Pakistan’s inability to maintain a successful growth trajectory is often attributed to a wide variety of causes: from falling exports, debts trap, to security reasons and energy shortage. No doubt, these factors have played some role in keeping the country from fulfilling its promised potential. However, a report published by Boston Consulting Group this month sees things a little differently.
Called Sustainable Economic Development Assessment, the objective of the report is to analyze whether economic growth and sustainable welfare of citizens need be at loggerheads perpetually. By taking 10 indicators of economic, social and human development and analyzing data from 152 countries over a decade, the report conclude unequivocally that growth and well-being can go hand in hand if a balanced approach is adopted (See BR Research column “Growth vs. well-being” published on July 30, 2018).
It is worthwhile to note that as per SEDA index published this year, Pakistan is ranked among the bottom 9 countries, even as its ranked 117th based on GNI per capita. Regional peer analysis with China, Iran, India and Bangladesh is not very helpful since Bangladesh, with a per capita income almost 15 percent lower than Pakistan’s, scores 7 points ahead of us. Whereas, on a SEDA scale of 100, land of the pure lags almost 12 points behind its not-so-friendly neighbour.
A comparative analysis of nations with GNI closest to ours reveals that Pakistan does not perform very poorly after all on conventional indicators of economic development. Take employment and economic stability for example, where Pakistan makes not only to the median position among peers, but on the latter scale scores highly on absolute basis as well, revealing better than world average situation.
Even surprisingly, the country makes it to top two among peers in indicators often cited as crucial for achieving sustainable development. The country trails India in infrastructure and equality rankings which not only leads the pack but is favourite among foreign investors and noted for equitable wealth distribution.
Yet unsurprisingly, it is the health of social sector indicators where Pakistan not only performs abysmally, these manage to pull the country’s ranking down not only among peers (median ranking of 134), but all the way down among the bottom 10 performers globally.
It may not be astonishing that the country scores lowest among GNI peers on indicators of education, civil society, and governance. But take each ranking apart, and one finds that on civil society, the country fares even worse than war ravaged Iraq, Yemen, and Congo, barely managing to beat Sudan, the only nation faring worse than us.
In education and governance, universally accepted as crucial indicators for sustainable development, Pakistan scores among bottom 10; unsurprising considering weak institutions are often cited as Pakistan’s pervasive challenges.
However, the silver lining for Pakistan may be the condition of its health sector – often vilified in press – where Pakistan does not make it to bottom 10. On an absolute scale, Pakistan’s health score is well below world average but not in the red zone.
One hopes that if the country has managed to bring some improvements in public health, improvement in education, the other key area of social development, will also follow eventually. However, it appears that it is the oft-neglected areas of citizen freedoms measured through civil society, and institutional governance that remain key to unlocking well-being.
Comments
Comments are closed.