ISLAMABAD, March 26: The 4.3 per cent overall agriculture growth rate per year during 1990s, as reported in the Pakistan Economic Survey 2002-03, was a mere statistical artifact, reveals a latest report of the Asian Development Bank (ADB). “Agricultural Growth and Rural Poverty; A Review of the Evidence”, a report by the ADB’s Resident Mission in Pakistan, which was made available to Dawn, has termed the much-trumpeted agriculture growth in 1990s as based on the incorrect accounting of the value-added of livestock in 1996, and that of forestry and fisheries in 2000. The report has put the annual growth of the agricultural sector during the decade at 3.1 per cent only. “Assuming a population growth of around 2.5 per cent per annum during the 1990s, this translates into a very low agricultural growth rate of 0.6 per cent per capita per annum,” the report stated.

That’s why estimates of poverty based on headcount measure showed an increase in rural poverty during the 1990s, it observed.

Overall agricultural growth is a composite of the growth of different sub-sectors e.g. crop and livestock. Each of these sub-sectors has a different impact on income distribution, and accordingly, on poverty. Any conclusive statement regarding the growth and poverty nexus, therefore, needs to be made in the light of a disaggregated analysis.

The ADB mission has observed that the agriculture sector grew at its highest rate (11.7 per cent) in 1996 mainly due to the high growth of livestock value-added. The livestock census conducted in 1996 was responsible for documenting this large reported growth and it revealed a much higher value-added than documented previously.

It found that this additional value added was recorded as a large one-time increase in the survey year and showed up as the reported growth rate of livestock value-added of 26 per cent.

This high growth rate was one of the reasons for the 11.7 per cent growth in the agriculture sector as a whole in 1996.

It observed: “In fact, the previously unreported livestock value-added should have resulted in a backward adjustment in the under-reported numbers for value-added over several years, rather than in a one-time increase in livestock value-added to the extent of 26 per cent over the previous year.

Making this adjustment reduces the overall agricultural growth rate from 12 per cent to 4.7 per cent, while the over all growth rate of the agriculture sector during the 1990s declines to 3.2 per cent from 4.5 per cent simply by adjusting for the one outlaying value of livestock value added in 1996.”

The mission has found that in addition to the high growth rate of the major crops sector, the national accounts for 2000 also indicated high growth rates for the fisheries and forestry sub-sectors. The value-added of fisheries as reported in the national accounts grew by 9.5 per cent. However, fish production in the same year declined by 6 per cent mainly due to the decline in marine fish production in Sindh.

Despite this decline, the government data indicated high growth in the sub-sector.

Similarly, the share of forestry sub-sector declined from 1.26 per cent in 1991 to 0.46 per cent in 1999, and then more than doubled to 0.97 per cent in 2000. The growth rate of forestry between 1999 and 2000 was reported as 113pc in the Pakistan Economic Survey.

According to the report, the forestry sub-sector produces major products such as timber and firewood, and minor forest products such as, resin, mazri and ephedra. The detailed data in the Pakistan Economic Survey showed a decline in the value of major forest products by 22 per cent and decline in the quantity of minor forest products by 28 per cent in 2000.

Yet, it indicated a growth rate of 113 per cent for the forestry in that year.

“This seems highly unlikely given that no significant changes occurred that might have altered the continuing (declining) trend in forest products.

Adjusting the growth rate of these sub-sectors (fishery and forestry) to reflect their trend values caused the overall growth of around 2.5 per cent per annum during the 1990s. This translates into a very low agricultural growth rate of 0.6 per cent per capita per year”, the report stated.