez Canal 141 148 1.0
Delta 37 52 1.4
Upper Egypt 45 68 1.5
Frontier 440 583 1.3
Average 128 177 1.4

 

 

 

Spatial Inequality in the Existing BE: Regional as well as Sub-regional Disparity

On the local Existing BE level, our analysis has shown a wide spectrum of per capita spending across the regions in each sector. The Frontier region received the highest per capita expenditure in all six sectors, an attribute partially explained by their far below average population sizes as well as their above average areas (Table 3). The Suez Canal region came second overall in per capita spending, with generally above average per capita spending throughout. Greater Cairo was third amongst the regions in per capita spending, and generally below average.

 

In fourth place was the predominantly rural Upper Egypt, with an overall per capita spending of 35% of the national average as most per capita spending was below and well below average across the sectors. Alexandria, an urban governorate and Egypt’s third largest city, was, surprisingly, next to last amongst the regions in per capita spending, with consistently below average per capita spending across all six sectors. The Delta was the region with the least per capita spending, at 29% of the average overall per capita share.

 

Table 3: Per capita spending on the Existing BE by Sector and Region (EGP/person)

Regions Existing BE
Electricity Transport Social Housing Waste-water Water Urban Develop. Average
Grater Cairo 4 191 72 72 31 9 63
Alex. 2 66 96 68 22 7 44
Suez Canal 28 57 551 133 37 41 141
Delta 3 28 105 58 26 1 37
Upper Egypt 9 41 142 45 24 6 45
Frontier 93 329 1556 181 283 198 440
Average 23 119 420 93 71 44 128

 

All regions suffered from internal spending disparities, with one or two governorates receiving above or high above average spending in a number of sectors, while others receiving below or well below average per capita spending in most if not all sectors.[8]   This large range of per capita spending indicates that spending is not necessarily needs-based. Budgets are similar in a number of governorates regardless of their population, where Damietta, Kafr al-Shiekh and Luxor were assigned identical budgets for their Existing BE Social Housing budget (See Appendix 5).

 

Spatial Inequality in New Cities: Regional as well as Sub-regional Disparity

There was regional disparity in per capita spending on New Cities, with just one city on its own, New Alamein in Matruh, raising the Frontier governorates to the top of the six regions (Table 4). That is despite very modest spending in Wadi al-Gadid and no New City programmes in the remaining three Frontier governorates. Overall, Matruh received the highest per capita spending amongst all the governorates in four out of the six sectors, with no spending on Social Housing or Urban Development.

 

Greater Cairo received the second highest per capita spending, and were it not for the anomaly of high spending on New Alamein, would have been NUCA’s top region by far, at 2.6 times higher per capita spending than the next region down (Alexandria). Alexandria had the third highest per capita investments, all in New Borg al-‘Arab, though generally below average across the sectors. The Delta came fourth in per capita investments, even though it is home to five New Cities in four of its seven governorates.  Upper Egypt trailed the Delta by a small margin, even though all its eight governorates are home to 11 New Cities, three of which are still under construction. The Suez Canal region understandably had the least per capita spending as it is the first year of construction for East Port Said and North Suez in Port Said and Suez respectively.

 

 

 

Table 4: Per capita spending in New Cities by Sector and Region (EGP/ Person)

Regions  New Cities
Electricity Transport Social Housing Waste-water Water Urban Develop. Average
Grater Cairo 44 53 62 99 43 177 80
Alex. 26 20 46 76 11 0 30
Suez Canal 7 5 0 43 7 0 10
Delta 12 29 49 37 38 0 27
Upper Egypt 23 22 64 23 11 0 24
Frontier 536 321 0 751 537 0 358
Average 108 75 37 172 108 29 88

                                                                                                                                             

Sectoral Inequality between New Cities and the Existing BE

Per capita spending by sector was more than three times higher in New Cities than in the Existing BE. The biggest difference was in local electricity networks, where spending on new networks and maintenance in the New Cities was 45 times higher than in the Existing BE (Table 5). Urban Development was four times higher and local transport (all roads and bridges) was three times higher, even though investments in the Existing BE included public transit and underground metro lines. New Cities also received double the per capita spending on both water and waste-water infrastructure, and 30% more on Social Housing.

 

Table 5: Effect of investments in New Cities on per capita spending by sector

  Local Electricity Local Transport Social Housing Waste-water Water Urban Develop. Average
Existing BE

(EGP/person)

7 85 126 54 30 18 53
Existing BE & New

(EGP/person)

314 270 169 109 58 73 166
Ratio Existing : New 45.6 3.2 1.3 2.0 1.9 4.0 3.1

 

Numbers Do Not Tell the Whole Story: Evidence of Drastic Modification

In the end, elements of the public budget could be drastically modified, either raised or lowered, within the course of the financial year, rendering it and this analysis more indicative than definitive. In some cases, public investment figures may be over ambitious. For example, there was consistent under-spending for the Social Housing Projetct. Only between 20% and 52% of its planned budget over three consecutive financial years was spent (Fig. 3).[9]

 

03-under-spending

Fig. 3: Under-spending on housing in FY 2012/2013 through 2014/2015

 

On the other hand, year-end modifications, and not final accounts, show both modest and drastic changes to agency budgets. For example the Ministry of Housing, Utilities and Urban Communities’ budget for FY 2013/14 was increased by 13.5Bn EGP, or about 168%.[10]

 

1. Methodology

The Built Environment Budget for FY 2015/16 has compiled data and information from several sources to provide its analysis. The project uses publicly available information only, giving a near accurate estimate of how much money the government allocates to the various built environment related sectors: building housing units; developing residential areas; providing roads and transportation for commuting in neighbourhoods and cities; building water and waste-water stations and networks; as well as providing electricity through power stations and grids.

Therefore, data compiled is consolidated to reflect information through six main sectors: 1) Housing Projects, 2) Urban Development, 3) Water, 4) Waste-water, 5) Transportation and 6) Electricity, with more detail within the sectors in the case of multiple projects. Furthermore, the BE Budget categorises public built environment spending according to both local spending on the sub-national governorate level to analyse spatial equality of public spending, as well as National spending for projects that cross sub-national borders such as National highways, rail-roads and electricity generation and networks. Another administrative distinction is made at the sub-national level particular to Egypt, which has dual local administrative structures. The first is the Existing Built Environment, composed of the mainstream municipalities that manage over 200 cities and 4000 villages and where over 98 percent of Egyptians live. The second are the so-called New Cities, composed of around 31 new urban settlements built in desert locations over the last four decades where 20 active, one is a mega tourist resort, and nine are under construction. Most New Cities have been built as satellites to large existing cities, and all constructed and run by a public corporation, the New Urban Communities Authority (NUCA), chaired by the Minister of Housing, Utilities and Urban Development.

 

1.1 Built Environment Sectors

Six sectors were chosen to represent built environment spending based on a number of criteria (Table 6). The sectors had to make up the physical built environment, have a general public benefit, use public funds, and have budget data available at the national or sub-national levels.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 6: Built environment sectors by administration and projects

Sector Projects
National Sub-national
Existing Built Environment New Cities
Roads and Transportation National Roads and Bridges Local Roads and Bridges Local Roads and Bridges
Railways N/A N/A
N/A Underground Metro
Public Buses
Electricity Power Stations and Grids Local Networks Local Networks
Water N/A Treatment Stations & Networks Treatment Stations & Networks
Waste-water N/A Treatment Stations & Networks Treatment Stations & Networks
Housing N/A Social Housing Programme Social Housing Programme
N/A Middle Income Housing/ Dar Masr
Cooperative Housing Programme N/A
Rural Housing (Desert Villages/Bedouin Housing/ Housing Repair) N/A
Urban Development N/A Most Needy Villages Project New Administrative Capital
Urban Renewal
Integrated Urban Development

 

Physical Built Environment

The sectors of Transport, Electricity, Water, Waste-water, Housing, and Urban Development were all chosen because of how they constitute and shape the built environment. While the built environment cannot function without other sectors such as solid waste management and social services (health, education, security, etc.), the BE Budget has focused on sectors where public spending is used to build infrastructure. This is isolated in the public budget as Chapter 6, and does not include any other spending.

Some sectors that partly fit the criteria, but the main purpose of which does not comfortably fit within the everyday built environment sector category have not been selected. These include flood defences, National natural gas networks, airports and sea-ports. The local natural gas network sector was not included because of time constraints.

General Public Benefit

All projects identified in this analysis must be accessible to the public or provide general public benefit. Some exceptions to this are the Cooperative Housing Programme and the Middle Income Housing Programme   (Dar Masr), which sell housing to middle and upper middle income groups and are considered profitable. These have been included to highlight how public finance is used, especially public land. The latter project represents a large proportion of spending by a government agency, NUCA, that is supposed to focus on public projects.

 

Public Funds

Most of the built environment sectors in Egypt depend on public spending through state affiliated agencies. These are classified into; Government (Ministries and their offices/departments, Service Authorities directly affiliated to ministries and Local Administration offices/departments), and State-Owned-Enterprises (Economic agencies, public sector companies). SOEs are defined as publicly owned corporations through which the government undertakes commercial activities for social and economic projects.

 

State-Owned-Enterprises’ investments are included in this research as they play a major role in the Built Environment projects in Egypt. Other than having funding from private sources and collecting payments from companies, there is also a relationship between SOE’s and the National Treasury, where funds come in to SOE’s through the National Treasury. Revenues from SOE’s flow to the National Treasury and to quasi-fiscal expenditures as well. SOE’s budgets are independent of the General State Budget but their investments directly serve the Egyptian Economic and Social Development Program.[11]

 

On the other hand there are a number of SOEs that use public money for mostly profitable construction and real estate activity, and these have not been included. One example is the Holding Company for Construction and Development and its real estate development subsidiaries, the Maadi, Heliopolis and el-Nasr companies.[12]

And while the private sector through their corporate social responsibility activities, charities, NGOs and donor agencies invest to some degree in the built environment, any of their expenditure that is exclusive to the State Budget and its agencies or that was not part of the agencies covered, is not included in the BE Budget.
Available Data

There are a number of agencies that fit the built environment criteria but that we could not find publicly available data for, and these were also not included.  These include;

  • The Holding Company for Water and Waste Water. Most public holding companies’ budgets are not published regularly or at all. Only the Egyptian Electricity Holding Company (EEHC) is made available as one bulk figure, published through the Ministry of Planning documents.
  • So-called private funds, sanadiq khassa, investing in public housing and urban development projects and affiliated to government agencies such as the Tahya Masr Fund (Presidency) and Governorate Services’ Funds, are excluded, as their budgets are not published.

 

1.2 Built Environment Divisions & Regions

Spending has been analysed based on; regional and local projects; two local administration structures particular to Egypt (Existing BE and New Cities); and six geographic regions.

Spatial Spending 1; Regional Projects and Local Projects

Regional projects are those that cross sub-national (governorate) borders and that could not be isolated at the local level such as national highways, rail-roads and electricity generation and grids. Their spending is presented as national totals only. Local projects are those that serve communities within the administrative boundaries of governorates such as local roads and highways, water and waste-water infrastructure, housing, urban development and local electricity networks. Their spending is presented as both a national total as well as per governorate. In some cases some local projects’ spending within one sector is not disaggregated, hence there are differences between the sub-national totals and the grand totals.

Spatial Spending 2; Geographic Regions

There is as yet no regional level administration, even though a provision for such a system has existed since 1977 and outlined seven or eight so-called Economic Regions. In this research we have identified six socio-geographic regions that better reveal spatial inequality and are different from the Economic Regions. They are:

  • The largely urban capital metropolis of Greater Cairo (Cairo, Giza and Qalyubia)
  • Egypt’s second largest city/governorate of Alexandria
  • The cohesive Suez Canal zone (Port Said, Ismailia and Suez)
  • T he rural/industrial Delta (Damietta, Daqahlia, Kafr al-Sheikh, Beheira, Munfia, Gahrbia and Sharkia)
  • T he mostly rural Upper Egypt (Fayoum, Beni Sweif, Minya, Assuit, Sohag, Qena, Luxor and Aswan)
  • The sparsely populated desert Frontier (Matruh, Wadi al-Gadid, Red Sea, North Sinai and South Sinai).

 

Administrative Divisions; Existing Built Environment and New Cities

There is an administrative distinction at the sub-national level particular to Egypt. Within the 27 sub-national governorates, Egypt has a dual local administrative structure. There are mainstream local administrations, or municipalities, that manage over 200 cities and 4000 villages where over 98 percent of Egyptians live.[13] This we have termed the Existing Built Environment (Existing BE). And then there are the 31 so-called New Cities that have been built and run by the New Urban Communities Authority (NUCA), a public corporation administered at the national level by the Ministry of Housing, Utilities and Urban Development (MoH). These are referred to simply as New Cities.

1.3 Expenditure Data, Sources and Government Agencies’ Information

The BE Budget has focused only on public investments allocated to built environment projects outlined in the sectors presented in Chapter 6 of the General State Budget and other documents,. This means that the rest of the expenditure budget line items are omitted.[14]

Given that the General State Budget is not published in a programs budget format, only planned allocations of Chapter 6, Investments, are relevant to this study. This allocation is concerned with investments directed to construction or developing infrastructure across sectors.
These figures provide a picture of how the government plans to spend public money on economic and social development programs, and do not reveal actual spending or information on accessibility of services.

The project has gathered this information through three main data sources all of which were published online, excluding the Official Gazette documents as explained below;

  • Mainstream budget documents released by the Ministry of Finance (MoF) and Offical Gazette,[15]
  • Programmatic and geographic spending as outlined in the Ministry of Planning’s (MoP) Economic and Social Development Plan,[16]
  • Agency specific budgets, in this case NUCA’s budget documents.[17]

Public Budget: Central administration, Local administration and Services authorities – (MoF)

The General State Budget provides economic expenditure allocations across three divisions of government: Central Administration, Local Administration and Services Authorities. Only Central Administration and Services Authorities’ documents are relevant for this study. Data for the relevant sectors of the Built Environment Budget is found through the sectoral sections of the MoF: Economic Affairs Sector, Environment Protection Sector and Housing & Public Infrastructure Sector.

Economic Entities’ Budgets – (MoF – Offical Gazette)

The Offical Gazette provides the budgets for Economic Entities: publicly owned corporations. Offical Gazette documents can be accessed through an e-mail mailing list with a paid membership. Seven economic entities are relevant for this study.

Economic and Social Development Plan – (MoP)

The ministry of planning publishes the government’s Economic and Social Development Plan annually. This  outlines investments across all sectors in some detail. The Housing and Public Infrastructure Sector information in Part 4; Social Equality, Electricity Sector and Transportation Sector in Part 5; Economic Development, local spending of some of the aforementioned sectors were found in Part 6. There is also information on Spatial Development and the Appendices tables.[18]

Economic Agencies’ information published online (NUCA only)

NUCA publishes programmatic investment plans on its website whereas the MoF and Offical Gazette only publish an accounting budget. The plans can be found for FYs 2012/2013 to 2015/2016 in presentation slide format.

1.4 Data Organization and Results

Data Entry

There are three data entry files for each data source:

  • MoF data entry consists of subsidy, investments, public spending and total expenditure for central administration and services authorities for eight-year periods. It also consists of information on economic entities, spending, investment, total capital investment and total budget for eight-year periods.
  • MoP data entry file contains data for one financial year. It consists of all relevant tables from relevant parts of the economic and social development plan.
  • NUCA data entry file contains two sheets for each financial year from 2012/2013 to 2015/2016. Each sheet consists of new urban cities project investments for each new city across different sectors.

Results

The Built Environment Budget data is presented as a current spatial distribution of built environment projects by sector, government agencies, regional and local projects, and New Cities and the Existing BE.

1.4.1 Sectors and Sub sectors

Table 7 below provides the built environment categorization, sectors and underlying projects, and the government agencies relevant to each as provided in the results. This table is created through the Spatial Distribution data from the Ministry of Planning.

Table 7: Budget classification of sources by government agency

Spatial Distribution Sector Project Government Agency Budget Classification
Regional Projects Roads and Transport National Roads and Bridges  Central Agency for Construction (CAC) General State Budget – Services Authority
General Authority for Roads, Bridges and Land Transport (GARBaLT) General State Budget – Services Authority
Railways  Egyptian National Railways (ENR) Economic Entity (exclusive to the General State Budget)
Electricity Power Stations and Grid Egypt Electricity Holding Company (EEHC) Holding Company* (exclusive to the General State Budget)
Local Projects Existing Built Environment Water & Waste-water Treatment Stations & Networks National Organisation for Potable Water and Sanitary Drainage (NOPWASD) General State Budget – Services Authority
Construction Authority for Potable Water and Wastewater (CAPW) General State Budget – Central Administration
Ministry of Housing, Utilities and Urban Development General State Budget – Central Administration
Roads & Transport Local Roads and Bridges General Authority for Roads, Bridges and Land Transport (GARBaLT) General State Budget – Services Authority
 Governorates’ Offices General State Budget – Local Municipalities
Central Agency for Construction (CAC) General State Budget – Central Administration
Underground Metro National Authority for Tunnels (NAT) General State Budget – Services Authority
Public Buses Cairo Transport Authority (CTA) Economic Entity (exclusive to the General State Budget)
Alexandria Public Transport Authority (APTA)
Housing Social Housing Programme Ministry of Housing/ Social Housing Fund (SHF) General State Budget – Central Administration
Guarantee and Subsidy Fund (GSF) General State Budget – Services Authority
Cooperative Housing Programme General Authority for Cooperative Construction and Housing (GACCH) Economic Entity (exclusive to the General State Budget)
Other Housing projects (undefined allocations) Ministry of Housing General State Budget – Central Administration
Central Agency for Construction (CAC) General State Budget – Services Authority
Electricity Local Networks Central Agency for Construction (CAC) General State Budget – Services Authority
Governorates’ Offices General State Budget – Local Municipalities
Urban Development 1000 Most Needy Villages Project Central Agency for Construction (CAC) General State Budget – Central Administration
Governorates’ Offices General State Budget – Local Municipalities
Informal Areas Development Informal Settlements Development Facility (ISDF) General State Budget – Services Authorities
Integrated Urban Development Central Agency for Construction (CAC) General State Budget – Central Administration
New Cities Water & Waste-water Treatment Stations & Networks New Urban Communities Authority (NUCA) Economic Entity (Exclusive to General State Budget)
Roads & Transport Local Roads New Urban Communities Authority (NUCA) Economic Entity (Exclusive to General State Budget)
Electricity Local Networks New Urban Communities Authority (NUCA) Economic Entity (Exclusive to General State Budget)
Housing Social Housing Programme New Urban Communities Authority (NUCA) Economic Entity (Exclusive to General State Budget)
Middle Income Housing/ Dar Masr New Urban Communities Authority (NUCA) Economic Entity (Exclusive to General State Budget)

 

1.4.2 Spatial Distribution

This format utilizes data published by the ministry of planning relating to all the governorates. It includes sectors, government agencies for each sector and the Built Environment categorizations. This data is available for the current financial year 2015/2016 only.

 

2. Spending by Agency

14 agencies in four ministries and 27 governorates invest in the built environment (Table 8). The largest investor by far was the Ministry of Housing, Utilities and Urban Communities (MoH) with a little over half the budget.  The second largest investor was the Ministry of Electricity at a quarter of the budget, followed by the Ministry of Transport with a share of less than 20%. The governorates and Ministry of Local Development administer less than 4% of the built environment budget.

The Ministry of Housings’ New Urban Communities Authority made the largest investments by agency at almost a third of the budget. It was followed by the Ministry of Electricity’s Egypt Electricity Holding Company, with investments equal to a quarter of the budget. This in turn was followed by the MoH’s Social Housing Fund at 11% of the built environment budget. The smallest investor was the MoH’s Guarantee & Subsidy Fund (GSF), at one million EGP, or 0.01% of the budget. However it is worth noting that the GSF’s main activity is funding the subsidy component of the Social Housing Programme’s mortgage units, for which it has allocated 1.5 Bn EGP in FY 2015/16.[19]

In terms of sectoral involvement, the MoH was the only ministry to invest in all six built environment sectors, specifically through it’s New Urban Communities Authority, which was the only agency to do so.[20] The Central Agency for Construction (part of the MoH) and the offices of the governorates were the only agencies to invest in three of the built environment sectors each, with the rest of the agencies only investing in one or two sectors.

 

Table 8: Agency budget by sector (‘000s EGP)

Sector Electricity Transport Housing Waste-water Water Other/ Urban Develop. Total
Ministry of Housing, Utilities & Urban communities New Urban Communities Authority 2,391,890 2,713,394 11,978,225 5,107,087 2,591,087 5,000,000 29,781,683
Central Agency for
Construction
47,500 1,838,000 229,500 0 0 163,000 2,278,000
Office of the ministry  0 0 25,000 41,100 49,150 0 115,250
Social Housing Fund  0  0 10,970,000  0  0 0 10,970,000
Guarantee & Subsidy Fund  0  0 1,000 0 0 0 1,000
General Authority for Cooperative Construction and Housing  0  0 103,500  0 0 0 103,500
Informal Settlements Development Facility  0  0  0  0 0 685,840 685,840
Construction Authority for Potable Water and Wastewater 0  0  0 1,694,465 686,635 0 2,381,100
National Organisation for Potable Water and Sanitary Drainage  0  0  0 3,017,567 1,935,932 0 4,953,499
Sub-total 2,439,390 4,551,394 23,307,225 9,860,219 5,262,804 5,848,840 51,269,872
Ministry of Electricity Egypt Electricity Holding Company 25,303,400 0 0 0 0 0 25,303,400
Ministry of Transport General Authority for Roads, Bridges and Land Transport 0 7,635,000 0  0 0 0 7,635,000
National Authority for Tunnels 0 4,059,800 0  0 0 0 4,059,800
Egyptian National Railways 0 6,840,000 0  0 0 0 6,840,000
Sub-total 0 18,534,800 0 0 0 0 18,534,800
Local Admin. Offices of the governorates 560,614 2,109,880 0  0  0 95 ,042 2,765,536
Cairo Transport Authority  0 177,735  0  0  0  0 177,735
Alexandria Public Transport Authority  0 185,000  0  0  0  0 185,000
Sub-total 560,614 2,472,615 0 0 0 95,042 3,128,271
Ministry of Local Development Office of the ministry 0 0 0 0 0 650,000 650,000
Total 28,303,404 25,558,809 23,307,225 9,860,219 5,262,804 6,593,882 98,886,343
Sector Electricity Transport Housing Waste-water Water Other/ Urban Develop. Total

 

 


 

3. Spending by Regional or Local Projects

This section gives an overview of public spending on the built environment in Egypt, based on sectoral totals at the National level, as well as comparing spending by administrative division; National spending; projects that cross sub-national borders and that could not be isolated at the sub-national level such as national highways, rail-roads and electricity generation and grids; and sub-national governorate level spending on locally identified projects. This section also analyses the further administrative distinction at the sub-national level particular to Egypt, where sub-national spending is divided and compared between the dual local administrative structures of the Existing Built Environment (BE), and the New Cities.[21]

Total Spending

Spending on the six built environment sectors totaled 98.9 Bn EGP (Table 9). When sub-divided administratively, over 40% of the Built Environment Budget for FY 2015/16 is spent on projects with National reach: power stations and networks, railroads and highways. Second comes spending on New Cities, which are administratively separate from existing local administration, where 30% of the budget is spent. This spending is mostly for real estate investments where new subdivisions are prepared and sold, as well as spending on both for profit housing schemes and public housing within the New Cities.  Only two percent of the population benefits from this spending. In third place, at 29% of the budget, comes spending on the Existing BE where 98% Egyptians live. Of this portion, a mere 13.3 percent is actually spent through the local administration. The rest is controlled by central ministries.

 

Table 9: Total spending on the BE by sector and administration

Sector Local Projects Regional Projects Total
Existing BE New Cities
‘000s EGP % ‘000s EGP % ‘000s EGP % ‘000s EGP %
Electricity 608,114 2.1% 2,391,890 8.5% 25,303,400 89.4% 28,303,404 28.6%
Transport 7,477,415 29.3% 2,713,394 10.6% 15,368,000 60.1% 25,558,809 25.8%
Housing 11,329,000 48.6% 11,978,225 51.4% 0 0.0% 23,307,225 23.6%
Waste-water 4,753,132 48.2% 5,107,087 51.8% 0 0.0% 9,860,219 10.0%
Urban Dev. 1,593,882 24.2% 5,000,000 75.8% 0 0.0% 6,593,882 6.7%
Water 2,671,717 50.8% 2,591,087 49.2% 0 0.0% 5,262,804 5.3%
Total 28,433,260 28.8% 29,781,683 30.1% 40,671,400 41.1% 98,886,343 100.0%

 

Total Per Capita Spending

Total BE spending translated to a national per capita spending of 1098 EGP per person (Table 10). Per capita spending fluctuated greatly between the different administrative divisions, where spending on New Cities was highest at 15,537 EGP per person, or about 15 times the national average. This was followed by National projects at 451 EGP per person, and then the Existing BE at 322 EGP per person, or about a third of the national average.

Table 10:  Per capita spending on the BE by sector and administration

Sector Local Projects Regional Projects Total
Existing BE New Cities
‘000s EGP EGP/ pax ‘000s EGP EGP/ pax ‘000s EGP EGP/ pax  ‘000s EGP EGP/pax
Electricity 608,114 7 2,391,890 1248 25,303,400 281 28,303,404 314
Transport 7,477,415 85 2,713,394 1416 15,368,000 171 25,558,809 284
Housing 11,329,000 128 11,978,225 6249 0 0 23,307,225 259
Waste-water 4,753,132 54 5,107,087 2664 0 0 9,860,219 109
Urban Dev. 1,593,882 18 5,000,000 2608 0 0 6,593,882 73
Water 2,671,717 30 2,591,087 1352 0 0 5,262,804 58
Total 28,433,260 322 29,781,683 15,537 40,671,400 451 98,886,343 1098

 

Total Per Capita Spending on the Sub-national Level

Looking only at the sub-national Built Environment Budget (only Existing BE and the New Cities) and dividing it by the total population produces an average per capita spending of 1140 EGP per person across the governorates. However, spending is very uneven (fig 4). Almost all Delta and Upper Egyptian governorates fall below the national average with Daqahlia receiving almost a tenth of the average. On the other hand only five governorates received near average spending. Cairo received almost double the average spending, and the Frontier governorates were all much higher than average, a fact emphasised by their very small populations. Matruh for example receiving five and a half times the national average spending. This is possibly explained by these governorates’ importance to the tourism sector.

Per Capita Spending on the Existing BE

Isolating spending on only the Existing BE shows an average per capita spending of 322 EGP per person, or about a third of the national average from the total BE Budget. Only seven governorates received spending close to that average (fig 5): Qalubia in Greater Cairo; Alexandria, Egypt’s second largest city; Damietta, a largely urban governorate; Munufia in the Delta, and Luxor and Aswan, the two tourism oriented governorates in Upper Egypt. By contrast, most Delta and Upper Egyptian governorates received less than average spending. Meanwhile urban governorates such as Cairo, Port Said and Suez received double to triple the average spending, while the frontier governorates’ per capita spending was between 6 to 16 times the national average, possibly because of their very small populations as well as being important for tourism.

04-admin-total-per-capita

 

Fig. 4: Total sub-national per capita spending on local projects

 

05-admin-ebe-per-capita

 

 

Fig. 5: Sub-national per capita spending on local projects in the Existing BE

 

 

 

Table 11: Calculating per capita expenditure for the New Cities in each governorate

Regions Gov Population Investments (‘000 EGP) Per Capita (EGP/person)
Egypt New Cities Based on NC pop Based on  Gov pop Based on NC/Gov pop
Grater Cairo Cairo 9,440,374 550,825 13,637,431 24,758 1445 24,758
Giza 7,762,792 506,318 3,348,231 6,613 431 6,613
Qalubia 5,215,446 107,462 1,058,164 9,847 203 9,847
Alex. Alexandria 4,901,910 98,305 877,516 8,926 179 8,926
Suez Canal Port Said 678,564 0 5,000 0 7 7
Ismailia 1,209,663 _ _ _ _ _
Suez 636,841 0 73,200 0 115 115
Delta Damietta 1,359,643 64,291 1,500,200 23,334 1103 23,334
Daqahlia 6,074,446 _ _ _ _ _
Sharkia 6,640,664 354,947 3,477,174 9,796 524 9,796
Kafr al-Sheikh 3,249,268 _ _ _ _ _
Gharbia 4,852,968 _ _ _ _ _
Munfia 4,035,137 68,554 479,706 6,998 119 6,998
Beheira 5,959,050 99,444 82,738 832 14 832
Upper Egypt Fayoum 3,280,103 0 58,848 0 18 18
Beni Sweif 2,943,740 45,314 165,623 3,655 56 3,655
Minya 5,309,254 11,647 509,600 43,752 96 43,752
Assiut 4,364,111 4,462 700,065 156,906 160 160
Sohag 4,734,676 144 539,341 0 114 114
Qena 3,128,194 0 498,336 0 159 159
Luxor 1,173,753 5,134 318,850 62,111 272 272
Aswan 1,466,965 0 447,660 0 305 305
Frontier Matruh 468,218 0 1,999,000 0 4269 4,269
Wadi al-Gadid 230,591 0 5,000 0 22 22
Sinai N 445,811 _ _ _ _ _
Sinai S 169,822 _ _ _ _ _
Red Sea 354,263 _ _ _ _ _
Total 90,086,267 1,916,846 29,781,683 17,876 481 7,198

 

 

Per Capita Spending on New Cities

Gross per capita spending on New Cities amounted to 15,537 EGP per person, or about 15 times the national average.[22] Cairo governorate received the highest spending by NUCA  (13.6 Bn EGP, or 46% of NUCA’s budget), that spending translated to 24,758 EGP per person based on population in its New Cities, and 1445 EGP per person based on Cairo’s total population (Table 11). This makes it the second highest per capita spending after Minya, which had per capita spending of 43,752 EGP per person, even though actual spending was only 510 Mn EGP, or about 1.7% of NUCA spending.

 

 

Total Governorate Level Spending to Population Ratio

When viewed as a ratio between spending and population, only six governorates were within the 1:1 ratio (0.8 to 1.2) (Table 12). Most Delta and Upper Egyptian governorates were below, ranging between a high of 0.6 for Assiut, Qena and Munfia, and a low of 0.2 for Daqahlia. Meanwhile almost all urban governorates were higher: between 1.7 for Suez and Port Said, to 3.2 for Cairo with the highest share of spending at 21% of the budget for 10.1% of the population. The exception was Alexandria, which was a low 0.7. Frontier governorates all had very high spending to population ratios, ranging from 2.9 for North Sinai, to a staggering 9.8 for Matruh.

 

 

Existing BE Governorate Level Spending to Population Ratio

When governorate level spending is isolated to show only spending on Existing BE, only three governorates, Qalubeya, Alexandria and Mufia are near a 1:1 ratio  (Table 12). Again, almost all Delta and Upper Egyptian governorates are below that, ranging from a high of 0.7 for most, to a low of 0.4 for Daqahlia. Once again we see also that only Damietta in the Delta, and Luxor and Aswan in Upper Egypt were higher than 1, all receiving 1.5 times more spending than their population. Urban governorates were also much higher than 1, with Cairo, Suez and Port Said at 2.1, 3 and 3.5 times respectively. Alexandria was the exception at only 0.8. Frontier governorates all ranged from a low of 6 for North Sinai, to an overall high of 17 for South Sinai.

 

 

New Cities’ Governorate Level Spending to Population Ratio

New City spending ignored local governorate populations even more. Only two governorates received near 1:1 spending, Luxor and Aswan at 0.8 and 0.9 respectively, while the rest of the Upper Egyptian New Cities received spending of between 0.1 in Fayoum to 0.5 in Qena and Assuit  (Table 12). Cairo was the highest of the Urban Governorates at 4.4, while Giza was 1.3 and Alexandria a mere 0.5. Most Delta governorates do not have New Cities, but the ones that do received between less than 0.1 for Beheira, and 3.3 for Damietta. 2015/16 is also the first year where one of the Frontier governorates will have a New City. New Alamein is a New City in Matruh, which will lead the governorates with a 12.9 spending to population ratio

 

 

 

Table 12: Spending to population ratios per governorate and administration

Region Gov Total BE New Cities Existing BE
Grater Cairo Cairo 3.2 4.4 2.1
Giza 0.9 1.3 0.6
Qalubia 0.8 0.6 1.0
Alex. Alexandria 0.7 0.5 0.8
Suez Canal Port Said 1.7 0.0 3.5
Ismailia 0.8 _ 1.6
Suez 1.7 0.3 3.0
Delta Damietta 2.4 3.3 1.5
Daqahlia 0.2 0.0 0.4
Sharkia 1.0 1.6 0.5
Kafr al-Sheikh 0.4 _ 0.7
Gharbia 0.3 _ 0.5
Munfia 0.6 0.4 0.9
Beheira 0.3 0.0 0.5
Upper Egypt Fayoum 0.4 0.1 0.7
Beni Sweif 0.4 0.2 0.7
Minya 0.4 0.3 0.5
Assiut 0.6 0.5 0.7
Sohag 0.5 0.3 0.7
Qena 0.6 0.5 0.6
Luxor 1.1 0.8 1.5
Aswan 1.2 0.9 1.5
Frontier Matruh 9.8 12.9 6.3
Wadi al-Gadid 3.6 0.1 7.2
Sinai N 2.9 _ 6.0
Sinai S 8.4 _ 17.0
Red Sea 3.4 _ 6.9
Average 1.8 1.4 2.5

 

 

 

 

Governorate Level Spending on New Cities versus Existing BE

Over half (51.9%) of the local BE budget was spent on New Cities (Fig 6). In some governorates, spending on New Cities was almost triple the spending on their existing BE where most of their populations live. For example in Sharkia, Giza, Damietta and Cairo, the government designated 79.4%, 72.5%, 71.3% and 70.1% respectively of their local spending on their New Cities. By contrast, the lowest rate was in Fayoum at 7.7%. Port Said, Suez and the New Valley were even lower. However this is the first year they receive funds to build New Cities, while another seven governorates do not have a New City programme.

06-admin-nc-vs-ebe-egp

 

Fig. 6: Total local spending; New Cities versus the Existing BE

 


 

4. Spending by Sector

Six sectors were chosen to represent spending on the built environment in Egypt: Transport; Electricity; Water; Waste-water; Housing, and Urban Development. This section analyses overall spending on a sector-by-sector basis, as well as the administrative shares between National and Sub-national sectors. The section also analyses the spatial equality of sub-national sectors as the per capita share of each governorate in each sector, as well as comparing spending in the Existing BE with spending on New Cities.

 

Total Sectoral Spending

Egypt’s total built environment budget for FY 2015/16 was 98.9 Bn EGP. The highest spending was on electricity (mostly power stations), where 29% of the budget is allocated (fig. 7). Transport, including National highways and railroads, is second at 26% of the budget. Housing projects for both social and middle income housing are third with almost a quarter of the budget. Spending on waste-water infrastructure accounted for 10%. 6.6 % was spent on Urban Development (projects that include more than one sector), where most of it was for the New Administrative Capital in Cairo (5%), while the rest were designated for  Informal Area Upgrading and the Most Needy Villages programmes. Finally, about 5.3% went to drinking water plants and networks.

07-sector-total

 

Fig. 7: Total BE Budget by sector

 

Per Capita Sectoral Spending

In per capita terms, the national share for built environment projects ranged from 314 EGP per person, for electricity projects, to 18 EGP per person for urban development projects (Table 13). When isolated on the sub-national level for the Existing BE, per capita spending ranges from 128 EGP per person for housing projects, to 7 EGP for electricity (local networks). On the other hand in New Cities, per capita spending ranges from a high of 6249 EGP per person for housing projects, which include the profitable Dar Masr, to 1352 EGP per person for projects in the water sector.

Table 13: Total and per capita sectoral spending

Sector Local Projects Regional Projects Total
Existing BE New Cities
‘000s EGP EGP/ pax ‘000s EGP EGP/ pax ‘000s EGP EGP/ pax  ‘000s EGP EGP/pax
Electricity 608,114 7 2,391,890 1248 25,303,400 281 28,303,404 314
Transport 7,477,415 85 2,713,394 1416 15,368,000 171 25,558,809 284
Housing 11,329,000 128 11,978,225 6249 0 0 23,307,225 259
Waste-water 4,753,132 54 5,107,087 2664 0 0 9,860,219 109
Urban Dev. 1,593,882 18 5,000,000 2608 0 0 6,593,882 73
Water 2,671,717 30 2,591,087 1352 0 0 5,262,804 58
Total 28,433,260 322 29,781,683 15,537 40,671,400 451 98,886,343 1098

 

Total Sectoral Spending on Local Projects

The leading expenditure in both New Cities and Existing BE is housing, representing 40% of the BE Budget (fig 8). In New Cities over half of the budget is for the profitable Dar Masr project. Both administrative systems spend approximately the same amounts on Waste Water and Water at around 17% and 9% respectively. However, expenditure on transport is much higher in the Existing BE, though most of it goes to the underground metro in one city, Cairo. In urban development 17% of the New Cities’ budget is allocated to one project; the New Administrative Capital in Cairo, compared to 5% of the Existing BE budget that goes to slum and village upgrading.

 

08-sector-nc-vs-ebe

Fig. 8: Spending in New Cities and the Existing BE by sector

For more information on each sector click on the following links

4.1 Transport

 

4.2 Electricity

 

4.3 Housing

 

4.4 Water

4.5 Waste-water

 

4.6 Urban Development

5. Conclusions and Recommendations

There are two main conclusions that can be drawn from the analysis of the Built Environment Budget for FY 2015/16. The first is the stark administrative inconsistency in investing in and managing the built environment. The work of 12 national agencies in four ministries, 2 sub-national agencies and 27 governorates largely overlaps, while the strict duality between New Cities and the Existing BE has created an exclusivity of urban development that ignores the local needs.

The other main conclusion is that information on the budget has been both extremely hard to gather, and very time consuming to analyse. Over 30 documents and almost one hundred tables from three main data sources were digitised and analysed. Sub-national spending was also not publicly available for most sectors. This is a regression from previous years, which required a special request to the Ministry of Planning to acquire the information.

 

5.1 Spatial In-equality of Sectoral Spending in the Existing BE

On the local Existing BE level, our analysis has shown a wide spectrum of per capita spending in each governorate and in each sector. The Frontier region received the highest per capita expenditure in all six sectors (Table 21). This is partially explained by their far below average population sizes. The tourism-oriented South Sinai received the most spending per capita in four out of the six sectors. In contrast, in neighbouring North Sinai, which has been the scene of armed conflict, investments ranged from above average to below average.

 

The Suez Canal region came second overall in per capita spending, with generally above average per capita spending throughout. Port Said led the region in two out of the six sectors,  Suez received high above average spending in two sectors, and Ismailia in one.

 

Greater Cairo was third among the regions in per capita spending, and spending was generally below average. Qalubia led the region in two out of the six sectors, though with below average spending in the other four. Cairo received far above average spending on Transport, coming in second overall, below South Sinai. Giza received consistently below average spending in all six sectors.

 

Upper Egypt came in fourth with an overall per capita spending of 35% the national average as most per capita spending was below and well below average across the sectors. There was a large disparity within the region. Both Aswan and Luxor, the two tourism oriented governorates, received the highest per capita spending among the region in two sectors each. Spending on Social Housing and Water in Aswan was twice the national average. Fayoum, Minya and Qena all received less than average spending in five out of the six sectors.

 

Alexandria, an urban governorate and Egypt’s second largest city, surprisingly came in next to last amongst the regions in per capita spending, with consistently below average per capita spending across all six sectors.

 

The Delta was the region with the least per capita spending at 29% of the average overall per capita share. There was some regional disparity as Damietta, a largely urban governorate and port city received the highest per capita spending in four out of the six sectors. In three of those, spending was high above the national average. Munfia was a distant second with average to above average spending in three out of the six sectors. In contrast, spending was below or well below average in the remaining five Delta governorates.

 

Table 21: Per capita spending in the Existing BE by sector and governorate

Regions Governorates Existing BE
Electricity Transport Social Housing Waste-water Water Urban Develop. Average
Grater Cairo Cairo 4 487 71 47 18 27 109
Giza 4 62 49 42 16 1 29
Qalubia 3 24 100 127 59 0 52
Alex. Alexandria 2 66 96 68 22 7 44
Suez Canal Port Said 25 114 755 80 30 104 185
Ismailia 20 40 268 94 74 10 84
Suez 40 16 644 225 5 7 156
Delta Damietta 5 34 237 141 49 0 78
Daqahlia 3 22 59 21 17 0 20
Sharkia 1 40 53 23 26 0 24
Kafr al-Sheikh 3 55 94 51 16 7 38
Gharbia 3 16 74 57 19 2 29
Munfia 4 16 129 85 40 0 46
Beheira 1 11 91 29 16 0 25
Upper Egypt Fayoum 6 22 140 23 23 0 36
Beni Sweif 8 24 124 55 11 10 39
Minya 6 16 59 33 27 16 26
Assiut 13 26 107 33 36 3 36
Sohag 5 33 97 26 51 7 37
Qena 10 20 100 43 15 4 32
Luxor 10 149 262 35 5 1 77
Aswan 16 36 278 109 25 11 79
Frontier Matruh 141 367 667 387 329 76 328
Wadi al-Gadid 85 208 1,399 155 178 230 376
Sinai N 74 247 1,233 33 64 224 313
Sinai S 164 588 3,716 194 648 27 889
Red Sea 0 235 1,177 135 195 430 362
Average 7 85 128 54 30 18 54

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

5.2 Spatial Inequality of Sectoral Spending in New Cities

There was regional disparity in per capita spending on New Cities. A single city, New Alamein in Matruh, raised the Frontier governorates to the top of the six regions (Table 22). That is despite very modest spending in Wadi al-Gadid and no New City programmes in the remaining three Frontier governorates. Overall, Matruh received the highest per capita spending amongst all the governorates in four out of the six sectors, with no spending on Social Housing or Urban Development.

Greater Cairo received the second highest per capita spending. Were it not for the anomaly of high spending on New Alamein, it would have been NUCA’s top region by far, at 2.6 times higher per capita spending than the next region down (Alexandria). Cairo itself led spending in five out of the six sectors, and had the most and only spending on Urban Development: a lump sum designated to the New Administrative Capital. Giza was second with around average spending and at a mere 30% of the spending on Cairo, while Qalubia received consistently below average spending across the sectors at barely 10% of Cairo spending.

Alexandria had the third highest per capita investments, all in one city, New Borg al-‘Arab, though generally below average across the sectors.

The Delta came fourth in per capita investments. This, even though it is home to five New Cities in four of its seven governorates.  Sharkia was top of the region overall, leading in four out of six sectors regionally, and in one sector, Social Housing, nationally. Overall per capita spending in Sharkia was 2.7 times higher than the next governorate down, Damietta, and a full 32.5 times more than the governorate with the least per capita spending in the region and nationally, Beheira.

Upper Egypt trailed the Delta by a small margin, despite the fact that all its eight governorates are home to 11 New Cities, including three of which are still under construction. Aswan received the highest per capita spending by far, and led in three out of the six sectors. Luxor was a very close second, while Beni Sweif and Fayoum trailed the region. The latter received 6% of the per capita share of Aswan.

The Suez Canal region understandably had the least per capita spending as it is the first year of construction for East Port Said and North Suez, in Port Said and Suez respectively.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 22: Per capita spending in New Cities by sector and governorate

Regions Governorates New Cities
Electricity Transport Social Housing Waste-water Water Urban Develop. Average
Grater Cairo Cairo 76 76 98 210 45 530 172
Giza 47 65 49 74 66 0 50
Qalubia 10 18 38 14 20 0 17
Alex. Alexandria 26 20 46 76 11 0 30
Suez Canal Port Said 1 1 0 2 2 0 1
Ismailia _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Suez 12 8 0 84 11 0 19
Delta Damietta 12 23 44 14 50 0 24
Daqahlia _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Sharkia 26 23 146 103 94 0 65
Kafr al-Sheikh _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Gharbia _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Munfia 9 69 0 26 5 0 18
Beheira 0 1 4 5 3 0 2
Upper Egypt Fayoum 6 5 2 2 3 0 3
Beni Sweif 9 12 10 15 11 0 9
Minya 3 13 15 21 7 0 10
Assiut 17 30 98 15 0 0 27
Sohag 14 17 52 19 12 0 19
Qena 8 32 71 23 25 0 27
Luxor 60 15 134 57 5 0 45
Aswan 68 50 127 33 26 0 51
Frontier Matruh 1,068 639 0 1,495 1,068 0 712
Wadi al-Gadid 4 4 0 7 7 0 4
Sinai N _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Sinai S _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Red Sea _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Average 74 56 47 115 74 26 65

 

5.3  Recommendations

 

Administrative Restructuring towards Equitable and Needs-based Sub-national Investment

The spatial inequality revealed through the BE Budget for FY 2015/16 on both the regional and sub-regional levels, as well as across the dual administrative structures governing the Existing BE and New Cities, can only be addressed through massive administrative restructuring. Overall, none of these agencies implements projects directly. Their primary role is in coordinating and overseeing public or private specialised contractors. Therefore it is recommended that:

  1. Short Term Solutions: Local Plans & Improved Transparency
  • Draw a yearly, comprehensive and needs-based socio-economic plan for each governorate
  • Improve budget transparency and accessibility by releasing budget data by programme and disaggregated by governorate and city/village three months prior to FY
  • Releasing Final Accounts data for each agency within three months of end of FY

 

  1. Medium to Long Term Solutions: Administrative Restructuring
  • Central Government ministries should play a strictly monitoring vis-avis the national, regional and sub-national agencies’ performance, as well as governing standards and overseeing regional and sub-regional equity.
  • National agencies in charge of regionally shared services such as rail-roads, regional highways, power stations and the national electricity grid should continue to operate that way (ENR and EEHC). Those that engage in both regional and local operations should be restructured to operate on one level or the other, but not both (CAC and GARBaLT).
  • National agencies with strictly local operations should be redrawn across geographic rather than sectoral lines. Sub-national investments in all six sectors should be merged into five or six regional agencies with 27 local branches in order to streamline planning and implementation.
  • The duality between New Cities and the Existing BE should also be merged at the local level to balance investments between needs based investment and real estate investments. These can then cross subsidise and support each other in a local and transparent manner.

 

Appendices

Appendix 1: Per capita expenditure on local projects for the total BE (New Cities & Existing BE) by governorate and sector (EGP/person)

 

Regions Gov Total BE
Electricity Transport Social Housing Waste-water Water Urban Develop. Average
Grater Cairo Cairo 80 534 163 254 62 555 274
Giza 51 123 93 114 81 1 77
Qalubia 12 42 136 138 78 0 68
Alex. Alexandria 28 85 141 142 33 7 73
Suez Canal Port Said 26 115 755 82 32 104 186
Ismailia 20 40 253 94 74 10 82
Suez 52 24 642 309 17 7 175
Delta Damietta 16 55 270 148 97 0 98
Daqahlia 3 22 59 21 17 0 20
Sharkia 27 61 196 125 119 0 88
Kafr al-Sheikh 3 55 94 51 16 7 38
Gharbia 3 16 74 57 19 2 29
Munfia 13 85 127 110 44 0 63
Beheira 1 12 94 34 19 0 27
Upper Egypt Fayoum 12 27 143 25 27 0 39
Beni Sweif 16 35 132 69 21 10 47
Minya 8 30 73 55 34 16 36
Assiut 30 57 203 48 36 3 63
Sohag 19 50 149 46 62 7 56
Qena 18 52 169 67 40 4 58
Luxor 71 164 395 92 10 1 122
Aswan 85 86 372 142 52 11 124
Frontier Matruh 1,209 1,005 655 1,882 1,397 76 1,037
Wadi al-Gadid 90 213 1,329 162 184 230 368
Sinai N 74 247 1,146 33 64 224 298
Sinai S 164 588 3,616 194 648 27 873
Red Sea 0 235 1,011 135 195 430 334
Average 314 284 172 109 58 73 168

 

 

 

 


 

Appendix 2: Per capita expenditure on local projects for the Existing BE by governorate and sector (EGP/person)

 

 

Regions Gov Existing BE
Electricity Transport Social Housing Waste-water Water Urban Develop. Average
Grater Cairo Cairo 4 487 71 47 18 27 109
Giza 4 62 49 42 16 1 29
Qalubia 3 24 100 127 59 0 52
Alex. Alexandria 2 66 96 68 22 7 44
Suez Canal Port Said 25 114 755 80 30 104 185
Ismailia 20 40 268 94 74 10 84
Suez 40 16 644 225 5 7 156
Delta Damietta 5 34 237 141 49 0 78
Daqahlia 3 22 59 21 17 0 20
Sharkia 1 40 53 23 26 0 24
Kafr al-Sheikh 3 55 94 51 16 7 38
Gharbia 3 16 74 57 19 2 29
Munfia 4 16 129 85 40 0 46
Beheira 1 11 91 29 16 0 25
Upper Egypt Fayoum 6 22 140 23 23 0 36
Beni Sweif 8 24 124 55 11 10 39
Minya 6 16 59 33 27 16 26
Assiut 13 26 107 33 36 3 36
Sohag 5 33 97 26 51 7 37
Qena 10 20 100 43 15 4 32
Luxor 10 149 262 35 5 1 77
Aswan 16 36 278 109 25 11 79
Frontier Matruh 141 367 667 387 329 76 328
Wadi al-Gadid 85 208 1,399 155 178 230 376
Sinai N 74 247 1,233 33 64 224 313
Sinai S 164 588 3,716 194 648 27 889
Red Sea 0 235 1,177 135 195 430 362
Average 7 85 128 54 30 18 54

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix 3: Per capita expenditure on local projects for New Cities by governorate and sector (EGP/person)

 

Regions Gov New Cities
Electricity Transport Social Housing Waste-water Water Urban Develop. Average
Grater Cairo Cairo 76 76 98 210 45 530 172
Giza 47 65 49 74 66 0 50
Qalubia 10 18 38 14 20 0 17
Alex. Alexandria 26 20 46 76 11 0 30
Suez Canal Port Said 1 1 0 2 2 0 1
Ismailia _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Suez 12 8 0 84 11 0 19
Delta Damietta 12 23 44 14 50 0 24
Daqahlia _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Sharkia 26 23 146 103 94 0 65
Kafr al-Sheikh _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Gharbia _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Munfia 9 69 0 26 5 0 18
Beheira 0 1 4 5 3 0 2
Upper Egypt Fayoum 6 5 2 2 3 0 3
Beni Sweif 9 12 10 15 11 0 9
Minya 3 13 15 21 7 0 10
Assiut 17 30 98 15 0 0 27
Sohag 14 17 52 19 12 0 19
Qena 8 32 71 23 25 0 27
Luxor 60 15 134 57 5 0 45
Aswan 68 50 127 33 26 0 51
Frontier Matruh 1,068 639 0 1,495 1,068 0 712
Wadi al-Gadid 4 4 0 7 7 0 4
Sinai N _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Sinai S _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Red Sea _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Average 74 56 47 115 74 26 65

 

 

 

 

Appendix 4: Local and Regional (not sub-nationally allocated) investments in the Total BE (Existing BE & New Cities) by sector and governorate (‘000s EGP)

 

Regions Governorates Total BE
Electricity Transport Housing Waste-water Water Urban Develop. Total
Grater Cairo Cairo 754,842 5,039,987 5,432,122 2,395,747 580,907 5,237,290 19,440,895
Giza 394,784 952,286 1,749,230 883,967 628,810 7,043 4,616,120
Qalubia 64,727 218,436 1,247,742 720,752 405,635 0 2,657,292
Alex. Alexandria 136,047 418,094 688,726 696,491 159,500 35,876 2,134,734
Suez Canal Port Said 17,724 78,197 512,000 55,877 21,996 70,788 756,582
Ismailia 24,453 48,626 324,500 113,376 90,065 12,240 613,260
Suez 32,993 15,300 410,000 196,734 10,593 4,602 670,222
Delta Damietta 22,252 75,197 1,672,400 201,195 131,632 201 2,102,877
Daqahlia 19,016 131,289 358,000 125,000 105,200 2,048 740,553
Sharkia 181,707 404,844 2,174,170 827,370 788,664 1,500 4,378,255
Kafr al-Sheikh 10,368 177,943 306,500 167,100 53,500 23,584 738,995
Gharbia 15,331 77,362 358,000 277,290 92,510 10,305 830,798
Munfia 53,766 341,873 548,000 444,862 177,788 0 1,566,289
Beheira 7,160 70,336 557,899 203,600 115,500 0 954,495
Upper Egypt Fayoum 39,069 89,696 467,500 80,936 88,000 0 765,201
Beni Sweif 48,151 104,399 388,000 203,487 62,391 30,110 836,538
Minya 43,171 156,990 585,600 290,250 178,550 87,297 1,341,858
Assiut 133,087 246,854 891,500 211,000 157,600 11,461 1,651,502
Sohag 90,137 237,213 707,200 216,575 295,778 33,577 1,580,480
Qena 56,735 162,775 533,136 208,503 125,897 11,242 1,098,288
Luxor 82,895 192,194 464,000 107,897 12,153 908 860,047
Aswan 123,962 125,875 595,000 208,160 76,150 15,961 1,145,108
Frontier Matruh 566,234 470,743 312,500 881,000 654,000 35,776 2,920,253
Wadi al-Gadid 20,710 49,050 322,500 37,300 42,500 53,068 525,128
Sinai N 32,879 110,255 549,500 14,800 28,485 100,000 835,919
Sinai S 27,804 99,932 631,000 32,950 110,000 4,526 906,212
Red Sea 0 83,263 417,000 48,000 69,000 152,429 769,692
Sub Total 3,000,004 10,179,009 23,203,725 9,850,219 5,262,804 5,941,834 57,437,595
Not sub-nat. allocated 25,303,400 15,379,800 103,500 10,000 0 653,000 41,449,700
 Total 28,303,404 25,558,809 23,307,225 9,860,219 5,262,804 6,594,834 98,887,295

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix 5: Local investments in the Existing BE by sector and governorate (‘000s EGP)

 

Regions Governorates Existing BE
Electricity Transport Housing Waste-water Water Urban Develop. TOTAL
Grater Cairo Cairo 33,862 4,326,842 629,000 417,470 159,000 237,290 5,803,464
Giza 32,609 446,894 357,500 305,843 118,000 7,043 1,267,889
Qalubia 14,633 124,608 512,000 646,252 301,635 0 1,599,128
Alex. Alexandria 8,097 319,345 461,000 324,900 108,000 35,876 1,257,218
Suez Canal Port Said 16,724 77,197 512,000 54,377 20,496 70,788 751,582
Ismailia 24,453 48,626 324,500 113,376 90,065 12,240 613,260
Suez 25,593 10,000 410,000 143,334 3,493 4,602 597,022
Delta Damietta 5,952 43,997 306,500 182,395 63,632 201 602,677
Daqahlia 19,016 131,289 358,000 125,000 105,200 2,048 740,553
Sharkia 9,227 249,544 332,000 145,347 163,463 1,500 901,081
Kafr al-Sheikh 10,368 177,943 306,500 167,100 53,500 23,584 738,995
Gharbia 15,331 77,362 358,000 277,290 92,510 10,305 830,798
Munfia 15,510 63,373 512,000 338,212 157,488 0 1,086,583
Beheira 7,160 65,497 532,000 171,600 95,500 0 871,757
Upper Egypt Fayoum 19,361 73,556 460,500 75,936 77,000 0 706,353
Beni Sweif 23,067 68,938 358,000 159,900 30,900 30,110 670,915
Minya 29,671 86,990 311,000 176,250 141,050 87,297 832,258
Assiut 58,722 115,354 465,500 144,900 155,500 11,461 951,437
Sohag 25,539 156,023 460,500 124,650 240,850 33,577 1,041,139
Qena 30,735 61,575 312,000 136,003 48,397 11,242 599,952
Luxor 11,895 174,694 306,500 41,047 6,153 908 541,197
Aswan 23,962 52,725 408,000 159,400 37,400 15,961 697,448
Frontier Matruh 66,234 171,743 312,500 181,000 154,000 35,776 921,253
Wadi al-Gadid 19,710 48,050 322,500 35,800 41,000 53,068 520,128
Sinai N 32,879 110,255 549,500 14,800 28,485 100,000 835,919
Sinai S 27,804 99,932 631,000 32,950 110,000 4,526 906,212
Red Sea 0 83,263 417,000 48,000 69,000 152,429 769,692
Sub Total 608,114 7,465,615 11,225,500 4,743,132 2,671,717 941,834 27,655,912
Not sub-nat. allocated 0 11,800 103,500 10,000 0 653,000 778,300
 Total 608,114 7,477,415 11,329,000 4,753,132 2,671,717 1,594,834 28,434,212

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix 6: Local investments in New Cities by sector and governorate (‘000s EGP)

 

Regions Governorates New Cities
Electricity Transport Housing Waste-water Water Urban Develop. Total
Grater Cairo Cairo 720,980 713,145 4,803,122 1,978,277 421,907 5,000,000 13,637,431
Giza 362,175 505,392 1,391,730 578,124 510,810 0 3,348,231
Qalubia 50,094 93,828 735,742 74,500 104,000 0 1,058,164
Alex. Alexandria 127,950 98,749 227,726 371,591 51,500 0 877,516
Suez Canal Port Said 1,000 1,000 0 1,500 1,500 0 5,000
Ismailia _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Suez 7,400 5,300 0 53,400 7,100 0 73,200
Delta Damietta 16,300 31,200 1,365,900 18,800 68,000 0 1,500,200
Daqahlia _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Sharkia 172,480 155,300 1,842,170 682,023 625,201 0 3,477,174
Kafr al-Sheikh _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Gharbia _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Munfia 38,256 278,500 36,000 106,650 20,300 0 479,706
Beheira 0 4,839 25,899 32,000 20,000 0 82,738
Upper Egypt Fayoum 19,708 16,140 7,000 5,000 11,000 0 58,848
Beni Sweif 25,084 35,461 30,000 43,587 31,491 0 165,623
Minya 13,500 70,000 274,600 114,000 37,500 0 509,600
Assiut 74,365 131,500 426,000 66,100 2,100 0 700,065
Sohag 64,598 81,190 246,700 91,925 54,928 0 539,341
Qena 26,000 101,200 221,136 72,500 77,500 0 498,336
Luxor 71,000 17,500 157,500 66,850 6,000 0 318,850
Aswan 100,000 73,150 187,000 48,760 38,750 0 447,660
Frontier Matruh 500,000 299,000 0 700,000 500,000 0 1,999,000
Wadi al-Gadid 1,000 1,000 0 1,500 1,500 0 5,000
Sinai N _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Sinai S _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Red Sea _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Sub Total 2,391,890 2,713,394 11,978,225 5,107,087 2,591,087 5,000,000 29,781,683
Not sub-nat. allocated 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
 Total 2,391,890 2,713,394 11,978,225 5,107,087 2,591,087 5,000,000 29,781,683

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix 7: Governorate, Existing BE and New City Populations in 2006[24]

 

Region Gov New City 2006 Population
New Cities Gov. %
Greater Cairo Cairo New Cairo 118,678
Shorouk 20,983
Badr 17,172
15-May 90,324
Total 247,157 8,471,859 2.9%
Giza 6th October 157,135
Sheikh Zayed 29,553
Total 186,688 5,724,545 3.3%
Qalubia Obour 43,802 4,251,672 1.0%
Alexandria Alexandria Borg al-‘Arab 41,351 4,123,869 1.0%
Suez Canal Port Said None / 570,603 0.0%
Ismailia None / 953,006 0.0%
Suez None / 512,135 0.0%
Delta Damietta New Damietta 25,944 1,097,339 2.4%
Daqahlia None / 4,989,997 0.0%
Kafr al-Sheikh None / 2,620,208 0.0%
Gharbia None / 4,011,320 0.0%
Beheira New Nubaria 39,611 4,747,283 0.8%
Munufia Sadat 27,781 3,270,431 0.8%
Sharkia 10th of Ramadan 124,120
New Salhiya 18,968
Total 143,088 5,354,041 2.7%
Upper Egypt Fayoum New Fayoum 0 2,511,027 0.0%
Beni Sweif New Beni Sweif 17,638 2,291,618 0.8%
Minya New Minya 4,570 4,166,299 0.1%
Assuit New Assuit 1,761 3,444,967 0.1%
Sohag New Sohag 57 3,747,289 0.0%
Qena قنا الجديدة 0 3,001,681 0.0%
Luxor طيبة 1000 457,286 0.2%
Aswan New Aswan 0 1,186,482 0.0%
Fronteir Matruh None / 323,381 0.0%
Wadi al-Gadid None / 187,263 0.0%
Red Sea None / 288,661 0.0%
Sinai N None / 343,681 0.0%
Sinai S None / 150,088 0.0%
Total 780,391 72,798,031 1.1%

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix 8: Governorate, Existing BE and New City Populations in 2016[25]

 

Region Gov Egypt* Existing BE** New Cities***
Count Count Count 2006 % of Gov 2016 % of Gov
Grater Cairo Cairo 9,440,374 8,889,549 550,825 2.9% 5.8%
Giza 7,762,792 7,256,474 506,318 3.3% 6.5%
Qalubia 5,215,446 5,107,984 107,462 1.0% 2.1%
Alex. Alexandria 4,901,910 4,803,605 98,305 1.0% 2.0%
Suez Canal Port Said 678,564 678,564 0 0.0% 0.0%
Ismailia 1,209,663 1,209,663 0 0.0% 0.0%
Suez 636,841 636,841 0 0.0% 0.0%
Delta Damietta 1,359,643 1,295,352 64,291 2.4% 4.7%
Daqahlia 6,074,446 6,074,446 0 0.0% 0.0%
Sharkia 6,640,664 6,285,717 354,947 2.7% 5.3%
Kafr al-Sheikh 3,249,268 3,249,268 0 0.0% 0.0%
Gharbia 4,852,968 4,852,968 0 0.0% 0.0%
Munfia 4,035,137 3,966,583 68,554 0.8% 1.7%
Beheira 5,959,050 5,859,606 99,444 0.8% 1.7%
Upper Egypt Fayoum 3,280,103 3,280,103 0 0.0% 0.0%
Beni Sweif 2,943,740 2,898,426 45,314 0.8% 1.5%
Minya 5,309,254 5,297,607 11,647 0.1% 0.2%
Assiut 4,364,111 4,359,649 4,462 0.1% 0.1%
Sohag 4,734,676 4,734,532 144 0.0% 0.0%
Qena 3,128,194 3,128,194 0 0.0% 0.0%
Luxor 1,173,753 1,168,619 5,134 0.2% 0.4%
Aswan 1,466,965 1,466,965 0 0.0% 0.0%
Frontier Matruh 468,218 468,218 0 0.0% 0.0%
Wadi al-Gadid 230,591 230,591 0 0.0% 0.0%
Sinai N 445,811 445,811 0 0.0% 0.0%
Sinai S 169,822 169,822 0 0.0% 0.0%
Red Sea 354,263 354,263 0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 90,086,267 88,169,421 1,916,846  

 

 

Notes

 

 

[1] This research has been authored by Yahia Shawkat and Amira Khalil, with copy editing by Waleed Almusharaf. We would also like to thank Dr Nihal al-Megharbel for all her help.

[2] For an overview of NUCA’s New Cities see http://www.newcities.gov.eg/english/New_Communities/default.aspx

[3]For more see 1.1 Built Environment Sectors, Public Funds

[4]Each New City has a subsidiary agency, the Gihaz al-Madina that is in charge of construction and management.

[5] A further two agencies are responsible for regionally shared investments in electricity and railroads.

[6]For more on the New Administrative Capital see NUCA 2016: New Administrative Capital Implementation Report 04.05.2016  http://newcities.gov.eg/know_cities/NewCapital/default.aspx And; The Capital Cairo 2015. http://thecapitalcairo.com/ Ret: 23.05.2016.

[7]For more on New Alamein see NUCA 2016: New Alamein, Implementation Report 04.05.2016 http://newcities.gov.eg/know_cities/alameen_new.aspx  Ret: 23.05.2016

[8] For more on spatial equality on the city level see Tadamun 2015, Investigating Spatial Inequality in Cairo http://www.tadamun.info/2015/12/15/investigating-spatial-inequality-cairo/?lang=en#.V07E-OSm0ow

[9]          This information was based on an exceptional instance where the MoP’s Socio-economic Plan for FY 2015/16 outlined this information in a table. See MoP 2015, Chapter 4, p 138

[10] The original investment budget (Ch 6)  for the MoH’s offices (diwan ‘am) as published in FY 2013/2014 was 8,051,600,000 EGP, however the FY 2014/2015 budget document showed the previous year’s modified budget as 21,401,600,000 EGP. See MoF Muwaznat al-gihaz al-idari, Istikhdamat Qita’ al-Iskan wal-Marafiq wal-Khadamat, 2013/2014 and 2014/2015.

[11] For a simple introduction to general definitions of State-Owned-Enterprises:

Natural Resource Governance Institute, State Participation and State Owned Enterprises, http://www.resourcegovernance.org/sites/default/files/nrgi_State-Participation-and-SOEs.pdf

For a more understanding of Quasi-Fiscal Activities and their relationship to public budgets:

IBP, Guide to Transparency in Public Finances: Looking Beyond the Core Budget,

http://www.internationalbudget.org/wp-content/uploads/Looking-Beyond-the-Budget.pdf

For more general information regarding Egyptian State-Owned-Enterprises:

Budgetary and Human Rights Observatory,  الهيئات الاقتصادية المصرية: موازنة خارج الموازنة

http://bahroegy.org/userfiles/pdf/arabic/Esdarat/AwrakSyasat/2700.pdf

[12] For more on the HCCD see http://www.hccd-construction.com/Hccd_main.aspx

[13] For population numbers at the National, Existing BE and New Cities, please see Appendicies 7 and 8.

[14] Budget line items are arranged as follows; Salaries and Compensation (Ch 1), Purchase of Goods and Services (Ch 2), Interest, Subsidy (Ch 3), Grants and Social Benefits (Ch 4), Other Expenditures (Ch 5), Investments (Ch 6), Acquisition of Financial Assets (Ch 7), Repayment of Loans (Ch 8).

[15]MoF 2015. Al-Muwazna al-‘Amma lil-Dawla lil-Sana al-Malia 2015/2016. Accessed: 01.11.2015    http://www.mof.gov.eg/Arabic/%D8%B9%D9%86%D8%A7%D9%88%D9%8A%D9%86%20%D8%B1%D8%A6%D9%8A%D8%B3%D9%8A%D9%87/PE/Pages/budget15-16.aspx

[16]MoP 2015. Khitat al-Tanmiya al-Iqtisadia wal-Igtimaeya lil-‘Am al-Mali 2015/2016. Accessed: 01.11.2015   https://web.archive.org/web/20160510204433/http://mop.gov.eg/plan/Plan2016.aspx?ModID=2&MID=31

[17]NUCA website, Khitat al-Hay’a, Al-Khitta al-Moqtaraha 2015/2016, May 3rd, 2015. Accessed: 01.11.2015   https://web.archive.org/web/20160323024252/http://newcities.gov.eg/about/maps/default.aspx

[18]A request to a senior official at the ministry of planning resulted in more detailed information for specific government agencies across governorates. Some of this data was present in the publicly published economic and social development plan, but some governorates were missing.

[19]As subsidies are part of Chapter 3 expenditure in the General State Budget, they have not been taken into account in this study. For more see Section 1.1 Built Environment Sectors & Data

[20]Most projects in the Urban Development sector require investments in more than one of the other five sectors. However, investments listed here were ones where sectoral division was not made available. It is also worth mentioning that NUCA’s investments allocated to this sector are for a lump sum dedicated to one New city, the New Administrative Capital, where investments in the other New Cities were disaggregated, and hence are not mentioned as part of the Urban Development sector in the rest of this study so as not to skew results.

[21] For more on administrative divisions, please see section 1.2 Built Environment Divisions & Regions

[22] Sub-national per capita spending primarily uses the populations of New Cities within the governorate boundaries, unless where the population numbers drop below 5000 people where a number of them have not gained any meaningful population, or are still under construction, in which case the total governorate population has been used. For more information please see Appendicies 7 and 8.

[23]        It is worth mentioning that Cairo governorate’s slum clearance and urban upgrading programmes received funding more than the grand total of the ISDF’s budget for all of Egypt, through the Tahya Masr Fund (One Bn EGP), the Cairo Governorate’s Services’ Fund (Around 200 Mn EGP), and the large charity Ma’an (Around 300 Mn EGP), this despite the fact that they are not part of this analysis for the reasons outlined in the Methodology Section 1.1 Built Environment Sectors & Data

[24] CAPMAS 2016, Egypt in Numbers, Population (as of January 1st 2016. New City populations were projected from 2006 census data (see Appendix 7) by calculating their proportion of the governorate population and then doubling it to reflect their higher than average growth rate.

[25] CAPMAS 2016, Egypt in Numbers, Population (as of January 1st 2016. New City populations were projected from 2006 census data (see Appendix 7) by calculating their proportion of the governorate population and then doubling it to reflect their higher than average growth rate.