COVID-19: Exacerbating Pakistan's economic problems – a critical analysis using the dependency paradigm

Abstract

Pandemics have been a recurrent phenomenon throughout the course of history. However, the levels of fear and hysteria brought by the COVID-19 outbreak, forcing regimes across the globe to impose stringent lockdowns, had never been witnessed before. While these lockdowns proved beneficial in reducing both the infection and mortality rate, they created an impossible environment for governments across the globe to effectively and efficiently govern, which in turn gave birth to numerous economic challenges, especially in developing countries like Pakistan. In Pakistan, where the common person was already finding it very difficult to makes ends meet, the pandemic incurred tremendous economic hardships like unemployment, poverty and decline in per capita income. Consequently, Pakistan's economy struggled as it experienced a negative economic growth rate, inflation and a significant reduction in exports. As a by-product of the economic crunch, the flawed Pakistani governance system came under the spotlight, as it found itself struggling to tackle the day-by-day worsening situation. Strikingly, due to the infamous longstanding province–centre rift, Pakistan was neither able to promulgate an effective unified lockdown strategy nor to provide basic necessities to its citizens. This article analyses the governance and economic problems faced by Pakistan due to the COVID-19 outbreak from the prism of the dependency paradigm, which highlights the exploitative nature of developed–developing/underdeveloped states. Also, it provides policy prescriptions to strengthen Pakistan's economic system to deter future pandemics.

Introduction

Throughout the course of history, humankind's existence has been time and again challenged by deadly pandemics such as the Black Death of 1350 or the Spanish Flu of 1918, both of which caused deaths in the millions. However, after the advent of globalization, which helped revolutionize the field of medicine, for a long time, no longer were virus outbreaks very catastrophic; SARS, H1N1, Ebola and Zika together caused deaths in the thousands. Now, it was inconceivable for the common person to even imagine that a deadly virus would take over the world causing deaths in the millions and more importantly altering life as we know it – yet this is what happened.

On 8 December 2019, in Wuhan, Hubei, China, COVID-19 contagion emerged. Initially, the world referred to it as just another flu and underestimated its deadliness; in a few days, it forced the complete lockdown of a city with a population of 11 million, Wuhan (23 January 2020), and strict travel bans were imposed across the globe, starting with the United States (31 January 2020), to curb the spread of the virus, and by April 2020, a million people had been infected by the virus across six continents, tens of millions had lost their jobs and the death toll had risen to 51,000 (Taylor, 2021).

In Pakistan, the first two cases of COVID-19 were reported on 26 February 2020. Pakistan having a fragile economy and outdated governance mechanism was in no position to immediately impose a stringent lockdown across the country; thus, it tried to manage the spread of the imported virus. However, as the situation began to rapidly deteriorate, the federal administration had no option but to promulgate a countrywide lockdown to curb the rate of infection and save lives; it did so on 23 March 2020, which continued up until 9 May 2020 (Bajwa, 2020).

While the lockdown decision helped to restrict the spread of the virus, it greatly exacerbated the already poor economic conditions of the country and badly exposed Pakistan's outdated governance system.

Dependency theory

In the 1950s, dependency theory was developed by Raul Perbisch, Director of the UN Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC). After conducting a detailed study on the economic development of Latin America and its principal problems, he outrightly rejected the then widely followed modernization theory of development and put forward a contrasting yet more logical theoretical paradigm, dependency theory, to explain the development of the developing/underdeveloped world (Namkoong, 1999).

Initially, dependency theory was presented as a critique of modernization theory (Namkoong, 1999). Perbisch rejected the notion put forward by modernization theory that developing/underdeveloped states should follow the very same path taken by the Western world to develop themselves (Namkoong, 1999). He argued that the ground realities in each developing state are unique and different in nature; thus, adopting previous developmental models could not be fruitful but would rather be counterproductive (Mahoney and Rodríguez-Franco, 2016). More importantly, modernization theory does not take into account the fact that developing/underdeveloped states now have to compete with well-established industrial giant states, whereas the developed world industrialized with next to no competition (Mahoney and Rodríguez-Franco, 2016). Also, in order to industrialize, developing/underdeveloped states have no choice but to borrow capital from developed nations (Randall and Theobald, 1998). Ironically, a huge chunk of this capital is later used to purchase advanced technology from the developed world as it is more or less necessary to efficiently develop (Randall and Theobald, 1998). Thus, a circle of dependency on the developed states is created, where the developing/underdeveloped states are always at the losing end.

Previously, Modernization theorists saw the Western influence on the developing/underdeveloped world to be beneficial for the developing world as they would learn from their experience; however, Dependency theorists termed the Western influence to be exploitative in nature (Mahoney and Rodríguez-Franco, 2016; Namkoong, 1999). They stated that the Western world only wants to exploit developing/underdeveloped states economically, particularly their natural resources. According to them, the developing/underdeveloped world is trapped in a vicious cycle by the developed world, and primary products, raw materials and cheap labour are exploited by the developed world (Mahoney and Rodríguez-Franco, 2016; Namkoong, 1999). Later, these resources are processed into finished goods and sold at high prices back to the developing/underdeveloped world (Mahoney and Rodríguez-Franco, 2016; Namkoong, 1999). Resultantly, the developed world gets richer while the developing/underdeveloped states’ capital reserves significantly deplete, thus curtailing their capability to develop and upgrade their productive capacity.

Dependency theorists consider the developing/underdeveloped world's policymakers and elites to be a cause of their economic backwardness, as these policymakers are backed by developed states; thus, they implement and maintain such a political and economic system that ensures that the interests of the developed world are safeguarded, even at the expense of the majority of their citizens (Randall and Theobald, 1998). Moreover, Dependency theorists firmly believe that the underdevelopment of the underdeveloped world, commonly termed as the third world, is not their own fault but is mostly due to the exploitation of the developed world. They suggest that for the swift development of the developing/underdeveloped states, both economic and political development must be done simultaneously, modernization theory, on the other hand, states that economic development should be prioritized as it leads to socio-political development (Randall and Theobald, 1998).

COVID-19: Pakistan's economic fallout

Even prior to the COVID-19 outbreak, the economy of Pakistan was in a troubled state, but there was no threat of it collapsing. This changed with the pandemic; now, the country's economy was virtually on the brink of bankruptcy, as, unlike other states, Pakistan does not possess the required resources to provide the much-needed huge bailout packages to maintain and sustain its economy.

Over the years, Pakistan's GDP growth rate has never been that remarkable but there has been consistent improvement. However, after Pakistan took the latest International Monetary Fund (IMF) programme in 2019, which had conditions like substantially reducing the current account deficit, its GDP growth took a massive hit. In the fiscal year 2018, Pakistan's GDP growth was approximately 5.5 percent, which came down to 3.3 percent in the fiscal year 2019, and the majority of the economic experts, as well as institutions, projected that for the fiscal year 2020, Pakistan's GDP growth rate would further fall to 2.4 percent (Sareen, 2020). After COVID-19 took Pakistan into its grasp, forcing major disruptions in the country's economic activities, the result was that for the second time in Pakistan's history, after 1951–1952, it experienced a negative GDP growth rate; −0.4 percent for the fiscal year 2020 (Zaidi, 2020). The dependency paradigm effectively explains Pakistan's constant unimpressive GDP growth rate; its dependence on West-led global financial institutions. After COVID-19 took over the world, the international financial institutions did not have the required resources to bail out countries like Pakistan; thus, their economic conditions rapidly deteriorated.

Furthermore, with COVID-19 came a huge wave of unemployment and poverty, meaning more misery and hardship for the masses. In the fiscal year 2018, Pakistan's unemployment rate stood at 5.8 percent – showing an improvement from the year before. However, as COVID-19 struck Pakistan, in merely a few months, 3 million people lost their jobs (Qureshi, 2020), and the unemployment rate rocketed to 9.56 percent for the fiscal year 2020 (Haider, 2020). Also, millions of people were thrown into poverty due to COVID-19 in Pakistan; to be exact, 18 million people, as the poverty population increased from 69 million (31.3 percent) in 2018 to 87 million (40 percent) in 2020 (Tashin, 2020). The Western economic/developmental model followed by Pakistan is more or less responsible for such a staggering unemployment rate, as predicted by the dependency paradigm. Unless Pakistan develops and implements a tailormade development scheme as per its complex ground realities, as advocated by dependency theory, the unemployment crisis cannot be controlled.

In addition, not only did COVID-19 greatly disrupt global trade, but also it had profound implications on Pakistan's exports and imports, adversely affecting its overall economy. In the fiscal year 2020, Pakistan's exports shrunk to US$22 billion, which was US$1.51 billion less than in the fiscal year 2019, representing a 6.36 percent decrease (Trend Economy, 2021). Meanwhile, in the fiscal year 2020, Pakistan's imports also decreased by 8.56 percent as compared to in the fiscal year 2019 – US$45 billion in 2020 and US$50 billion in 2019, showing a net difference of US$5 billion (Trend Economy, 2021). If the relationship between the developed and developing/underdeveloped world were cooperative in nature, as earlier predicted by modernization theory, then during COVID-19 special subsidies would have been given to Pakistan to help balance its trade deficit and manage its current account deficit. However, no support was given by the developed world, thus reiterating the stance of dependency theory that the developed world economically exploits the developing/underdeveloped world.

Also, COVID-19 considerably slowed down economic activity in Pakistan. For the fiscal year 2020, initially, the government set a tax collection target of PKR 5.5 trillion (Sareen, 2020). Interestingly, even before COVID-19 emerged as a threat, Pakistan's tax collection target was revised twice; in December 2019 to PKR 5.2 trillion, and in February 2020 to PKR 4.8 trillion (Sareen, 2020). However, none of these targets were met, especially after COVID-19 hit Pakistan, and only PKR 3.9 trillion revenue was collected – identical to the amount collected in the previous three fiscal years (Sareen, 2020). On the contrary, Pakistan's expenditure increased by PKR 2.1 trillion, further pressurizing the already strained economy (Sareen, 2020).

Moreover, COVID-19 significantly challenged the living standards of the common person in Pakistan, as a record inflation rate was witnessed and the per capita income dropped remarkably. In the fiscal year 2016, the inflation rate in Pakistan was at an all-time low of 2.86 percent, with low inflation years in the proceeding years (4.15 percent (2017), 3.93 percent (2018) and 6.74 percent (2019)), until COVID-19 hit and disrupted life as we knew it and the inflation rate jumped to a staggering 10.74 percent in the fiscal year 2020 (Statista, 2020). Also, the per capita income in Pakistan fell drastically from US$1625 in the fiscal year 2019 to US$1325 in the fiscal year 2020 (Zaidi, 2021). Since its independence, time and again, Pakistan's economic agenda has been more or less dictated by the West-led international financial institutions. Dependency theory states that the policymakers of the developing/underdeveloped world intentionally implement an economic system, at the behest of the developed world, that safeguards the interests of the developed world at the expense of their own citizens, hence the persisting underdevelopment and dismal economic conditions of Pakistan.

Even before the COVID-19 crisis, Pakistan's public finances were in a parlous state. However, the COVID-19 situation greatly increased the country’s difficulties when it came to debt servicing. In the fiscal year 2018, Pakistan's total debts and liabilities were US$95.2 billion, with the exchange rate at Rs 121.54, whereas in the fiscal year 2020 these debts soared up to US$112.8 billion, while the exchange rate was at Rs 162.2 (Rana, 2020). The mammoth increase in the exchange rate coupled with taking more loans means that Pakistan has slipped into the debt trap – taking new loans to pay back old ones. Strikingly, the dependency paradigm too predicts a vicious cycle that the underdeveloped/developing world finds itself trapped in, being largely dependent for money on the developed world. The famous proverb that beggars can’t be choosers explains Pakistan's helplessness vis-a-vis its economic affairs.

The COVID-19 virus infected Pakistan's economy through three transmission channels. It affected the aggregate demand, owing to the steps taken to contain the transmission of the virus, which not only slowed down the economy but also substantially increased the unemployment rate. These layoffs decreased the disposable income of many households, thus causing a demand shock across the economy. Consequently, the aggregate demand considerably shrunk, not only adversely affecting Pakistan's economic outlook but also altering the lifestyle of the common person.

To sum up, Pakistan's economy was undoubtedly in turmoil long before the COVID-19 crisis emerged. However, the COVID-19 situation exacerbated the situation since most, if not all, economic parameters, such as GDP growth rate, unemployment rate, inflation, per capita income, debt, tax collection, poverty and trade (imports/exports), showed a substantial decline.

COVID-19 mitigation measures

The COVID-19 pandemic is undoubtedly the biggest global challenge the world has faced in recent memory. Well over 100 countries worldwide instituted either a full or partial lockdown, following in the footsteps of Asian and European countries. The pandemic has caused both demand and supply shocks to reverberate through the global economy. In Pakistan, there was a day-by-day growing fear over how a state with extremely limited resources would deal with this pandemic, especially due to the fact that in the past Pakistan had failed to contain infectious diseases like polio, hepatitis and tuberculosis. In Pakistan, to date, the COVID-19 virus has caused 30,379 deaths, with 1,530,145 confirmed reported numbers of cases (Government of Pakistan, 2022).

The first cabinet meeting devoted to containing the COVID-19 virus was held on 13 March 2020, after the first confirmed case in Karachi. The federal government devised a National Action Plan for COVID-19. This plan was a policy document illustrating the fundamental principles for outbreak preparedness, containment and mitigation. The administration took swift actions authorized by the Ministry of National Health Services, Regulations Coordination (MNHSRC) to take necessary measures. The MNHRSC formulated guidelines to tackle the disease, such as priority testing; social distancing; the establishment of quarantine facilities; Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) for Ramazan, Eid, gatherings, ceremonies and marriage; and guidelines for the reopening of educational institutions, tourism, air transportation, etc.

However, by mid-March 2020, as cases of local transmission began to multiply rapidly, particularly in densely populated cities such as Karachi, Lahore and Peshawar, the responses of provincial governments varied. Sindh province was the first to impose a stringent lockdown on 23 March 2020 (International Crisis Group, 2020). It restricted public movement and barred the opening of non-essential businesses. The other three provinces followed in Sindh's footsteps but imposed far looser restrictions, arguing that a complete lockdown would be fatal for people living below the poverty line (International Crisis Group, 2020). Thus, all provinces except Sindh, especially Punjab, allowed many businesses to reopen. After the famous 18th Constitutional Amendment, which was unanimously passed by the Parliament of Pakistan, provincial governments were given more or less full autonomy to govern their respective provinces as they desired (Majeed et al., 2021). Where devolution of power and self-regulatory provincial units are prerequisites of the democratic model, the lack of political maturity among Pakistani leaders and their political mileage gaining behaviour, even during a calamity, caused an inter-provincial rift, which, in turn, emerged as the biggest obstacle to promulgating a unified policy to curb the spread of the virus. Nonetheless, finally, on 14 April 2020, Imran Khan, the then Prime Minister, implemented a nationwide lockdown until 30 April 2020. However, restrictions on several non-essential industries, including construction, textile industry, small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), were relaxed.

Considering the mammoth economic disruption due to COVID-19, the Pakistani administration, on 24 March 2020, announced an economic bailout package of PKR 1.2 trillion as a part of its immediate response to COVID-19 (Dawn, 2020b). Key fiscal measures included:

• Import duties on health equipment eliminated

• PKR 200 billion allocated to provide financial support to daily wage workers

• PKR 150 billion allocated to be distributed amongst low-income families

• PKR 100 billion allocated for tax relief for the export industry

• PKR 100 billion allocated for support of SMEs.

The bailout package also allocated PKR 280 billion for procurement of wheat, PKR 50 billion to utility stores to ensure the provision of essentials at subsidized rates, PKR 70 billion to provide relief in fuel prices, PKR 15 billion to support food and health supplies, PKR 110 billion to subsidize electricity prices, PKR 100 billion as an emergency contingency fund and PKR 25 billion to the National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA) to buy essential equipment to deal with the pandemic (Dawn, 2020b).

The provincial governments also announced various economic initiatives, broadly revolving around tax relief, speedy upgrading of the healthcare system and cash grants to low-income families. The provincial government of Punjab gave a PKR 18 billion tax relief package as well as a PKR 10 billion cash grant programme, whereas the provincial government of Sindh commenced a PKR 1.5 billion ration distribution programme for the poorest of the poor (International Monetary Fund, 2021).

Although this economic stimulus package appears remarkable, many of the items listed in it are traditionally part of the federal budget. For instance, every year exporters are given tax refunds. Moreover, providing financial support to the most vulnerable section of society was already part of the financial year 2020's budget, but interestingly, the bulk of the allocated money remained unutilized, which was now being presented as a new allocation. While the IMF lauded the bailout package given by the government to help the economic sector to recuperate from the COVID-19 shock, it pegged the package to be 1.2 percent of the GDP, unlike the administration's claims of 2 percent (Sareen, 2020).

Furthermore, in response to the pandemic and to give businesspeople much-needed relief, the State Bank of Pakistan (SBP) made a series of revisions to the benchmark interest rate. Prior to COVID-19, in January 2020, the SBP retained the interest rate at 13.25 percent, which it stated was necessary due to high inflation rates (Siddiqi, 2020). However, in a period of just five months, from mid-march to June, the SBP drastically reduced the interest rate by 625 basis points to 7 percent (State Bank of Pakistan, 2020). While this move was applauded by most businesspeople, economists remained sceptical as to whether it would be able to generate economic activity as the pandemic prolonged.

Generally, states across the globe wanted to end their lockdowns, enforced to curb the spread of the pandemic, as soon as possible to begin the economic rejuvenation process. However, states that were facing numerous economic challenges before the pandemic, like Pakistan, were facing tremendous pressure to lift the lockdown. A substantial part of Pakistan's population is engaged in the informal economy; thus, a long lockdown would have had a detrimental effect on a large segment of the society. The areas of southwestern Baluchistan and northwestern Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, which are adjacent to the borders, were badly affected as borders remained closed for many weeks (Sen, 2020). Major economic generation of both these areas comes from the services industry related to cross-border trade; thus, economic hardships were faced by the locals. According to Rafiullah Kakar, the Director of the Strategic Planning and Reforms Cell, Government of Balochistan, the lockdown inflicted a loss of PKR 60–90 billion on the province (Sen, 2020).

Moreover, in the health department, immediate structural adjustments commenced complementing the pandemic response. The federal administration launched a PKR 595 million Pakistan Preparedness and Response Plan (PPRP), on 23 April 2020, to help contain and quash the COVID-19 outbreak. The PPRP aimed to strengthen Pakistan's capacity in prevention, preparedness, response and relief, as well as its the health system, within nine months, by December 2020 (Ali, 2020). The PPRP called for all stakeholders to join hands, use their expertise and forces and exploit all available resources to help execute an organized response at the federal and provincial levels. The following are the key determinants of the PPRP:

1. Increase and enhance emergency response systems to ensure a collective society approach

2. Initiate large-scale COVID-19 public awareness campaigns

3. Establish necessary facilities to curb COVID-19: mass testing, contact tracing and isolation wards

4. State-of-the-art surveillance mechanisms to determine the origins of the virus outbreak and monitor virus outbreak trends

5. Implement health measures to ensure effective social distancing to curb the transmission rate

6. Ensure laboratories are equipped with polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing kits to adequately test and detect the virus

7. Upgrade the health system to deal with the surge in patients, especially ensuring an ample stock of medical supplies

8. Provision of emergency food rations and cash transfers.

Moreover, to somewhat ease Pakistan's external economic burden, many international economic institutions came forward to provide the direly needed economic assistance in the form of loans, aid and grants. On 2 April 2020, a US$200 million economic stimulus package for Pakistan was approved by the World Bank (World Bank, 2020). Furthermore, on 16 April 2020, the IMF approved a US$1.386 billion financial assistance package for Pakistan so that Pakistan could resolve the urgent balance of payment crisis that had emerged due to the COVID-19 outbreak (International Monetary Fund, 2020). Also in April 2020, the Islamic Development Bank (IDB) agreed to give Pakistan a US$650 million financial package to fight against the pandemic (Dawn, 2020a). In addition, on 19 May 2020, the Asian Development Bank (ADB) gave a US$300 million emergency assistance loan to Pakistan (Asian Development Bank, 2020). Surprisingly, these support packages and loans were issued to ease the economic blow of pandemic; however, the budget report of the fiscal year 2020 did not paint such a picture, as it showed that the country had experienced negative growth.

The dependency paradigm repeatedly claims that international financial institutions, which are dominated by the developed world, almost never help the developing/underdeveloped world in good conscience, and that it is at most a show staged by the developed world to glorify its sincerity to help resolve the problems of the developing/underdeveloped world. In Pakistan's case, to help battle COVID-19, a similar approach was adopted by international financial institutions by providing economic assistance which was very low compared to the amount required to stabilize Pakistan's economy.

To conclude, the mitigation measures adopted by the Pakistani regime did not turn out to be very fruitful, as they were neither able to provide relief to the masses or to ameliorate the country's economy.

COVID-19: Highlighting Pakistan's outdated governance system

Pakistan's governance mechanism has been a constant bar to an efficient and effective administration for a long time. With time, where governance systems across the world have rapidly evolved, adopting e-governance techniques focusing on the devolution of power, Pakistan still uses the governance system inherited from British India. This is based upon traditional paperwork and governance through a rigid bureaucracy. Where, during the pre-pandemic era, somehow the administration was able to deliver using its outdated techniques, not only did COVID-19 badly expose the highly flawed system but also the administration was unable to cater to the needs of the masses. Consequently, life as people knew it came to a standstill.

Indeed, bureaucracy plays a pivotal role in the efficient running of the affairs of a state. Without a proactive bureaucracy, anarchy and chaos will be prevalent in society. Unfortunately, the performance of Pakistan's bureaucracy has been egregious. It has transformed into an amalgam of corruption, bribery, nepotism, fraud and abuse of authority. This is evident from the fact that in 2006 the corruption perception index (CPI) of Pakistan was 2.2 and it was ranked 142 out of 163 (Transparency International, n.d.a); in 2015, Pakistan's CPI increased to 30 and it was ranked 117 out of 168 countries (Transparency International, n.d.b); and in 2020, Pakistan's CPI increased to 31 and it was ranked 124 out of 180 countries (Transparency International, n.d.c). This clearly depicts a pattern of constant progression of corrupt practices in Pakistan, consequently rapidly corroding the social fabric of the state.

After the pandemic hit Pakistan, billions of rupees were allocated by the federal government for the coronavirus response. However, a report published by the Auditor General of Pakistan on expenditure related to the COVID-19 relief activities of various government departments and agencies discovered major irregularities and discrepancies amounting PKR 40 billion (Rana, 2021). Irregularities over PKR 25 billion were found against PKR 133 billion spent under the banner of the Benazir Income Support Program; PKR 5.2 billion out of the PKR 10 billion spent by the Utility Stores Corporation were deemed suspicious; PKR 4.8 billion out of the PKR 22.8 billion spent by the National Disaster Management Authority raised red flags; and PKR 1.5 billion out of the PKR 3.2 billion spent by the Ministry of Defence were deemed to be doubtful (Rana, 2021).

Dependency theory blames the constant growing economic problems of developing/underdeveloped countries to be as a result of the policies promulgated by the elite, as mostly these policies focus on safeguarding their own interests, even at the expense of the masses. Pakistan's case is similar, where the economic agenda is set by handful influential people, with the primary motive of promoting their own economic interests. Hence, year after year, corruption is on the rise in Pakistan.

In order to contain the spread of the virus, despite the fact that explicit guidelines were given by the federal government to the provinces, initially to enforce lockdown, later to strictly implement SOPs vis-a-vis public gatherings, opening/closing of markets/businesses etc., domestic politics and federal–province rifts remained the biggest hurdle in promulgating a unified response to the virus. Resultantly, a drastic increase was witnessed in the virus transmission rate, and the death toll increased too. Also, officials who were stationed to enforce the SOPs were busy collecting bribes in exchange for blatantly violating the rules (News, 2021). Furthermore, the administration failed to control the spread of disinformation regarding COVID-19 among the masses, especially transmitted through social media. Resultantly, the masses, particularly less educated people, began to mistrust the government and raised concerns such as COVID-19 being a western policy to distance Muslims from their religion/prayers (Firdous, 2021). Hence, the masses began to blatantly disregard and violate the SOPs implemented by the administration to control the spread of the virus.

Pakistan's health sector was badly exposed during the pandemic. Many hospitals located in small towns and villages, to date, use outdated medical equipment. Thus, when the health sector faced the unprecedented challenge of COVID-19, it failed to deliver. The majority of hospitals were not equipped with the PCR machines required for testing COVID-19, thus the public had no other option but to pay thousands of rupees to private labs to get themselves tested (Mehmood, 2021). More importantly, doctors and other medical staff faced an acute shortage of personal protective equipment (PPE) (Manzoor, 2020), which resulted in the deaths of many medical professionals; more than 200 doctors died (Geo News, 2021). In addition, hospitals across the country more or less operated in segregation; they were not linked to one another via the internet. Thus, they were unable to coordinate and share their experiences with one another to prevent repetition of mistakes/errors in a crucial life-and-death fight. Moreover, not only did patients have to face a shortage of lifesaving medicine, but also prices of medicine substantially increased.

In Pakistan, an overwhelming majority of the public sector offices are still using traditional paperwork mechanisms; thus, physical presence on the premises is a prerequisite for work to happen. During the pandemic, one of the key challenges was ensuring physical presence in offices, as highly crowded offices emerged as one of the hotspots of virus transmission. Resultantly, when the offices were forced to shut down, the efficacy of the administration was badly affected, which, in turn, increased problems for people. As the dependency paradigm rightly propagates, the developing/underdeveloped world is trapped in a vicious cycle by the developed world, where the former works tirelessly day and night to somehow make ends meet while being dependent on the latter; thus, it has neither resources nor time to upgrade the fundamental structure of the administration. Consequently, when a calamity struck – COVID-19 – the pre-existing structure was unbale to deliver, causing chaos and unrest among the masses.

In a report, the Free and Fair Election Network (FAFEN) after meticulously observing Pakistan's response to the pandemic from October 2020 to April 2021, highlighted the many flaws in Pakistan's health governance mechanism. After careful monitoring of the legislative activity, FAFEN concluded that even though the country was facing recurrent waves of the pandemic, the legislature, the fundamental pillar of the governance mechanism, showed minimal interest (Free and Fair Election Network, 2021). Given the alarming rise in the COVID-19 infection rate, the state should have declared a national health emergency, to save the failing healthcare system (Free and Fair Election Network, 2021). Nonetheless, during the later stages of the pandemic, a little seriousness was indeed witnessed in parliamentary decision-making.

Furthermore, the phenomenon of devolution of power, while commonly adopted and practised throughout the world, remains largely on paper and agreed in principle amongst the political elite of Pakistan. To date, Pakistan has been unable to devise and implement a unanimous and consistent local bodies system. The burden of resolving the very basic issues of the common person remains largely with local representatives, members of the national or provincial assembly or the already overburdened bureaucracy. Whereas prior to the pandemic, these traditional methods, up to a certain extent, catered to the needs of the common person, post pandemic, as issues rapidly multiplied, the handful of bureaucrats and public representatives were unable to provide for the masses in a timely manner. One of the key reasons behind power not being devolved, although agreed in principle by all stakeholders, is that the elite does not want to let go of the monetary hold it has by not empowering local bodies. Dependency theory also advocates that policymakers will retain as much as possible hold over financial matters; to strengthen their grip, the developed world and international financial institutes put such stern conditions on their funded projects that ensures that their backed elite remains in charge.

Local governments are considered to be the proximate government body to the local population. They are the most familiar with the problems faced by the local community. However, in Pakistan, local bodies do not wield much power, and are not even consulted when developmental projects are planned. Also, multiple other factors affect the efficacy of the local governments, such as very limited powers, budget constraints, no coordination between local, provincial and federal governments, bribery and abuse of authority. At the time COVID-19 hit Pakistan, there ceased to exist a local body system across the country. Hence, provision of relief to the masses was a much direr task for the provincial governments.

The infamous ‘centre–province rift’ has been constantly in the way of effective governance. Especially after the 18th Constitutional Amendment, which greatly increased the autonomy of the provinces, whenever a crucial policy matter has arisen, the federal and provincial governments have not seen eye to eye. Consequently, the issue becomes further complicated due to the different strategies adopted by the federation and the province. A similar situation arose when the pandemic struck, where the federal administration was adamant that lockdown was not the answer to containing the rapid spread of the virus, and some provincial governments insisted that a strict lockdown was the only viable option (Ahmed, 2020). Resultantly, Pakistan was unable to implement a unified strategy, which, in turn, aggravated the crisis, spoiling any chances of Pakistan containing the looming threat.

Lastly, to date, in Pakistan, there has been no effective disaster management mechanism. Though in the last few years, many disaster management authorities have been established, both at the federal and provincial levels, these authorities lack the very basic capabilities to mitigate the adversities incurred by a disaster, something that has proven time and again when the monsoon floods hit the country every summer (New Humanitarian, 2014). Even though Pakistan was one of the fortunate enough countries where COVID-19 hit relatively late (despite it sharing a border with China – the origin of the deadly virus), next to no pre-emptive measures were taken by the administration, particularly by these well-funded disaster management agencies.

To sum up, the obsolescent governance system of Pakistan, instead of facilitating relief efforts, proved to be a huge obstacle in adopting the necessary measures to curb the spread of the fatal virus. As a result, the common person suffered a great deal.

Policy prescriptions to strengthen Pakistan's governance system

After critically analysing the exacerbated economic problems and governance issues of Pakistan due to the virus outbreak, the following policy prescriptions are a way forward to mitigate the adverse socio-economic effects caused by the pandemic:

• Coordination and harmony amongst the federation and provinces are essential for stability and socio-economic development. Therefore, it is of the utmost importance that clear roles be delineated for the federal, provincial and local governments.

• To ensure efficient and effective governance, the administration must adopt e-governance methods, letting go of the traditional paperwork method. Mechanisms such as establishing ‘virtual rooms’, where all decisions can be made in virtual meetings, must be implemented.

• It is high time that Article 140-A of Pakistan's constitution, which directs each province to establish a local government and devolve political, administrative and financial responsibility (National Assembly of Pakistan, n.d.), be exercised in true letter and spirit by all provincial governments. Devolution of power remains a prerequisite to speedy development.

• Similar to the National Financial Commission Award, in which funds are allocated to the provinces by the federal government, provincial governments must also constitute their own provincial finance commission awards and allocate funds to district bodies, according to their population and area, for their development.

• Pakistan is still using the bureaucratic structure established by the British to govern the Subcontinent. This system is incapable of delivering in the modern era, especially for a huge population of 220 million; thus, on a war footing, Pakistan needs to overhaul and restructure its bureaucracy.

• Well-funded disaster management authorities are the need of the hour to prevent future catastrophes. In addition to federal and provincial disaster management authorities, district disaster management authorities must be established.

• Institutional balance is needed to ensure political stability, a pre-requisite to speedy socio-economic development. Every institution must work within its pre-defined limits as per the constitution of Pakistan. No institution should overstep its jurisdictions; if it does, it must be harshly punished for violating the constitution of Pakistan.

Conclusion

In a nutshell, Pakistan is one of the fortunate countries where the pandemic up till now has not caused casualties in the numbers witnessed in neighbouring states like India and Iran, or generally across the world. However, the deadly pandemic has brought into the limelight the many flaws that Pakistan's economic and governance system has had for a very long time.

The virus outbreak has adversely affected the lives of the common person, as it has added onto the pre-existing insurmountable economic challenges. Consequently, the living standards of the masses have significantly worsened, as hundreds of thousands of people have lost their livelihoods and tens of thousands have been forced into poverty. Furthermore, the economic conditions of the state also deteriorated considerably, the GDP of the country shrunk for the very first time, inflation was at an all-time high and exports decreased significantly.

Moreover, Pakistan's outdated governance system was badly exposed during the pandemic. Pre-pandemic, the outdated mechanisms used in government offices were somehow able to cater to the needs of the masses to a certain extent. However, post pandemic, as the traditional ways of living were no longer viable, the administration, understaffed and with scarce resources, was able neither to contain the spread of the virus nor to sustain economic wellbeing.

Pakistan adopted several mitigation measures to curb the spread of the virus – complete lockdowns, smart lockdowns and micro-smart lockdowns – all of which played an important role in minimizing the transmission of the virus. Furthermore, the government gave subsidies on all basic necessities. Tax relief was given to businesses to facilitate them, especially export industries which were greatly accommodated by the government as they were the most affected by the pandemic. Millions of rupees were distributed among low-income families and daily wage workers.

The dependency paradigm effectively explains the developed world's exploitative policies and clever manipulation of the international institutions, creating a high level of dependence for the developing/underdeveloped world on the former. Pakistan, being a developing state, owing to its poor economic conditions is also highly dependent on international financial institutions for its macro-economic stability. Thus, time and again, whenever Pakistan was in dire need of economic assistance – even during COVID-19 – stern conditional loans were issued by the international financial institutions which, in reality, far more secured the political interests of the developed world than helped attain economic stability in Pakistan. Moreover, after the pandemic struck the world, the developed world hesitated to play a proactive role to help the developing/underdeveloped world recuperate, reiterating dependency theory's core argument.

To sum up, the COVID-19 outbreak is an eye-opener for the Pakistani administration. It has clearly showcased the structural flaws in Pakistan's economic model and governance system. It is high time that the administration addressed these issues on war footings, especially as disasters can never be predicted and are a recurrent phenomenon.