WB likely to aid Reko Diq plan
The World Bank is likely to provide technical assistance for developing an integrated infrastructure roadmap and socio-economic development plan for Reko Diq and other mining sites in Balochistan, sources told The Express Tribune on Wednesday.
They said that a World Bank representative has consented to technical assistance plan in a recent meeting of the Non-Lending Technical Assistance Committee (NLTAC) held at the Economic Affairs Ministry.
The NLTAC discussed a proposal from the Petroleum Division of the Energy Ministry to seek technical support from the World Bank for the development of an integrated infrastructure roadmap and socio-economic development plan for the Reko Diq and other mining sites in Balochistan.
The meeting, chaired by the economic affairs secretary, received a briefing from the petroleum secretary, who stressed the need for incorporating socio-economic uplift through community and infrastructure development, while safeguarding environmental aspects in ongoing mining operations.
Pakistan's mining industry is currently at a nascent stage, with very few medium-to-large scale projects. Pakistan has recently developed a harmonised legal and regulatory framework aligned with international best practices, according to a source.
"There is a need to address environmental, social, and economic aspects at all phases of mining operationsfrom exploration and extraction to processing and site closure — for which the proposed technical assistance is being sought from the World Bank, the sources said, quoting from the briefing.
The World Bank representative, the source said, informed that the proposed technical assistance would be arranged by the World Bank at its own end, with no financial liability on the part of the government of Pakistan.
However, after the finalisation of plans under the NLTA, any subsequent development projects might be considered either under the World Bank support or through the private sector, following prescribed government procedures.
The World Bank representative agreed to a Planning Ministry's proposal for hiring a consultancy firm and the internal discussions on the matter to determine the actual requirements of experts. The Petroleum Secretary said that the concept paper was at the finalisation stage.
The committee agreed to forward the request of the Petroleum Division to the World Bank for the requisite technical assistance. It was also agreed that the Petroleum Division would share the concept paper with terms of reference for consultants who would be engaged through the World Bank.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Express Tribune
20 hours ago
- Express Tribune
Climate not behind agri-sector fall
Listen to article Pakistan's GDP growth exceeded expectations during FY24. It proved wrong everyone, including international organisations, experts, and policymakers. A deep dive into GDP data revealed that the major push came from agriculture. Despite bad governance, climatic factors, and a distorted market, agriculture showed remarkable performance. It posted a growth rate of 6.25%, driven by the crop sector, which grew by 11.3%. Unfortunately, agriculture struggled to sustain momentum in 2025. The growth rate dropped to 0.56% from 6.25% in 2024. The crop sector grew by -6.82% in 2025, compared to 11.3% in 2024. Major crops, such as wheat, sugarcane, cotton, and rice – key contributors to agricultural GDP — faced significant losses. Wheat experienced a negative growth rate of -8.9%, with the government attributing it to climate change and reduced production areas. Interestingly, for sugarcane and rice, although their cropping areas increased by 1.1% and 7.2%, respectively, their production decreased by -3.4% and -1.38%. Cotton saw the worst decline, contracting by 30.7%. These figures are very concerning given the ongoing issues of poverty, food insecurity, and unemployment in Pakistan. The World Bank estimated that about 44.7% of the population lives below the poverty line, which is a troubling statistic. Additional analysis reveals that 16.5% of the population is living in extreme poverty. They struggle to meet basic daily needs and face uncertainty about their future. It has also been predicted that the poor performance of agriculture has contributed to a 0.2% increase in poverty in rural areas. This is a serious situation. Poverty is growing, even though the government claims to be investing in poverty reduction programmes like the Benazir Income Support Programme (BISP). This also raises questions about the effectiveness and sustainability of BISP. Each year, Pakistan spends billions of rupees on BISP. But what is the result? Poverty keeps increasing. Second, food insecurity remains a major concern. A 2013 study estimated that 58.8% of Pakistan's population was food insecure. Unfortunately, we are still relying on old data because the government hasn't updated Pakistan's food insecurity data. There are concerns that food insecurity has risen over time due to various factors. First, poor economic conditions and the devaluation of the PKR have significantly reduced people's purchasing power, leaving fewer resources to buy healthy food. Second, weak governance of the agricultural sector has led to lower production and reduced availability of high-quality food. The government blames climate change for the poor performance, but a closer look at the data shows that isn't the full story. The true cause of the agricultural decline is poor governance – the government's consistent ignorance and pro-market, or specifically pro-private sector, policies. Now, under the International Monetary Fund (IMF) direction, Pakistan has left farmers at the mercy of the private sector and climate change. It devises and enforces policies that favour the private sector at the expense of farmers. For example, last year, the government allowed market forces or the private sector to dictate and control the agricultural input market. The private sector exploited farmers by manipulating prices and input availability. Farmers scrambled from one market to another to obtain inputs but faced numerous difficulties. Most farmers were unable to secure the necessary inputs at the right time, which negatively impacted crop production. The farmers were protesting and voicing their concerns, but the government refused to intervene. The government believed that interfering in the market would disrupt free market principles and was, therefore, unwilling to intervene. On the other hand, the government forgets the free-market principles when it comes to agricultural products. It artificially sets the prices of commodities and forces farmers to sell their commodities at government prices. For example, the Punjab government has announced the wheat price at Rs2,900 per 40kg. It is an injustice to the farmers because it is lower than the cost of production. The farmers claim that the cost of production for 40kg is around Rs4,000, and the Punjab government is asking them to sell wheat at Rs2,900. In this way, the farmers are incurring a loss of Rs1,100 per 40kg. Now, the question is why the government is interfering in the private market and forcing farmers to sell their product at a loss. Isn't it against the market law? The government claims that it wants to protect the poor. In this context, then, what about the poor farming community? Why should the government protect the poor at the cost of the poor farming community? The second example is the sugar crisis. First, the government allowed the sugar industry to export sugar, resulting in an abnormal price increase. Now, it is allowing the same sector to import sugar, and the arrival time will be during the crushing season. It will enable the industry to exploit farmers. The above discussion suggests that poor governance and government preferences are significantly impacting the agricultural sector, leading to the downfall of the farming community. Unfortunately, this policy is not limited to the present government; the successive governments, political and military, have systematically destroyed agriculture and the farming community. The fall of farmers will lead to the collapse of agriculture. It will impact the country on multiple fronts, including the unavailability or high cost of inputs, a sharp increase in unemployment, poverty, and food insecurity, among other consequences. Therefore, the government will have to take immediate steps to reverse the process. It will have to decide on the market structure, either to leave it to market forces with the invisible hand or to adopt a free market approach with the firm visible hand. It is suggested that the government should pursue a free market, but with a strong, visible hand, not an invisible one. Also, the government will need to develop policies that help farmers lower production costs and enable low-income consumers to afford food. One possible option can be a double-edged subsidy policy. On the one hand, subsidies should be limited to small farmers with landholdings of up to 12.5 acres, in different slabs. For example, farmers with less than one acre should be provided with essential inputs free of charge, and those with 2.5 acres should receive them at half price. Similarly, farmers with less than 7.5 acres should be given a 30% subsidy, and those with up to 12.5 acres should receive a 20% subsidy. Farmers with 25-50 acres should be entitled only to a 10% subsidy. A similar formula should be applied on the consumption side. Government should also divide the consumers into four groups: 1) group-1, people connected with BISP, 2) group-2, people with a monthly income of Rs50,000, 3) Rs100,000, and 4) above Rs100,000. The wheat distribution should be as Rs1200/40kg, Rs1800/40kg, Rs2200/40kg, and wheat at market price, among groups, respectively. This strategy will not only help farmers but also shield the urban poor. The same formula can be applied to other commodities, such as grams, onions, garlic, and meat. THE WRITER IS A POLITICAL ECONOMIST AND A VISITING RESEARCH FELLOW AT HEBEI UNIVERSITY, CHINA
Express Tribune
20 hours ago
- Express Tribune
IMF's Washington Consensus versus Beijing Consensus
Listen to article "Practical men, who believe themselves to be quite exempt from any intellectual influence, are usually the slaves of some defunct economist. Madmen in authority, who hear voices in the air, are distilling their frenzy from some academic scribbler of a few years back," said John Maynard Keynes, the founder of Keynesian thought in economics, in the final chapter of his pathbreaking book — The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money in 1936. Today, Keynes's words may well apply to the economic policies that govern Pakistan. In our case, the defunct economist was a certain John Williamson, who returned to his Lord some four years ago. Dr Williamson, who held a PhD in Economics from Princeton and taught there and at other prestigious universities such as MIT, served as the chief economist for South Asia at the World Bank from 1996 to 1999. He is best known for coining the term "Washington Consensus" — this was a set of 10 economic policy prescriptions, emphasising fiscal discipline, trade liberalisation, and privatisation. In its original form, Williamson had intended the Washington Consensus to be a rough set of guidelines, to be applied with common sense and flexibility in accordance with the specific needs of the country. Unfortunately, Williamson's carefully laid out treatise fell into the hands of the minions of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF). These are institutions known for hiring some of the smartest people and then doing their utmost to squeeze all creativity and independence of thought from their new recruits, rendering them automatons committed to the unquestioning enforcement of what they preach. And so it was that Williamson's loose set of guidelines became gospel, immune to doubt, flexibility, or change — to be applied ruthlessly to "saving" sinking developing economies around the world. It is this prescription — the Washington Consensus – that the IMF has foisted on Pakistan. The ten principles of the consensus are: fiscal discipline, cutting subsidies, tax reform, market-based interest rates, competitive exchange rates to encourage exports, trade liberalisation such as reducing duties on imports, encouraging foreign direct investment, privatisation, deregulation, and finally, respect for property rights. All these principles, for some time now, have been pushed down the throat of Pakistan's government. The question is: has the Washington Consensus worked for Pakistan? A simple comparison with China, which followed sufficiently distinct policies to merit the name "Beijing Consensus," may provide an answer. The numbers tell the story. In 1962, China's GDP per capita was $70, while Pakistan's was $90. By 1973, there was a brief reversal: China had $155 and Pakistan still $90. By 1980, China's figure was $308 and Pakistan's $479. This gap continued until 1993, when China decisively began pulling ahead. Today, China's GDP per capita is more than eight times that of Pakistan. To understand why, let's contrast the Washington Consensus as applied to Pakistan with the Beijing Consensus followed by China. Pakistan adopted many Washington Consensus-style reforms, especially under IMF programmes and structural adjustment policies. Here's how they played out: 1) Fiscal discipline: Pakistan struggled with high fiscal deficits. Reforms aimed to reduce government borrowing, but persistent debt and inefficient spending remained challenges. 2) Tax reform: Efforts to broaden the tax base were made, but Pakistan's large informal economy and tax evasion limited success. 3) Privatisation & deregulation: State-owned enterprises were privatised, but outcomes were mixed, some sectors saw efficiency gains, others faced backlash due to job losses and poor regulation. 4) Trade liberalisation: Tariffs were reduced and markets opened, but domestic industries often couldn't compete, leading to trade imbalances. 5) Foreign direct investment (FDI): Policies encouraged FDI, but political instability and weak infrastructure deterred sustained inflows. Despite these reforms, Pakistan's average growth rate hovered around 3% - far below the 7% needed to reduce debt and create jobs. Now, contrast this with the Beijing Consensus: China's model emphasises state-led development, gradual reform, and pragmatic experimentation. Key features include: 1) Strong government role: The state controls key sectors like energy and finance, guiding long-term planning. 2) Incremental reform: Instead of shock therapy, China implemented changes step-by-step, allowing adaptation and stability. 3) Focus on welfare: Development isn't just about GDP – it includes poverty reduction, infrastructure, and quality of life. 4) Export-led growth: China used manufacturing and trade to drive growth, supported by strategic investments and incentives. 5) Merit-based bureaucracy: Officials are rewarded for economic performance, creating incentives for innovation and efficiency. The Beijing Consensus has turbocharged China's growth, transforming it from a neglected backwater into a global economic powerhouse. Since 2000, about 400 million people have been lifted out of extreme poverty in China. The poverty rate has declined from about 40% in 2000 to about 10% today. Contrast this with Pakistan: under the Washington Consensus, poverty has increased from about 35% in 2000 to 45% in 2025. So, what is the lesson here? Any set of policy prescriptions for economic development must not be based on blind dogma, as is the case with the IMF's implementation of the Washington Consensus. Policies must be tailored to the specific circumstances and needs of the country to which they are applied. In this sense, the IMF has rendered a great disservice to Pakistan by compelling us to adopt policies that do more harm than good. THE WRITER IS CHAIRMAN OF MUSTAQBIL PAKISTAN AND HOLDS AN MBA FROM HARVARD BUSINESS SCHOOL
Business Recorder
20 hours ago
- Business Recorder
TMC partners for ‘Pakistan Digital Leap' to revolutionise higher education
KARACHI: The Higher Education Commission (HEC) of Pakistan hosted the groundbreaking 'Pakistan Digital Leap' event, announcing a major step forward in the digital transformation of the country's higher education sector. At this event, TMC Pvt Ltd was recognized for playing a major role in digitization of 25 universities through its advanced Maktab ERP-SLCS and Al-Fihri Learning Management System (LMS) platforms. The event brought together vice chancellors, corporate leaders, and key education stakeholders to witness the unveiling of state-of-the-art digital infrastructure aimed at transforming higher education for millions of students. Managed under HEC's flagship Higher Education Development Program (HEDP) in collaboration with the World Bank, these initiatives are set to benefit over 6 million students nationwide. Speaking at the event, Dr. Mukhtar Ahmad, Chairman, HEC, said: 'We have provided the much-needed technological support to the universities and students of Pakistan. With these technologies, our students can now compete with the top-ranked universities in the world, while universities can lower their costs and enhance efficiency.' Commenting on this milestone, Abdul Haseeb, CEO and Managing Director, TMC, said: 'Through this project, we are proud to contribute to a future where quality education is accessible, efficient, and inclusive. This partnership with HEC and the World Bank is a milestone in our mission to modernize Pakistan's higher education landscape with locally developed globally competitive solutions.' Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
