This research paper explores governance structures in Syria prior to 8 December 2024, analyzing the varied governance systems that emerged during the conflict across different regions. The research is based on extensive data gathered from all parts of Syria concluded three months before the unfolding of events in late November. It highlights the fragmentation of governance within the three main zones of influence: the regime-controlled central Syrian government, the Turkish-backed opposition zones, and the autonomous administration in the northeast. These three zones of control were further divided into seven distinct models of governance based on political, social, and economic dynamics. These governance models include: the central government main model and its variations especially in Dara’a and Sweidah; the Salvation Government in Idleb; the Syrian Interim Government in Northern Aleppo and Raqqa; as well as the Autonomous Self Administration model applied in areas under the Kurdish controlled Syrian Defence Forces, and its main variation defined as the civil administrations applied in areas with majority Arab populations.

Key findings include:

1. Legitimacy and Functionality: The paper evaluates governance through three lenses: justification (transparency, fairness, and societal needs), functionality (efficiency in service delivery), and societal acceptance. Most regions exhibited weak governance performance, with minimal public trust and accountability. Of notice is the low ranking of central government areas may provide a strong reflection at the speed at which the formal institutions collapsed after the rebel drive started in late November. 

2. Regional Variances: Governance models in government-controlled areas leaned on centralized institutions, yet they suffered from corruption and resource depletion due to sanctions and mismanagement. Opposition-controlled areas faced challenges due to dependency on external actors, while areas under the Autonomous Administration showcased a stronger alignment between governance and local identity, albeit with tensions in Arab-majority areas. Variances within each area of control, point to inconsistent governance systems and lack of replicable or scalable governance frameworks to be emulated in the future. 

3. Service Delivery: Service provision was inconsistent across regions, with the most effective systems relying on external support or autonomous management. The Autonomous Administration's areas benefited from oil and international aid, while opposition-held regions depended heavily on Turkish and NGO support. Regime-controlled central government The research concludes by emphasizing the critical need for inclusive governance models to facilitate national reconciliation and sustainable development in post-conflict Syria. This paper is the first of a series of papers analyzing, governance, services and livelihoods on the eve of regime collapse in Syria. areas, despite having a formal institutional framework, struggled with resource scarcity and service quality.

4. Social Acceptance: Across all regions, public perception of governance was shaped by the authorities' ability to respect local traditions, ensure security, and provide basic services. However, democratic participation and trust in governance remained low nationwide.

The paper concludes by emphasizing the critical need for inclusive governance models to facilitate national reconciliation and sustainable development in post-conflict Syria.