Download (28Mb) - LSE Theses Online

which is not only a critical, though infrequently acknowledged part of the island's
political history, but also an important part of the island's economic history. Prior
to 1974 much of the Turkish-Cypriot community spent ten years in fortified
enclaves and inter-communal trade was limited by persistent, periodic Greek-
Cypriot embargoes and a Turkish-Cypriot boycott of the Greek-Cypriot economy
(see Chapter 3). So, in theory, the Turkish-Cypriot community went from one
extreme to the other; from extreme scarcity in spatially highly limited, scattered and
militarily insecure enclaves, to abundance in a militarily secure región that
amounted to nearly 40% of the island's territory. It is perhaps obvious, with a
subsequent large scale immigration policy, that no housing shortages faced newly
displaced Turkish-Cypriots in the north after 1974; rather the problem was the
reverse, under-utilisation of newly controlled fixed capital assets (see Chapter 4).
So researchers are faced with very different economic conditions, north and south,
at the juncture of de facto división, faced by two communities with very different
economic experiences immediately preceding their respective migrations. Given
these circumstances, how important was uncertainty over property rights, the
opposition of the international community, the so called "embargo" 52 ,
organisational and distribution problems, as barriers and bottlenecks to the efficient
management of the resources available to the Turkish-Cypriot community after
1974?
52 "So called" because most of the regions key exports continued to be traded with existing
international customers, see Chapter 5, particularly Figures 5.24 to 5.26.
41