Weak governance undermines urban projects

While development partners continue to emphasise robust project preparation as the foundation for sustainable urban infrastructure, experts argue that Pakistan's deeper challenge lies in weak urban governance, which continues to derail implementation on the ground.

With rapid urbanisation and population growth placing mounting pressure on infrastructure and public services, particularly in major cities, Pakistan faces a widening gap between planning and execution. According to global estimates, the country confronts an infrastructure investment shortfall of around $125 billion between 2016 and 2040 across critical sectors such as energy, transport and water. This persistent deficit is estimated to cost the economy between 4% and 6% of gross domestic product annually, underscoring the scale of the challenge. However, urban planning experts caution that these gains remain fragile without parallel improvements in governance frameworks.

"From an urban planning perspective, the main issue is that development projects in Pakistan are treated as engineering projects, whereas they are fundamentally urban governance projects," said M Toheed, an urban planner affiliated with the Institute of Business Administration (IBA). He stressed that gaps in utility mapping, city-level data, inter-agency coordination, phased construction planning and traffic management continue to hinder execution. He added that weak community engagement further compounds implementation challenges, particularly in dense urban centres like Karachi, where infrastructure projects often disrupt daily life and face resistance from affected populations.

The Asian Development Bank-supported Cities Development Initiative for Asia (CDIA), which has worked with 12 cities in Pakistan since 2009, maintains that effective project preparation remains a critical entry point for delivering sustainable urban development. Its recent monitoring findings highlight the importance of embedding gender considerations, climate resilience, stakeholder engagement and institutional capacity building early in the planning process. Through initiatives such as the Punjab Intermediate Cities Improvement Investment Programme, the Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa Cities Improvement Programme, the Peshawar Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) and the Islamabad BRT, CDIA has supported the development of bankable and structured urban projects. These interventions demonstrate that city development plans, when aligned with medium-term investment programmes, help avoid fragmented approaches and create a coherent pipeline of priority projects.

Officials involved in these programmes, Brian Capati and Lara Arjan, note that early-stage planning has delivered tangible benefits. For instance, integrated city development strategies and climate risk assessments have helped cities like Sahiwal secure approvals for sectoral master plans. Similarly, stakeholder consultations, including engagement with private operators, have reduced resistance and improved acceptance of large-scale transport reforms such as the Peshawar BRT.

Gender inclusion has also emerged as a key outcome of structured project preparation. Dedicated gender action plans and community engagement initiatives have improved women's participation in urban services, with female ridership in Peshawar's BRT rising to around 30%, compared to negligible levels prior to the system's introduction. Climate-responsive planning, including a shift towards public transport and improved waste management systems, has further strengthened environmental sustainability.

According to Toheed, even technically sound and well-prepared projects risk failure if governance deficiencies are not addressed. "Without fixing these underlying issues, delays, cost overruns and public inconvenience will persist," he said.

He noted that a key limitation in current development frameworks is the assumption that better preparation automatically leads to successful outcomes. While technical feasibility studies and financial structuring are essential, they often underestimate the complexity of local political economy dynamics, informal service networks and institutional fragmentation. Karachi, in particular, exemplifies these challenges, where overlapping jurisdictions, weak coordination among civic agencies and outdated urban data systems have repeatedly delayed major infrastructure initiatives. In such an environment, even well-funded and carefully designed projects struggle to maintain timelines and budgets.

Institutional clarity and sustainable financing models also remain critical gaps. While some projects have benefited from the creation of dedicated entities, such as urban mobility authorities, experts argue that long-term success depends on clearly defined mandates, operational autonomy and reliable funding for maintenance and service delivery. Moreover, heavy reliance on government subsidies for operation and maintenance continues to undermine financial sustainability, increasing the risk of asset deterioration and costly rehabilitation cycles.