ALMATY – Almaty and Astana are likely to retain their position as Central Asia’s leading economic centers, even as Tashkent and Bishkek record rapid growth and invest heavily in their future expansion. Kazakhstan’s two largest cities benefit from an economic scale, financial infrastructure and established business ecosystems that have been built up over decades, reported the Times of Central Asia.
Photo credit: Yandex
Almaty has long combined Kazakhstan’s commercial and political functions and established itself as Central Asia’s leading business center. After Astana became the country’s capital, the two cities gradually developed more complementary roles. Almaty remained the region’s main business and financial hub, while Astana accumulated political, institutional and corporate weight.
Updated figures show Astana’s economy grew by about 10% in 2025, while Almaty recorded growth of about 5%. Together, the two cities generated nearly $107 billion in economic output last year.
Their position is supported by Kazakhstan’s broader economic weight. The country accounts for more than half of Central Asia’s GDP and nearly two-thirds of the region’s inward FDI stock, according to The Times of Central Asia’s Central Asia Balance Sheet. That larger economic base provides greater fiscal capacity for infrastructure and urban development, which in turn supports business activity.
Kazakhstan also has the region’s most developed capital markets. The Kazakhstan Stock Exchange (KASE) in Almaty and the Astana International Financial Centre (AIFC) and Astana International Exchange (AIX) in Astana provide companies with access to equity and debt financing, institutional investors and financial infrastructure on a scale not currently available elsewhere in Central Asia.
Kazakhstan is also the only Central Asian country with an investment-grade sovereign rating. That status can reduce the country-risk premium and financing costs for companies and projects compared with lower-rated regional markets.
Tashkent and Bishkek are also growing rapidly
Tashkent is the most significant challenger to Kazakhstan’s two leading cities. Uzbekistan’s political and commercial capital had an economy of about $29 billion in 2025, nearly 40% the size of Almaty’s and about three-quarters that of Astana.
Its growth rate, however, has been considerably higher. Tashkent’s real GRP increased by 11.3% in 2025, according to preliminary national figures. Tashkent also benefits from Uzbekistan’s demographic scale. The country’s population is almost twice that of Kazakhstan, giving its capital access to a considerably larger domestic market and labor pool.
That advantage comes with its own demands. A larger and growing population requires continuous investment in employment, housing, transport and other infrastructure. If productivity and investment do not keep pace with demographic growth, population size can become a constraint rather than an economic advantage.
The difference in economic output per resident remains substantial. In 2025, GRP per capita stood at approximately $29,900 in Almaty and $23,700 in Astana, compared with about $9,300 in Tashkent. These figures measure economic output per resident rather than labor productivity, household income or living standards, but they nevertheless illustrate the difference in the economic scale of the cities.
Bishkek is growing from a considerably smaller base. Its economy was only about 30% the size of Tashkent’s in the reporting years used here, although the Kyrgyz capital recorded real GRP growth of 15.8% in 2024.
Its economic advantages are different from those of Tashkent. The Kyrgyz Republic’s 10% standard corporate profit-tax rate is below the standard rates in Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan. The country’s predominantly hydropower-based electricity generation also provides a relatively low-carbon energy base, with further development potential.
At the same time, seasonal electricity shortages remain a constraint. Bishkek’s much smaller population and economy also mean a narrower domestic market and a smaller economic base from which to finance major infrastructure projects.
Can Tashkent catch up?
Tashkent’s ability to narrow the gap with Kazakhstan’s leading cities will depend on more than maintaining high growth rates. The city’s ambitious expansion will require enormous amounts of capital from public funds, domestic and foreign private investment and international borrowing.
Uzbekistan’s economy was about $147 billion in 2025, less than half the size of Kazakhstan’s $306 billion economy. Its sovereign credit remains below investment grade, while its capital markets are still less developed. Remittances also remained significant, accounting for 14.3% of GDP in 2025. Kazakhstan, by comparison, combines a larger economy with investment-grade sovereign credit and substantially greater financial and resource buffers.
These differences do not prevent Tashkent from growing rapidly. They do, however, mean that sustaining large-scale investment over several decades will require continued development of capital markets, labor-market reforms and stronger institutions capable of reducing investment risk and mobilizing capital. Tashkent is therefore narrowing the gap with Astana, but the current data do not indicate that it is on the verge of overtaking it.
The difference in recent growth rates is also smaller than it might initially appear. Tashkent recorded 11.3% real GRP growth in 2025, compared with 10.2% in Astana, giving it an advantage of only 1.1%.
Both cities are also expanding their physical and economic capacity. Construction of New Tashkent began in 2023. Its first phase is designed for 600,000 residents, while the eventual city is planned to accommodate up to 2 million people. By 2034, plans call for 200,000 apartments, together with business, education and transport infrastructure. Residential complexes, business facilities and university campuses are already under construction.
Astana is simultaneously adding substantial capacity of its own. Around 2.2 million square meters of housing were completed in January–July 2026, while new transport and utility infrastructure continues to be developed. The city’s master plan envisages a population of 2.275 million by 2035.
Almaty is a much higher hurdle
The challenge is substantially greater when Tashkent is compared with Almaty. Almaty’s economy is currently more than twice the size of Tashkent’s. Tashkent recorded 11.3% real GRP growth in 2025, compared with 4.9% in Almaty, giving Uzbekistan’s capital a considerably wider growth advantage over Almaty than over Astana. But again, the size of the existing gap matters.
Based on the 2025 economic sizes, Tashkent would need to maintain an average annual real-GRP growth advantage of about 1.75% over Almaty for 50 years simply to reach parity, assuming both economies continued to grow. There is little reason to assume that such a differential could be maintained indefinitely. Growth rates generally slow as economies become larger, while long-term OECD projections also point to slower growth in emerging markets as they converge toward higher-income economies.
Tashkent could therefore continue to grow faster than Almaty while still requiring several decades to close the existing gap.
Almaty, meanwhile, is not standing still. The city’s development programme and 2040 master plan envisage five key economic and urban centers intended to distribute business activity and development more broadly across the city. Revised proposals anticipate population growth to as much as 3.6 million by 2040, alongside additional housing and infrastructure.
Nearby Alatau City, although separately administered, is also being developed as part of the wider Almaty agglomeration. It could add employment, investment and economic activity to the metropolitan area, although its contribution is not included in the Almaty city GRP used in this comparison.
Can Bishkek overtake Tashkent?
Bishkek’s growth is impressive, but its much smaller economic base makes a near-term challenge to Tashkent unlikely. The Kyrgyz capital recorded real GRP growth of 15.8% in 2024. Yet its economy was only around 30% the size of Tashkent’s on the reporting years used here.
Even if Bishkek maintained relatively high growth for an extended period, it would need to sustain a significant advantage for many years before reaching a comparable economic scale. The city is nevertheless expanding. A 2024 administrative-territorial reform more than tripled Bishkek’s territory, from 12,900 to approximately 41,000 hectares, incorporating 24 surrounding settlements.
The city has since approved a development plan through 2030, with water networks and social infrastructure being developed in the newly incorporated areas. Its approved 2050 master plan prepares for a population approaching 2 million. Bishkek’s lower operating costs and hydropower base could help it attract investment in selected sectors. Its smaller domestic market and limited economic base, however, remain significant constraints on its ability to compete with the region’s larger centers.
Central Asia’s economic map is changing
The most likely outcome is not necessarily one city replacing another, but a more competitive and interconnected regional economy. Still, Almaty and Astana enter this competition with substantial accumulated advantages. Their combined economic output, financial infrastructure, corporate networks and access to Kazakhstan’s broader resource and investment base provide a strong foundation for continued regional leadership.
Tashkent can narrow the gap, particularly if it succeeds in sustaining productivity growth and mobilizing the capital required for its ambitious expansion. But current city-level data do not indicate that either Almaty or Astana is close to losing its position.
Central Asia’s economic geography is changing, but the region’s established leaders are expanding alongside the challengers. The competition is therefore less about one city simply overtaking another and more about whether the region’s major urban centers can convert growing economic scale into higher productivity, stronger connectivity and greater international competitiveness.
The article was originally published in the Times of Central Asia.
