The country’s economic team’s hierarchy has contested Pakistan’s low ranking on the global index of competitiveness.

The local partners of the global monitoring agency accepted the possibility of an error but blamed it on the government’s ineptness to generate timely credible data and manage its circulation to the international agencies.

The Global Competitiveness Report 2017-18 ranked Pakistan at 115 among 137 nations assessed. The country jumped seven places on the index but continued to trail behind other South Asian countries despite CPEC.

“The report is not a figment of anyone’s imagination but based on facts and the result of perception surveys involving several reputable international monitoring institutions. It is a globally accepted practice.

“Yes, perceptions are subjective and depend on the composition of participants but the data is drawn from official sources. If data providers falter they should be held accountable”, defended the monitors.

“I am confident that had we been efficient in sharing current data with international development agencies, with all its shortcomings, Pakistan’s comparative profile would have been much better.

“Several nations now update their data on a quarterly basis globally. In Pakistan’s case, monitoring agencies are still using three to four year old data”, Amir Jehangir, CEO Mishal, a country partner institute of the Global Competitiveness and Benchmarking Network commented, accepting that the performance seems to be under stated.

“Pakistan can jump 20 positions by just streamlining data disbursement mechanism in the Pakistan Bureau of Statistics. It matters how a nation is assessed by reputable global monitors. It affects the credibility of ‘label Pakistan’ in trade and the country’s placement on the international investment map. The challenge is to convince the relevant officials”, he made a point.

Amir did not satisfactorily explain why trade performance has not been factored in the report. He informed that to make assessment more realistic the process to reassess the criteria and make adjustments therein is in progress.

Efforts to locate the liaison officer or the department responsible for disbursing the country’s data to development partners did not yield results.

People in the Statistics division directed to the Ministry of Commerce. The officers in the federal commerce ministry said the foreign ministry should be approached. “When everybody deflects responsibility on somebody, nobody feels accountable. The task needs to be clearly defined and designated”, commented an officer.

As power centres wrestle publicly to assert dominance, the edgy bureaucrats withdrew from the hustling corridors to the sidelines, confining themselves to their committee rooms and offices.

It was hard to solicit comments last week in Islamabad because senior economic team members, uncertain about the future, were reluctant to interact with the media. Some who did meet categorically declined to go on record.

While the ignorance of some star members of the economic ministries was baffling, others thought Pakistan’s performance on the economic front has been understated in the comparative assessment report mentioned above.

Commenting on said report of the World Economic Forum, some senior officers pointed out a number of factors that make the assessment doubtful.

“We are aware of weak areas but placing Pakistan’s $300 billion economy so low on the index is both unfair and delusional. Who can deny the need to tackle corruption or the need to improve institutionalisation? But the capital formation rate in the country has picked up as reflected in the quality of life of an average citizen”, argued a senior source in the government.

“The consumer market is vibrant and expanding. If multinational companies are expanding their operations and luxury brands are entering Pakistan in hordes, it is not for love but for the business promise that the country holds. The poverty in the country has gone down significantly. Soon we will release the report confirming the steep fall in poverty level in Pakistan”, an official of the Planning Commission asserted.

They mentioned several components of the 12 pillars used to assess competitiveness by the WEF. They cover: institutions, infrastructure, macroeconomics and health/education as basic requirements.

Higher education/training, goods market efficiency, labour market efficiency, financial market development, technological readiness and market size as efficiency enhancers; and business sophistication and innovation as key drivers.

An assessment based on 2012-13 data in 2017 would be misleading. It is probably true that Pakistan deserves to be ranked higher on the competitiveness index. Growth has certainly picked up pace in the last three years but policy makers and the self declared custodian of national interest can’t shy away from questions on the quality and the sustainability of progress.

“The progress needs to be assessed not just with reference to the past but the potential. The country is certainly underperforming, and it’s not the fault of ordinary people who are working multiple jobs and long hours to make ends meet”, commented an expert.

Published in Dawn, The Business and Finance Weekly, October 9th, 2017