Experts stress growth for poverty alleviation

Pakistan needs a shift in social protection policies, coupled with sustained economic growth of 8 per cent over the next 8-10 years, to effectively address poverty and unemployment.

According to experts, without long-term, data-driven reforms and a focus on human capital, current programmes will fall short create meaningful change.

These insights emerged from an interactive session titled "Poverty Alleviation in Pakistan: Examining the Concept and Performance of BISP," held at the Institute of Policy Studies (IPS), Islamabad.

The event, chaired by Dr Ghulam Muhammad Arif, former dean at the Pakistan Institute of Development Economics (PIDE), included contributions from Dr Shujaat Farooq, chief of research at PIDE, Khalid Rahman, chairman of IPS, and other experts.

The session focused on the limitations of the Benazir Income Support Programme (BISP) and broader structural issues in Pakistan's social protection strategies.

Despite its role as a major social safety net, BISP has become largely donor-driven, influenced by conditions set by international organizations like the IMF, making it difficult for the government to reform or end the program even after 16 years of operation.

Dr Farooq highlighted the inefficiency of BISP in reducing poverty, pointing out that while its Rs600 billion budget is substantial, the lack of sustainable economic opportunities means it functions more as a temporary relief than a solution. He further criticised the programme's poor data management, with billions being spent without effective tracking, and discrepancies between national-level data and actual ground realities.

Other panellists echoed concerns about the manipulation of data by third-party evaluators and NGOs, making reliable assessment difficult. Additionally, issues such as embezzlement and rising operational costs have reduced BISP's overall effectiveness.

The experts also identified three major structural challenges hindering poverty alleviation: the flawed National Finance Commission (NFC) award formula that discourages growth, the centralized administration of social programs, and the lack of long-term program ownership by short-tenured government secretaries.