k-
B
b
&
)
s
3
o

M Lt R

5

   

in that way, of course, they are also crucial to the process of
defining the long-run shape and structure of the economy.

Table 1 below contains estimates of the contribution by the
public sector to monetary Gross Domestic Product in 1970 as
presented by Erick Svendsen. These include the central govern-
ment as well as parastatals but the contribution of the former to
any but water and the last three categories is likely to be
negligible.

TABLE 1: PUBLIC SECTOR SHARE OF MONETARY
GDP 1970

%
Agriculture 5
Mining 88
Manufacturing 29
Electricity and Water 100
Construction 12
Commerce 8
Transport .
Finance, Real Estate 46
Public Administration 100
Education and Health 77
Other h)

33

On this assumption the contribution of the parastatal sector
proper to total monetary GDP in 1970 was less than 18 % overall.
The main reason for this is that the two largest sectors, agriculture
and commerce, continue to be dominated by private individuals
and companies. There has been some change since 1970 par-
ticularly in real estate, construction, manufacturing and to a lesser
extent, trade, but even then the overal share of the parastatal sec-
tor is unlikely to be in excess of 25% . This is also approximately
their relative importance in total employment and in the total
wage bill (about 24% in each).

The real significance of the parastatals lies in their role as in-
vestors. In 1971 they accounted for 43 % of total gross domestic
capital formation — a sharp rise from the 35% level of 1970.
Allowing for unusual fluctuations in stock holdings in those years

4