Pakistan's Human Development Ranking Hits New Low of 150 After Decade of Democracy

[Riaz Haq]

Pakistan's human development ranking plunged to 150 this year, down from 149 last year. It is worse than Bangladesh at 136, India at 130 and Nepal at 149. The decade of democracy under Pakistan People's Party and Pakistan Muslim League (Nawaz) has produced the slowest annual growth rate in the last 30 years. The fastest growth in Pakistan human development was seen in 2000-2010, a decade dominated by President Musharraf's rule, according to the latest Human Development Report 2018.

Human Development in Pakistan: 

UNDP’s Human Development Index (HDI) represents human progress in one indicator that combines information on people’s health, education and income.

Pakistan's Human Development Growth Rate By Decades. Source: HDR 2018

Pakistan saw average annual HDI (Human Development Index) growth rate of 1.08% in 1990-2000, 1.57% in 2000-2010 and 0.95% in 2010-2017, according to Human Development Indices and Indicators 2018 Statistical Update.  The fastest growth in Pakistan human development was seen in 2000-2010, a decade dominated by President Musharraf's rule, according to the latest Human Development Report 2018.

The Human Development Index (HDI) is a composite index focusing on three basic dimensions of human development: the ability to lead a long and healthy life, measured by life expectancy at birth; the ability to acquire knowledge, measured by mean years of schooling and expected years of schooling; and the ability to achieve a decent standard of living, measured by gross national income per capita.

Not only has Pakistan's economy slowed since 2008 but its progress in education sector has seen a dramatic slowdown. Data shows that Pakistan's literacy and enrollment rates are not rising in spite of significantly increased education spending over the last several years. Education budgets at federal and provincial levels have seen double digit increase of 17.5% a year on average since 2010. And yet, school enrollment and literacy rate have remained essentially flat during this period.  This lack of progress in education stands in sharp contrast to the significant improvements in outcomes seen from increase education spending during Musharraf years in 2001-2008. Why is it?

Is the money not being spent honestly and wisely? Is the education budget being used by the ruling politicians to create teacher jobs solely for political patronage? Are the teachers not showing up for work? Is the money being siphoned off by bureaucrats and politicians by hiring "ghost teachers" in "ghost schools"? Let's try and examine the data and the causes of lack of tangible results from education spending.

Pakistan Education Budget:

The total money budgeted for education by the governments at the federal and provincial levels has increased from Rs. 304 billion in 2010-11 to Rs. 790 billion in 2016-17,  representing an average of 17.5% increase per year since 2010.

Education and Literacy Rates:

Pakistan's net primary enrollment rose from 42% in 2001-2002 to 57% in 2008-9 during Musharraf years. It has been essentially flat at 57% since 2009 under PPP and PML(N) governments.

Source: Economic Survey of Pakistan 2015-16

Similarly, the literacy rate for Pakistan 10 years or older rose from 45% in 2001-2002 to 56% in 2007-2008 during Musharraf years. It has increased just 4% to 60% since 2009-2010 under PPP and PML(N) governments.

Source: Economic Survey of Pakistan 2015-16

Four Levels of Development:

The extensive data compilation and research by Professor Hans Rosling of Sweden has shown that the binary categorization of nations into developed and developing is no longer useful. Instead, he has proposed using 4 levels of development based on health and wealth indicators, a proposal that has now been accepted by the United Nations and the World Bank. Here's how Rosling and the United Nations define these 4 levels:

1. Level 1: One billion people live on level 1. This is what we think of as extreme poverty. If you’re on level 1, you survive on less than $2 a day and get around by walking barefoot. Your food is cooked over an open fire, and you spend most of your day traveling to fetch water. At night, you and your children sleep on a dirt floor.

2. Level 2: Three billion people live on level 2, between $2 and $8 a day. Level 2 means that you can buy shoes and maybe a bike, so it doesn’t take so long to get water. Your kids go to school instead of working all day. Dinner is made over a gas stove, and your family sleeps on mattresses instead of the floor.

Level 3: Two billion people live on level 3, between $8 and $32 a day. You have running water and a fridge in your home. You can also afford a motorbike to make getting around easier. Some of your kids start (and even finish) high school.

Level 4: One billion people live on level 4. If you spend more than $32 a day, you’re on level 4. You have at least a high school education and can probably afford to buy a car and take a vacation once in a while.

Imran Khan's Ambitious Agenda:

Imran Khan laid out his agenda in his first speech to the nation after taking the office of the prime minister.  It was more like a fireside chat in which he spoke directly to the people to explain his priorities that emphasize education,  health care and human development. These are the keys to leading Pakistan from level 2 to level 3. In order to pursue his priorities, Mr. Khan needs to first address the more urgent economic crisis which he acknowledged. Pakistan needs to deal with excessive public debt and pay for the necessary imports to move forward.  He must also deal with financial corruption and mismanagement to free up the resources for his ambitious agenda of economic and human development of the nation.

Mr. Khan will almost certainly face stiff opposition from the status quo forces which stand to lose from the changes he seeks. They will fight to preserve their patronage networks and their power and privilege. They will try to bring down his coalition government with all they have got. They might even threaten his personal safety and security.

Democracy and Development:

Professor Hans Rosling has compiled extensive socioeconomic data and done serious research to understand how nations develop. He has shared his work in "Factfulness" that he co-wrote with his son Ola Rosling and daughter Anna Rosling Ronnlund. Here's an except on democracy and development from Factfulness:

"This is risky but I am going to argue it anyway. I strongly believe that liberal democracy is the best way to run a country. People like me, who believe this, are often tempted to argue that democracy leads to, or its even a requirement for, other good things, like peace, social progress, health improvement, and economic growth. But here's the thing, and it is hard to accept: the evidence does not support this stance.

Most countries that make great economic and social progress are not democracies. South Korea moved from Level 1 to Level 3 faster than any other country had ever done (without finding oil), all the time as a military dictatorship. Of the ten countries with the fastest economic growth, nine of them score low on democracy.

Anyone who claims that democracy is a necessity for economic growth and health improvements will risk getting contradicted by reality. It's better to argue for democracy as a goal in itself instead of as a superior means to other goals we like."

Summary:

Pakistan saw average annual HDI (Human Development Index) growth rate of 1.08% in 1990-2000, 1.57% in 2000-2010 and 0.95% in 2010-2017, according to Human Development Indices and Indicators 2018 Statistical Update.  The fastest growth in Pakistan human development was seen in 2000-2010, a decade dominated by President Musharraf's rule, according to the latest Human Development Report 2018. Pakistan's newly elected Prime Minister Mr. Imran Khan has laid out an ambitious agenda that could accelerate Pakistan's human development progress to take his country from level 2 to level 3 of socioeconomic development. It is achievable but the odds are against him because he faces stiff opposition from the status quo forces. The powerful dynastic duopoly of PPP and PMLN still dominates Pakistan's Senate whose support will be required for major reforms. The research by Professor Hans Rosling shows: "Of the ten countries with the fastest economic growth, nine of them score low on democracy." It's also supported by Pakistan's economic history where pace of development has consistently been faster under military governments than during civilian democratic rule. Can Prime Minister Imran Khan's leadership change the course of history and deliver faster human progress under democratic rule? Let's wait and see.

Related Links:

Haq's Musings

South Asia Investor Review

Democracy vs Dictatorship in Pakistan

Pakistan 2018 Elections Predictions

Pakistan's Balance of Payments Crisis

Panama Leaks in Pakistan

Conspiracy Theories About Pakistan Elections"

PTI Triumphs Over Corrupt Dynastic Political Parties

Strikingly Similar Narratives of Donald Trump and Nawaz Sharif

Nawaz Sharif's Report Card

Riaz Haq's Youtube Channel

PakAlumni Social Network

[Riaz Haq]

Human development
Neil Buhne Updated November 08, 2018 

https://www.dawn.com/news/1444286/human-development

As measured by the Human Development Index, people’s lives have improved in Pakistan, with the HDI increasing from 0.404 in 1990 to 0.562 in 2018. This is a rate higher than average for developing countries.

While Pakistan progressed from a “low human development country” in 1990 to a “medium human development country” today, the rate of progress is slower than in other countries in South Asia, eg Nepal, which has overtaken Pakistan, jumping to 149th place.

The critical dimensions measured in the HDI are health, education and income. Regarding income, Pakistan is ahead of its neighbours: its per capita Gross National Income of $5,311 is among the highest in South Asia. But on measures of education and health, Pakistan is lagging.

For instance, Pakistan’s expected years of schooling of 8.6 years is lower than India’s 12.3 years. Similarly, Pakistan’s average life expectancy at birth is 66.6 years, which is below Bangladesh’s 72.8 years.

There are many reasons for its slow progress in human development.

First, Pakistan doesn’t spend sufficient public resources on education and health. Among regional countries, Nepal has the highest public expenditure on health at 6 per cent of GDP. India’s recent low expenditure on health at 1.4pc is still higher than Pakistan’s 0.9pc.

Similarly, Nepal has on average spent more than 3.5pc of GDP on education. Pakistan’s public expenditure on education stands at 2.2pc — higher than Bangladesh’s but lower than both Nepal’s and India’s.

But it is not just the amount spent that impacts human development, it is also quality. While infrastructure investments are essential to national development, for investments to improve people’s education and health, there must be well-managed schools and hospitals with skilled, motivated staff. This is where Pakistan lags.

Another challenge that stands out is population growth. The 2017 census shows an annual growth of 2.4pc, significantly above the earlier believed rate of 1.9pc. Nepal’s population growth rate is 1.1pc, India’s 1.2pc and Bangladesh’s 1.1pc. This means that for Pakistan to increase its share of people with access to education and health services, it has to move faster than its neighbours. It also means there are unsustainable strains on scarce resources such as water when Pakistan also has to adapt to the rapid effects of climate change.

[Riaz Haq]

The importance of educating girls in the Newly Merged Districts (Ex FATA) of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan

https://www.brookings.edu/research/the-importance-of-educating-girl...

For the first time in the history of Pakistan, the Newly Merged Districts (NMDs) of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP) formerly known as Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) of Pakistan—are moving toward normalization. The Talibanization period has ended and the Pakistani military has largely cleared violent extremism from this area (see Box 1 for details on the history of the NMDs). At this historic time for this war-torn area, to bring it on par with the rest of the country, it is highly important to focus on the gender aspects of the NMDs’ policies and their implementation. This is especially urgent given that traditionally, this area has operated as a patriarchy. There should be immediate attention to gender equity in two sectors that are fundamental for development and where the NMDs’ reform program will roll out: health and education

https://youtu.be/JocUDDMD8SE

The Directorate of Education (DoE), housed in the FATA Secretariat, developed a five-year comprehensive Education Sector Plan (ESP) for the NMDs—a planning document that was based on the 2009 National Education Policy. While developing the ESP, the FATA Secretariat identified barriers to education, taking into account input from teachers, head teachers, and government officials. However, it appears that most of the barriers identified are applicable to both boys and girls, despite the fact that more girls don’t attend school. The few gender-specific barriers mentioned are distance from school and related security concerns, parents’ reluctance to send girls to school, and other cultural issues. However, the ESP lacks specifics about which cultural or environmental aspects and parental perceptions stop families from sending their daughters to school. Furthermore, under the ESP’s section on “Gender Issues,” the only issue identified is the shortage of women staff in the DoE. Without a deeper understanding of the problem, it will be difficult to devise a plan that can address the core reasons for the low participation of girls in education.

Most importantly, the ESP’s macro-level performance indicator list does not include indicators that measure quality of education and gender equity. Without relevant and adequate indicators, it will be hard to measure the progress in achieving gender equity.

[Riaz Haq]

The PDHS (Pakistan Demographic and Health Survey) 2017-18 documents a decrease in infant and under-five-years-of-age child mortality showing there have been some improvements in the health system.


https://tribune.com.pk/story/1791011/1-child-nutritional-mortality-...


Infant mortality was recorded at 62 deaths per 1,000 live births, down from 74% in the last survey of 2012-13. The under-five mortality rate was recorded at 74 deaths per 1,000 live births, down from 89 previously.

The neonatal mortality rate has also decreased in the past five years, from 55 to 42 deaths per 1,000 live births.


The survey shows that 69% of children born in the past five years were delivered by skilled care providers. This is up from the 52 per cent recorded in the 2012-13 survey.

It further noted that 66% of all births took place in a health facility, as compared to 48% five years ago.

Urban women were far more likely to benefit from skilled delivery care than rural women with 84% of births to urban mothers assisted by a skilled provider. Moreover, 81% of babies were delivered in a health facility.

This was 63%and 59% respectively for women in rural areas.

Vaccine coverage rates increased over the past five years from 54% to 66% of the country.

Punjab had the highest coverage rate of 80% followed by AJK at 75%, Islamabad Capital Territory (ICT) at 68%, Gilgit-Baltistan (G-B) at 57 per cent, K-P at 55 per cent, Sindh at 49%, Balochistan at 29% and the erstwhile FATA at 30%.

Balochistan had a marked improvement over the past five years from only 16 per cent of children receiving all basic vaccinations.

Though considerable improvement was made in the indicator, PIPS Deputy Project Director Dr Aysha Sheraz said that the World Health Organisation demands that all children be vaccinated against diseases.

Contrary to the recommendation that children under the age of six months be exclusively breastfed, only 48% of the infants aged six months and below were exclusively breastfed while seven per cent were not breastfed at all.

This, however, was an improvement over the past five years when 38% of children under six months of age were exclusively breastfed while 45% of children were taking breast milk plus supplementary liquids and complementary foods.

Stunted and Wasted

The survey indicated that the nutritional status of children in Pakistan has improved over the last five years.

The percentage of stunted children declined from 45 per cent in 2012-13 to 38% in the 2017-18 survey.

A similar downward trend, from 30% to 23%, was observed for underweight children over the same period.

Children who are wasted also declined from 11% to seven%. Children who are obese remained at three% over this period.

Fertility

If fertility were to remain constant at current levels, a woman from Pakistan would bear an average of 3.6 children in her lifetime.

The report noted that fertility was higher amongst rural women than among urban women with rural women giving birth to about one more child on average during their reproductive years than urban women.

Malnutrition major cause of fatalities among children

However, the report noted that there has been a steady decline in fertility rates over time. From 5.4 births per woman as reported in the 1990-91 PDHS to 3.6 births per woman in the 2017-18 PDHS — a drop of about two births per woman in almost three decades. However, the decline is minimal in the recent period with 3.8 births per woman recorded in the 2012-13 survey.

Punjab has the lowest fertility rate of 3.4%, Sindh is 3.6, K-P and Balochistan are at four each, ICT at three, formerly Fata areas at 4.8, AJK at 3.7, and at G-B 4.8.

Use of contraceptives has remained stagnant over the past 5 years (34% in the 2017-18 PDHS and 35% in the 2012-13 PDHS). Seventeen per cent of currently married women has an unmet need for family planning services. Moreover, 34%of married women are currently using a contraceptive method. 


http://www.nips.org.pk/abstract_files/PDHS%20-%202017-18%20Key%20in...

[Riaz Haq]

Human Development Report 2019
Inequalities in Human Development in the 21st Century
Briefing note for countries on the 2019 Human Development Report
Pakistan

http://hdr.undp.org/sites/all/themes/hdr_theme/country-notes/PAK.pdf

Pakistan’s HDI value for 2018 is 0.560 (India 0.647)— which put the country in the medium human development
category—positioning it at 152 (India 129) out of 189 countries and territories.

The GDI is calculated for 166 countries. The 2018 female HDI value for Pakistan is 0.464 (India 0.574) in contrast with
0.622 (India 0.692) for males, resulting in a GDI value of 0.747, placing it into Group 5. In comparison, GDI values for
Bangladesh and India are 0.895 and 0.829 respectively (see Table D).

Between 1990 and 2018, Pakistan’s HDI value increased from 0.404 to 0.560, an increase of 38.6 percent.
Table A reviews Pakistan’s progress in each of the HDI indicators. Between 1990 and 2018, Pakistan’s life
expectancy at birth increased by 7.0 years, mean years of schooling increased by 2.9 years and expected
years of schooling increased by 3.8 years. Pakistan’s GNI per capita increased by about 62.4 percent
between 1990 and 2018.

Pakistan’s HDI for 2018 is 0.560. However, when the value is discounted for inequality, the HDI falls to
0.386, a loss of 31.1 percent due to inequality in the distribution of the HDI dimension indices. Bangladesh
and India show losses due to inequality of 24.3 percent and 26.3 percent respectively. The average loss due
to inequality for medium HDI countries is 25.9 percent and for South Asia it is 25.9 percent. The Human
inequality coefficient for Pakistan is equal to 30.2 percent (see Table C).

The most recent survey data that were publicly available for Pakistan’s MPI estimation refer to 2017/2018.
In Pakistan, 38.3 percent (India 27.9 percent) of the population (75,520 thousand people) are multidimensionally poor while an
additional 12.9 percent (India 19.37 percent) are classified as vulnerable to multidimensional poverty (25,454 thousand people).
The breadth of deprivation (intensity) in Pakistan, which is the average deprivation score experienced by
people in multidimensional poverty, is 51.7 percent. The MPI, which is the share of the population that is
multidimensionally poor, adjusted by the intensity of the deprivations, is 0.198. Bangladesh and India have
MPIs of 0.198 and 0.123 respectively.

[Riaz Haq]

India’s HDI value and rank
India’s HDI value for 2018 is 0.647— which put the country in the medium human development category—
positioning it at 129 out of 189 countries and territories.

http://hdr.undp.org/sites/all/themes/hdr_theme/country-notes/IND.pdf


Between 1990 and 2018, India’s HDI value increased from 0.431 to 0.647, an increase of 50.0 percent. Table
A reviews India’s progress in each of the HDI indicators. Between 1990 and 2018, India’s life expectancy
at birth increased by 11.6 years, mean years of schooling increased by 3.5 years and expected years of
schooling increased by 4.7 years. India’s GNI per capita increased by about 262.9 percent between 1990
and 2018

The GDI is calculated for 166 countries. The 2018 female HDI value for India is 0.574 in contrast with 0.692
for males, resulting in a GDI value of 0.829, placing it into Group 5. In comparison, GDI values for
Bangladesh and Pakistan are 0.895 and 0.747 respectively (see Table D).

The most recent survey data that were publicly available for India’s MPI estimation refer to 2015/2016. In
India, 27.9 percent of the population (373,735 thousand people) are multidimensionally poor while an
additional 19.3 percent are classified as vulnerable to multidimensional poverty (258,002 thousand people).


The breadth of deprivation (intensity) in India, which is the average deprivation score experienced by people
in multidimensional poverty, is 43.9 percent. The MPI, which is the share of the population that is
multidimensionally poor, adjusted by the intensity of the deprivations, is 0.123. Bangladesh and Pakistan
have MPIs of 0.198 and 0.198 respectively.