RASHID A MUGHAL
THE latest economic update by the Asian Devel opment Bank paints a very dreadful picture about the escalating poverty in Pakistan. According to these figures, during the years 2005-2015, 12 million people have been added to this list. Most of the affected are from rural areas where the poverty ratio has jumped drastically, especially after the de-regularizing of the marketing mechanism of the agricultural crops. This scenario is very scary as the number of poor is multiplying in geometrical progression. According to Asian Development Bank, fiscal poverty ratio in Pakistan has jumped from 33 per cent to 50 per cent. Though the ADB has not given the figures of the poor during the period, however, according to the World Bank the poverty ratio has indeed gone-up despite all claims of poverty reduction. The major issues, the country is facing today, are improvement of educational and health system and productive development of its human resource to safeguard the environment and improving the lifestyle of its citizens while reducing poverty and keeping wastage within limits and moving towards efficient infrastructure within the dictates of micro-economic stability. For this, development must centre on the people, be de-centralized and participatory in nature. To achieve this goal is very important and critical elements will have to be catered. Gender equality and security along with high standard educational and health facilities are needed, says Dr. Jennifer Bennet, a renowned economist The question is how the third world countries can fulfil their obligations to economic, social and cultural rights, when they are unable to improve their social and economic conditions in the era of globalization which restricts freedom to pursue independent economic policies. According to some scholars, globalization is an impediment in the third world countries rights to development and it poses a threat to the vast majority of mankind as much of the world population consists of poor segment of society rather than rich class. The advocates of globalization suggested that it has brought some reduction in poverty as some UNDP reports divulge. For example UNDP report of 1994 shows that in the 1960s, 70 per cent people were living in the awful and sub-human conditions while in 1992, 32 per cent survived in adverse conditions. UNDP report of 1997 shows that more people escaped from poverty in second half of 20th Century than in the preceding 500 years. The fact, however, remains that globalization has not eradicated poverty. With the population explosion in Asia and Africa, much of the development is likely to be nullified in these areas. At present all the economic indicators point to one direction – the world is far from banishing poverty. The number of people living on less than one dollar per day is at present 1.15 billion though in 1990 this figure was about 1.28 billion. These figures projected income down to 753 million by 2012. Some economists say thatWorld Bank and IMF and their policies are the major reasons for failing economies of various countries and that the IMF and World Bank policies have indebted borrowing countries. The economic and legislative changes proposed by World Bank and IMF have augmented rather than ameliorated poverty. In South Asia, poverty roughly decreased by half by year 2015. In contrast the number of absolute poor level on less than one dollar per day rose in sub-Saharan Africa from 242 million in 1990 and 300 million in 1999 to 345 million in 2015 and remained static in the Middle East and Central Africa with six millions in 2015 and fell from 74 million in 1990 and 77 million in 1999 and projected to 60 million in 2020 in Latin America and Caribbean. According to the World Bank study, South Asia saw its number of the poor fall from 495 million in 1990 and 490 million in 1999 to 279 million in 2015 and East Asia and Pacific reduced their number from 452 million in 1990 and 260 million in 1999 to 59 million in 2015. TheWorld Bank and IMF have imposed stabilization policies for elimination of subsidies and price control mechanism which have weakened social safety nets. The report further goes on to add that most of the people suffer from high prices, fewer employment opportunities and escalating poverty. In the context of Pakistan, its GDP growth has shown a steady decline from 6.5% in 1980s to 4.5 percent in 1990s and presently around 3%. According to Pakistan Institute of Development Economics the micro economic policy pursued in the 80s aimed at stabilization of the various sectors of economy and structural changes. Both were necessary to meet the fiscal deficit, which had reached alarming heights and had become unsustainable. Nevertheless, the reduction in fiscal deficit after 9/11 stabilized the economy and brightened the prospects of growth and investment. Had these expectations been translated into reality, there was every hope that Pakistan would have been able to reduce poverty to a reasonable level. Social safety nets are integral part of the overall package of poverty reduction. Recent public welfare programmes (Langars/free-meals), micro credit, food related transfer and rehabilitation programme have received increased attention in the context of reducing poverty, which constitutes the major segment of the society. The slow economic growth in the 1990s increased poverty and weakened the development in Pakistan. Several areas of planning reforms emerge from the cause of poverty and human deprivation. People in Pakistan are presently suffering from worst price hike ever witnessed. Prices of all essential commodities, vegetable, pulses, flour, rice, sugar etc have risen astronomically during the last 6-8 months. There seems to be complete lack of price control system and government machinery seems to have gone in deep slumber while the masses are suffering immensely. “Ehsas” Programme seems to be a step in the right direction but its results are yet to be seen. The present government, which claims to be poor-friendly, has not shown any visible signs of redressing the grievances of the poor lot. This aspect needs to be looked into urgently and profiteers and smugglers need to be dealt with an iron hand. — The writer is former DG (Emigration) and consultant ILO, IOM.
