ARTICLE (May 22 2010): As I look back over the years that I have served Pakistan in the public domain, I have concern for my country in many areas but principally in the areas of decision-making and in the area of financial resources and how there is misallocation and misapplication of resources. Gresham's law does come in play 'bad intentions drive out good intentions'.
One could go further and seek what happens when criminal intentions are furthered in the public domain. The philosophies of old have been forgotten and in its place something sinister is developing. There is something or everything wrong where reason and decisions at the highest level have been distorted and misapplied. Leibenstein's x-efficiency theories have now to be radically modified in light of new evidence that is emerging. The decision making has been further thwarted by the 'deforms' undertaken by the Musharraf regime.
The understanding at the grassroots level was and is what is required and the only way that can be achieved is by the involvement of the root level. The World Bank and other institutions have given us the concept of 'stakeholder[s]' and then they go on to do anything they deem fit, or the stakeholders are persons that do not have any stake and numbers are filled in.
When the decision-making is supposed to be independently done through the board of governors the constituent members are generally the secretaries drawn in from the many ministries of the government of Pakistan and all of them bring their own peculiar regressive attitudes to the decision-making process. The end result is chaos.
Policy-making decisions are admittedly more difficult in as much as the nature of our societal development makes the going even more difficult. Economics and the constituent subjects are not exact science and require a considerable amount of judgement. The entire process is not procedural but meaningless overtones, and ambitious statements that have no meaning have overtaken one that is complex in its substantive nature for the decision-making domain.
Economic decisions are rarely outside the social and political domain and have an impact that may or may not be intentions of the policy making political system. The dictator, working on limited requirement that generally meet the requirements of those that are essential to keep the tyrannical forces in power, is always limited. That is why I have been advocating that the law of forces has to be differently stated. The law should include that policy [s] should be for the many rather than the few.
No practical economic question has simple answer and none in the developing world that is not a zero sum game. There is never in real life any decision that can be taken unhesitatingly. Abstract reasoning and elementary principles do not contribute in our case and the bureaucracy sourly supports the people that have to take these decisions.
Intentional actions are attributed to the weakest link by the strongest link in the system-not strongest in terms of reason, but in terms of power - the last three dictators have thirty plus years to their credit and the distortions that have caused in the working ethics of the majority are far worse than what is given by Gresham's law. For the right or objective decisions and solutions, the facts have to be known and the gray areas have to be minimised and yet the opinion-oriented forces make all kinds of interventions that not only perverts, but pollutes the decision making process, the louder the voice in a meeting the worse the basis for the opinion[s].
In an economy that is as diverse as Pakistan's, the factual ascertaining is difficult to determine. The structured bureaucracy is under fire and panicked individuals guarding their positions are hardly likely to give correct assessments in factual terms. The scientific basis breaks down and the 'humane base emerges'.
A humane base that takes into consideration not some defunct thinking from the West but something that comes from the localised zones of this country that reverberates from and with the local communities. It is as if the internal decency seeks to implement a decision that is worthwhile. The decision-maker then has to give of himself rather than take for himself. The function of economic theory is not to give pat decisions and hope that they will be right. Rather, it is to lead the way to discussion and the modification of that theory by the practical realities that come our way. The conflict between the specialist [?] and the political decision-maker is almost always given.
The tyrannical powers have no such problems because they can rough ride any option by virtue of the 'saving the country' syndrome. We have been saved so often by these undergrads that every time they go, they leave the country in a bigger mess. Accidental actions and inconclusive reasoning will mean the correctness to implement will be dependent on variables that lead to the conclusion that correct solutions will only happen by accident rather than by intent.
The discipline that is being taught in the universities is hopelessly out of context is now understood. What is not understood is what to do about it. Are the principles given by the academics of the west absolute? The strength of this society was its community feeling and the ability to give rather than take. That ability has been lost because inherently it was acquired from the attitudes and family nurturing, the academics as such had very little to do with it. The use of a developed mind was far more important than the policies fed to us by the very institutions that should have been discarded long ago. The 'do-nothing' policy is a safe one especially if one has a job for a lifetime and the chance of risk-taking is to be eliminated.
The strength of character that was supposed to have been in the bureaucracy has ebbed away basically because of the tinkering that has taken place over the years. Men who took cudgels for society have been systematically eliminated. The 'do-nothing' policy absolves the policy-maker of any mistake that he may have made the negative absolves the bureaucrat and put to rest the specialist-generalist controversy. There is no controversy and the facts that govern each will be discussed subsequently. A librarian, who has not issued a single book, has never lost one and that is not a bad formula to follow if the internal system is not so organised as to be in the service of Pakistan.
In current times, the exclusion of those that were not part of the development process has assumed some alarming proportions. These proportions are such that the people involved in decision making will have to double and triple their efforts if the position is to be retrieved. Scoundrels that have misguided the economic situation are not the biggest patriots. What has this to do with decent and equitable development?
The legacy [s] of the immediate past still linger on and these can be devastating in the sense that they distort decision making in economic matters and the opportunity cost of these distortions can be disastrous for the country. How can then there be a coherent economic policy? Think about it. Get involved with the policy makers in the reasoning for the economy. It is not a waste of time; it will be worthwhile for the country. Try it. Lazy!!
Source: http://www.brecorder.com/index.php?id=1060156&currPageNo=1&query=&search=&term=&supDate=
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment