CPEC: An Assessment of Its Socio-economic Impact on Pakistan
Ashmita Rana
Download PDF
Mar 10 2022 •
532 views
This content was originally written for an undergraduate or Master's program. It is published as part of our mission to showcase peer-leading papers written by students during their studies. This work can be used for background reading and research, but should not be cited as an expert source or used in place of scholarly articles/books.
Picture by Samina Kousar / Pixabay.com
China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) was launched in 2015 when 51 agreements and MoUs (Memorandums of Understanding) worth USD 46 billion were signed between China and Pakistan (Rauf, 2017). This grand-scale bilateral project is a flagship constituent of China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). CPEC started out with the goal of modernising Pakistan’s road, rail, air and energy transportation systems and enhancing connectivity between its Gwadar and Karachi ports to the Chinese province of Xinjiang and beyond (Rauf, 2017). Over the years, this project has resulted in Special Economic Zones (SEZs) and cooperation between the two partner countries in other domains such as outer space– all to monitor this massive project. While China has a lot to gain from this crucial component of its BRI dream, many Pakistani leaders and other observers have called CPEC a “game-changer” for Pakistan time and again. The CPEC deal was indeed a significant event for a struggling Pakistani economy, which was also endangering levels of social development in the country. For Pakistan, CPEC not only meant an opportunity to address its existing challenges like the energy crisis but also a golden moment to emerge as a hub for economic activities in the region (Bhattacharjee, 2015).
A Center for Strategic and International Studies report had found that as of 2020, 32 of the 122 announced projects have been completed, which corresponds to USD 20 billion of the estimated USD 87 billion in funding (Hillman, 2020). This underperformance is often attributed to a number of factors, including domestic politics, corruption and terror. The COVID-19 pandemic has further caused delays in the progress of CPEC projects. Despite the lag in CPEC projects, the impact that it has had on Pakistan is too substantial to be overlooked. This paper will focus on the socio-economic aspect of this impact and try to assess how positive or negative this impact has been.
Socio-economic indicators and parameters for assessment
There has been a growing focus on the non-economic aspects of development in recent times. However, these aspects are not independent of the level of economic development of an individual or society. Therefore, socio-economic development as a measure of a society’s economic performance and social progress has gained more recognition. There are various indicators that serve to identify the level of socio-economic development in a society. Broadly, the umbrella of socio-economic indicators includes concepts like ‘happiness’, ‘well-being’, ‘quality of life’, ‘living conditions’, ‘life situations’, ‘social capital’, ‘generalised and political trust’, ‘environmental concepts’ etc (UNECE, 2017: 1). This diversity makes measuring the level of socio-economic development a complex task. A number of composite indicators have been devised to accomplish this task. One of the most common of these is the Human Development Index (HDI) by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). The HDI is a composite index to track socio-economic development, and it aggregates life expectancy, educational attainment and income (UNECE, 2017: 2).
Composite socio-economic indicators have often been suspected of hiding information “behind a single number of dubious significance (UNECE, 2017: 2).” Even in the case of CPEC, the prime focus of this paper, one argument that has been asserted by those who support the project has been that the progress of CPEC is improving the HDI of Pakistan (The Nation, 2018). However, this paper will exercise caution and therefore not use one single composite socio-economic indicator for a simplistic conclusion of a complex project that holds great significance for Pakistan. Instead, this paper will focus on four central factors to understand its socio-economic impact– employment, political trust, gender equality and environment. This paper will not seek to reach a black-and-white verdict of boon or bane, but it will attempt to analyse the impact of CPEC on Pakistan along these four contours.
Existing literature
Most scholarly literature on the socio-economic impacts of CPEC had been published around the time of the megaproject’s initial phases. However, not much study has been conducted in recent times to assess the socio-economic performance of CPEC. Moreover, the early works are heavily influenced by the massive hype about this project that ensued right after its announcement. These works also focused on one or just a few aspects of the project, usually those related to economic gains. One work that was published the year after the signing of the CPEC agreement had kept ‘transportation’ in focus and had used its case to conclude that CPEC’s impacts and benefits were more valuable for the community than its costs (Ali et al., 2016). This study was primarily based on a survey conducted among the local residents of a selected area. The expectations of the locals, that is, their perceived benefits of CPEC were used to argue for the promising socio-economic impact of CPEC. However, while public opinion regarding such lifestyle-altering projects and policies are crucial, they are not sufficient to establish their connection with a final socio-economic level of development. In the case of CPEC, the promotion of the deal had generated widespread optimism in Pakistan, but now that some years have passed, a lot of concerns have also surfaced. Even the aforementioned study had acknowledged that it has some limitations, and “future study” would be needed to assess the total impact of CPEC (Ali et al., 2016: 91). This paper is an attempt in this direction.
Meanwhile, some existing studies do highlight the positives of the project using numerical data available during the initial phases of CPEC, but essential details are lacking. For example, a 2017 study concluded that CPEC would create “millions of jobs” and “improve the living standard of Pakistani people.” (Ali et al., 2017: 195) However, details like the kind of jobs, permanency of employment– contractual, sub-contractual or otherwise, rights granted to the employees, income details etc. were missing. Such details are central while trying to assess the totality of CPEC’s impact on the socio-economic development in Pakistan. Besides, the lack of transparency in CPEC-related information makes assessing its performance a challenge in general. It has been observed that even the information that is in the public domain sometimes do not match and at other times, information is seldom available at any one place or not available at all (Jacob, 2017). Some argue that the nature of governance and politics in both China and Pakistan obstructs the availability of transparency in CPEC-related information (Jacob, 2017). Nonetheless, there have been recent studies conducted by analysts across the world in which different promises and claims about CPEC– rather the BRI as a whole, are contradicted (AidData, 2021).
This paper attempts to explore four components of socio-economic development (employment, political trust, gender equality and environment) to assess the impact of CPEC on Pakistan till now. It will evaluate both the positives and negatives in these four domains using the data available, and will also weigh contradictory claims, wherever applicable. Additionally, this paper will try to draw attention to factors like political trust that are not directly linked with economic progress. This helps in viewing a more balanced picture as the usual narrative around CPEC has been dominated by economic factors like jobs, GDP growth, income growth, etc.
Impact of CPEC on employment
Pakistan currently features in the top five of the list of countries with the highest population sizes.[1] Moreover, the median age in Pakistan is just 22.8 years.[2] A low median age implies that the majority of people in Pakistan will be entering the working-age group in the coming years, and therefore the demand for jobs is expected to grow in the country. Therefore, a major expectation from CPEC– Pakistan’s biggest development assistance, is the realisation of its promise of generating employment for Pakistani citizens. As is the case with most “official” data on CPEC, the data on employment generated by CPEC projects is not very clear. Official statements from Pakistan or China often refrain from giving exact numbers for jobs created or likely to be created (Jacob, 2017). Even when numbers regarding employment generated are released, details such as the nature of jobs, the relevant skillsets involved, duration of availability of these jobs etc. are not provided (Jacob, 2017).
The launch of CPEC was followed by optimistic predictions regarding employment generation in Pakistan. The International Labour Organisation (ILO) had estimated that CPEC could create 400,000 jobs in Pakistan, while the country’s Planning Commission had estimated a figure of 800,000 jobs by 2030 (Zia and Waqar, 2018: 3). Despite such figures widely promoted by the Pakistani and Chinese governments, what was observed in the early harvest projects of CPEC was a mismatch between job availability and skills of those seeking employment. The early harvest projects were demanding in terms of precise and definite skills, and the domestic workers of Pakistan lacked in most of them (Zia and Waqar, 2018: 2). As a consequence, Chinese companies became more inclined to hire foreign workers (Zia and Waqar, 2018: 2). For instance, in 2017, i.e., during the initial phase of the CPEC projects, out of the total 1,100 skilled labour working in the Gwadar Free Zone, only 250 were Pakistani while the remaining 850 were Chinese nationals (Zia and Waqar, 2018: 13). It is worth noting that the requirement of labour in Gwadar projects at that stage were highly skilled jobs like Pilots/Tig operators, engineers, marine scientists, quality control officers, hydrographic officers etc (Zia and Waqar, 2018: 13).
For the projects that have successfully proceeded beyond their harvest stages, employment is mostly available in the operations and maintenance domains. However, two main challenges remain. First, the current employment data under CPEC has become even less transparent. Consequently, it is not clear if the numbers quoted by government officials, ambassadors or political mouthpieces include jobs that the Chinese are getting in Pakistan under CPEC or not (Jacob, 2017). Second, the scope for jobs under maintenance tasks has been limited for Pakistanis and include not very highly skilled jobs like those of security personnel. A set of figures used to cite employment in Pakistan included about 18,000 jobs in the security domain– all to protect Chinese investments and citizens (Jacob, 2017). On the contrary, CPEC projects have sometimes led to instances where the existing sources of livelihood of local communities in Pakistan have become threatened. For example, the fishing community in Gwadar– a natural seaport supporting the income of a number of local fishermen, has been affected by the CPEC developments aimed at transforming Gwadar into a ‘Developed Mega Port City’ (Suleman, 2019). The construction activities in the area have blocked a long coastline for the indigenous fishing communities, and most of the fishing neighbourhoods have been relocated to the outskirts of Gwadar without prior consultation (Suleman, 2019).
Mere ability to generate jobs is not sufficient to track the socio-economic impact of the employment generating project. The impact that the jobs created have in terms of a decent income and favourable working conditions with labour rights is essential to understand the bigger picture that often gets obscured under cold statistics. CPEC projects do not fare very well in these parameters. Special economic zones under CPEC are regulated under the Special Economic Zones Act, 2012 whose Article 30 makes all labour laws of Pakistan applicable to these zones (Hisam, 2017). The domestic labour laws in Pakistan already suffer from weak implementation, and thus, the workforce involved in the not-so-transparent contractual CPEC projects have little in terms of guaranteed labour rights. Moreover, the majority of the workforce is unskilled and lacks proper education and contractors do not do enough to ensure that safety standards are met in the work sites (Hisam, 2017). As a result, there has been no formal news of work-related accidents during CPEC projects, especially the energy-related ones, because there is no mechanism to report or document such issues (Hisam, 2017). Nevertheless, news about fatal accidents and deaths of low-tiered workers due to electrocution, collapsing of structures, fire, etc., have often made rounds (Hisam, 2017).
The issue of employment is closely related to migration. The push factors in certain Pakistani provinces, including poverty and lack of job opportunities, lead to internal as well as external migration of people. A recent study that explored CPEC’s impact on local communities found that CPEC does not affect migration in the short term (Akhtar et al., 2021). Initially, CPEC had generated optimism about its ability to halt the migration of local people and also to provide an enabling environment that would serve as an incentive for migrants to return home (Akhtar et al., 2021). In the longer term, CPEC may positively impact migration in Pakistan, but that will depend on its performance in terms of generating satisfactory employment opportunities that lead to an improvement in local living standards. However, the delay in the completion of CPEC projects continues to put such optimistic speculations in doubt.
Impact of CPEC on political trust
The United Nations Department of Economic Affairs has always held that trust in public institutions and leaders is essential for social and economic progress for any society (UN, 2021). Having an optimum level of political trust helps in better cooperation for the implementation of public policies and fosters the growth of peaceful and inclusive societies (UN, 2021). The significance that political trust holds in socio-economic development can be gauged from the words of UN Secretary-General – António Guterres. Mr. Guterres has warned that a “trust deficit” holds power to undermine progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals (UN, 2021). Therefore, political trust is a crucial component to be analysed while studying the socio-economic impact of CPEC on Pakistan.
Many public surveys and opinion polls conducted during the initial years of the CPEC rollout illustrated the high hopes and expectations that people in Pakistan had from these projects. Of late, such surveys have been witnessing an increase in resentment against the government’s conduct in the implementation of CPEC. A substantial section of the Pakistani population fears that they would be deprived of the benefits of CPEC because of a lack of trust in political and government authorities (Saad et al., 2020). A myriad of corruption scandals and other controversies, discrimination in the distribution of resources and non-transparent procedures are the major factors that have led to a growth of political trust deficit in Pakistan. As a result, the government’s CPEC-related actions are not always viewed as those that meet political legitimacy. A 2021 report by AidData showed that Pakistan is the country that has the highest number of BRI infrastructure projects (10 projects worth 5,675 USD 2017 million) plagued with alleged scandals, controversies or violations (Malik et al., 2021: 66). Additionally, Pakistan also topped the list of countries with BRI infrastructure projects (4 projects worth 2,675 USD 2017 million) that contain references to claims of corruption or other financial wrongdoings (Malik et al., 2021: 67). In 2018, the World Bank had cautioned the countries participating in BRI projects against, inter alia, corruption, and this fear seems to have come true in the case of CPEC (Wani, 2020). The active and retired elite of the Pakistan army has allegedly amassed huge wealth by misusing their crucial positions on the CPEC projects that gave them direct access to the project funds (Wani, 2020). The present-day government in Pakistan led by Imran Khan, which is infamously known to be a “puppet of the army establishment”, has done nothing concrete to investigate the corruption charges in the CPEC projects (Wani, 2020).
Such controversies related to corruption and financial wrongdoings have often invited the anger of common people in Pakistan, who are deprived of the fruits of the promises of CPEC. For instance, when Retd. General Asim Saleem Bajwa’s name surfaced in corruption scandals in CPEC projects, and there were protests and a massive uproar on social media. General (Retd.) Bajwa was then the chairman of CPEC Authority– the main government agency that oversees BRI projects in Pakistan (Aamir, 2020). However, despite the protests and public rage, Bajwa had refused to resign from his top post in the CPEC Authority.
Another factor causing a political trust deficit among the citizens of Pakistan is the issue of discrimination in the distribution of CPEC resources. CPEC has often been met with opposition from ethnic groups in the smaller provinces of Pakistan who fear that the bigger province of Punjab would reap all benefits of the projects at the cost of their lands and resources (Shams, 2016). A manifestation of these fears and trust deficit was when the proposed route for the corridor between Gwadar and Kashgar was debated. Pashtun’s opposition political parties blamed the then Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and Chief Minister of Punjab– Shahbaz Sharif for “rerouting” CPEC to favour communities in Punjab over those in Balochistan and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (Custer et al., 2021: 12). It was also alleged that the Sharifs had diverted funds into their political campaigns (Custer et al., 2021: 12). In addition, the CPEC and related discontent among the local communities also stir Baloch anger and insurgency in the region. The marginalised Baloch fear displacement due to CPEC projects and believe that all the economic benefits related to the projects will flow solely to the state (Tekwani, 2020). The CPEC has triggered old apprehensions and given rise to new ones, all causing a decline in political trust in Pakistan.
Finally, the lack of information-sharing regarding CPEC projects has also caused a deterioration of political trust in the country. A lack of transparent functioning of the rollout of projects and usage of funds weakens the faith citizens bestow upon their leaders. The most noteworthy case is that of the Pakistani business community, which remains sceptical about incoming foreign direct investment into Pakistan’s market. They fear that post completion of CPEC, low-priced Chinese goods will flood Pakistan markets and negatively impact the already weak domestic manufacturing industry (Arif, 2018). The dearth of information regarding CPEC projects in the public domain widens the political trust deficit as the local businesses believe their government provides favours to Chinese investment (Arif, 2018). Similarly, there is a widespread feeling of scepticism about the government’s intent behind CPEC projects, especially among people who have felt no tangible benefit of the projects so far.
Thus, the lack of transparency, widespread corruption and alleged disparity in the distribution of resources in CPEC-related projects erode the political trust in Pakistani society.
Impact of CPEC on gender equality
Gender equality is a major component of the socio-economic environment of any country. In countries that witness the marginalisation of women, adequate economic opportunities are extremely important to empower women and ensure gender equality. Pakistan has consistently fared poorly in global rankings related to gender equality. It ranked 153rd out of 156 countries in the Global Gender Gap Report 2021 (World Economic Forum, 2021). When the CPEC-game-changer buzz was new in Pakistan, there were hopes that it would benefit the women of the country. The UN Women Pakistan had called it an “unprecedented opportunity” to promote Pakistani women’s economic potential and rights (Mukhtar and Ummar, 2016). The promise of large and diverse job creation by the CPEC projects meant that women had a greater number of opportunities in the job market. However, the mere presence of a potentially massive economic opportunity did not mean that women would be the natural beneficiaries in the process. For instance, when Pakistan witnessed a boom in its services sector after the turn of the millennium, it was observed that women and men did not benefit equally (Siegmann and Majid, 2017). While men were favoured over women for jobs in banking and telecommunications, women were hired in casual and low-paying jobs in industries like textiles and garments (Siegmann and Majid, 2017). Therefore, to assume that in the case of CPEC, the creation of employment would naturally translate into women empowerment, and consequently greater gender equality would be a folly.
Since, as mentioned before, employment data regarding CPEC is not very clear or transparent, there are gaps in credible statistics about the composition of women in these jobs. Meanwhile, Chinese media and Pakistani think tanks that have collaborations with China project a rosy picture about the economic benefits that women derive from CPEC. One such source had cited the example of China Power Hub Generation Company (CPHGC) to emphasise the positives of CPEC. It reported that over 30% of the employees at CPHGC are women, including the ones in important positions, and that they face “absolutely no discrimination” (Malik and Tian, 2019). Some argue that Chinese companies under CPEC offer Pakistan blue-collar women a better work environment and health care facilities (Malik and Tian, 2019). Given the nature of sources available in state-controlled Chinese media and their Pakistani partners, one cannot draw a black-or-white conclusion; however, it is also true that Pakistan has not improved much in terms of global rankings that reflect gender equality. The latest report by the World Economic Forum revealed that only 22.6% of the women in Pakistan participate in the labour force and only 4.9% are in managerial positions (World Economic Forum 2021: 38). In addition, there exists a huge gender wage gap in the country, with on average of woman’s income being just 16.3% of a man’s (World Economic Forum, 2021: 38). Moreover, there isn’t sufficient evidence to assume that a positive impact has been uniform in all provinces. For example, consider the case of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa– a province in which the women are socially more constrained, less educated, and economically weaker compared to their counterparts elsewhere in Pakistan (Farooq et al., 2018: 52). There is very little awareness in this province among women regarding the CPEC projects in which they may avail opportunities (Farooq et al., 2018: 56). Also, these women lack language skills, technical and vocational education that can help them derive economic benefits from the CPEC projects (Farooq et al., 2018: 55). Additionally, the education sector has also failed to focus on training the women of this province to prepare themselves in relevant skills required for CPEC-generated jobs (Farooq et al., 2018: 56). Thus, the question of jobs available due to CPEC becomes secondary, given that a majority of women in Pakistan face similar challenges of lack of education and related skills.
A number of reports have held CPEC responsible for increasing the plight of women in Pakistan by causing organised crime, human trafficking, and sexual exploitation. It is alleged that CPEC workers and illegal marriage centres, set up by both Pakistani and Chinese matchmakers, have been luring poor Pakistani women into marriages with Chinese men (EFSAS, 2019). On moving to China in the hope of an economically better life, these brides are said to be treated violently and forced into prostitution by their Chinese husbands (EFSAS, 2019). The Human Rights Watch had asked both Pakistan and China to take action against this issue of bride trafficking and related crimes. While authorities in both countries have become active to counter this menace, Chinese authorities repeatedly deny claims of forced prostitution in their country (EFSAS, 2019).
Despite the challenges discussed above, it would be unfair to label CPEC as a whole as a bane for the women in Pakistan. A lot of these challenges have roots in the very low level of women empowerment in Pakistani society, and not in CPEC per se. Whatever opportunities may have been introduced by CPEC, the marginalised women in Pakistan found themselves unskilled and unprepared to make the most out of them. However, one does hear some positive stories about women empowering themselves. For example, the news that women are taking up jobs as truck-drivers in the coal-rich Thar Desert, as part of a CPEC project, was welcomed as evidence of breaking of cultural barriers (Financial Express, 2017). It was not only a positive sign in terms of women facing grim employment prospects finding jobs, but also in terms of how females were taking up a job traditionally dominated by males.
Even though many had hoped that CPEC would prove to be a source of empowerment for Pakistani women, the underwhelming performance of the project coupled with the social challenges prevalent in Pakistan have undermined such hopes.
Impact of CPEC on environment
A clean environment is imperative for the healthy and fulfilling life of the citizens of a country. The latest research has also established a link between climate change– which is a consequence of pollution in the environment, and the downfall of living standards of people in the longer run. A study conducted by the World Bank in 2018 projected that by 2050, under the carbon-intensive scenario, changes in average weather conditions would lead to a decline of living standards in Pakistan by 2.9 % (Mani et al., 2018). Further, in the “severe hotspots” of the country, income levels would decrease drastically in the carbon-intensive scenario by 2050 (Mani et al., 2018). Given the present faltering economy of Pakistan, where the living standards are already quite poor, such a decline could prove to be severe. For these and multiple other reasons, a clean environment is an essential component while studying the sustainability of socio-economic development in Pakistan. It is also important in CPEC’s case, as environmental concerns can dampen the potential benefits CPEC aims to offer.
Concerns regarding the impact of CPEC on the environment in Pakistan have been in existence since the project’s announcement in 2015. In March 2015, the Pakistan Environment Protection Agency (Pak-EPA) had rejected the Environment Impact Assessment Report by labelling it as “incomplete”, “insufficient”, and “prepared by amateurs” (Shahid, 2015). This report had warned about the potential negative impacts of CPEC, including irreparable damage to the fragile ecosystems and other repercussions of cutting trees like the melting of glaciers in northern Pakistan that feed Indus– the lifeline of the country’s agro-based economy (Shahid, 2015). Nevertheless, Pakistan had proceeded with the project by assuring the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) that it would work with its Chinese partners to make CPEC “environmentally and economically sustainable” (Shahid, 2015). However, after about seven years, the negative impact of CPEC on the natural environment can be observed in Pakistan. The major environmental concern is related to the energy projects of CPEC. These projects are important for Pakistan as it finds itself in the midst of an energy crisis. However, around three-quarters of this planned energy is known to be generated from traditional coal-fired power plants in the provinces of Sindh, Punjab and Balochistan (Kouser, 2019). These cause a great amount of carbon dioxide emissions which can lead to a number of respiratory problems, acid rains, global warming and other hazards.
Another kind of CPEC project that causes environmental concerns is the road network projects, which mainly aggravate two menaces: deforestation and vehicle trafficking. One can consider just two cases to gauge the number of environmental problems these projects generate. First, consider the case of Abbottabad, Nowshera, Lower Dir, Swabi, Mardan, and Malakand districts, where more than 54,000 trees were chopped down to give way to CPEC road networks in 2017 (Kouser, 2019). Research found that the large-scale deforestation in these districts, which implied a massive reduction in the carbon sink, intensified the high risks of climate change effects in these districts ranging from extreme flooding to severe droughts, thus negatively impacting the tourism industry in these districts (Kouser, 2019). Apart from the tourism industry, such extreme and erratic climatic changes affect every walk of life, including healthcare, agriculture and other sources of livelihood. Second, an example of vehicle trafficking due to massive CPEC road projects is the Karakoram highway (China-Pakistan Friendship Highway), which is expected to carry up to 7,000 trucks per day and release up to 36.5 million tonnes of carbon dioxide in the process (Kouser, 2019).
The negative environmental impacts of CPEC have started to affect the day-to-day lifestyle of people residing near these projects. In 2020, groups of activists published a compilation of interviews in the form of a book titled ‘Belt and Road Through My Village’. The book included an interview of a local residing near the Sahiwal coal-fired power plant– a CPEC project built on 690 hectares of fertile land between Lahore and Karachi (The Print, 2020). Though the power plant claimed to offer more than 3,000 jobs (the job profile and other details were not provided), the interviewee was concerned about the air pollution caused by the plant that was leading to nasal, skin and lung diseases in the vicinity (The Print, 2020). Also, contaminated water released from the plant that was drained into the nearby canal was eventually causing toxicity in cattle and crops (The Print, 2020). Considering the hazardous impact of this plant and several others like it in the nearby areas, one cannot help but wonder about the harmful working conditions inside these plants. 3,000 jobs is a positive figure, but if the working conditions involve long and constant exposure to unhealthy and toxic fumes etc., the “achievement” of CPEC in job creation is again brought into question.
The Pakistani government has taken a few steps to restore the lost forest cover in the country. The most ambitious of these is the ‘10 billion trees project’, launched in 2019, which aims to plant 10 billion trees by 2023 with support from the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) (Khan, 2021). It remains to be seen how successful this project is in compensating for the environmental harms caused by CPEC, but it is already being met with a lot of criticism. Critics have alleged that the ‘10 billion trees project’ is plagued by bureaucratic missteps and a non-transparent budget, and it is further giving rise to new problems like the elimination of grazing areas (Khan, 2021).
Thus, the negative impact of CPEC on the natural environment in Pakistan has outweighed the positives. Furthermore, the prospects for a more environmentally sustainable approach seem bleak given that a commitment to stick to the Paris Agreement– a call that China has often reiterated in the global fora, has no mention in the CPEC long-term plan document (Alam, 2020).
Conclusion
Analysis of CPEC’s performance on the four parameters taken demonstrates that the project’s socio-economic impact on Pakistan has not been very positive. While there have been certain gains from the project in terms of new opportunities for employment etc., the lack of detailed, transparent information regarding the same restricts conclusive analysis and leaves room for scepticism. In the absence of complete information, one cannot equate the increased availability of jobs with an increase in the living standards of people. Often there also exist mismatches between the type of jobs available and the skillsets of the people seeking jobs. Furthermore, CPEC-related scepticism is worsened by the reports regarding the controversy, scandals, corruption, ethnic bias and crimes that allegedly infest the CPEC projects in Pakistan. All these are closely intertwined with the nature of domestic politics in Pakistan and, therefore, when these incidents tarnish the credibility of CPEC implementation, they cause a political trust deficit in the society. Even those Pakistanis who were optimistic about CPEC doubt the realisation of its promises due to their lack of faith in the government.
CPEC’s performance in the sphere of gender parity has also been underwhelming. Even if the numbers regarding employment opportunities are taken at face value, there is no sufficient data to back the claims of non-discriminatory access to these jobs. Moreover, the original scepticism generated due to non-transparency in the job specifications or working conditions details persists in the case of women as well. CPEC-related crimes like bride trafficking and sexual abuse have still not been successfully eliminated from Pakistan. So, multiple challenges that need concrete action remain pending in the case of gender parity, too. On top of that, CPEC-related environmental concerns are only increasing– especially with the global concerns regarding climate change intensifying by the day. The counter-measures to compensate for the environmental costs of CPEC again lack transparency and are not known to be adequately efficient. Thus, CPEC has performed underwhelmingly low in the four parameters taken to gauge its socio-economic impact on Pakistan.
Notes
[1] Data accessed from Worldometer on 29 December 2021, https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/pakistan-population/.
[2] Ibid.
References
Aamir, Adnan (2020), “Pakistan Belt and Road chief under pressure to resign”, Nikkei Asia, 11 September 2020.
Akhtar, Nadeem et al. (2021), “Exploring the Determinants of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor and Its Impact on Local Communities”, SAGE Open, October 2021.
Alam, Ahmad R. (2020), “Why don’t CPEC projects factor in the climate crisis?”, China Dialogue, 3 January 2020.
Ali, L. et al. (2016), “Socio Economic Impacts of China Pakistan Economic Corridor and Local Residents Support Using Structure Equation Modeling Approach”, 3rd International Conference on Psychology, Management and Social Science (PMSS 2016).
Ali, L. et al. (2017), “The Potential Socio-Economic Impact of China Pakistan Economic Corridor”, Asian Development Policy Review, 5(4): 191-198.
Arif, Amber (2018), “CPEC: a continuum of opportunities and challenges for Pakistan”, South Asia @ LSE, London School of Economics and Political Science, 22 May 2018.
Bhattacharjee, Dhrubajyoti (2015), “China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC)”, Indian Council of World Affairs- Sapru House, New Delhi, 12 May 2015.
“CPEC’s rapid progress improving human development index”, The Nation, 26 November 2018.
Custer, Samantha (2021), “Corridors of Power: How Beijing uses economic, social and network ties to exert influence along the Silk Road”, Williamsburg, VA: AidData at the College of William & Mary.
“Disputes, pollution, deforestation — what it’s like to live near CPEC project in Pakistan”, The Print, 21 December 2020.
Farooq, Shamaila (2018), “Role of Trained Women Workforce in China – Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC): A Gender Gap Analysis”, PUTAJ- Humanities and Social Sciences, 25(1): 49-58.
Hillman, Jonathan (2020), “The China-Pakistan Economic Corridor at Five”, Center for Strategic and International Studies, 2 April 2020.
Hisam, Zeenat (2017), “CPEC and labour”, Dawn, 31 December 2017.
Jacob, Jabin T. (2017), “Deciphering the Numbers: Employment in the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor”, E-International Relations, 22 August 2017, accessed on 26 December 2021 from https://www.e-ir.info/2017/08/22/deciphering-the-numbers-employment-in-the-china-pakistan-economic-corridor/.
Khan, S. (2021), “Pakistan: Environmentalists slam ’10 billion trees’ project”, Deutsche Welle (DW), 2 September 2021.
Kouser, Shahzad et al. (2019), “Uncovering Pakistan’s Environmental Risks and Remedies under the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor”, Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 27: 4661–4663.
Malik, Ammar et al. (2021), “Banking on the Belt and Road: Insights from a new global dataset of 13,427 Chinese development projects”, Williamsburg, VA: AidData at William & Mary.
Malik, M.S. and Tian, L. “CPEC and the role of women”, Xinhua, Islamabad, 21 March 2019.
Mani, Muthukumara et al. (2018), “South Asia’s Hotspots: The Impact of Temperature and Precipitation Changes on Living Standards”, South Asia Development Matters, Washington, DC: World Bank.
Mukhtar, Aisha and Ummar, Fareeha (2016), “The China-Pakistan Economic Corridor – a Possible “Game-changer” for Empowering Women”, UN Women- Asia and the Pacific, 22 September 2016.
“Organized Crime, Human Trafficking and Sexual Exploitation; CPEC brings more than the people of Pakistan wished for”, EFSAS-European Foundation for South Asian Studies, 5 July 2019.
“Pakistan women drivers break cultural barriers in coal-rich Thar desert; see pictures”, Financial Express, 5 October 2017.
Rauf, Shayan (2017), “China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC)”, Encyclopedia Brittanica, 4 August 2017.
Saad, Ahmad et al. (2020), “China-Pakistan economic corridor and its impact on rural development and human life sustainability: Observations from rural women”, Plos One, 2 October 2020.
Shahid, Jamal (2015), “‘Environmental and economic sustainability of CPEC assured”, Dawn, 8 June 2015.
Shams, Shamil (2016), “China’s economic corridor creating new conflicts in Pakistan”, Deutsche Welle (DW), 29 August 2016.
Siegmann, Karin A. and Majid, Hadia (2017), “A game changer for women?”, Dawn, 13 November 2017.
Suleman, Mariyam (2019), “Will China’s Plans for Gwadar Destroy Fishermen’s Livelihood?”, The Diplomat, 3 April 2019.
Tekwani, Shyam (2020), “Pakistan’s ‘three evils’, CPEC and good governance”, East Asia Forum, 26 November 2020.
United Nations Economic Commission for Europe- UNECE (2017), Chapter 6: composite socio-economic indicators, URL: https://unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/stats/documents/ece/ces/ge.42/2017/Seminar/Chapter_6_draft_2017.06.15_-_for_the_seminar.pdf.
United Nations- UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs (2021), “Trust in public institutions: Trends and implications for economic security”, 20 July 2021.
Wani, Ayjaz (2020), “Pakistan: Why has China halted CPEC projects”, Observer Research Foundation, 25 November 2020.
World Economic Forum (2021), Global Gender Gap Report 2021, March 2021.
Zia, Muhammad and Waqar, Shujaa (2018), “Employment Outlook of China Pakistan Economic Corridor A Meta-Analysis”, Preprint URL: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/333421520.
Further Reading on E-International Relations
A See-Saw Relationship: An Overview of Afghanistan’s Ties with India and Pakistan
A Look into the Conflict Between India and Pakistan over Kashmir
An Assessment of Climate Change Imagery in the UK’s Media
Drones and Radicalisation in Pakistan
The EU’s Normative Nature and Its Sanction Regime Against Russia: An Oxymoron?
Socio-ecological Security: Moving Beyond the Human-Nature Du
===
Lesley McLachlan
3 Attp8rSafil aot 412:25r26 · Shared via AddThis ·
CPEC: An Assessment of Its Socio-economic Impact on Pakistan
E-IR.INFO
CPEC: An Assessment of Its Socio-economic Impact on Pakistan
The China-Pakistan Economic Corridor has been underwhelming, plagued by shortcomings in the project itself and from the nature of governance and politics in Pakistan.
22 comments
Lesley McLachlan
This paper attempts to explore four components of socio-economic development (employment, political trust, gender equality and environment) to assess the impact of CPEC on Pakistan till now. It will evaluate both the positives and negatives in these four domains using the data available, and will also weigh contradictory claims, wherever applicable. Additionally, this paper will try to draw attention to factors like political trust that are not directly linked with economic progress. This helps in viewing a more balanced picture as the usual narrative around CPEC has been dominated by economic factors like jobs, GDP growth, income growth, etc.
Impact of CPEC on employment
Pakistan currently features in the top five of the list of countries with the highest population sizes.[1] Moreover, the median age in Pakistan is just 22.8 years.[2] A low median age implies that the majority of people in Pakistan will be entering the working-age group in the coming years, and therefore the demand for jobs is expected to grow in the country. Therefore, a major expectation from CPEC– Pakistan’s biggest development assistance, is the realisation of its promise of generating employment for Pakistani citizens. As is the case with most “official” data on CPEC, the data on employment generated by CPEC projects is not very clear. Official statements from Pakistan or China often refrain from giving exact numbers for jobs created or likely to be created (Jacob, 2017). Even when numbers regarding employment generated are released, details such as the nature of jobs, the relevant skillsets involved, duration of availability of these jobs etc. are not provided (Jacob, 2017).
The launch of CPEC was followed by optimistic predictions regarding employment generation in Pakistan. The International Labour Organisation (ILO) had estimated that CPEC could create 400,000 jobs in Pakistan, while the country’s Planning Commission had estimated a figure of 800,000 jobs by 2030 (Zia and Waqar, 2018: 3). Despite such figures widely promoted by the Pakistani and Chinese governments, what was observed in the early harvest projects of CPEC was a mismatch between job availability and skills of those seeking employment. The early harvest projects were demanding in terms of precise and definite skills, and the domestic workers of Pakistan lacked in most of them (Zia and Waqar, 2018: 2). As a consequence, Chinese companies became more inclined to hire foreign workers (Zia and Waqar, 2018: 2). For instance, in 2017, i.e., during the initial phase of the CPEC projects, out of the total 1,100 skilled labour working in the Gwadar Free Zone, only 250 were Pakistani while the remaining 850 were Chinese nationals (Zia and Waqar, 2018: 13). It is worth noting that the requirement of labour in Gwadar projects at that stage were highly skilled jobs like Pilots/Tig operators, engineers, marine scientists, quality control officers, hydrographic officers etc (Zia and Waqar, 2018: 13).
For the projects that have successfully proceeded beyond their harvest stages, employment is mostly available in the operations and maintenance domains. However, two main challenges remain. First, the current employment data under CPEC has become even less transparent. Consequently, it is not clear if the numbers quoted by government officials, ambassadors or political mouthpieces include jobs that the Chinese are getting in Pakistan under CPEC or not (Jacob, 2017). Second, the scope for jobs under maintenance tasks has been limited for Pakistanis and include not very highly skilled jobs like those of security personnel. A set of figures used to cite employment in Pakistan included about 18,000 jobs in the security domain– all to protect Chinese investments and citizens (Jacob, 2017). On the contrary, CPEC projects have sometimes led to instances where the existing sources of livelihood of local communities in Pakistan have become threatened. For example, the fishing community in Gwadar– a natural seaport supporting the income of a number of local fishermen, has been affected by the CPEC developments aimed at transforming Gwadar into a ‘Developed Mega Port City’ (Suleman, 2019). The construction activities in the area have blocked a long coastline for the indigenous fishing communities, and most of the fishing neighbourhoods have been relocated to the outskirts of Gwadar without prior consultation (Suleman, 2019).
Mere ability to generate jobs is not sufficient to track the socio-economic impact of the employment generating project. The impact that the jobs created have in terms of a decent income and favourable working conditions with labour rights is essential to understand the bigger picture that often gets obscured under cold statistics. CPEC projects do not fare very well in these parameters. Special economic zones under CPEC are regulated under the Special Economic Zones Act, 2012 whose Article 30 makes all labour laws of Pakistan applicable to these zones (Hisam, 2017). The domestic labour laws in Pakistan already suffer from weak implementation, and thus, the workforce involved in the not-so-transparent contractual CPEC projects have little in terms of guaranteed labour rights. Moreover, the majority of the workforce is unskilled and lacks proper education and contractors do not do enough to ensure that safety standards are met in the work sites (Hisam, 2017). As a result, there has been no formal news of work-related accidents during CPEC projects, especially the energy-related ones, because there is no mechanism to report or document such issues (Hisam, 2017). Nevertheless, news about fatal accidents and deaths of low-tiered workers due to electrocution, collapsing of structures, fire, etc., have often made rounds (Hisam, 2017).
The issue of employment is closely related to migration. The push factors in certain Pakistani provinces, including poverty and lack of job opportunities, lead to internal as well as external migration of people. A recent study that explored CPEC’s impact on local communities found that CPEC does not affect migration in the short term (Akhtar et al., 2021). Initially, CPEC had generated optimism about its ability to halt the migration of local people and also to provide an enabling environment that would serve as an incentive for migrants to return home (Akhtar et al., 2021). In the longer term, CPEC may positively impact migration in Pakistan, but that will depend on its performance in terms of generating satisfactory employment opportunities that lead to an improvement in local living standards. However, the delay in the completion of CPEC projects continues to put such optimistic speculations in doubt.
Reply1 dEdited
Lesley McLachlan
Impact of CPEC on political trust
The United Nations Department of Economic Affairs has always held that trust in public institutions and leaders is essential for social and economic progress for any society (UN, 2021). Having an optimum level of political trust helps in better cooperation for the implementation of public policies and fosters the growth of peaceful and inclusive societies (UN, 2021). The significance that political trust holds in socio-economic development can be gauged from the words of UN Secretary-General – António Guterres. Mr. Guterres has warned that a “trust deficit” holds power to undermine progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals (UN, 2021). Therefore, political trust is a crucial component to be analysed while studying the socio-economic impact of CPEC on Pakistan.
Many public surveys and opinion polls conducted during the initial years of the CPEC rollout illustrated the high hopes and expectations that people in Pakistan had from these projects. Of late, such surveys have been witnessing an increase in resentment against the government’s conduct in the implementation of CPEC. A substantial section of the Pakistani population fears that they would be deprived of the benefits of CPEC because of a lack of trust in political and government authorities (Saad et al., 2020). A myriad of corruption scandals and other controversies, discrimination in the distribution of resources and non-transparent procedures are the major factors that have led to a growth of political trust deficit in Pakistan. As a result, the government’s CPEC-related actions are not always viewed as those that meet political legitimacy. A 2021 report by AidData showed that Pakistan is the country that has the highest number of BRI infrastructure projects (10 projects worth 5,675 USD 2017 million) plagued with alleged scandals, controversies or violations (Malik et al., 2021: 66). Additionally, Pakistan also topped the list of countries with BRI infrastructure projects (4 projects worth 2,675 USD 2017 million) that contain references to claims of corruption or other financial wrongdoings (Malik et al., 2021: 67). In 2018, the World Bank had cautioned the countries participating in BRI projects against, inter alia, corruption, and this fear seems to have come true in the case of CPEC (Wani, 2020). The active and retired elite of the Pakistan army has allegedly amassed huge wealth by misusing their crucial positions on the CPEC projects that gave them direct access to the project funds (Wani, 2020). The present-day government in Pakistan led by Imran Khan, which is infamously known to be a “puppet of the army establishment”, has done nothing concrete to investigate the corruption charges in the CPEC projects (Wani, 2020).
Such controversies related to corruption and financial wrongdoings have often invited the anger of common people in Pakistan, who are deprived of the fruits of the promises of CPEC. For instance, when Retd. General Asim Saleem Bajwa’s name surfaced in corruption scandals in CPEC projects, and there were protests and a massive uproar on social media. General (Retd.) Bajwa was then the chairman of CPEC Authority– the main government agency that oversees BRI projects in Pakistan (Aamir, 2020). However, despite the protests and public rage, Bajwa had refused to resign from his top post in the CPEC Authority.
Another factor causing a political trust deficit among the citizens of Pakistan is the issue of discrimination in the distribution of CPEC resources. CPEC has often been met with opposition from ethnic groups in the smaller provinces of Pakistan who fear that the bigger province of Punjab would reap all benefits of the projects at the cost of their lands and resources (Shams, 2016). A manifestation of these fears and trust deficit was when the proposed route for the corridor between Gwadar and Kashgar was debated. Pashtun’s opposition political parties blamed the then Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and Chief Minister of Punjab– Shahbaz Sharif for “rerouting” CPEC to favour communities in Punjab over those in Balochistan and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (Custer et al., 2021: 12). It was also alleged that the Sharifs had diverted funds into their political campaigns (Custer et al., 2021: 12). In addition, the CPEC and related discontent among the local communities also stir Baloch anger and insurgency in the region. The marginalised Baloch fear displacement due to CPEC projects and believe that all the economic benefits related to the projects will flow solely to the state (Tekwani, 2020). The CPEC has triggered old apprehensions and given rise to new ones, all causing a decline in political trust in Pakistan.
Finally, the lack of information-sharing regarding CPEC projects has also caused a deterioration of political trust in the country. A lack of transparent functioning of the rollout of projects and usage of funds weakens the faith citizens bestow upon their leaders. The most noteworthy case is that of the Pakistani business community, which remains sceptical about incoming foreign direct investment into Pakistan’s market. They fear that post completion of CPEC, low-priced Chinese goods will flood Pakistan markets and negatively impact the already weak domestic manufacturing industry (Arif, 2018). The dearth of information regarding CPEC projects in the public domain widens the political trust deficit as the local businesses believe their government provides favours to Chinese investment (Arif, 2018). Similarly, there is a widespread feeling of scepticism about the government’s intent behind CPEC projects, especially among people who have felt no tangible benefit of the projects so far.
Thus, the lack of transparency, widespread corruption and alleged disparity in the distribution of resources in CPEC-related projects erode the political trust in Pakistani society.
Reply1 dEdited
Lesley McLachlan
Imran Khan: Imran Ahmed Khan Niazi HI PP (Punjabi and Urdu: عمران احمد خان نیازی, Pashto: عمران احمد خان نیازی; born 5 October 1952) is a Pakistani politician and former cricketer who is the 22nd[n 1] and current prime minister of Pakistan. He is also the chairman of the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI). ... ; On 8 March 2022, opposition parties submitted motion of no confidence against him to National Assembly Secretriat.[332]
On 1 April 2022, Prime Minister Imran Khan announced that in context of no-confidence motion against him in the National Assembly, the "establishment" had given him three options to choose from viz: "resignation, no-confidence [vote] or elections".[333] ... /// Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf: Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI; Urdu: پاکستان تحريکِ انصاف or پی ٹیآئی, "Pakistan Movement for Justice") is the current ruling political party of Pakistan. It was founded in 1996 by former Pakistani cricketer turned politician Imran Khan.[9] PTI is one of three major political parties of Pakistan along with PML-N and PPP, and the largest party in terms of representation in National Assembly since 2018. ... ; In 2018, it received 16.9 million votes, the largest for any political party in Pakistan so far. It formed the government of Pakistan in coalition with 5 other parties for the first time with Imran Khan as prime minister. As of 2020, the party is in government at the national level and governs the provinces of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Punjab. It is also a part of the coalition government in Balochistan and acts as the largest opposition party in Sindh.[15][16]
Officially, the party aims to create an Islamic welfare state[3][17] and to dismantle religious discrimination in Pakistan.[18][6] The party terms itself an anti-status quo movement advocating egalitarian Islamic democracy.[2][17][19] It claims to be the only non-dynastic party of mainstream Pakistani politics.[20] Recently however, the party has been criticised by its political opponents and analysts for its failures to address various economic and political issues and weakening economy.[21][22][23] It has also faced backlash for its crackdown on opposition and attempts to curb media outlets and freedom of speech.[24][25][26] ... /// Corruption in Pakistan: Corruption in Pakistan is widespread,[1] and extends to every sector from government to judiciary, police, health services and education.[2]
The problems are long-standing, and despite ongoing calls for reform, and many attempts to improve the situation, there is little evidence of progress.[3][4] The current government of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaaf (Pakistan Justice Movement) led by cricketer turned politician Imran Khan vowed to uproot corruption from all sectors. However, there is little success in bringing accountability across the board.[5] The promise to build a welfare state on the principle of Riasat-e-Madina (state of Madina) has been enshrined by recent government but there is little success on practical grounds.[6] ... /// Politics of Pakistan: Pakistan is a multiparty democracy where several political parties compete for seats in the National and Provincial assemblies. However, as an aftermath of the Fall of Dhaka in 1971, a two-party system was inculcated between the Peoples Party and Muslim League. There has also been a sharp rise in the popularity of centrist parties such as PML-Q and PTI.[9][10] The Military establishment has played an influential role in the country's politics. From 1950s to 2000s, several coups were staged that overthrew democratic regimes. However, after the resignation of President Pervez Musharraf in 2008, a sharp line has been drawn between the Military and politics and Pakistan is moving closer to becoming a liberal democracy. However, critique argue that country is moving towards strict hybrid system, a system in which military and political leaders take collective decisions, thus affecting overall power structure of civilian government. Meanwhile many proponent stands with the change and depicts it as a needed change in the country's system to bring in more civilian voice in the policy making process. Many praise the efforts and give example of how successful this system has been like National Command and Control Center (NCOC)[11] to track Covid-19 response effectively at the state level, National Locust Control Centre (NLCC)[12][13] to counter the locust attack and ensures food security in the country[14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21]
The Economist Intelligence Unit rated Pakistan a "hybrid regime" in 2019.[22] ...
Reply1 d
Lesley McLachlan
Impact of CPEC on gender equality
Gender equality is a major component of the socio-economic environment of any country. In countries that witness the marginalisation of women, adequate economic opportunities are extremely important to empower women and ensure gender equality. Pakistan has consistently fared poorly in global rankings related to gender equality. It ranked 153rd out of 156 countries in the Global Gender Gap Report 2021 (World Economic Forum, 2021). When the CPEC-game-changer buzz was new in Pakistan, there were hopes that it would benefit the women of the country. The UN Women Pakistan had called it an “unprecedented opportunity” to promote Pakistani women’s economic potential and rights (Mukhtar and Ummar, 2016). The promise of large and diverse job creation by the CPEC projects meant that women had a greater number of opportunities in the job market. However, the mere presence of a potentially massive economic opportunity did not mean that women would be the natural beneficiaries in the process. For instance, when Pakistan witnessed a boom in its services sector after the turn of the millennium, it was observed that women and men did not benefit equally (Siegmann and Majid, 2017). While men were favoured over women for jobs in banking and telecommunications, women were hired in casual and low-paying jobs in industries like textiles and garments (Siegmann and Majid, 2017). Therefore, to assume that in the case of CPEC, the creation of employment would naturally translate into women empowerment, and consequently greater gender equality would be a folly.
Since, as mentioned before, employment data regarding CPEC is not very clear or transparent, there are gaps in credible statistics about the composition of women in these jobs. Meanwhile, Chinese media and Pakistani think tanks that have collaborations with China project a rosy picture about the economic benefits that women derive from CPEC. One such source had cited the example of China Power Hub Generation Company (CPHGC) to emphasise the positives of CPEC. It reported that over 30% of the employees at CPHGC are women, including the ones in important positions, and that they face “absolutely no discrimination” (Malik and Tian, 2019). Some argue that Chinese companies under CPEC offer Pakistan blue-collar women a better work environment and health care facilities (Malik and Tian, 2019). Given the nature of sources available in state-controlled Chinese media and their Pakistani partners, one cannot draw a black-or-white conclusion; however, it is also true that Pakistan has not improved much in terms of global rankings that reflect gender equality. The latest report by the World Economic Forum revealed that only 22.6% of the women in Pakistan participate in the labour force and only 4.9% are in managerial positions (World Economic Forum 2021: 38). In addition, there exists a huge gender wage gap in the country, with on average of woman’s income being just 16.3% of a man’s (World Economic Forum, 2021: 38). Moreover, there isn’t sufficient evidence to assume that a positive impact has been uniform in all provinces. For example, consider the case of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa– a province in which the women are socially more constrained, less educated, and economically weaker compared to their counterparts elsewhere in Pakistan (Farooq et al., 2018: 52). There is very little awareness in this province among women regarding the CPEC projects in which they may avail opportunities (Farooq et al., 2018: 56). Also, these women lack language skills, technical and vocational education that can help them derive economic benefits from the CPEC projects (Farooq et al., 2018: 55). Additionally, the education sector has also failed to focus on training the women of this province to prepare themselves in relevant skills required for CPEC-generated jobs (Farooq et al., 2018: 56). Thus, the question of jobs available due to CPEC becomes secondary, given that a majority of women in Pakistan face similar challenges of lack of education and related skills.
A number of reports have held CPEC responsible for increasing the plight of women in Pakistan by causing organised crime, human trafficking, and sexual exploitation. It is alleged that CPEC workers and illegal marriage centres, set up by both Pakistani and Chinese matchmakers, have been luring poor Pakistani women into marriages with Chinese men (EFSAS, 2019). On moving to China in the hope of an economically better life, these brides are said to be treated violently and forced into prostitution by their Chinese husbands (EFSAS, 2019). The Human Rights Watch had asked both Pakistan and China to take action against this issue of bride trafficking and related crimes. While authorities in both countries have become active to counter this menace, Chinese authorities repeatedly deny claims of forced prostitution in their country (EFSAS, 2019).
Despite the challenges discussed above, it would be unfair to label CPEC as a whole as a bane for the women in Pakistan. A lot of these challenges have roots in the very low level of women empowerment in Pakistani society, and not in CPEC per se. Whatever opportunities may have been introduced by CPEC, the marginalised women in Pakistan found themselves unskilled and unprepared to make the most out of them. However, one does hear some positive stories about women empowering themselves. For example, the news that women are taking up jobs as truck-drivers in the coal-rich Thar Desert, as part of a CPEC project, was welcomed as evidence of breaking of cultural barriers (Financial Express, 2017). It was not only a positive sign in terms of women facing grim employment prospects finding jobs, but also in terms of how females were taking up a job traditionally dominated by males.
Even though many had hoped that CPEC would prove to be a source of empowerment for Pakistani women, the underwhelming performance of the project coupled with the social challenges prevalent in Pakistan have undermined such hopes.
Reply1 dEdited
Lesley McLachlan
Impact of CPEC on environment
A clean environment is imperative for the healthy and fulfilling life of the citizens of a country. The latest research has also established a link between climate change– which is a consequence of pollution in the environment, and the downfall of living standards of people in the longer run. A study conducted by the World Bank in 2018 projected that by 2050, under the carbon-intensive scenario, changes in average weather conditions would lead to a decline of living standards in Pakistan by 2.9 % (Mani et al., 2018). Further, in the “severe hotspots” of the country, income levels would decrease drastically in the carbon-intensive scenario by 2050 (Mani et al., 2018). Given the present faltering economy of Pakistan, where the living standards are already quite poor, such a decline could prove to be severe. For these and multiple other reasons, a clean environment is an essential component while studying the sustainability of socio-economic development in Pakistan. It is also important in CPEC’s case, as environmental concerns can dampen the potential benefits CPEC aims to offer.
Concerns regarding the impact of CPEC on the environment in Pakistan have been in existence since the project’s announcement in 2015. In March 2015, the Pakistan Environment Protection Agency (Pak-EPA) had rejected the Environment Impact Assessment Report by labelling it as “incomplete”, “insufficient”, and “prepared by amateurs” (Shahid, 2015). This report had warned about the potential negative impacts of CPEC, including irreparable damage to the fragile ecosystems and other repercussions of cutting trees like the melting of glaciers in northern Pakistan that feed Indus– the lifeline of the country’s agro-based economy (Shahid, 2015). Nevertheless, Pakistan had proceeded with the project by assuring the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) that it would work with its Chinese partners to make CPEC “environmentally and economically sustainable” (Shahid, 2015). However, after about seven years, the negative impact of CPEC on the natural environment can be observed in Pakistan. The major environmental concern is related to the energy projects of CPEC. These projects are important for Pakistan as it finds itself in the midst of an energy crisis. However, around three-quarters of this planned energy is known to be generated from traditional coal-fired power plants in the provinces of Sindh, Punjab and Balochistan (Kouser, 2019). These cause a great amount of carbon dioxide emissions which can lead to a number of respiratory problems, acid rains, global warming and other hazards.
Another kind of CPEC project that causes environmental concerns is the road network projects, which mainly aggravate two menaces: deforestation and vehicle trafficking. One can consider just two cases to gauge the number of environmental problems these projects generate. First, consider the case of Abbottabad, Nowshera, Lower Dir, Swabi, Mardan, and Malakand districts, where more than 54,000 trees were chopped down to give way to CPEC road networks in 2017 (Kouser, 2019). Research found that the large-scale deforestation in these districts, which implied a massive reduction in the carbon sink, intensified the high risks of climate change effects in these districts ranging from extreme flooding to severe droughts, thus negatively impacting the tourism industry in these districts (Kouser, 2019). Apart from the tourism industry, such extreme and erratic climatic changes affect every walk of life, including healthcare, agriculture and other sources of livelihood. Second, an example of vehicle trafficking due to massive CPEC road projects is the Karakoram highway (China-Pakistan Friendship Highway), which is expected to carry up to 7,000 trucks per day and release up to 36.5 million tonnes of carbon dioxide in the process (Kouser, 2019).
The negative environmental impacts of CPEC have started to affect the day-to-day lifestyle of people residing near these projects. In 2020, groups of activists published a compilation of interviews in the form of a book titled ‘Belt and Road Through My Village’. The book included an interview of a local residing near the Sahiwal coal-fired power plant– a CPEC project built on 690 hectares of fertile land between Lahore and Karachi (The Print, 2020). Though the power plant claimed to offer more than 3,000 jobs (the job profile and other details were not provided), the interviewee was concerned about the air pollution caused by the plant that was leading to nasal, skin and lung diseases in the vicinity (The Print, 2020). Also, contaminated water released from the plant that was drained into the nearby canal was eventually causing toxicity in cattle and crops (The Print, 2020). Considering the hazardous impact of this plant and several others like it in the nearby areas, one cannot help but wonder about the harmful working conditions inside these plants. 3,000 jobs is a positive figure, but if the working conditions involve long and constant exposure to unhealthy and toxic fumes etc., the “achievement” of CPEC in job creation is again brought into question.
The Pakistani government has taken a few steps to restore the lost forest cover in the country. The most ambitious of these is the ‘10 billion trees project’, launched in 2019, which aims to plant 10 billion trees by 2023 with support from the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) (Khan, 2021). It remains to be seen how successful this project is in compensating for the environmental harms caused by CPEC, but it is already being met with a lot of criticism. Critics have alleged that the ‘10 billion trees project’ is plagued by bureaucratic missteps and a non-transparent budget, and it is further giving rise to new problems like the elimination of grazing areas (Khan, 2021).
Thus, the negative impact of CPEC on the natural environment in Pakistan has outweighed the positives. Furthermore, the prospects for a more environmentally sustainable approach seem bleak given that a commitment to stick to the Paris Agreement– a call that China has often reiterated in the global fora, has no mention in the CPEC long-term plan document (Alam, 2020).
Reply1 dEdited
Lesley McLachlan
Conclusion
Analysis of CPEC’s performance on the four parameters taken demonstrates that the project’s socio-economic impact on Pakistan has not been very positive. While there have been certain gains from the project in terms of new opportunities for employment etc., the lack of detailed, transparent information regarding the same restricts conclusive analysis and leaves room for scepticism. In the absence of complete information, one cannot equate the increased availability of jobs with an increase in the living standards of people. Often there also exist mismatches between the type of jobs available and the skillsets of the people seeking jobs. Furthermore, CPEC-related scepticism is worsened by the reports regarding the controversy, scandals, corruption, ethnic bias and crimes that allegedly infest the CPEC projects in Pakistan. All these are closely intertwined with the nature of domestic politics in Pakistan and, therefore, when these incidents tarnish the credibility of CPEC implementation, they cause a political trust deficit in the society. Even those Pakistanis who were optimistic about CPEC doubt the realisation of its promises due to their lack of faith in the government.
CPEC’s performance in the sphere of gender parity has also been underwhelming. Even if the numbers regarding employment opportunities are taken at face value, there is no sufficient data to back the claims of non-discriminatory access to these jobs. Moreover, the original scepticism generated due to non-transparency in the job specifications or working conditions details persists in the case of women as well. CPEC-related crimes like bride trafficking and sexual abuse have still not been successfully eliminated from Pakistan. So, multiple challenges that need concrete action remain pending in the case of gender parity, too. On top of that, CPEC-related environmental concerns are only increasing– especially with the global concerns regarding climate change intensifying by the day. The counter-measures to compensate for the environmental costs of CPEC again lack transparency and are not known to be adequately efficient. Thus, CPEC has performed underwhelmingly low in the four parameters taken to gauge its socio-economic impact on Pakistan.
Notes /// China–Pakistan Economic Corridor: China–Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) (Chinese: 中巴经济走廊; pinyin: Zhōng bā jīngjì zǒuláng; Urdu: چین پاکستان اقتصادی راہداری) is a collection of infrastructure projects that are under construction through out Pakistan beginning in 2013.[4] Originally valued at $47 billion, the value of CPEC projects is worth $62 billion as of 2020.[5] CPEC is intended to rapidly upgrade Pakistan's required infrastructure and strengthen its economy by the construction of modern transportation networks, numerous energy projects, and special economic zones.[6][7][8][9] On 13 November 2016, CPEC became partly operational when Chinese cargo was transported overland to Gwadar Port for onward maritime shipment to Africa and West Asia,[10] while some major power projects were commissioned by late 2017.[11][12][13] All the progress for CPEC after COVID-19 pandemic alert in Pakistan as of 2021 has been haulted due to security concerns of the workers and the protests being carried out in the Northwest-Frontier Province and Balochistan.[14] ... ; Ashiq Khan Pervaiz Amir Fozia Naz Hanif Quazi
Reply1 dEdited
Lesley McLachlan
CPEC: An Assessment of Its Socio-economic Impact on Pakistan
Ashmita Rana
Mar 10 2022 • 479 views
This content was originally written for an undergraduate or Master's program. It is published as part of our mission to showcase peer-leading papers written by students during their studies. This work can be used for background reading and research, but should not be cited as an expert source or used in place of scholarly articles/books.
China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) was launched in 2015 when 51 agreements and MoUs (Memorandums of Understanding) worth USD 46 billion were signed between China and Pakistan (Rauf, 2017). This grand-scale bilateral project is a flagship constituent of China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). CPEC started out with the goal of modernising Pakistan’s road, rail, air and energy transportation systems and enhancing connectivity between its Gwadar and Karachi ports to the Chinese province of Xinjiang and beyond (Rauf, 2017). Over the years, this project has resulted in Special Economic Zones (SEZs) and cooperation between the two partner countries in other domains such as outer space– all to monitor this massive project. While China has a lot to gain from this crucial component of its BRI dream, many Pakistani leaders and other observers have called CPEC a “game-changer” for Pakistan time and again. The CPEC deal was indeed a significant event for a struggling Pakistani economy, which was also endangering levels of social development in the country. For Pakistan, CPEC not only meant an opportunity to address its existing challenges like the energy crisis but also a golden moment to emerge as a hub for economic activities in the region (Bhattacharjee, 2015).
A Center for Strategic and International Studies report had found that as of 2020, 32 of the 122 announced projects have been completed, which corresponds to USD 20 billion of the estimated USD 87 billion in funding (Hillman, 2020). This underperformance is often attributed to a number of factors, including domestic politics, corruption and terror. The COVID-19 pandemic has further caused delays in the progress of CPEC projects. Despite the lag in CPEC projects, the impact that it has had on Pakistan is too substantial to be overlooked. This paper will focus on the socio-economic aspect of this impact and try to assess how positive or negative this impact has been.
Socio-economic indicators and parameters for assessment
There has been a growing focus on the non-economic aspects of development in recent times. However, these aspects are not independent of the level of economic development of an individual or society. Therefore, socio-economic development as a measure of a society’s economic performance and social progress has gained more recognition. There are various indicators that serve to identify the level of socio-economic development in a society. Broadly, the umbrella of socio-economic indicators includes concepts like ‘happiness’, ‘well-being’, ‘quality of life’, ‘living conditions’, ‘life situations’, ‘social capital’, ‘generalised and political trust’, ‘environmental concepts’ etc (UNECE, 2017: 1). This diversity makes measuring the level of socio-economic development a complex task. A number of composite indicators have been devised to accomplish this task. One of the most common of these is the Human Development Index (HDI) by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). The HDI is a composite index to track socio-economic development, and it aggregates life expectancy, educational attainment and income (UNECE, 2017: 2).
Composite socio-economic indicators have often been suspected of hiding information “behind a single number of dubious significance (UNECE, 2017: 2).” Even in the case of CPEC, the prime focus of this paper, one argument that has been asserted by those who support the project has been that the progress of CPEC is improving the HDI of Pakistan (The Nation, 2018). However, this paper will exercise caution and therefore not use one single composite socio-economic indicator for a simplistic conclusion of a complex project that holds great significance for Pakistan. Instead, this paper will focus on four central factors to understand its socio-economic impact– employment, political trust, gender equality and environment. This paper will not seek to reach a black-and-white verdict of boon or bane, but it will attempt to analyse the impact of CPEC on Pakistan along these four contours.
Existing literature
Most scholarly literature on the socio-economic impacts of CPEC had been published around the time of the megaproject’s initial phases. However, not much study has been conducted in recent times to assess the socio-economic performance of CPEC. Moreover, the early works are heavily influenced by the massive hype about this project that ensued right after its announcement. These works also focused on one or just a few aspects of the project, usually those related to economic gains. One work that was published the year after the signing of the CPEC agreement had kept ‘transportation’ in focus and had used its case to conclude that CPEC’s impacts and benefits were more valuable for the community than its costs (Ali et al., 2016). This study was primarily based on a survey conducted among the local residents of a selected area. The expectations of the locals, that is, their perceived benefits of CPEC were used to argue for the promising socio-economic impact of CPEC. However, while public opinion regarding such lifestyle-altering projects and policies are crucial, they are not sufficient to establish their connection with a final socio-economic level of development. In the case of CPEC, the promotion of the deal had generated widespread optimism in Pakistan, but now that some years have passed, a lot of concerns have also surfaced. Even the aforementioned study had acknowledged that it has some limitations, and “future study” would be needed to assess the total impact of CPEC (Ali et al., 2016: 91). This paper is an attempt in this direction.
Meanwhile, some existing studies do highlight the positives of the project using numerical data available during the initial phases of CPEC, but essential details are lacking. For example, a 2017 study concluded that CPEC would create “millions of jobs” and “improve the living standard of Pakistani people.” (Ali et al., 2017: 195) However, details like the kind of jobs, permanency of employment– contractual, sub-contractual or otherwise, rights granted to the employees, income details etc. were missing. Such details are central while trying to assess the totality of CPEC’s impact on the socio-economic development in Pakistan. Besides, the lack of transparency in CPEC-related information makes assessing its performance a challenge in general. It has been observed that even the information that is in the public domain sometimes do not match and at other times, information is seldom available at any one place or not available at all (Jacob, 2017). Some argue that the nature of governance and politics in both China and Pakistan obstructs the availability of transparency in CPEC-related information (Jacob, 2017). Nonetheless, there have been recent studies conducted by analysts across the world in which different promises and claims about CPEC– rather the BRI as a whole, are contradicted (AidData, 2021).
Reply1 d
Lesley McLachlan
What is socioeconomic impact?
Definition: quantitative evaluation of the utility of projects and public policies, i.e. their creation of collective value net of costs. This method allows all social, environmental, economic and financial impacts of a project or public policy to be measured in a monetary unit. ... ; Socio-economic impact studies measure and monetize the economic, social, environmental and financial costs and benefits, for all stakeholders, of a project or public policy over its lifetime.
By translating the costs and benefits into a monetary unit, socio-economic evaluation allows the following indicators to be derived:
the net creation of collective value (socio-economic NDV)
the socio-economic return
the collective value per euro invested (socio-economic ROI)
Reference values, academic article extrapolation and contingent valuation studies can all be used to translate the costs and benefits into monetary terms. (citizing consulting) /// Economic development: In the economics study of the public sector, economic and social development is the process by which the economic well-being and quality of life of a nation, region, local community, or an individual are improved according to targeted goals and objectives. ...
Reply1 d
Lesley McLachlan
Comparing Socioeconomic Development Across Nations
27 NOVEMBER 2012
By Douglas Beal, Enrique Rueda-Sabater, and Teresa Espírito Santo
The BCG Sustainable Economic Development Assessment (SEDA) is a new methodology that provides a dynamic perspective on the well-being of populations in 150 nations by assessing a broad range of social and economic dimensions over three time horizons: current level of development, recent progress, and long-term sustainability. SEDA scores can be used to measure how well a country translates its wealth, or income, into the overall well-being of its population. (See "How SEDA Measures Development" for definitions of terms.)
HOW SEDA MEASURES DEVELOPMENT
SEDA provides a variety of angles from which to tell a rich, instructive story about the dynamics of socioeconomic development. A nation’s development scores can be compared with those of the remaining 149 nations included in our assessment. They can also be used to make numerous other useful comparisons—for example, with countries in the same region or those with similar income levels, or, in some cases, with fast-growing emerging-market or oil-producer peers.
For the purposes of this report, we used SEDA outputs to show which countries have the highest current levels of development and which have achieved the most progress recently. We also assessed which countries are better at converting their current level of development and their recent progress into well-being for their populations. Finally, we looked at which dimensions of socioeconomic development stand out as the most significant in differentiating leading countries in terms of both current levels of development and recent progress.
CURRENT WELL-BEING
Not surprisingly, many of the wealthiest countries have the highest current-level development scores. Western European nations such as Switzerland and Norway dominate the top 20, which also include Australia, New Zealand, Canada, the U.S., and Singapore. (See the Appendix for complete scores.)
What distinguishes the top performers, other than that they enjoy the advantages of already-high income levels? By far, governance is the dimension of socioeconomic development on which the countries with the highest current-level SEDA scores most outperform the rest, on average. These nations enjoy solid political stability, freedom of expression, and low levels of corruption—issues with which many less developed nations still struggle. Civil society and infrastructure are other important differentiators. And while there are also differences in terms of the quality of health care and education, what really distinguishes the highest performers are such factors as the power of citizens to participate in the political process, express themselves freely, and trust in public safety and the legal system. SEDA cannot tell us, of course, whether good governance is the cause or the result of a high level of socioeconomic development. It may well be both. But clearly, governance matters.
CONVERTING WEALTH INTO WELL-BEING
By looking at a nation’s current-level development score in the context of its per capita GDP, SEDA offers a way of assessing how successfully a country has converted its wealth into broad-based socioeconomic development—or well-being—for its population. To visualize the pronounced differences among the 150 countries assessed, we plotted the per capita GDP and current-level SEDA score of each one. We quantified the results by calculating the wealth to well-being coefficient for each nation.
Several of the wealthiest nations—and all the top 15 countries by current-level SEDA score—are relatively strong performers in translating wealth into well-being. Clusters of Eastern European countries, including Albania and Romania, and such lower-GDP Southeast Asian nations as Indonesia, the Philippines, and Vietnam, also stand out as having translated income into higher living standards. (See Exhibit 1.) It is notable that a number of petroleum- and mineral-producing states in the Middle East and Africa show relatively low performance in converting wealth into well-being.
Norway, which scores highest on current level of development and has a wealth to well-being coefficient of 1.19, illustrates the general excellence required to convert high per capita GDP into high living standards for a population. Norway exceeds the average current-level score of the top 15 nations on nearly every dimension. It is among the best in the world in terms of civil society, income equality, and governance. In education, Norway outperforms the remaining 14 economies as a group in pupil-teacher ratio and is one of the best in years of primary to tertiary schooling.
It may seem surprising that the U.S. does not score higher—as it often does in global indices. The U.S. has a wealth to well-being coefficient of slightly less than 1, compared with an average coefficient of 1.1 for the 15 nations with the highest current-level scores. The U.S. outperforms the top 15 as a group in per capita income. It also outperforms in education, thanks largely to very high enrollment in tertiary schools, and is on par in measures of civil society and economic stability. But it is below the average of the leaders on every other dimension. (See Exhibit 2.) The greatest gap is in income equality. The U.S. also ranks relatively low in health for a nation at its income level—in part because of high levels of obesity and the incidence of HIV
We studied nine Eastern European members of the European Union with high wealth to well-being coefficients to understand what sets them apart from other economies with comparable per capita income. The average coefficient of these nations is 1.2, well above the average of 0.9 for the 23 other economies we studied that have annual per capita incomes in the same range ($12,000 to $27,000). On average, the nine countries outperform the 23 comparable nations on every dimension except employment, where the difference is negligible. (See Exhibit 3.) They are most ahead in terms of income equality, governance, health, and education (Eastern European students test well in math and science); they also perform well on measures of property rights and safety
By contrast, the petroleum-rich Gulf Cooperation Council states (Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates) have wealth to well-being coefficients of less than 1. The average for the group is 0.8. This suggests that these nations have not yet translated their wealth into widespread living standards comparable to those of nations with similar per capita incomes. The biggest gap is in education. Many Gulf states have low tertiary-enrollment rates, and their students perform relatively poorly in math and science. Low scores on press freedom in several Gulf nations pull down rankings on governance, while lack of gender equity harms rankings on civil society.
This does not mean that the Gulf states are failing to take steps to improve living standards. Indeed, one explanation for their low development scores is that oil and gas revenue represents relatively new wealth. Most of the Gulf states are investing to improve K–12 education, build modern universities, and upgrade health care. They are also introducing important reforms. Many are even taking steps to evaluate and plan their overall future. Qatar’s National Development Strategy 2011–2016, for example, clearly lays out development priorities across several sectors. But development takes time. The full impact of investments in education, health care, infrastructure, and the institutions needed to manage modern economies will take years to materialize.
Reply1 dEdited
Lesley McLachlan
RECENT PROGRESS
The economies that have achieved the greatest relative improvements in overall living standards over the past five years are scattered across the globe. What’s more, nations with the top 20 recent-progress SEDA scores represent a range … See more
Reply1 d
Lesley McLachlan
HOW SEDA MEASURES DEVELOPMENT
SEDA takes more than one perspective on socioeconomic development. Here is an explanation of key terms:
Current level shows how well a country is performing on ten dimensions of socioeconomic development based on the most recent data available. The dimensions are income, employment, income equality, economic stability, health, education, governance, the environment, infrastructure, and civil society.
Recent progress measures how much a country has achieved over the most recent five-year period for which data are available along the same ten dimensions of development.
Long-term sustainability assesses the "enablers" that help improvements on each of the ten dimensions of socioeconomic development continue into the next generation. It is measured on the basis of ten key sustainability factors: education and skills development, health care, investment capacity, public finances, economic institutions, infrastructure development, economic dynamism, social development, demographics and employment, and macroeconomic management.
The wealth to well-being coefficient compares a country’s current-level SEDA score with the score that would be expected given its per capita GDP and given the average worldwide relationship between current-level score and per capita GDP, as measured in terms of purchasing power parity. A coefficient greater than 1 indicates that a nation’s living standard is higher than what would be expected given its per capita GDP, while a coefficient of less than 1 indicates that its living standard is below what would be expected given its per capita GDP.
The growth to well-being coefficient compares a country's recent-progress SEDA score over the most recent five years for which data are available with the score that would be expected given its per capita GDP growth rate and given the average worldwide relationship between recent-progress score and per capita GDP growth rate during the same period. A coefficient greater than 1 indicates that a country has improved the well-being of its population more than would be expected given its GDP growth rate, and a coefficient of less than 1 means that it has failed to improve well-being to the extent expected given its GDP growth rate.
Reply1 d
Lesley McLachlan
socioeconomic development, se costs, se relationships between countries ... /// Standard of living: Standard of living is the level of income, comforts and services available, generally applied to a society or location, rather than to an individual.[1]… See more
Reply1 d
Lesley McLachlan
Economic Resilience Is Built on Societal Well-Being
The Sustainable Economic Development Assessment
JUNE 08, 2021
By Christian Schwaerzler, Abhishek Gopalka, Qahir Dhanani, Nikolaus Lang, Vincent Chin, and Dwaa Osman
This article is the first in a series providing insight on why government leaders need to look beyond economic development and prioritize the overall well-being of citizens. The second article will explore how leaders can approach and tackle inequality, and the third will cover direct actions governments must take for the short- and long-term development of countries and their citizens.
One of the biggest lessons COVID-19 taught governments is that societal well-being makes countries more resilient. Nations that invest across a range of development dimensions—such as education, health, infrastructure, and governance—have been better able to cushion the socioeconomic fallout from the pandemic. Our analysis shows that countries with improved abilities to convert wealth into well-being as well as those with high overall well-being tended to mitigate drops in economic performance and limit the growth of unemployment rates during the first year of the pandemic. In contrast, countries with lower levels have fallen further behind, particularly in GDP growth and employment. This aligns with our previous research that shows countries better at converting wealth into well-being were able to recover more quickly from the 2008–2009 financial crisis.
Since 2012, BCG has ranked countries according to a proprietary economic development tool called the Sustainable Economic Development Assessment, or SEDA. (See “A Comprehensive Measure of Well-Being.”) A consistent finding from our research is that the more traditional metrics of economic development, which focus on GDP and other macroeconomic indicators, are not sufficient to gauge the true state of development in any society. Rather, countries need to take a more comprehensive and sustainable approach that incorporates and optimizes societal well-being. Viewed through this lens, SEDA analyses have shown that some lower-income countries are actually better off than high-income countries because they look beyond economic metrics and invest in well-being more broadly. COVID-19 brought in a new dimension—an opportunity to observe how such efforts make countries more resilient in a crisis.
A COMPREHENSIVE MEASUREMENT OF WELL-BEING
Launched in 2012, BCG’s proprietary SEDA tool looks at a range of economic and societal data for 141 countries to track how well governments turn wealth into well-being. It aggregates public data on ten dimensions in three broad categories.
Economic metrics, including income levels, economic stability, and employment
Investments in education, health, and infrastructure
Sustainability in terms of governance equality, civil society, and environment
SEDA is primarily an objective measure (combining data on outcomes, such as in health and education, with quasi-objective data, such as governance assessments). It is also a relative measure that assesses how a country performs in comparison to either the entire universe of countries or to individual peers or groups. SEDA offers a current snapshot as well as a measure of progress over time and complements purely economic indicators like GDP.
EXPLORE BCG’S RANKINGS OF NATIONAL WELL-BEING
Even as countries continue fighting the pandemic, they need to think long-term and make investments today that will lead to faster and more sustainable progress during the coming recovery. Specifically, we believe that three overarching themes have the potential to generate positive change across multiple well-being dimensions: accelerating actions to slow climate change, investing in digitization, and strengthening social protection systems to ensure inclusive and equitable growth. Each of these themes should be a priority for governments.
THE PANDEMIC’S LASTING IMPACT ON DEVELOPMENT
COVID-19 has left an unprecedented mark on global development. The United Nations Development Programme’s simulations of the pandemic’s real-time impact suggest that the Human Development Index fell in 2020, for the first time since measurements began in 1990. Similarly, the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals are expected to be significantly disrupted and many of the historic gains over the past several decades could be reversed, at least temporarily.
At a country level, the pandemic revealed the way that all realms of society are interconnected. Evolving from a health crisis to an economic and education crisis, COVID-19 has led to rising social tensions, high unemployment, and failing health systems, even in high-income countries. In low-income and developing countries, inequality has increased across several realms.
Income. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) predicts that income inequality for emerging-market and developing economies will rise to levels not seen since the global financial crisis of 2008–2009, essentially wiping out a decade of development in these regions.
Health. Disparities in access to health services—due to factors such as income, race, gender, and resident status—have widened the gap in life expectancy, accentuating the vulnerability of disadvantaged groups within poorer countries.
Education. According to UN data, close to 1.5 billion students have been affected by COVID-19-related school closures. Inadequate internet penetration has hampered lower-income countries’ ability to pivot to distance learning and likely exacerbated education inequality both within and between countries.
The pandemic has reinforced the need for governments to look beyond income growth and GDP and focus on the broader goal of overall well-being.
Reply1 d
Lesley McLachlan
WELL-BEING STABILIZED COUNTRIES DURING THE CRISIS
It’s too early to measure the full response of any country to COVID-19, but early indications suggest that countries with high SEDA scores—indicating higher levels of societal well-being—will suffer less of an impact. Indeed, well-being served as a form of stabilizer, enabling countries to absorb the shock and potentially positioning them to bounce back more quickly once the crisis ends. In our analysis, we looked at two leading economic indicators: economic growth and employment.
In terms of economic growth, countries which improved their ability to convert wealth into well-being since the global financial crisis, saw a smaller drop in their real GDP growth rate in 2020, while countries that have experienced a deterioration in their ability to convert wealth into well-being saw a correspondingly larger drop. (See Exhibit 1.) This reveals that investing in well-being enhances long term resilience and can further enhance a nation’s ability to withstand future crises. Notably, the countries that experienced the biggest drop in GDP also underperformed significantly in SEDA measurements of governance and civil society, suggesting that these are key dimensions in fighting the pandemic’s economic repercussions. Governance is critical because it boosts transparency and accountability, leading to greater public trust in government and increasing participation and engagement of citizens. Civil society matters because it helps countries deal with the unequal fallout from a crisis—for example, providing support and aid to those who are disproportionately affected.
The positive correlation between wealth, as reflected in per capita income levels, and SEDA scores should come as no surprise. After all, income affects well-being in many ways. At the same time, well-being is not simply a function of income. Many countries at similar income levels have significant disparities in well-being.
In terms of employment, we saw a similar effect. Countries that had high SEDA scores were better able to cushion the blow of COVID-19 and limit the growth of unemployment. (See Exhibit 2.) Many of these countries already had measures in place to increase the resilience of labor markets—such as unemployment safety nets and job retention schemes. Even in cases where the labor market policies needed to be adjusted, doing so was a faster process than creating them from scratch. A stubborn question remains as to whether retention schemes will lead to a stronger labor recovery once the pandemic ends; to some extent, that depends on whether they support jobs that have been temporarily at risk but are still viable in the long term.
CAPITALIZING ON THE POST-PANDEMIC RECOVERY
Even as countries continue to face immediate priorities in addressing the crisis, they must reset their ambitions for the future. In fact, severe shocks like COVID-19 present a real opportunity to spring forward and introduce broad reforms toward the goal of overall societal well-being. Regardless of their past performance, governments should seek to leverage the current hardships to reimagine and realign policy imperatives across the full range of SEDA dimensions. From our analysis, we believe that three themes can have a multiplier effect in increasing well-being and thus should be at the top of government agendas.
Accelerate Actions to Slow Climate Change.
The pandemic is estimated to have driven a 5% to 10% drop in CO2 emissions in 2020. That may seem promising as a temporary relief, but compared with the change in trajectory required to slow global warming, it is a mere blip. As the economic cycle resumes momentum, governments and societies have a unique opportunity to accelerate climate-related actions and build a green recovery. Previous recessions have led to an increased adoption of renewable energy sources and battery technologies. In fact, citizens expect governments to tackle climate change as part of COVID-19 recovery efforts. In a BCG survey of more than 3,200 corporate leaders, 77% of respondents say that companies receiving public aid or grants due to the pandemic should take on additional environmental responsibilities and commitments. A recent analysis by the International Energy Agency and the IMF found that a well-structured green recovery plan could lead to an increase in global GDP of 3.5% over the next three years and create 9 million jobs over the same period.
Indeed, some nations are intensifying their investments in environmental well-being. While countries that are already leading in SEDA environmental performance tend to be doubling down on a green recovery, other countries that are not environmental frontrunners have also passed recovery packages with a substantial share of investments targeted at environmental objectives. (See Exhibit 3.) This suggests that these countries see the crisis as an opportunity to accelerate their sustainability efforts.
For example, India’s green stimulus measures include investment in biogas and cleaner fuels, incentives for high-efficiency solar, and advanced battery production. South Korea’s “New Deal,” in addition to focusing on digitization, prioritizes initiatives that support a green transition, including investments in renewables and R&D funding for electric vehicles (EVs) and batteries. China’s green efforts entail substantial funding for EVs and related infrastructure, railway infrastructure development, and electricity transmission. In addition, China—the world’s largest emitter of greenhouse gases—recently pledged to achieve carbon neutrality by 2060 and the European Union has strengthened its commitments under the Paris Agreement by pledging to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 55% by 2030.
Despite these promising early signs, further action will be required. To stay on track to achieve the goal of limiting global warming to 1.5°C above preindustrial levels, roughly 1% to 3% of global GDP will need to be allocated to climate-change initiatives. To build a green recovery and accelerate actions to slow climate change, governments should focus on four actions.
Hardwire sustainability into stimulus spending. Focus investments on both decarbonizing existing sectors (for example, industrials and energy) and spurring growth in new green sectors such as green hydrogen. Include incentives and regulatory standards, such as sustainability targets and carbon disclosure requirements, in stimulus packages.
Create green jobs and prepare for job transitions. Prioritize investments and programs based not on their absolute job creation potential but on the number of jobs created in the green sector. Manage an equitable transition of the workforce toward a zero-carbon economy. Actively invest in reskilling programs to train workers who are displaced.
Partner with the private sector. To alleviate fiscal constraints, access private funding through structures such as public-private partnerships. Capitalize on the growth in environmental, social, and governance (ESG) investing and integrate ESG factors into investment processes.
Coordinate across borders. Partner with other national and regional governments on climate initiatives to make faster progress. The UN’s COP26 climate conference, which has been rescheduled for November 2021, will be a key milestone in monitoring progress toward the Paris Agreement. With representatives from nearly 200 countries, it also provides an opportunity to step up global momentum in forwarding a green recovery from the pandemic.
Reply1 d
Lesley McLachlan
Invest in Digitization as an Enabler and Amplifier of Well-Being.
Done right, digitization can help countries manage shocks in the short term and keep economies running. In the medium to long run, it can help developing and emerging economies leapfrog developed nations, accelerating human capital development, industry competitiveness, and access to global markets. Indeed, our previous analysis shows that digital infrastru
cture increases the ability to convert wealth into well-being at lower income levels; that is, its spillover impact on other well-being dimensions such as employment, education, and governance is particularly significant for developing countries.
Several countries have successfully integrated digital technologies into their crisis response; for example, by using mobile apps to trace transmission chains, register populations for vaccines, increase collaboration, and provide community support. Looking ahead, the pandemic has made clear that the future will be even more digital than previously imagined. Many of the behavioral shifts we are experiencing today, such as online grocery shopping and working from home, are expected to endure beyond the crisis.
Specifically, countries should focus on the following priorities.
Bridge the digital divide. As evidenced by those who have been disproportionately affected by school closures and the move to telework and telehealth, digital inequality tends to exacerbate existing social inequality. At the foundational level, countries need to ensure the provision of universal, reliable, and stable connection to the internet. Equally critical to safeguarding connectivity is bridging the access gap. COVID-19 has exposed the hardware divide, in which availability of devices (smartphones, PCs, laptops, tablets) and peripheral services (apps and subscriptions) dictates the extent to which people are able to leverage critical digital services such as e-learning. Furthermore, digital inclusion policies need to be multidimensional—promoting digital literacy, enhancing technological competence, and fostering the effective use of technologies to promote fruitful participation in the digital economy. As Exhibit 4 shows, there is a correlation between a country’s digital inclusion performance (as measured by the Network Readiness Index) and how well it converts wealth into well-being.
Leverage digital to build more resilient cities. Curbing the spread of COVID-19 has tested the capabilities of urban environments. City resilience will continue to be the main buffer against inevitable shocks, particularly as the 70% the world’s population will live in metropolitan areas by 2050. Big data’s role in smart city platforms will be essential in responding to future disasters in real time.
Digital government. Governments must continue to expand their digital capabilities with a citizen-centric mindset, as delivering simpler, more seamless, and faster government services becomes increasingly important. By harnessing both the human and technological elements of their organizations, governments can provide positive outcomes for citizens.
Strike the right balance between data accessibility and privacy.COVID-19 has shown the enormous potential for governments to use and leverage citizen data. Yet this raises important ethical and legal questions. Governments need to safeguard information while instilling high ethical standards for its utilization. For instance, by creating data-sharing frameworks that put in place data use guardrails, governments can support accessibility and adoption without compromising privacy.
Establish Social Protection and Welfare Systems to Ensure Sustainable and Equitable Growth.
Social protection systems can dramatically mitigate the impact of crises like COVID-19, particularly for vulnerable populations who have been disproportionally impacted. Since the beginning of the pandemic, the number and scope of social protection initiatives has been unprecedented. Overall, as of December 2020, approximately $590 billion (or nearly 1% of worldwide GDP) had been pledged toward more than 1,500 specific measures in 209 countries. More than half of these were for new programs or benefits. (See Exhibit 5.) Many countries prioritized benefits for workers and their dependents along with benefits for poor or vulnerable populations.
Despite these efforts, however, many social protection schemes still fall short. According to research from the UN’s International Labour Organization, 55% of the global population has no form of social protection. About 40% of people have no access to health insurance or national health systems, and only 20% can count on unemployment benefits.
There is a clear need for future-proof welfare systems, which should not only act as an immediate cushion during a crisis but also make countries more resilient and equip them to transition to more sustainable economic growth. It is crucial, therefore, that governments treat the COVID-19 pandemic as an opportunity to rethink their approach to social protection. Rather than a safety net for vulnerable populations, these programs should serve as a trampoline, empowering citizens to be more socially and economically adaptive. The right approach will reduce inequalities, strengthen human capital, and contribute to long-term productivity.
To that end, governments should focus on the following priorities in revamping social protection systems.
Institutionalize successes. Identify which of the programs launched in response to COVID-19 functioned best and make them permanent. Cut or modify other programs as needed.
Increase financial sustainability. Look beyond one-time stimulus spending packages to make programs—particularly basic protection measures—that will be viable over the long term.
Collaborate across stakeholders. Design programs to draw on support from government, business, and citizens.
Use digital delivery channels that are fast and cost-effective in interacting with participants and delivering benefits.
The pandemic has served as a forced experiment in testing countries’ resilience, and as our analysis shows, the results are clear. Societal well-being not only helps countries during good times; it also makes them more resilient during crises. The SEDA framework is a powerful tool for governments to assess and track their progress in this realm and identify specific policy interventions that will comprehensively improve the well-being of their populations. By focusing on the three overarching themes we identified—slowing climate change, fostering inclusive digitization, and enhancing social protection—countries can capitalize on multiplier effects and accelerate overall progress. (bcgcom) /// What Is SEDA?
Without a doubt, there is a connection between a country’s wealth and economic growth and improvements to its overall well-being. So rather than focusing solely on GDP per capita—the most frequently used indicator of a country’s general welfare—BCG designed SEDA, a proprietary diagnostic tool built to objectively measure a country‘s sustainable economic growth and citizen well-being.
SEDA combines data on outcomes (such as health and education) with quasi-objective data (such as governance assessments). It also assesses how a country performs relative either to the entire universe of 143 countries or to individual peers or groups.
SEDA offers a current snapshot of a country’s sustainable economic development assessment ranking as well as a measure of progress over time, and it complements purely economic indicators like GDP. However, SEDA doesn’t include purely subjective measures. Other metrics based on subjective measures—such as the ones used in the UN’s Happiness Report—offer valuable complementary, but separate, analyses. In fact, BCG has found a strong overall positive correlation between the UN’s Happiness scores and SEDA scores. (bcgcom)
Reply1 d
Lesley McLachlan
Daniel Karageorgis
Reply1 d
Daniel Karageorgis
Lesley McLachlan Pakistan has a long long way to go as far as women rights are concerned. I doubt if they will ever reach a basic level.
Reply13 h
Lesley McLachlan
Boston Consulting Group: Boston Consulting Group (BCG) is an American global management consulting firm founded in 1963, headquartered in Boston, Massachusetts.[3] It is one of the Big Three — the world’s three largest and most prestigious management consulting firms — along with Bain & Company and McKinsey & Company. /// 2019 New Zealand budget: Budget 2019, dubbed the Wellbeing Budget, was the name given to the New Zealand budget for fiscal year 2019/20 presented to the New Zealand House of Representatives by Finance Minister Grant Robertson on 30 May 2019. ... /// 2021 New Zealand budget: ... ; Background
The budget is for the fiscal year from 1 July 2021 to 30 June 2022. This is the fourth budget of the Sixth Labour Government and the first budget of Labour's second term in office, in which they have a parliamentary majority, making this the first budget where the Labour Party has been the sole party behind the creation of the budget.[2]
The impact of COVID-19 on the economy has led to an increase in government borrowing, with government debt expected to hit NZ$166.2 billion by the end of the 2020/21 fiscal year; before the pandemic it was at $57.7 billion. The 2020/21 fiscal year ends with a forecasted budget deficit of $21.6 billion.[3] The operating allowance for this budget is $3.8 billion per year.[1] ... /// Minister of Finance (New Zealand): The minister of Finance, originally known as colonial treasurer, is a minister and the head of the New Zealand Treasury, responsible for producing an annual New Zealand budget outlining the government's proposed expenditure. The position is often considered to be the most important cabinet post after that of the prime minister.[2]
The current Minister of Finance is Grant Robertson. There are also two associate minister roles; they are currently held by David Parker, and Megan Woods.[3]
Contents
1 Responsibilities and powers
2 History
3 List of Finance Ministers
4 List of Treasurers
5 References
6 External links
Responsibilities and powers
This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (December 2017) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)
One of the Minister of Finance's key roles involves the framing of the annual year budget. According to Parliament's Standing Orders, the Minister of Finance may veto any parliamentary bill which would have a significant impact on the government's budget plans. The Minister of Finance supervises the Treasury, which is the government's primary advisor on matters of economic and financial policy.[4] As such, the Minister of Finance has broad control of the government's spending, making the position quite powerful.
Some analysts, such as Jonathan Boston, claim that the Minister of Finance can sometimes hold more influence than the Prime Minister, if the conditions are right. Gordon Coates, Finance Minister in the early 1930s, was sometimes such a figure. Some political scientists, such as Boston, believe that in the government of David Lange, Minister of Finance Roger Douglas held more power than was proper, and that the Treasury was using its control of government finances to take a supervisory role across the whole administration. It was probably for this reason that Lange's successor, Geoffrey Palmer, established the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, which could offer the Prime Minister advice independent of that given by individual ministers.
History
The office of Minister of Finance has existed since 1841.[5] Apart from the office of Prime Minister itself, the only other cabinet posts to have existed since the first cabinet are those of Attorney-General and Minister of Internal Affairs. Originally, the holder of the post was designated "Colonial Treasurer", but this term was replaced with "Minister of Finance" shortly after New Zealand ceased to be a Colony and became a Dominion. This occurred in 1907, during the cabinet of Joseph Ward.
In the past, several Prime Ministers took on the post of Minister of Finance themselves, though in recent times this practice has declined. Robert Muldoon, the last person to concurrently serve as Prime Minister and Minister of Finance, created considerable controversy by doing so. It is more common, however, for a Deputy Prime Minister to serve as Minister of Finance. Bob Tizard, Michael Cullen and Bill English served as Deputy Prime Minister when in the position as Minister of Finance.
Traditionally Ministers of Finance rank second or third in seniority lists within Westminster-style Cabinets ...
Reply1 dEdited
Lesley McLachlan
Women in Pakistan: Women in Pakistan make up 48.76% of the population according to the 2017 census of Pakistan.[3] Women in Pakistan have played an important role throughout Pakistan's history[4] and they are allowed to vote in elections since 1956.[5] In Pakistan, women have held high offices including that of the Prime Minister, Speaker of the National Assembly, Leader of the Opposition, as well as federal ministers, judges,[6] and serving commissioned posts in the armed forces. Major General Shahida Malik, attaining the highest military post for a woman.[7][8] Benazir Bhutto was sworn in as the first woman Prime Minister of Pakistan on 2 December 1988.
The status of women in Pakistan differs considerably across classes, regions and the rural/urban divide due to the uneven socioeconomic development and the impact of tribal and feudal social formations on lives of women in Pakistan. Gender Concerns International reports that the overall women's rights in Pakistan have improved with increasing number of women being educated and literate.[9][10][11][12]
However, Pakistan does face issues where woman are kept behind in the field of education. This is also associated with low government funding,[13] less schools and colleges for women, and a low enrollment rate of women in educational institutions due to lack of awareness and women rights in certain areas.[14][15] Cases of rape, honor killing, murder, and forced marriages in backward areas are also reported.[14][16][17][18] All these issues are related to constraints due to a lack of education, poverty, a judicial system of Pakistan that is disrupted, the negligence of government authorities to implement laws[19][20] and widespread underperformance of law enforcement agencies such as the Police.[21][22]
Contents
1 History
1.1 Zulfikar Ali Bhutto Government
1.2 Zia-ul-Haq's Military Regime
1.3 Benazir Bhutto Government
1.4 Nawaz Sharif Government
1.5 Pervez Musharraf's regime
1.6 President Asif Zardari
1.6.1 Appointment of women
1.6.2 Legislation for protection of women
1.6.3 Criminal Law (Amendment) (Offense of Rape) Act 2016
1.6.4 Special Courts
2 Practices
2.1 Purdah
2.2 Vani
2.3 Watta satta
2.4 Dowry
2.5 Violence against women
2.5.1 Rape
2.5.2 Honour killings (karo-kari)
2.5.3 Acid attacks
2.6 Female infanticide
2.7 Marriage to the Quran
2.8 Cousin marriages
3 Culture
3.1 Gender roles
4 Education and economic development
4.1 Education
4.2 Rural/urban divide and government policy
4.3 Employment
4.3.1 Workforce participation
4.3.2 Military
4.4 Land and property rights
5 Other concerns
5.1 Forced conversion of non-muslim girls to Islam
5.2 Gender roles
5.3 Health
5.4 Marriage and divorce issues
6 Notable women
6.1 Politics and activism
6.1.1 Pakistani Women's rights activism and NGOs
6.2 Science, technology, engineering and mathematics
6.3 Arts and entertainment
6.3.1 Actresses
6.3.2 Singers
6.3.3 Pakistan Air Force
6.3.4 Others
6.4 Sports
6.5 Literature
6.6 Other fields
7 See also
8 References
9 External links
Reply9 h
Lesley McLachlan
Daniel Karageorgis thank you! a patriarchal society. Geng Song Sejin Pak work in gender studies, sociology ... /// Women in Pakistan: ... ; Education and economic development
In Pakistan, the women's access to property, education, employment etc. remains considerably lower compared to men's.[78] The social and cultural context of Pakistani society has historically been predominantly patriarchal.[10] Women have a low percentage of participation in society outside of the family.[129] As per research study of Khurshid, Gillani, Hashmi; Pakistani school textbooks are discreminatory towards female representation in quantity and status. History taught in Pakistani school text books is mostly male oriented, in Urdu school books women religious role too is less depicted, women get depicted in inferior position compared to men.[citation needed] ... ; Gender roles
A girl in North Pakistan.
Pakistan is a patriarchal society where men are the primary authority figures and women are subordinate.[158] Gender is one of the organizing principles of Pakistani society. Patriarchal values embedded in local traditions, religion and culture predetermine the social value of gender. Islam heavily influences gender roles in particular. An artificial divide between production and reproduction, made by the ideology of sexual division of labour, has placed women in reproductive roles as mothers and wives in the private arena of home and men in a productive role as breadwinners in the public arena.[159]
Pakistani women lack social value and status because of negation of their roles as producers and providers in all social roles. The preference for sons due to their productive role often dictates the allocation of household resources in their favor. Traditionally, male members of the family are given better education and are equipped with skills to compete for resources in the public arena, while female members are imparted domestic skills to be good mothers and wives. Lack of skills, limited opportunities in the job market, and social, religious and cultural restrictions limit women’s chances to compete for resources in the public arena.[159]
This situation has led to the social and economic dependency of women that becomes the basis for male power over women in all social relationships. However, the spread of patriarchy is not even. The nature and degree of women’s subordination vary across classes, regions, and the rural/urban divide. Patriarchal structures are relatively stronger in the rural and tribal setting where local customs establish male authority and power over women's lives. On the other hand, women belonging to the upper and middle classes have increasingly greater access to education and employment opportunities and can assume greater control over their lives.[159]
According to Pakistani standards, 'good women' could be either educated or uneducated and are expected to be unselfish, calm, tolerant, empathetic, reliable, able to organize, compromise, coordinate and maintain hospitality within the house and in keeping good relationships.[160] They are also expected to do household chores, care for her children, husband and in-laws and, when needed, provide the home with external income.[160] Women are also expected to marry a man of their parent's choice, follow Islam's code of dress[161] and sacrifice their own dreams.[162]
In a study carried out by Gallup Pakistan, the Pakistani affiliate of Gallup International, majority of the Pakistanis believe that both males and females have different roles to play in the society. Although women’s role has broadened beyond being a housewife over time, many people still give priority to men in politics, education, employment, and related walks of life. When the respondents were asked to give their opinion on a number of statements about gender roles 63% of the respondents agreed with the statement that "Boys' education is more important than girls'"; 37% disagreed with it. The percentage of people agreeing with this statement was higher among rurallites (67%) as compared to the urbanites (53%). However, more than 90% believe that female children should be educated, nearly half of them believing that, should opportunity be available, they should rise to college education and beyond.
Fifty five percent (55%) of the respondents believe that "Both husband and wife should work"; while 45% said it is wrong for both husband and the wife to work. More than 50% of men including those from rural areas agree that both husband and wife should work for a better living. When the respondents were asked whether "Men are better politicians as compared to women or not"; 67% agree men are better politicians while 33% think otherwise. More women agree with this statement as compared to men. In response to the following statement "If jobs are in shortage should men be given priority for employment"; 72% of the respondents believe they should be given priority while 28% disagree. Eighty three percent (83%) of the respondents think that "To live a happy life women need children"; while only 17% think they do not. A vast majority of all respondents including 82% of women respondents believe that "prosperous women should raise their voice to support the rights of poor women."[163] ... Foqia says while the highest number of women contested the 2018 general elections, still fewer, i.e. just eight, got elected compared to previous years. Foqia says that while electoral reservations provide for minimum level assurance, Pakistani familial, societal and institutional structure do little to give women a fair chance to thrive in competitive political environments. According to Foqia, though local level elections give more opportunities at entry level, being non-political in character means that political exposure remains limited; political parties do allot five percent of their parliamentary seats, but mostly where chances of winning are bleak; and the parliamentary reserved seats for women are awarded based on clientelism. This results in no benefit of exposure in a competitive political environment and the patriarchal hegemony continues to stifle meaningful political inclusion of women in Pakistan's political power structures.[171] Prominent actress Sarah Khan states that Allah provides for equal gender rank for women and that instead of women's day's Aurat March activism, women need to focus on their children's education.[172] ... ; Sportswomen of Pakistan have always been plagued by the patriarchal society and many have come forward to claim that coaches, selectors and others who are in position of power demand sexual favours. Sexual abuse of this kind has led some athletes to commit suicide due to inaction of authorities in pursuing the suspects. In some cases the female athletes who register the cases of sexual abuse and harassment are banned or put on probation.[206][207][208][209]
In 1996, when sisters Shaiza and Sharmeen Khan first tried to introduce women's cricket in Pakistan, they were met with court cases and even death threats. The government refused them permission to play India in 1997, and ruled that women were forbidden from playing sports in public. However, later they were granted permission, and the Pakistani women's cricket team played its first recorded match on 28 January 1997 against New Zealand in Christchurch.
Shazia Hidayat was the sole woman Olympian on the Pakistan team at the 2000 Summer Olympic Games and the second woman to represent Pakistan in an Olympic event.[210] ...
Reply5 hEdited
Lesley McLachlan
/// Gender and Education
Volume 33, 2021 - Issue 7: Race, ethnicity and gendered educational intersections ... ; We live in an era of gendered Islamophobia where the misappropriation of feminism too often leads to the portrayal of Islam as misogynistic, serving only to advance colonial interests (Hasan 2012). Such discourses undermine the cause of gender equality; a top priority alongside education, embedded in the United Nation’s Sustainable Development Goals. Hussain (2020) argues that both education and gender equality in India are mediated through an idealised middle class through the concept of ‘respectable femininity’. This pervasive ideology often represents Muslims as a homogenous group driven only by their religious identity and portrayed as oppositional to women’s empowerment. Hussain’s paper is a timely critique of the notion of Muslim women in India as oppressed by Muslim men and only liberated through western intervention. It offers a rare, intersectional analysis of how Muslim families negotiate issues of ethnicity, class, and education through cultural authorisation. This is defined as a process linked to the concepts of bhal suwali (good girlhood) and bhal ghor (good family), which work in unison to produce a form of symbolic capital, facilitating the enactment of respectable femininity. Hussain acknowledges this as a derivative of colonial values of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. However, her research also points to the emergence of a ‘new, liberal Muslim’ woman, ‘who embraces education, pursues a career, exercises choice of partners and delays marriage’. Most importantly, this empowered womanhood is not limited to the middle classes but supported by parents from various socioeconomic backgrounds. I thoroughly enjoyed this paper and the significant contribution it makes to our understandings of the intersecting and complex nature of ethnicity, gender, class, education and social mobility in the twenty-first-century India. /// Race, Class, and Gender in Education Research: An Argument for Integrative Analysis
Carl A. Grant, Christine E. Sleeter
First Published June 1, 1986
Abstract
Race, social class, and gender tend to be treated as separate issues in education literature. We review a sample of education literature from four journals, spanning ten years, to determine the extent to which these status groups were integrated. We found little integration. We then provide an example from research on cooperative learning to illustrate how attention to only one status group oversimplifies the analysis of student behavior in school. From findings of studies integrating race and class, and race and gender, we argue that attending only to race, in this example, oversimplifies behavior analysis and may contribute to perpetuation of gender and class biases. ... /// Sociology of gender: Sociology of gender is a prominent subfield of sociology. Social interaction directly correlated with sociology regarding social structure. One of the most important social structures is status. This is determined based on position that an individual possesses which effects how they will be treated by society. One of the most important statuses an individual claims is gender. ... /// Woman: Womanhood is the period in a human female's life after she has passed through childhood, puberty, and adolescence.[11] Different countries have different laws, but age 18 is frequently considered the age of majority (the age at which a person is legally considered an adult). ... /// Gender studies: Gender studies is an interdisciplinary academic field devoted to analysing gender identity and gendered representation. ... ; In gender studies, the term "gender" is often used to refer to the social and cultural constructions of masculinity and femininity and not to the state of being male or female in its entirety.[8] However, this view is not held by all gender theorists. Beauvoir's is a view that many sociologists support (see Sociology of gender), though there are many other contributors to the field ...
Reply5 hEdited
Lesley McLachlan
Misogyny: ... ; Islam
Main article: Women in Islam
See also: Namus and Islam and domestic violence
The fourth chapter (or sura) of the Quran is called "Women" (an-nisa). The 34th verse is a key verse in feminist criticism of Islam.[50] The verse notes men's God-given advantages over women. They are consequently their protectors and maintainers. Where women are disobedient "admonish them, and leave them alone in the sleeping-places and beat them; then if they obey you, do not seek a way against them...." In his book No god but God, University of Southern California, Professor Reza Aslan wrote that "misogynistic interpretation" has been persistently attached to An-Nisa, 34 because commentary on the Quran "has been the exclusive domain of Muslim men".[51]
In his book Popular Islam and Misogyny: A Case Study of Bangladesh, Taj Hashmi discusses misogyny in relation to Muslim culture, writing:
[T]hanks to the subjective interpretations of the Quran (almost exclusively by men), the preponderance of the misogynic mullahs and the regressive Shariah law in most "Muslim" countries, Islam is synonymously known as a promoter of misogyny in its worst form.... we may draw a line between the Quranic texts and the corpus of avowedly misogynic writing and spoken words by the mullah having very little or no relevance to the Quran.[52] ... /// Islamic feminism: A combination of Islam and feminism was advocated as "a feminist discourse and practice articulated within an Islamic paradigm" by Margot Badran in 2002.[1] Islamic feminists ground their arguments in Islam and its teachings,[2] seek the full equality of women and men in the personal and public sphere, and can include non-Muslims in the discourse and debate. Islamic feminism is defined by Islamic scholars as being more radical than secular feminism[3] and as being anchored within the discourse of Islam with the Quran as its central text.[4] As a "school of thought", it is said to refer to Moroccan sociologist "Fatema Mernissi and scholars such as Amina Wadud and Leila Ahmed".[5]
Advocates refer to the observation that Muslim majority countries produced several female heads of state, prime ministers, and state secretaries such as Lala Shovkat of Azerbaijan, Benazir Bhutto of Pakistan, Mame Madior Boye of Senegal, Tansu Çiller of Turkey, Kaqusha Jashari of Kosovo, and Megawati Sukarnoputri of Indonesia. In Bangladesh, Khaleda Zia was elected the country's first female prime minister in 1991, and served as prime minister until 2009, when she was replaced by Sheikh Hasina, who maintains the prime minister's office at present making Bangladesh the country with the longest continuous female premiership.[6] ...
No comments:
Post a Comment