National development planning was reintroduced in former Soviet states in the 1990s through legislation establishing long-term strategic plans. Plans ranged from 5 to 20 years in duration and were led by government agencies. Goals were generally broad like economic growth and improving living conditions. Key findings were that plans lacked econometric models and Western concepts, donors had limited involvement, and more centralized states tended to have longer planning periods. Further research could examine the impact of governance systems and factors driving the return of long-term planning.

1. uOttawa.cauOttawa.ca
National Development Planning in the Former
Soviet Union
uOttawa.ca
Faculté des sciences sociales | Faculty of Social Sciences
Begench Yazlyyev CASID Conference Toronto, 2 June 2017

2. uOttawa.ca
Presentation Overview
 Introduction
 Types of plans and planning periods
 Goals and objectives of the plans
 Drivers of the plans and lead agencies
 Key findings
 Further research
2

3. uOttawa.ca
Introduction
 1991 – Disintegration of the Soviet Union;
 The early 1990s – Abolition of centrally directed planning and
state planning agencies (i.e. GOSPLAN and affiliated research
institutions);
 1990s/2000s – National legislation adopted to introduce state-
led strategic planning:
o BLR: Law on State Forecasting and Programs of Social and Economic
Development of Belarus (1998)
o UKR: Law on State Forecasting and Elaboration of Programs of Economic
and Social Development of Ukraine (2000)
o KGZ: Law on State Forecasting of Socio-Economic Development of the
Kyrgyz Republic (2008)
o KAZ: Presidential Decree on the System of State Planning (2009)
o RUS: Federal Law on Strategic Planning (2014)
3
“A strong state does not pursue a policy of survival,
but a policy of planning, long-term development and
economic growth” – Nursultan Nazarbayev

4. uOttawa.ca
Introduction (2)
 Establishment of state agencies in charge of
long-term strategic planning issues:
o Kazakhstan: Agency for Strategic Planning and Reforms
(1998)
o Turkmenistan: Institute for Strategic Planning and
Economic Development (2007)
o Uzbekistan: Institute of Forecasting and Macroeconomic
Research (2008)
o Tajikistan: Department of Strategic Planning and Reforms
within the Office of the President (2014)
4

5. uOttawa.ca
5
Types of Plans and Planning Periods
Country Title Period Duration (yrs) Length (pp)
Belarus National Strategy for Sustainable Socio-economic
Development of the Republic of Belarus up to 2030
2015-2030 15 143
Latvia National Development Plan of Latvia for 2014–2020 2014-2020 7 70
Moldova Moldova 2020. National Development Strategy: 7 solutions
for economic growth and poverty reduction
2012-2020 9 72
Russia Strategy 2020: Final report on the results of the expert work
on the actual problems of social and economic strategy of
Russia until 2020
2012-2020 8 834
Ukraine Ukraine 2020 Strategy 2015-2020 6 32
Armenia Armenia Development Strategy for 2014‐2025 2014-2025 12 167
Azerbaijan “Azerbaijan 2020: Look into the Future” Concept of
Development
2013-2020 8 41
Georgia Social-Economic Development Strategy of Georgia "Georgia
2020"
2014-2020 6 68
Kazakhstan Kazakhstan-2050 Strategy 2012-2050 38 31
Kyrgyzstan National Sustainable Development Strategy for the Kyrgyz
Republic
2013-2017 5 127
Tajikistan National Development Strategy of the Republic of Tajikistan
for the period until 2030
2016-2030 15 104
Turkmenistan National Program for Socio-Economic Development of
Turkmenistan for the period 2011-2030
2011-2030 20 398
Uzbekistan Plan of Action on Five Priority Directions of Development of
the Republic of Uzbekistan for the period 2017-2021
2017-2021 5 26

6. uOttawa.ca
Goals and Objectives of the Plans
6
GOALS & OBJECTIVES BLR LVA MOL RUS UKR ARM AZE GEO KAZ KGZ TJK TKM UZB
Access to social services      
Building effective government   
Combating corruption  
Development of knowledge-based industries 
Development of regions  
Diversification of the economy    
Economic growth / development            
Employment creation  
Ensuring human security  
Food security 
Human capital development   
Human development    
Improving business environment  
Improving living conditions    
Infrastructure development   
Institutional changes     
Long-term macro-economic stability 
Poverty reduction 
Strengthening rule of law    
Strengthening social cohesion 

7. uOttawa.ca
Drivers of the Plan and Lead Agencies
Type of Drivers and Agencies Countries
Ministry of Economy BLR, TKM
Ministry of Finance LVA
Office of the President AZE, KAZ, TJK, UZB
Government Administration / State Chancellery /
Cabinet of Ministers
RUS, LVA, MOL, ARM, GEO,
TJK, UZB
Inter-Ministerial Bodies / National Development
Councils
BLR, KGZ, TJK, LVA
Strategic Planning Agencies and Institutions BLR, RUS, TKM
7

8. uOttawa.ca
Key Findings
 While majority of the plans had broad
development goals (e.g. economic
development, improving living conditions etc.),
some plans had more specific objectives
(e.g. employment creation, development of
infrastructure, food security);
 None of the plans used econometric models
(except Tajikistan – World Bank's 'Revised
Minimum Standard Model - Extended");
8

9. uOttawa.ca
Key Findings (2)
 Limited usage of Western management
concepts and development jargon in general (e.g.
results-based management, monitoring and
evaluation, etc.);
 However, references to various Western rankings
are made to showcase previous achievements or to
track the achievement of objectives stated in the
plan (e.g. the World Bank’s “Doing Business”
ranking and Governance Indicators, Knowledge
Economy Index, Network Readiness Index, etc.);
9

10. uOttawa.ca
Key Findings (3)
 While the extent of donor
dependence varies across the
region (see ODA figures), the
role of development partners
or donors has been limited;
 Donors’ involvement in the plan
formulation process could have
been limited, with governments
perceiving their contribution to
national development process
less important or (in some
cases) undesired, compared to
developing countries in other
parts of the world;
10
Country 2010 2015
Belarus 0.3% 0.2%
Latvia N/A N/A
Moldova 7.5% 4.4%
Russia N/A N/A
Ukraine 0.5% 1.6%
Armenia 3.5% 3.2%
Azerbaijan 0.3% 0.1%
Georgia 5.6% 3.3%
Kazakhstan 0.2% 0.0%
Kyrgyzstan 8.6% 12.1%
Tajikistan 6.2% 4.4%
Turkmenistan 0.2% 0.1%
Uzbekistan 0.6% 0.7%
Source: World Bank DataBank
Net ODA received (% of GNI)

11. uOttawa.ca
Key Findings (4)
 Correlation between the nature of the political
system with the duration of the plans
11
Centralized
executive
power and
limited
political
participation
Kazakhstan 2050
Belarus 2030
Tajikistan 2030
Turkmenistan 2030

12. uOttawa.ca
Key Findings (5)
12
Some examples of keywords counted in the plans
Country Total pages Economic growth Job creation Investment Poverty reduction Aid
Belarus 143 7.7% 4.9% 25.9% 0.7% 0.0%
Latvia 70 11.4% 14.3% 82.9% 5.7% 0.0%
Moldova 72 25.0% 9.7% 76.4% 20.8% 0.0%
Russia 834 16.4% 3.0% 37.5% 3.8% 0.0%
Ukraine 32 0.0% 3.1% 18.8% 0.0% 0.0%
Armenia 167 49.7% 20.4% 68.3% 12.0% 0.0%
Azerbaijan 41 22.0% 7.3% 51.2% 7.3% 0.0%
Georgia 68 64.7% 11.8% 122.1% 8.8% 0.0%
Kazakhstan 31 38.7% 9.7% 45.2% 6.5% 0.0%
Kyrgyzstan 127 19.7% 11.8% 90.6% 3.9% 0.8%
Tajikistan 104 30.8% 16.3% 36.5% 13.5% 1.9%
Turkmenistan 398 11.6% 5.0% 8.8% 0.0% 0.0%
Uzbekistan 26 11.5% 3.8% 15.4% 0.0% 0.0%
Keyword density formula:
Number of occurrences of a specific word / total number of pages * 100

13. uOttawa.ca
Further Research
 Governance typologies and their potential
impact on the national planning processes in the
CIS countries;
 Key factors contributing to the re-emergence of
the long-term planning approaches, for example:
o Financial crisis;
o Political crisis and the need for greater domestic political
mobilization;
o Global development agendas such as the MDGs/SDGs
and the need to align national development processes
with them.
13

14. uOttawa.ca
Thank you!
Spasibo!
14