01 Growth and Investment
01 Growth and Investment
01 Growth and Investment
TTT
AAA
BBB
LLLEEE11
1. .8
.
A measure of macroeconomic stability achieved over the past two years has kindled a
moderate recovery in the economy, despite one of the most serious economic crises
in the country’s recent history. The economy grew by a provisional 4.1% in the
outgoing year, after a modest growth of 1.2% in 2008 ~09. However, the recovery in
the economy is less than secure.
First, the durability of the incipient economic turnaround is far from assured given the
significant challenges the economy faces. Second, not all sectors of the economy or
regions of the country appear to have participated so far in the modest upturn. Finally,
from the perspective of strong job creation, overall growth is still not robust enough. In
fact, latest official estimates suggest a moderate increase in unemployment.
The macroeconomic context remains difficult in the near term. However, the
successful resolution of some of the critical challenges the economy has faced in
2009 ~10, such as the energy and water shortage, and a disturbed internal security
situation, could lay the basis for higher growth in 2010 ~11. In addition, the economy
could benefit from large initial productivity gains as capacity utilization begins to
increase from a low base. For the longer term, however, without a resolution of
Pakistan’s perennial structural challenges, such as raising the level of domestic
resource mobilization or promoting higher productivity in the economy, growth and
investment will continue to be constrained, and the growth path unstable.
After the steepest fall since World War II, global trade is expected to pick up
moderately in the current year. Early signs of recovery in both global output and trade
have signalled improved prospects for Pakistan’s exports. The eruption of the Greek
debt crisis since April, and fears of wider contagion especially in the Euro ~zone,
however, threatens to disrupt the recoveryprocess.
1.2 Pakistan
Despite severe challenges, the economy has shown resilience in the outgoing year.
Growth in Gross Domestic Product (GDP) for 2009 ~10, on an inflation ~adjusted basis,
has been recorded at a provisional 4.1%. This compares with GDP growth of 1.2%
(revised) in the previous year.
For the outgoing year, the A gr i cu l ture sector grew an estimated 2%, against a target of
3.8%, and
Economic Survey 2009 ~10
previous year’s growth rate of 4%. While the Crops sub ~sector declined 0.4% over the
previous year, Livestock posted a healthy rise of 4.1%. The performance of the
Agriculture sector was boosted by the weakening of the ElNino phenomenon, after late
winter rains.
Industrial output expanded by 4.9%, with Large Scale Manufacturing (LSM) posting a
4.4% rate of growth. The Services sector grew 4.6%, as compared to 1.6% in 2008 ~09.
Overall, the Commodity Producing Sectors are estimated to have expanded at a 3.6%
pace, which represents a significant turnaround from the anaemic growth rates of the
previous two fiscal years.
Table 1.2 compares the structure of contribution to overall GDP growth for 2009 ~10, with
the previous five years. Growth in Agriculture contributed 11% to headline GDP growth for
the year, with Industry accounting for 30%. What stands out from the Table is the
Economic Survey 2009 ~10
consistently high contribution to recent growth, averaging 62% for the past six years,
accounted for by the Services sector. In 2009~10, the share of services in headline growth
was roughly in line with its average, at 59%.
Fig~1: Composition of GDP Growth
(Percent)
Sector 2004 ~05 2005 ~06 2006 ~07 2007 ~08 2008 ~09 2009 ~10 Avg
Agriculture 17% 24% 13% 6% 71% 11% FY05 ~FY10
24%
Industry 34% 19% 34% 10% ~41% 30% 14%
Manufacturing 30% 28% 24% 24% ~58% 23% 12%
Services 49% 57% 53% 85% 70% 59% 62%
Real GDP (fc) 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Source: Federal Bureau of
Statistics
03 2003 ~04 2004 ~05 2005 ~06 2006 ~07 2007 ~08 2008 ~09 2009 ~10 Source: Federal Bureau of Statistics
Reflecting the marginal decline in gross fixed investment for the year of ~0.6%, the
share of total investment was a nominal 1% in GDP growth. Adjusting for the assumed
contribution of Changes in stocks category, the contribution of gross fixed capital
formation (GFCF) was ~1%. Finally, reflecting the sharp reduction in the external current
account deficit, which is projected to decline to less than 2.8 percent of GDP for
2009 ~10 from 5.7 percent the previous year, share of Net Exports was 4%.
Economic Survey 2009 ~10
The stronger pace of economic growth in 2009 ~10 has occurred on the back of several
favourable developments, which have included:
ig~4: Cotton crop and GDP growth, Year~ on~~3:
Fig year change
Annual 10.0
Remittances
9,000 8,000
Substantial transfers to the rural sector over the past two years via the
government’s crop support price policies, which, combined with higher worker
remittances, have sustained aggregate demand in the economy;
FY01 FY02 FY03 FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 Jul~Apr FY10
A larger ~than ~expected cotton output, which offset the moderately negative impact
on the wheat crop caused by a delay in seasonal rains. The cotton crop continues to
exert a disproportionate impact on overall growth in the economy (Fig ~4).
The revision of prior year’s growth rate, based on firmer data for the full twelve months
of 2008 ~09, as opposed to nine month data which is used at the time of preparing the
provisional estimate, resulted in an adjustment in the real GDP growth from a
provisional estimate of 2% to a revised 1.2%. The impact on the growth rate for
2009 ~10 is estimated at over one percentage point.
Economic Survey 2009 ~10
1.2 ~b Investment
At current market prices, Gross Fixed Capital Formation (GFCF) has been estimated to
have declined ~0.6%, after recording a 5.5% increase in 2008 ~09. A decline in fixed
investment by the private sector has accounted for the overall change, with an
estimated contraction of 3.5% for the year. The bulk of the decline has occurred in
Electricity & Gas, Large Scale Manufacturing, Transport & Communication, and Finance
& Insurance. General Government GFCF is estimated to have risen 9.8%.
Table 1.3: Gross Fixed Capital Formation In Private, Public & General Government
Sectors By Economic Activity______________________________________________________________
(At Current Market Prices)
% Change
Sr # Sectors 2008 ~09 R 2009 ~10 P
2007 ~08 F 2008 ~09 R
Total GFCF (A+B+C) 5.5 ~0.6
A. Private Sector 5.3 ~3.5
Manufacturing 2.3 ~4.9
i. Large ~7.4 ~12.4
Scale& Gas
Electricity ~4.3 ~18.8
Transport & Communication ~3.9 ~14.2
B. Public Sector 3.9 2.6
C. General Government 7.7 9.8
F: Final, R : Revised, P: Provisional Source: Federal Bureau of
Statistics
Clearly, this development is not salutary for the long run prospects of the economy.
However, given the challenging circumstances in which the economy had to operate
during 2009 ~10, it is not surprising that the private investment response has remained
subdued.
A substantial decline in FDI inflow for the period also contributed to the decline in fixed
investment in 2009 ~10. FDI accounts for a high share of gross fixed investment in
Pakistan, with a share of close to 20 percent.
A large part of the decline in FDI for the period was recorded under
Telecommunications (a net decline of US$ 607 million), and Financial Services (a fall of
US$ 548 million). Combined , the decline in these two sectors, which related to a few
“lumpy” transactions last year, amounted to 81 percent of the overall reduction in FDI
in 2009 ~10.
Investment levels in some sectors remained healthy, including in Oil and Gas
exploration (FDI of US$ 605 million), Communications (US$ 222 million), Transport (US$
104 million), Construction (US$ 86 million), and Paper and Pulp (US$ 81 million).
Despite a steep decline, inflow of FDI into Financial Services was recorded at US$ 133
Growth and Investment
million for the period.
A worrying development was the large net disinvestment recorded under the IT Services
sector for the
Economic Survey 2009 ~10
year (amounting to US$95 million). Overall, out of the major industry categories, 12
recorded higher FDI for the period, while 24 industries witnessed a net reduction in
FDI inflow.
Apart from the “headline” numbers and statistics, however, the discussion on
competitiveness and relative productivity in Pakistan’s economy needs to be
nuanced. Firstly, a large part of the shift in relative market shares between Pakistan
and other South Asian countries represents trade di vers i on on account of the effect on
Pakistan of the difficult security situation it has been facing since 2002, rather than an
endogenous underlying dynamic. Secondly, developments on the competitiveness front
are not uniform throughout the economy. Some segments of the Textile industryare
doing well in international markets, while new exportproducts such as H al al meat and
Jewellery in particular are growing rapidly.
On the other hand, many Pakistani goods a n d services are finding it difficult to
compete even in the d o m e s t i c market. Construction services are an example, where
Chinese companies have made large inroads.
The second challenge emanated from the energy crisis, which, due to factors detailed
in a later chapter on the subject, underwent an intensification during the outgoing
year. As a result, it is estimated that a loss of approximately 2.0 ~2.5 percent of GDP
occurred in 2009 ~10 on account of the energy supply constraint.
The overall cost to the economy emanating from Pakistan’s fight against terror is
discussed in the following section.
Growth and Investment
1.2 ~f Impact on Pakistan of the “War on Terror”
Since 9 / 1 1 , Pakistan has been at the epicentre of the global “War on Terror”.
Between 2002 and end ~ April 2010, a total of 8,141 incidents of terrorism have
occurred on Pakistan’s soil, resulting in 8,875
Economic Survey 2009 ~10
deaths of both civilians as well as personnel of law enforcement agencies (LEAs), and
injuries to a further 20,675 people. 1
In terms of the economic impact, the fall out on Pakistan has also been immense. As a
front line state in the global “War on Terror”, it is officially estimated that Pakistan has
been impacted to the extent of over US$ 43 billion between 2001 and 2010.
Since 2007 ~08, with the “war on terror” moving to a qualitatively different phase, with
the Pakistan army mobilizing and undertaking large scale military operations in the
country’s North West (in Malakand/Swat, and the Agencies of South Waziristan, Bajuar,
Mohmand, Khyber, and lately, Kurram and Orakzai), the negative effects on the
economy have greatly increased.
A brief list of the areas where the economy has been impacted includes the following:
Largely as a result of the negative effects of the War on Terror, growth and
investment have stalled. Pakistan’s economy grew 1.2 percent in 2008/09, with
large ~scale manufacturing (LSM) contracting ~8.2 percent for the year. The five year
annual average rate of growth of the economy was 6.6 percent in the 2004 ~2008
period, while LSM output had expanded at an average of 12 percent. Hence, the
change in the five year average ~to ~2009 trough works out to over 4.5 percent of
GDP. Cumulatively, the loss of potential GDP for 2008 and 2009 is estimated at 7
percent (or equivalent to approximately US$ 11.7 billion).
Table 1.5: Change in GDP growth, Investment, LSM, FDI and Exports
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 5 yr Chg.
Avg: [2009
2004~ vs
Real GDP Growth (fc) % 2.0 3.1 4.7 7.5 9.0 5.8 6.8 4.1 1.2 2008
6.6 5 Yr
~5.4
Fixed Investment % 15.8 15.5 15.3 15 17.5 20.5 20.9 20.4 18.1 18.9 ~0.8
Government GDP
% 5.7 4.2 4.0 4.0 4.3 4.8 5.6 5.4 4.9 4.8 0.1
Private GDP
% 10.2 11.3 11.3 10.9 13.1 15.7 15.4 15.0 13.2 14.0 ~0.8
Private Sector Credit % ~0.5 12.1 12.8 34.3 34.4 23.5 17.3 16.5 0.7 25.2 ~24.5
Exports (FBS) US$ 9.20 9.14 11.16 12.31 14.39 16.45 17.0 19.1 14.8 15.8 ~1.1
bnSource: Federal Bureau of Statistics; State Bank of Pakistan; Economic
Adviser’s Wing, Ministry of Finance
While the last available data pertains to fiscal year 2008 ~09, the impact of more recent
developments in the energy sector can be gauged from the widening deficit between
electricity supply and demand during 2009 ~10, which crossed 5,000 MW at its peak.
Fig ~6: Electricity & Gas Consumption In Industrial Sector
22.0
Electricity Gas
17.0
12.0
7.0
2.0
~8.0
Source: HDIP
Economic Survey 2009 ~10
The effect of lower energy availability is estimated at the equivalent of 2.0 ~2.5
percent of GDP during 2009 ~10.
1.3 Longer Term Constraints: Improving Policy and Changing the Incentives
Framework
While the economy has had to navigate through difficult challenges in the short run,
a set of complex, inter ~related, and longer term, structural constraints to overall
growth continue to operate.
A faster increase in imports than exports. The Export ~Importratio had declined to
a low of 0.48x in 2007 as a result.
The expansion of the informal sector, relative to the formal partof the economy.
While this trend is suggested in a number of unreleased studies, it is clearly
evident from the following dynamic at work: the share of informal labour in the
economy has increased, from 72.8% in 2007 ~08, to 73.3% in 2008 ~09, as a
percent of total. Conversely, formal sector employment has declined over the
same period.
Put together, the above trends represent a worrying picture for scale and the level of
formality, in the economy. A large partof the problem relates to the incentives
framework in place.
Specifically for the viability of the domestic manufacturing sector, the Free Trade
Agreement (FTA) with China since 2007 is unlikely to have helped, given China’s
global dominance of manufactured products, especially in the low value added
segment.
Growth and Investment
Pervasive mis ~declaration and under ~invoicing of imports, which according to
some estimates costs the economy anywhere between Rs 100 billion to Rs 300
billion in lost revenue alone, in conjunction with the rampant misuse of the Afghan
Transit Trade (ATT) facility, has undermined the viability and competitiveness of
the sector.
Economic Survey 2009 ~10
Recent developments on this front, with the winding up of the PACCs system by
FBR, does not bode well for reducing leakages on account of weak administration of
Customs.
Weaknesses in the taxation system, including in terms of policy design, have set
perverse incentives for formality and hence, scale. This is evident from the following
table, which depicts strikingly how uneven the “playing field” is, especially in terms of
taxation, for the larger ~sized firms (mostly corporate entities).
Other cost advantages to being a relatively smaller, informal player in the economy are
not captured in the Table. These include savings accruing via the elimination of the
regulatory “burden” (audits, inspections, filings, registration costs etc), and the use of
informal channels for gaining utility connections, as well as making lower payments for
consumption.
The loss of scale induced by the taxation system has seriously eroded the
competitiveness of the Large Scale Manufacturing (LSM) sector, in particular. In
addition, by encouraging informality, the taxation regime in place over the last many
years has plausibly reduced revenue collection compared to what would have been the
case counter ~factually.
Despite an improvement in the growth performance for 2009 ~10, the economic
turnaround is still fragile, with non ~trivial risks stalking the outlook. Some of these
include:
• Thetipping of the world economy into a severe recession in the wake of the
Eurozone debt crisis,
which could hurt Pakistan’s exports as well as remittances on the one hand, but could
reduce
international prices of key commodities such as oil, on the other;
The magnitude, timing and nature of external assistance inflows will be an important
factor in reinforcing the nascent recovery. While the risk of pre ~emption of the
private sector’s credit requirements by government bank borrowing was obviated to a
large extent in 2009 ~10 by weak credit demand from the private sector, as well as
improved liquidity in the banking system, the threat of crowding out of private sector
demand for bank credit by government bank borrowing remains. In any case,
government borrowing for budgetary supporthad an unintended consequence: the
interest rate structure was pressured upward as a result. If and when external inflows
relieve this constraint, interest rates can begin to decline at the margin.
The longer term prospects for the economy are promising, given potential drivers
such as the size and dynamism of the Pakistani diaspora, the potential for unleashing
large productivity gains in agriculture, improvements in the economic environment by
a deepening of regional trade and investment links, and the harnessing of the “youth
bulge”.
TABLE 1.
(%)
Sector 1999- 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-
2000 F R 10
I. COMMODITY PROD. P
SECTOR 49.3 48.7 47.9 47.6 48.4 48.7 48.3 48.2 47.1 46.9 46.7
A. Agriculture 25.9 24.9 24.1 24.0 22.9 22.4 22.5 21.9 21.3 21.9 21.5
1 Major Crops 9.6 8.5 8.0 8.2 7.8 8.4 7.6 7.7 6.9 7.4 7.0
2 Minor Crops 3.5 3.3 3.1 3.0 2.9 2.7 2.6 2.4 2.6 2.5 2.4
3 Livestock 11.7 11.9 12.0 11.7 11.2 10.6 11.6 11.1 11.2 11.4 11.4
4 Fishery 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4
5 Forestry 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3
B. Industry 23.3 23.8 23.7 23.6 25.5 26.3 25.9 26.3 25.8 25.0 25.2
6 Mining & Quarrying 2.3 2.4 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.6 2.5 2.6 2.5 2.4
7 Manufacturing 14.7 15.7 15.9 16.3 17.3 18.3 18.8 19.0 19.2 18.3 18.5
i Large Scale 9.5 10.3 10.4 10.6 11.7 12.9 13.2 13.4 13.4 12.2 12.2
ii Small Scale 5.2 5.4 5.6 5.6 4.2 4.1 4.3 4.3 4.5 4.7 4.9
iii Slaughtering - 2.9 3.0 - - 2.4 12.4 4.1 4.2 4.2 4.3
8 Construction 2.5 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.59 2.36 2.07 2.30
9 Electricity and
Gas Distribution 3.9 3.3 3.0 2.5 3.7 3.2 2.2 2.2 1.6 2.1 2.0
II. SERVICES SECTOR 50.7 51.3 52.1 52.4 51.6 51.3 51.7 51.8 52.9 53.1 53.3
10 Transport, Storage
& Communication 11.3 11.6 11.4 11.4 10.9 10.4 10.2 10.0 10.0 10.2 10.2
11 Wholesale & Re-
tail Trade 17.5 17.9 17.8 18.0 18.2 18.7 17.2 17.1 17.4 16.9 17.1
12 Finance & 3.7 3.1 3.5 3.3 3.4 4.0 5.5 5.9 6.3 5.8 5.4
Insurance
13 Ownership of 3.1 3.2 3.2 3.1 3.0 2.9 2.8 2.7 2.7 2.8 2.7
Dwellings
14 Public Admn. &
Defence 6.2 6.2 6.4 6.6 6.3 5.9 6.1 6.1 6.0 6.1 6.3
15 Social Services 9.0 9.3 9.8 9.9 9.7 9.5 9.9 10.0 10.6 11.4 11.6
16 GDP (fc) (I + II) 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
R : Revised F: Source: Federal Bureau of
P : Provisional Final Statistics
TABLE 1.
REAL GDP / GNP GROWTH RATES (AT CONSTANT FACTOR COST OF 1999-2000)
(%)
Sector 2000-01 2001- 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006- 2007-08 2008-09 2009-
02 07 F R 10
I. COMMODITY PROD. P
SECTOR 0.8 1.4 4.2 9.3 9.5 5.1 6.6 1.3 0.8 3.6
A. Agriculture -2.2 0.1 4.1 2.4 6.5 6.3 4.1 1.0 4.0 2.0
1 Major Crops -9.9 -2.5 6.8 1.7 17.7 -3.9 7.7 -6.4 7.3 -0.2
2 Minor Crops -3.2 -3.7 1.9 3.9 1.5 0.4 -1.0 10.9 -1.6 -1.2
3 Livestock 3.8 3.7 2.6 2.9 2.3 15.8 2.8 4.2 3.5 4.1
-
4 Fishery -3.0 12. 3.4 2.0 0.6 20.8 15.4 9.2 2.3 1.4
5 Forestry 9.1 -4.4 11.1 -3.2 - -1.1 -5.1 -13.0 -3.0 2.2
32.4
B. Industry 4.1 2.7 4.2 16.3 12.1 4.1 8.8 1.4 -1.9 4.9
6 Mining & Quarrying 5.5 5.7 6.6 15.6 10.0 4.6 3.1 4.4 -0.2 -1.7
7 Manufacturing 9.3 4.5 6.9 14.0 15.5 8.7 8.3 4.8 -3.7 5.2
i Large Scale 11.0 3.5 7.2 18.1 19.9 8.3 8.7 4.0 -8.2 4.4
ii Small Scale 6.2 6.3 6.3 - 7.5 8.7 8.1 7.5 7.5 7.5
20.0
iii .. .. .. .. 2.4 12.4 4.1 4.2 4.2 4.3
Slaughterin
0.5 1.6 4.0 - 18.6 10.2 24.3 -5.5 - 15.3
8 Construction
10.7 11.
9 Electricity and 2
Gas Distribution -13.7 -7.0 - 56.8 -5.7 - 4.7 -23.6 30.8 0.4
11.7 26.6
II. SERVICES SECTOR 3.1 4.8 5.2 5.8 8.5 6.5 7.0 6.0 1.6 4.6
10 Transport, Storage
& Communication
-15.1 17. -1.3 9.0 30.8 42.9 14.9 11.1 -7.0 -3.6
12 Finance & Insurance
2
13 Ownership of
3.8 3.5 3.3 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5
Dwellings
14 Public Admn. &
Defence 2.2 6.9 7.7 3.2 0.6 10.1 7.1 1.2 3.6 7.5
15 Social Services 5.6 7.9 6.2 5.4 6.6 9.9 7.9 9.8 8.9 6.6
16 GDP (fc) 2.0 3.1 4.7 7.5 9.0 5.8 6.8 3.7 1.2 4.1
R : Revised P : Source: Federal Bureau of
.. : Not available Provisiona Statistics
TABLE 1.
4 Change in Stocks 71,051 73,703 79,085 82,934 87,647 89,046 92,281 96,305 3.63 4.36
5 Export of Goods and
Non-Factor Services 814,42 801,98 878,89 965,86 988,16 935,30 904,37 1,031, -3.31 14.06
5 2 6 3 4 3 5 533
6 Less Imports of Goods
and Non-Factor 657,98 601,55 845,14 1,003, 968,04 1,002, 850,11 944,97 -15.16 11.16
Services 3 9 4 052 1 052 1 0
7 Expenditure on GDP at
Market Prices 4,222, 4,534, 4,881, 5,183, 5,477, 5,565, 5,767, 6,018, 3.63 4.36
976 123 796 371 948 375 538 865
8 Plus Net Factor Income
from Rest of the World 127,05 90,721 88,750 84,343 82,434 85,586 112,83 193,71 31.84 71.67
0 8 1
9 Expenditure on GNP
at Market Prices 4,350, 4,624, 4,970, 5,267, 5,560, 5,650, 5,880, 6,212, 4.06 5.65
026 844 546 714 382 961 376 576
10 Less Indirect Taxes 355,32 372,02 358,45 395,44 361,84 372,65 360,58 374,53 -3.24 3.87
3 9 5 0 1 1 4 1
11 Plus Subsidies 54,451 53,488 69,889 72,545 75,602 190,28 41,085 26,434 -78.41 -35.66
8
12 GNP at Factor Cost 4,049, 4,306, 4,681, 4,944, 5,274, 5,468, 5,560, 5,864, 1.69 5.46
154 303 980 819 143 598 877 479
R : Revised P : Provisional Source: Federal Bureau of
Statistics F : Final
TABLE 1.