Every growing country eventually reaches a moment when the question stops being whether it has enough people and becomes whether its institutions are the right size for them. Pakistan is a young, energetic nation of more than 240 million, and its population has grown more than sevenfold since 1951. That is a story of vitality. The natural next question is whether the way we organize government has kept pace with that vitality, and whether new provinces might be the logical next chapter.
The numbers make the case more clearly than any argument. Punjab alone has about 128 million people, while Balochistan has fewer than 15 million across a much larger territory. Lahore has around 13 million residents, while Harnai in Balochistan has about 128,000. A provincial capital has to design policy for both realities at once, which is a natural result of a country growing so quickly.
The country has already shown the right instinct. Through the 18th Constitutional Amendment and the 7th NFC Award, the provinces took on responsibility for health and education and saw their share of federal taxes rise from 47.5 to 57.5 percent. That was a deliberate decision to bring decisions closer to people. New provinces would extend the same logic one step further, since a province works best when its government can reach the school, the clinic and the farmer it is responsible for. A government that sits closer to its people can also see local differences sooner and respond more precisely.
Other large and diverse countries have made this adjustment as they matured, and the numbers tell the story. Nigeria began with three regions at independence, moved to 12 states in 1967 and now has 36, a structure reached by 1996. Indonesia grew from 27 provinces in 1991 to 38 today. Kenya replaced its eight provinces with 47 elected counties in 2013. Provinces and states in Indonesia, Nigeria and Brazil typically serve six to eight million people each, while Pakistan’s four provinces average about 60 million. The pattern is just as visible in North America, where the United States has 50 states and Canada, with a far smaller population than Pakistan’s, has 10 provinces and three territories. Large federations tend to treat their internal geography as something that grows with them.
Think of it the way a family does. When a family grows, there comes a point when everyone can no longer fit comfortably under one roof. The brothers each move into their own homes, and nobody takes that as a sign of distance between them. They still share meals, celebrate together and stand by one another, and they usually get along better because each has the space to run their own household well. Provinces can work the same way. A new province is not a separation from the federation. It is a family growing up while staying together, with more homes under the same name.
Kenya’s experience shows how to do it well. It did not simply draw new lines on a map. Its counties came with elected governments, protected responsibilities and a share of national revenue set by formula, with population and poverty both counted. The takeaway is an encouraging one: when the map, the money and the mandate arrive together, closer government stands on solid ground, backed by steady funding, meaningful local revenue powers and clearly defined duties.
Revenue is another place where proximity helps. Provinces closer to their taxpayers can show people what their contributions buy, and when citizens see that connection, accountability follows naturally. The recent agricultural income tax reforms give provinces a base to build on, and better data sharing with the Federal Board of Revenue and greater automation can strengthen it further. The IMF itself projects provincial tax collections to rise from about Rs929 billion in FY25 to more than Rs3.1 trillion by FY30, which suggests the foundation is already strengthening.
There is a broader benefit as well. Smaller, better-resourced provinces would open more doors for political and public-service talent, and make it easier to plan around local strengths and growing cities. When cities expand or the weather turns, a provincial government close to the ground can respond faster, and that closeness is a real form of preparedness.
In my view, what matters most is the principle. A population that has outgrown a framework built for a smaller country is a sign of success, not a shortcoming, and the confident response is to let institutions grow alongside it. That way, decisions, resources and accountability stay within reach of the people they serve. Pakistan has the population, the constitutional groundwork and the reform experience to take that conversation forward, and, like any growing family, it can add new homes while staying as close as ever.
— The writer is an MS Research Scholar at IIUI and a freelance Content Writer and Columnist.
