October 19, 2003

‘Every additional migrant who enters Sindh costs the province about Rs32,000 per year in terms of water, sewerage, education, health and such other facilities,’ explains Ghulam Sarwar

IN TERMS of economic resources, Sindh is the richest province in Pakistan. Karachi boasts of two national sea ports from where over 90 per cent of Pakistan’s more than $23 billion international trade (imports over $12 billion, and exports over $11 billion during 02-03) originates. Sindh contributes over 67 per cent of the national revenue. It produces 48 per cent of country’s total gas, 39 per cent of electricity, 62 per cent of crude oil and 31 per cent of coal. Sindh has an equally impressive production ratio of industrial goods and agricultural commodities in Pakistan and is the biggest hub of services sector in the country.

With these enviable economic ratios, Sindh carries a burden of over 33 per cent unemployment in officially counted population of 35 million (30 million in 1998). A report of Asian Development Bank consultant has estimated the extent of poverty in Sindh at 53 per cent as against 29 per cent in Punjab, and 24 per cent in the NWFP. Only Balochistan is somewhat more unfortunate than Sindh with 54 per cent poverty ratio.

Karachi attracts the highest number of unemployed from all parts of the country and illegal immigrants from other countries. Out of an estimated 12 million population, some 40 per cent (about 4.5 million) live in what are called the Kutchi Abadis (ghettos, shanties and squatter settlements) in Karachi. No wonder population growth ratio in the city is the highest in the country at over three per cent.

Ghulam Sarwar Khero, Additional Chief Secretary (Planning and Development), of Sindh, recently answered a few questions put to him by Dawn Magazine to explain this paradox. The following are the excerpts:

Q. Sindh is claimed to be the richest of all the four provinces. How is it that it has remained poor and continues to be so?

A. Poverty in Sindh should be seen in the context of its environmental setting and topography where about 66 per cent of its total area is arid, stretched over dry lands, deserts and mountainous enclaves.

Sindh constitutes 23 per cent of the country’s population. It has experienced sustained population growth in the last five decades because of internal growth combined with unhindered and steady flow of migration from other provinces and influx of illegal foreign migrants.

According to data, the population of Sindh increased by 2.5 times during the first two decades (1951 to1972) and has doubled during the last three decades (1981 to 1998) and has touched the mark of 58 per cent. Whatever funds Sindh gets as its share, on population basis under successive awards of the National Finance Commissions, the factor of migratory population in Sindh from other provinces and from other countries has been overlooked or ignored.

Illegal migration from other countries into Sindh has created serious law and order situation and it has badly hampered economic activities which contributed towards poverty growth in the province. Obviously, this pressure of population has caused a the crumbling of social and physical infrastructure in the province.

Every additional migrant who enters Sindh from other province or other country costs the province about Rs32,000 every year in terms of infrastructure facilities — water, sewerage, education, health etc.

Besides, since the signing of the water accord in 1991, Sindh ha received about 35 per cent less water than its share in the last decade for irrigation. Total losses suffered on account of this shortfall in water share to agriculture, forestry, livestock and migrations is estimated at Rs365.64 billion in the last decade.

A cut in Sindh’s share in river waters has sharply depleted water flow through the delta region which has led to sea intrusion in Badin and Thatta, inundating 1.46 million acres of agricultural land. It has affected socio economic conditions of people in 50 villages.

Q. From the poverty point of view, where would you place Sindh compared to the other province?

A. A report of Agrodev consultants of the Asian Development Bank (ADB), prepared under the Sindh Rural Development Project, indicates the extent of poverty in Sindh at 53 per cent. It estimated the extent of population in Punjab at 29 per cent and the NWFP at 24 per cent. Only Balochistan has poverty ratio of 54 per cent, which is slightly higher than that in Sindh.

This report is based on the survey of five representative districts of lower Sindh, which are Dadu, Badin, Thatta, Mirpurkhas and Umerkot. The report reveals that 82 per cent of the population live under ‘poverty’ conditions in rural Sindh. The unemployment ratio stands at 33 per cent.

Poverty in Sindh has become more acute because of successive five calamities that hit the province. These were persisting drought, earthquake, cyclone, sea intrusion in Thatta and Badin and the recent rains.

Q. What has been the impact of these five natural calamities on poverty in Sindh in general and the economy in particular?

A. Persisting drought over the last several years has affected desert areas of Tharparkar, Mirpurkhas and Sanghar districts spread over 22,000 square kilometres. It also affected more than 15,000 square kilometres area in Kohistan Kutcho areas starting from the north of Karachi to Larkana, moving along the Balochistan border.

It affected 265 dehs and 2,913 villages. Over 1.39 million people were affected and about three lakh people were forced to migrate to barrage areas. Besides, 5.69 million cattle heads got perished, and added to the miseries of the drought-affected people. Some 95 per cent of such people live below the poverty line.

A cyclone hit Sindh’s coastal areas in May 1999. It wiped out 73 settlements, destroyed 1,800 small and big boats and partially damaged 642 boats, causing a loss worth Rs380 million. Loss to infrastructure was Rs750 million. Some 328 persons lost their lives and 11,000 cattle heads got perished. We had never experienced such a calamity before and were caught unawares. It took time to gear ourselves up and confront the situation.

An earthquake also hit parts of Sindh in January 2001 and caused immense damage to property in Thatta and Badin. I have already explained the damages caused by sea intrusion, and, finally, we received record widespread rains this August which broke the long spell of drought. It rained for almost a fortnight in lower Sindh in which 300 persons lost their lives.

Initial estimates indicate damage to 213,000 housing units of which 75,000 collapsed. Standing crops of mango, sugarcane, dates on over 410,000 acres were damaged. Initial estimates of losses from recent rains is about Rs45 billion. The government is still in the process of assessing losses suffered on account of heavy rains. But there is no doubt that people in both rural and urban areas have suffered because of August rains.

Q. How would you define poverty?

A. In April last year, the federal government offered a new definition of poverty based on 2,350 calories needed a day. But this calorie intake-based definition does not fully capture the magnitude of deprivation. A persons needs certain units of calories is okay, but for survival there is also the need for housing, education, healthcare and of course water and sanitation.

Poverty can therefore be precisely defined as lack of essential physical and social assets. Poverty is the creation of conditions in which the poor are not given, or enabled to acquire, the physical and social assets amid enabling environment to get return from these assets.

The preliminary conclusion of the qualitative Participatory Poverty Assessment conducted by Aga Khan University reveals the existence of extreme poverty in rural Sindh. In rural Sindh a very large number of people earn and consume very little. The human development indicators in rural Sindh are very low as compared to any other part of the country. The livelihood prospects of the poorest groups are affected by extreme economic inequalities.

For a change, let us be honest and admit that the policies that affect the poor people are often driven by prejudices and vested interests. Natural calamities like drought, severe rains, cyclones and earthquake bring more miseries for the poor because they have very limited assets at their disposal. The rich and the powerful, in fact, stand to gain from such calamities.

Q. During the early ‘90s, donor agencies sponsored a highly publicized ‘Social Action Programme’. What were the results? Did the poor benefit, and, if not, what were the reasons? And, of course, who stands to take the blame?

A. The Social Action Programme (SAP) was taken up in two phases. During 1993-96, SAP-I was taken up involving an investment of Rs20.91 billion. The SAP-II was taken up at a cost of Rs61.97 billion. A total investment of Rs82.89 billion was made in these two phases of SAP. The focus was on primary education, rural water supply, sanitation and population welfare, and the donors were the World Bank and the Asian Development Bank.

It is true that there has been a lot of criticism against SAP. But the sponsors were involved in the designing of the projects, monitoring and final evaluation. The Auditor-General, has by and large cleared the provincial government of the responsibility of audit objections.

The bulk of SAP funds went to brick and mortar. Girls enrolment in primary schools did increase, but did not meet the target. The reasons for the failure of SAP were several: projects were not designed according to the need of the community; the communities did not replicate these projects; the projects were found unaffordable for management by the communities; the communities found recurring expenditure of many schools, water supply schemes and other projects unaffordable, and, a a result, a big number of these projects now are either incomplete or virtually abandoned; the salary component was too high; and other vital sectors of the economy — agriculture, roads etc. — were ignored in budgets because of the priority given to the SAP.

Q. Former prime minister Mian Nawaz Sharif had launched his Tameer-e-Sindh programme, which was maintained by Benazir Bhutto as well. Did the federal government fulfil the commitments made by the two prime ministers? What were the results?

A. Nawaz Sharif had announced a Rs10 billion fund for Sindh minus Karachi for which he had announced a separate Rs7.5 billion. But subsequently, Karachi’s share was reduced to Rs3.5 billion. Therefore, total amount made available to Sindh by successive federal governments was Rs13.5 billion in all. Of this, Karachi was given Rs7.5 billion, which was spent on the construction of flyovers, over-head bridges, pedestrian bridges, treatment plant, the purchase of hundred buses from China, and other improvement of public facilities.

Rs5.142 billion was spent in rural Sindh. One public school has been set up at a cost of Rs49 million in each of the 16 districts of the province, and 320 police stations were constructed in Kutcho areas.

Overall, the Tameer-e-Sindh programme has proved a useful investment in urban and rural Sindh. This programme was continued by all the successive governments.

Q. Since October 1999, the government has launched programmes like Khushal Pakistan (KP) and the Drought Emergency Relief Programme (DERA). These are claimed to be pro-poor. Are they so?

A. Yes, these are pro-poor programmes and have generated a lot of employment in rural areas. About Rs6 billion have been invested in three phases of KP under which 3,614 schemes in education, rehabilitation, drainage etc. were taken up in all the districts. Out of these, 3,190 schemes have been completed and these have generated about 99,000 jobs.

For DERA, a sum of Rs10 billion has been provided to Sindh out of which Rs3 billion have been sanctioned, and Rs1.95 billion actually released. So far, Rs1.24 billion has been spent. A National Steering Committee has approved 574 schemes for Sindh, involving an outlay of Rs2.95 billion.

These programmes are being financed by the World Bank and the Asian Development Bank, and will continue till December 2004. The two donors make critical analysis, and Sindh has been declared a role model for other provinces in the implementation of these programmes. There are indications of DERA-II being launched from January 2005 with an indicated investment of Rs3.6 billion.

Q. Has there been any impact of devolution and the implementation of development schemes through the district governments on alleviation of poverty?

A. The system is still in its infancy. A Provincial Finance Commission has given an interim award for the distribution of funds between the provincial and district governments. The district governments lack the capacity to utilize huge funds that are now available for them.

These difficulties are understandable. But with the passage of time, the district administrations are gaining experience and maturity. The provincial government is in the process of preparing a manual which is bound to serve a useful purpose.

Yes, the devolution has helped in involving communities at grassroots levels in the designing and implementation of development schemes. This enables them to take over the management of these schemes on completion, and, eventually, all this would help in poverty alleviation.

Please Visit our Sponsor (Ads open in separate window)