Professional Documents
Culture Documents
DEVELOPMENT
OF
PAKISTAN
More than half a century has passed but our economic planners have failed to
comprehend the basic reasons obstructing the process of development. Some of the major
reasons obstructing the economic development of Pakistan are:
REASONS
FOREIGN AID
In the beginning, foreign aid proved helpful and many a mega project got completed. But
this easy way of fostering economic development did not last long. The tragedy that had
obstructed the desired development was the fact that aid inflows were misused and tied
up with certain political motives. We aware for the fact that in the earlier years of
Pakistan, the element of grants-in-aid was greater than loans. With the passage of time,
this trend reversed. Grant-in-aid now got transformed in to loans at high rate. The result
of this cheap aid had now got confronted with the emergence of heavy public debt. This
financial situation slowly but steadily became unfavorable to Pakistan. Debt servicing
now accounted as % of GDP 46.07 for domestic debt and 51.09 for foreign debt (2002-
03). Pakistan has successfully negotiated a rescheduling of its external debt with the Paris
Club in December 2001. This has been the third rescheduling since January;
1999.Rescheduling of the older loans has remained the only last hope to come out of the
critical financial crisis. But here again the consent from the IMF and World Bank is the
primary condition. Now the situation has reached a stage where neither Pakistan’s exports
earnings are increasing nor the revenue receipts showing any tangible improvement. The
fault is not with the lack of needed management, human and material resources but the
way they are being mobilized.
DEVALUATION
Basically, devaluation is a measure to correct a fundamental disequilibrium in a country’s
balance of payments. This may be achieved as a result of restraint on imports by making
them quite expansive and the expansion of exports by making them cheap. In our case,
we export primary commodities and processed material whose supply elasticities are
rather low in the short run. On the other hand, our imports consist of essential capital
goods, intermediate inputs (including fuel and fertilizer) and sometimes-basic consumer
goods. That is why devaluation has not resulted in resolving our BOP problem.
Furthermore, not only exports of Pakistan but whole economy have been doubly affected
by the events of September 11 during the outgoing fiscal year. Side by side with the
unsatisfactory mode of economic management found in selected areas, lack of
implementation of plans, inadequate preparatory work on projects, and lack of evaluation
of plan progress there are other factors which too are standing as an obstruction in the
way of self sustaining process of development.
PRIVATIZATION
The policy of privatization has been announced by Altaf saleem (chairman of the
privatization commission, on January 22 1991), which offered 105 industrial units, four
bank, and two development financial institutions for sale. This may be true that the
objective of privatization is to raise direct foreign investment from the sale of 49 units of
public sectors but we have some reservation against the privatization policy. There are
certain profitable ventures like the PTCL, PSO, HABIB BANK Ltd etc. The major caveat
being the fact that if PTCL or other such institutions are sold out to foreign bidders, the
ultimate result may not prove helpful to Pakistan. As we have already seen in the case of
power projects’. The gains from the generation of electricity are being more than offset
by the high level of profit remittances to the foreign investors. Another point going
against selling of public enterprises is that most of these units will not earn any foreign
exchange to meet the cost of profit remittances.
POVERTY
The incidence of caloric poverty after having decreased from 27% in 1986-87 to 23% in
1990-91 deteriorated to an estimated 29% in 1999-2000. The prime reason for the
increase has been the low rate of economic growth, which has been accompanied by
rising unemployment (about 3.25 million persons were estimated as unemployed in 2002
compared to 3.18 million in 2001. unemployment rate was 7.82 in 2002), income
inequality and cost of living, social deprivation indicators, reflected in low access to food,
land, health care, education, drinking water and sanitation facilities were correspondingly
affected.
POPULATION
The population is estimated to have reached 149.03 million (population growth rate is
2.10%) in 2002-2003. Pakistan is now facing a serious problem of more food for more
mouths, more families to house, more children to educate, and more people looking for
gainful employment, millions more are migrating from the countryside to major cities in
search of jobs, thus creating a raising pressure on urban infrastructure and giving rise to
Katchi Abaadis.
POLITICAL UNCERTAINTY
The misfortune is that our economy was badly affected by the political uncertainty and
disturbances, inefficient bureaucracies riddled with corruption, massive budget deficits
and rampant inflation. An objective assessment of economy of Pakistan for the last 56
years is the crying need. Every ruling government had been claiming success stories. On
the other hand, opposition to the ruling governments has all along been harping on the
theme of economic failure. We all wish to know the truth of our economic performance
of the past and have a yearning desire for a prosperous future.
CONCLUSION:
While looking at some of the reforms being introduced by the present government, one is
hopeful that things are likely to be improved on the basic factors needed for the
acceleration of economic development. All reforms are well meaning but their
implementation may not be easy to be carried out for long time period. One of the much-
needed requirements to attain this objective is political stability. Political stability help
bring economic stability. Let us hope that the coming decade will be a period of political
and economic stability under sincere leadership making Pakistan a healthy and
prosperous country.
3. The Take-Off
Agriculture is commercialised, new industries appear. Unused natural resources are
exploited, savings and investment rise and steady growth is achieved.
Rostow's thesis assumes a strong bias towards a western model of modernization. It de-
emphasizes any difference between how leading sectors develop in free and controlled
markets. However, Rostow’s consideration of non-western cases such as China shows
that to some extent, modernization can be achieved in different ways and through free
market or controlled economic means and still fit into his model. It is more at his
description of the final age, the age of high mass consumption, where controlled
economies seem most to find no niche in Rostow’s work. Even there, though, it could be
said that the society seeks out economic equality at the complete detriment of any luxury.
The most disabling assumption that Rostow is accused of is trying to fit economic
progress into a linear system. This charge is correct in that many countries make false
starts, reach a degree of transition and then slip back, or as is the case in contemporary
Russia, slip back from high mass consumption (or almost) to a country in transition. On
the other hand, Rostow’s analysis seems to emphasize success because it is trying to
explain success. To Rostow, if a country can be a disciplined, uncorrupt investor in it, can
establish certain norms into its society and polity, and can identify sectors where it has
some sort of advantage, it can enter into transition and eventually reach modernity.
Rostow would point to a failure in one of these conditions as a cause for non-linearity.
Another problem that Rostow’s work has is that it considers mostly large countries:
countries with a large population (Japan), with natural resources available at just the right
time in its history (Coal in Northern European countries), or with a large land mass
(Argentina). He has little to say and indeed offers little hope for small countries, such as
Rwanda, which do not have such advantages. Neo-liberal economic theory to Rostow,
and many others, does offer hope to much of the world that economic maturity is coming
and the age of high mass consumption is high. But that does leave a sort of 'grim
meathook future for the outliers, which do not have the resources, political will, or
external backing to become competitive.
Finally we might conclude that rather than being one way to economic development,
there are many. But in each path to development there are common characteristics and
Rostow has successfully identified some of them.