RAWALPINDI, April 4: Rawalpindi has been placed at the lowest in development ranking of five districts in Punjab, according to development profile of districts currently being applied by the Punjab government. It is evident from this ranking that the allocation of funds by the Punjab government for the development of physical and social infrastructure in the Rawalpindi remained low, compared to other districts in the province.

Being a sister city of the federal capital, Rawalpindi remained under-developed and needs not only special attention of the Punjab government, but also adequate funds to match with the pace of development taking place in Islamabad.

Other districts ranked on top in the context of development are Lahore (1), Faisalabad (2), Multan (3) and Gujranwala (4). Five districts declared as least developed are Layyah, Bhakkar, Narowal, Khushab and Hafizabad.

The development ranking was done using 27 indicators covering agriculture, industry, education, health, roads and transport, water supply, sewerage and drainage, energy and banking sectors.

To assess sectoral development, all the districts were separated on the basis of top quartile scorings in every of the eight main development sectors. On the basis of this classification, structural variations were obvious as certain districts at the top of the ranking in one sector were found at the bottom in another sector.

All the districts separated in top quartile were found lagging behind in the context of sewerage and drainage development except Lahore, Sahiwal and Gujranwala. This situation might be attributed to rapid expansion in residential areas in urban localities in relation to provision of this facility, and it poses a serious challenge to planners in times to come, the report says.

According to the methodology, a multi-dimensional approach has been applied to measure the development level of various districts in Punjab by examining data on physical, social and economic variables and aggregating them within various sectors to determine the level of sectoral development. Lack of data has not only constrained the approach to the construction of development indicators, but it has also limited the number of indicators and in some cases prompted the choice of relatively crude proxies.

Analysis of the magnitude of the development indicators in the relatively less developed districts indicates that the profile of backwardness was primarily related to provision of poor services in the social sectors, while they were found lagging behind also in economic sectors.

The profile of rankings was carried out by Punjab Economic Research Institute, and serious difficulties were faced in obtaining data on relevant indicators of development from the departments of education, health, industry and excise and taxation. Although, private sector has come up in a big way particularly in major urban centres in providing education and health facilities, no reliable data on the number of private schools or their enrolment was available. Reliable data was also not available regarding private doctors, hospitals, nurses and hospital beds.

Similarly, up-to-date data was also not available on industrial units and their output. Data on small industries was also unavailable. A mapping exercise of physical and social infrastructure at district level is a pre-requisite for rational decision making regarding the location of new schools, hospitals, roads, water supply, sewerage and drainage facilities, the report said.