Latest news with #MahbubulHaq
Business Recorder
24-06-2025
- Business
- Business Recorder
Beyond growth: Pakistan's war against poverty, privilege, and the digital divide
Let's not sugarcoat it — Pakistan is a land of jarring contrasts. In one part of town, a billionaire is escorted in a bulletproof Land Cruiser. Across the bridge, a child rifles through garbage for dinner. And no, this isn't just bad luck or a temporary dip in fortunes. This is by design. We've been sold a story: that if GDP grows, the rising tide will lift all boats. But what if the boats are chained to the bottom while the yachts float higher? Dr Mahbubul Haq, the brilliant mind behind the Human Development Index, called this bluff long ago. He reminded us that real development isn't about numbers — it's about people. It's about whether children go to school, whether mothers survive childbirth, and whether families eat more than once a day. Joseph Stiglitz, Nobel laureate in economics, once said that inequality isn't just a moral issue — it's a threat to economic stability. And he's right. In Pakistan, we see the same story playing out every day. The top 1 percent hoards wealth while 40 percent of the population lives in multidimensional poverty. Add to that a broken education system, crumbling hospitals, and a state that often behaves more like a gatekeeper than a service provider. You don't need to crunch numbers to feel it — the anxiety in a working-class mother's eyes says more than any economic report ever could. There's a reason why the rich are building taller gates while the poor are digging deeper wells. It's not just the volume of poverty that's alarming — it's the architecture of inequality that makes it so resilient. This isn't a temporary misstep; it's a well-entrenched design. A tax system that punishes consumption but falls short of addressing direct taxation, a labour market where informal workers form the backbone but remain invisible in policymaking, and a state obsessed with optics over outcomes. We've had enough of the Power Points; what we need now is power to the people. And that power begins with reform that doesn't pretend. For decades, elites have perfected the art of capturing growth while outsourcing the consequences. Landowners who haven't planted a seed in years still enjoy subsidies. Powerful elite amassed wealth over generations operating on tax holidays on generational wealth and inheritance while daily wage workers queue for overpriced sugar. Somewhere along the way, Pakistan confused privilege with productivity. We gave the keys to the country to those least interested in steering it forward. The tragedy is not just economic, it's existential. Inequality of wealth quickly becomes inequality of dignity. When a student in a far-off village has to walk ten kilometres for a teacher who rarely shows up, and a minister's child gets an international education with state perks, we're not just failing at governance — we're violating the social contract. And this social contract isn't frayed — it's in tatters. Ask any young Pakistani why they want to leave. They'll give you a look. It's not just about jobs. It's about fairness, trust, and the hope that if you work hard, you'll get ahead. Right now, that ladder looks more like a wall. There is a way out, but it needs political courage and moral clarity — both in short supply. Start with taxation. We have to tax the rich. Yes, it's politically difficult. But so was eradicating polio — and yet we did it. The time has come to shift the burden away from consumption to capital. We need to close loopholes, digitise land records, and ensure that wealth — especially inherited, unproductive wealth — pays its due. Then there's public spending. For every rupee spent on a ribbon-cutting ceremony, there are children dying of preventable diseases in rural Sindh. This is not just a misallocation — it's a moral failing. Health and education need to be seen as rights, not privileges. That means not just building more schools, but ensuring teachers show up. Not just importing ventilators but maintaining basic sanitation. It's boring work, unglamorous work — but it's the work that actually matters. Social safety nets must be expanded and modernised. BISP was a good start, but it's time to link cash transfers to measurable outcomes — school attendance, vaccination records, and nutritional benchmarks. No more handouts for the sake of headlines. Let's fund dignity, not dependence. And yes, we must confront the oldest taboo of all: land. Land reform remains the elephant in Pakistan's living room. We know the numbers. A small elite owns the lion's share of arable land, often leaving it underutilised while sharecroppers barely survive. This is not just a rural issue. It's an issue of justice. If we can't talk about land, we can't talk about equality. Full stop. But here's the twist. Amid all this dysfunction, a quiet revolution is taking place — in the palm of your hand. The digital revolution might just be the great equaliser we've been waiting for. Tech doesn't care about your last name. Mobile banking has brought financial inclusion to places the state never reached. Platforms like Easypaisa and JazzCash are letting rural women bypass patriarchal gatekeepers to access and move money. They're doing it from their homes without getting perturbed how they will go to a bank and how they will find someone ready to help them. Digital classrooms are making it possible for children in Jhang to learn from the same curriculum as those in Lahore. Telemedicine is bringing diagnostics to Balochistan. Agricultural apps are helping farmers in Rahim Yar Khan get fair prices without relying on exploitative middlemen. But for all this to work, we need not just devices, but digital literacy. A 4G tower in a village means nothing if the people under it can't afford data or don't know how to use it. Infrastructure must walk hand in hand with inclusion. This is where the state can play a constructive role — not as a provider of patronage, but as a platform of possibility. Let it ensure connectivity, regulate fairly, and then get out of the way. Let entrepreneurs, students, nurses, and small farmers innovate their way forward. Just as Mahbubul Haq once asked us to measure what matters, we must now build what empowers. Kate Pickett and Richard Wilkinson in their influential book, 'The Spirit Level: Why More Equal Societies Almost Always Do Better', showed how inequality poisons even the wealthy. In deeply unequal societies, no one feels safe. And in Pakistan, that's tragically evident. Gated communities, security guards, surveillance systems — the rich are just as trapped in fear as the poor are in hardship. It's not a society. It's a siege. But it doesn't have to be this way. We're not poor because we lack money — we're poor because we lack justice. We don't need more donor reports or imported models. We need to look inward, build bottom-up, and trust our own people. Reform isn't rocket science — it's just will power plus empathy. And if we don't find both soon, we'll keep spinning in circles, watching each new 'vision' document fade into irrelevance. The choice before us isn't between socialism and capitalism, or tradition and modernity. It's between fairness and chaos. Between a digital future that empowers, or a digital dystopia that deepens divides. If we want to build a Pakistan where opportunity isn't inherited like a family asset, we have to act — and act boldly. So let's not be the generation that downloaded every app but forgot to upgrade the lives of the poor. Let's be the generation that saw the fault lines — and chose to fix them, not flee from them. Let's move beyond growth. Let's grow fair. Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Scroll.in
04-05-2025
- Business
- Scroll.in
The blindspots in India's calculation of poverty reduction
Poverty estimates have long been a political battleground in India. The recent Multidimensional Poverty Index findings have been critiqued not just for methodological flaws but also for potentially serving political narratives. Political critics of the government point out, 'It was a report prepared by NITI Aayog (Central government's think tank), (based on) a survey done by them and reported by them.' To be fair, the study of multidimensional poverty was led by the NITI Aayog in collaboration with UNDP and the Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative. However, such a self-referential loop does raise questions about transparency and objectivity of India's recent claims of a sharp reduction in multidimensional poverty. Major gains have been reported in states long considered poverty hotspots – Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, and Madhya Pradesh. But behind these statistics lies a more complex story. While the numbers may suggest progress, there are significant methodological and contextual concerns that cast doubt on the depth and durability of this achievement. Evolution of poverty metrics India's poverty discourse has evolved from focusing solely on income or consumption to incorporating multidimensional indicators like education, health, and standard of living. This shift began with the pioneering work of Amartya Sen and Mahbub ul Haq in the 1990 UNDP Human Development Report. It later matured into the Global Multidimensional Poverty Index, or MPI, developed by the Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative – OPHI. While this move represents a broadening of the scope of measuring poverty, it also raises critical concerns about accuracy, representation and the over-simplification of complex realities. Methodological concerns with MPI The Indian version of the MPI, developed by NITI Aayog, extends the global MPI's 10 indicators to 12, adding dimensions like maternal health and financial inclusion. However, the weighting and selection of indicators have drawn criticism from several scholars. For instance, owning a bank account is considered an indicator of improved living standards under MPI, despite nearly universal coverage of owning bank accounts under government schemes. This can inflate the perception of progress without reflecting meaningful change in people's lives. Such modifications to the MPI serve to amplify the appearance of poverty reduction, especially when aligned with flagship government programs. Scholars have highlight how including indicators with high baseline access – like electricity or bank accounts – can distort the index, creating an over-optimistic narrative. Similarly, indicators like 'asset ownership' combine vastly different items – from radios to refrigerators – without accounting for their varying relevance or economic weight. Others have criticised the MPI's arbitrary deprivation cut-off and the omission of critical age-specific nutritional data, especially for children aged 6-14, who are particularly vulnerable. Moreover, the MPI conflates inputs (like the provision of sanitation facilities, which contribute to reducing poverty) with outcomes (like child mortality, which goes down with poverty alleviation). Nutrition indicators show similar issues – while the MPI suggests improvements, anaemia among women and children has worsened between National Family Health Survey (NFHS-4) and NFHS-5, and the 810 million people receiving food subsidies under the Public Distribution System remain underrepresented in MPI estimates. Pandemic realities missing The time-frame for the current MPI estimates includes the early pandemic years, yet more than 70% of the data comes from before Covid-19. As such, the MPI likely fails to reflect the pandemic's devastating impact on health, education, and livelihoods. This limitation is acknowledged, yet the report still makes strong claims about progress during this period. The pandemic led to severe disruptions in education, health services, and employment – particularly among informal workers, who constitute over 90% of India's workforce. School closures affected over 200 million children, and learning loss has been widely reported by surveys such as Annual Status of Education Report (ASER). In this context, gains in MPI education indicators may not represent actual improvements in human development. Moreover, fiscal constraints during the pandemic – India's stimulus package amounted to only about three percent of GDP – curbed the state's capacity to cushion vulnerable populations. Public health expenditure remains below 1.5% of GDP, and the education budget has shrunk to under three percent. Given these realities, projections based on pre-pandemic trends should be treated with caution. Disputed estimates The absence of recent, reliable consumption expenditure data further weakens the poverty discourse. The lack of updated census data, alongside methodological inconsistencies and limited transparency in the implementation of revised consumption surveys, has further eroded the credibility and utility of poverty statistics. The 2017-'18 survey, which reportedly showed a decline in consumption among the poor, was never released. This gap is crucial because consumption data provides a direct link to people's real purchasing power and living standards. Economists have noted that in a country like India with a large informal economy and significant self-employment, national accounts need to be cross-verified with household-level data to ensure credibility. Relying solely on MPI without the parallel support of consumption-based indicators can distort the policymaking landscape. Integrated metrics needed The MPI can offer a broader understanding of poverty, but it cannot replace consumption expenditure data. The two approaches are complementary. While MPI captures structural and multidimensional deprivations, consumption data reflects immediate economic realities and distributional outcomes of growth. A multidimensional approach should not be reduced to a convenient narrative tool but must be grounded in comprehensive, high-quality data. The proposed synergy between both metrics offers the most accurate picture of poverty and helps determine whether India's recovery is 'V-shaped' (equal) or 'K-shaped' (divergent, benefiting only some). Recent research shows that India has made real gains in reducing the intensity of poverty among the poor. However, the number of poor has not declined proportionally, and gains are often skewed toward those who are relatively better off within the poor population. This distinction is often lost in celebratory headlines. Data-driven governance Government programmes such as Poshan Abhiyan, PM Garib Kalyan Anna Yojana, and Jal Jeevan Mission have made important contributions to poverty reduction. Yet, their impact must be rigorously assessed through robust and current data. For instance, the PM-POSHAN scheme now accounts for just 0.26% of the budget – its lowest in nearly a decade – raising concerns about sustained support. Similarly, the Public Distribution System still operates based on Census 2011 figures, which do not reflect current demographic realities. Until India conducts its long-delayed Census, and revives detailed consumption surveys, its poverty assessments will remain incomplete. Way forward To make poverty statistics more credible and policy-relevant, India must prioritise the following: Revive the Data Ecosystem: Conduct the decadal Census, release up-to-date consumption expenditure surveys, and ensure that NFHS data reflects current realities. Combine MPI and Consumption Measures: Use both to capture structural and immediate aspects of poverty. Invest in Social Infrastructure: Allocate sustained resources to public education, healthcare, and social safety nets. Focus on Learning Outcomes: Go beyond enrolment numbers and track actual educational achievement through tools like ASER. Adapt to New Realities: Include emerging dimensions such as digital access, climate resilience, and social inclusion in future poverty metrics. India's poverty story is far from over. While recent figures suggest progress, they also mask critical gaps in methodology, data collection and lived experiences. Policymakers, researchers, and civil society must resist the temptation of easy optimism and instead embrace a comprehensive, data-driven approach that reflects the full spectrum of deprivation. Only then can India claim not just to have reduced poverty on paper, but to have transformed lives on the ground. Dr Anand Prasad Mishra is Retired Professor, Department of Geography, Banaras Hindu University.
