Tuesday, September 2nd, 2025
Home »Editorials » Higher per capita does not mean reduced poverty

  • News Desk
  • Feb 20th, 2005
  • Comments Off on Higher per capita does not mean reduced poverty
Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz, while inaugurating a new laboratory complex of the International Center of Chemical Sciences, reiterated his government's target of a 7 to 8 percent growth rate. He maintained that a high growth rate is expected to raise the per capita income to $700 by the end of this year. The Prime Minister also added that higher investment in education would be the focus of his government because that alone would propel the economy towards development.

Such statements, reflecting an appropriate rationale, have been made repeatedly in the past by both military and civilian governments. However, few have been as successful in achieving high growth targets as the present government. Critics of the present government argue that the high growth rate is due to increased reliance on substantial concessional funding from bilateral and multilateral sources, funding that is spearheaded by the United States in response to the significant geo-strategic importance of Pakistan at present.

That may change in future, they allege, which would plunge Pakistan into the old syndrome of low investment and low growth rates with a consequent negative impact on poverty levels. Foreign investors, they point out, are still hesitant because of security advisories issued by our major trading partners, including the United States.

Be that as it may, there is ample evidence that the government is committed to undertaking bold initiatives as an integral part of the process of reforming the economy - reforms which include improving governance considered at present level to be a key deterrent to the growth rate. This may account for the improvement in exports as well as in the balance of payment position.

However, what is unfortunate is that recent statistics, released by the government, have shown that poverty levels have risen in recent years. Thus the focus on per capita income, not a reflection of income inequality within a country, must not be used as a yardstick to assess poverty levels.

Basic economic theory does propound a linkage between increased private sector activity and growth, which is expected to eventually trickle-down to the poor in perfect market conditions; yet we have learnt that the trickle-down theory does not work where market conditions are imperfect as in Pakistan with a parallel illegal economy as well as significant amounts of capital flight annually.

The Prime Minister's focus on education as an engine of growth is, without doubt, a pertinent approach. He added that the present government had made higher allocations to education - proof positive that political commitment to improve literacy and higher education is there. However higher is not the same as adequate and, unfortunately, Pakistan continues to invest less than 1% on education.

The Prime Minister must however be fully cognizant of three basic factors that need to be provided to ensure sustainable economic growth. First and foremost, all law and order problems need to be resolved. These include not only issues related to internal politics of the country erupting in violence as in the case of Balochistan and Sindh but include security problems faced by the common man. Companies that provide security are unable to meet growing demand and there is evidence that part of the reasons for a spate of robberies, kidnappings and murders are the yawning inequality in the country.

Second, the government needs to promote income equality through providing support to the small and medium enterprises in rural areas, which would also effectively deal with the issues of migration to cities. And, lastly, adequate resources must be allocated to education for the next decade to take the economy out of the present mire of illiteracy and lack of employment.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2005


the author

Top
Close
Close