Skip to Content
WorldWorld
  • Review
  • Open Access

7 November 2024

10 Pages

Structural and External Barriers to Pakistan’s Economic Growth: Pathways to Sustainable Development

,
,
and
1
Department of Political Science, University of Campania ‘L. Vanvitelli’, 81100 Caserta, Italy
2
Department of Basic Sciences and Related Studies (BSRS), Mehran University of Engineering and Technology, Shaheed Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto Campus, Khairpur Mirs 66020, Pakistan
3
Centre of Excellence in Analytical Chemistry, University of Sindh, Jamshoro 76080, Pakistan
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.

Abstract

Pakistan’s economic growth has been hindered by various internal and external factors since its independence in 1947. This study aims to identify the root causes of these issues and provide a comprehensive understanding of the country’s economic situation. Internally, inefficient bureaucracy, corruption, inadequate support for small and medium enterprises (SMEs), labor market rigidity, tax evasion, and regional inequalities have impeded development. External factors such as political instability, terrorism, weak governance, foreign policy challenges, and insufficient infrastructure have discouraged investment and disrupted economic activities. Pakistan’s reliance on low-tech exports has also led to a loss of competitiveness in international trade. To revitalize the economy, the study suggests reforms in governance, bureaucracy, and infrastructure, with a focus on supporting SMEs, reducing corruption, and attracting investment. The adoption of circular economy (CE) practices, particularly through the use of recycled materials, is proposed as a viable pathway to enhance economic resilience and environmental sustainability. The study highlights the potential for integrating CE strategies, drawing from successful global practices, to address Pakistan’s economic and environmental challenges. However, the reliance on historical data and linear econometric models may not fully capture the evolving economic dynamics, necessitating further research incorporating real-time data and sector-specific approaches. Despite these limitations, the study provides actionable insights for policymakers, offering a framework for Pakistan and other developing economies to achieve sustainable growth.

1. Introduction

Pakistan’s economy has faced numerous challenges in recent years, including fiscal imbalances, rising inflation, and external sector vulnerabilities. Internally, issues such as ethnic conflicts, religious militancy, and poor governance have worsened economic instability, and the agricultural sector, which is crucial to Pakistan’s economy, has been hampered by limited water resources, poor management, natural disasters, and ineffective policies. Externally, factors such as the global financial crisis and the war on terror have reduced exports and foreign direct investment (FDI). For example, FDI fell from USD 2.56 billion in 2020 to USD 2.06 billion in 2021, continuing a long-term decline since 2008 [1].
The economy has seen a period of both growth and recession, but events like the 2010 floods, which caused USD 43 billion in damage [2], pushed it further into difficulty. While there has been significant research into Pakistan’s economic problems, most studies tend to focus on specific isolated issues like trade deficits or fiscal policies. These studies often overlook broader and interconnected factors like urbanization, human capital development, governance, and regional trade [3]. Additionally, many uses outdated models that fail to reflect the complexity of the current economic situation.
One promising solution lies in the circular economy (CE) framework, which is gaining global recognition as a way to reduce waste, recycle materials, and promote more sustainable resource use [4]. CE has been successful in other regions; for instance, Europe saw a 12% reduction in material extraction and a 9% decrease in greenhouse gas emissions from 2010 to 2018 by adopting these principles [5]. For Pakistan, adopting similar strategies could help decrease its reliance on raw materials, reduce environmental harm, and build a more resilient economy. A key element of the circular economy is the use of recycled materials, which can significantly reduce energy use and the environmental impact. For example, producing aluminum from recycled sources uses 95% less energy compared to using raw materials [6]. Embracing such practices could help Pakistan not only address resource challenges but also foster sustainable economic development. This research explores how applying circular economy principles, especially through the use of recycled materials, can help tackle Pakistan’s economic and environmental challenges. By using advanced econometric analysis, it provides insights and recommendations that aim to inform both policymakers and the academic community on pathways toward sustainable growth.

2. Literature Review

Since gaining independence in 1947, Pakistan has faced significant economic challenges, shaped by a complex mix of political instability, inadequate infrastructure, and inconsistent economic policies. Early on, the country inherited several British administrative institutions, which contributed to its initial development. However, Pakistan’s nascent democratic process and evolving institutions struggled to foster sustained growth. In the 1960s, despite limited natural resources and political instability, Pakistan’s economy grew at an average GDP rate of 6.8%, outpacing India’s growth. Analysts attribute this success to strict government-led planning strategies [7]. However, this growth occurred alongside the establishment of an authoritarian streak in Pakistan’s economic management, a feature that persisted until 1971. The shift toward democracy thereafter led to inconsistent economic management, undermining the long-term stability [7].
From the 1990s onward, Pakistan implemented various liberalization policies, including privatization, deregulation, and trade reforms, to stimulate internal and external growth [8]. Although these reforms aimed to strengthen the economy, they failed to fully protect it from international and domestic shocks. Pakistan demonstrated resilience during the Asian financial crisis (1998–2002), but its economic momentum was slowed by inflation, rising external debt, and unfavorable terms of trade [8]. Additionally, structural weaknesses in key sectors like agriculture further hindered sustainable growth. The agricultural sector, once a dominant contributor to GDP, suffered from water scarcity, poor management, and climatic changes, which exacerbated the fiscal deficits and reduced the sector’s contribution to the GDP [9]. Various theoretical perspectives have explored the relationship between political regimes and economic development, often yielding conflicting conclusions. Table 1 summarizes key arguments from the literature on the impact of democracy versus authoritarianism on economic growth and applies these findings to the context of Pakistan. This comparison highlights how the political environment has influenced Pakistan’s economic trajectory and institutional development.
Table 1. Theoretical perspectives on the impact of political regimes on economic development and their application to Pakistan.
Bruns and Ioannidis (2020) have emphasized the importance of demography, trade openness, education, and investment as critical factors in promoting economic growth, aligning with Pakistan’s economic reforms during this period. However, the benefits of such reforms were uneven [18]. Pegkas et al. (2020) explored how human capital and trade openness are essential for long-term economic growth, findings that also apply to Pakistan, where these factors have been underutilized [19]. The decline in total factor productivity (TFP) across sectors, noted by Siddique (2023), points to inefficiencies in labor and capital utilization, contributing to slower economic growth [20]. While these studies provide valuable insights into individual aspects of Pakistan’s economy, they often analyze issues in isolation. A more comprehensive approach is required to understand the interplay of macroeconomic and sectoral factors. Barro (2003) highlighted governance, international openness, and human capital as key drivers of economic growth, while pointing out that high government consumption and fertility rates could impede progress [13]. Building on this, the current study applies advanced econometric models to examine the relationships between key macroeconomic variables such as FDI, energy consumption, and trade openness, while also considering governance issues, political instability, and sectoral productivity. Another emerging area of interest for promoting sustainable growth in Pakistan is the circular economy (CE) framework, which has gained global traction as a model for reducing waste, reusing materials, and promoting recycling. Ghisellini et al. (2016) documented the success of CE strategies in reducing resource extraction and environmental degradation, particularly in developed regions like Europe [4]. For example, CE initiatives in Europe led to a 12% reduction in material extraction and a 9% decrease in greenhouse gas emissions from 2010 to 2018 [5]. Recycling has played a critical role in these initiatives, reducing the demand for raw materials and energy consumption. Stahel (2016) notes that recycling metals and plastics can significantly lower energy use and emissions, contributing to both environmental sustainability and economic growth [21]. Despite the global momentum, Pakistan has been slow to adopt CE strategies. Most studies on Pakistan’s economy still focus on traditional growth models and fail to address the potential benefits of integrating sustainability into economic development [20]. There is a growing need to explore how CE principles, particularly recycling, can be tailored to Pakistan’s context to address issues like resource depletion, waste management, and economic resilience. The Ellen MacArthur Foundation (2017) emphasizes that using recycled materials in industrial processes not only reduces environmental harm but also promotes economic efficiency by decreasing reliance on resource extraction [22]. In developed economies, the adoption of CE has generated new opportunities in industries such as recycling and waste management. Mazzanti and Zoboli (2008) demonstrated how Germany’s adoption of CE principles has fostered both economic growth and environmental sustainability by encouraging the use of recycled materials in construction and manufacturing [23]. The potential for such practices in Pakistan remains largely untapped, though their application could contribute significantly to sustainable development. This study builds upon the existing CE literature by analyzing how Pakistan can incorporate these practices to promote long-term economic resilience. By applying advanced econometric models, this research explores the potential for integrating recycled materials into Pakistan’s industrial sectors, providing new insights into the role of CE in developing economies.

3. Data and Methodology

The relationships between Pakistan’s key economic indicators—such as GDP, foreign direct investment, trade openness and energy consumption—are examined in this study using sophisticated econometric techniques. Pakistan’s economic growth is assessed using data from reliable sources including the World Bank, the Pakistan Bureau of Statistics, and global resources such as Google Scholar, ResearchGate, Web of Science, and Scopus. Johansen co-integration tests are used to identify cointegrative relationships, augmented Dickey–Fuller unit root tests are used to check stationarity, and a vector error correction model (VECM) is used to examine both the short and long-term dynamics. Breusch–Godfrey and Ramsey RESET are two diagnostic tests that can validate the results by confirming the stability and reliability of the model. Supplementary Table S1 provides a comprehensive breakdown of the data sources and methods.

5. Internal and External Challenges to Pakistan’s Economic Growth

Pakistan’s economic growth is shaped by a mix of internal and external challenges, each affecting the country’s progress in different ways. Internally, factors such as small and medium enterprises (SMEs), labor market rigidity, tax evasion, regional inequalities, and bureaucracy have a strong influence on growth. SMEs play a key role in the economy, contributing more than 30% to GDP and 25% to exports, but they face significant hurdles, especially in securing funding and dealing with complicated regulations (Table 2).
Table 2. Internal factors affecting economic growth in Pakistan.
On the external side, political instability and terrorism have harmed Pakistan’s ability to attract foreign direct investment (FDI), which dropped from USD 8 billion in 2007 to USD 3.5 billion in 2022 (Figure 2, Table 3). While SMEs struggle with internal barriers, the country’s international image is undermined by security concerns, making it difficult to attract foreign investors.
Figure 2. Foreign direct investment, net inflows (% of GDP)—Pakistan 2000–2022. Source: World Bank (worldbank.org (accessed on 1 April 2024)). The FDI ratio is represented on the y-axis in Figure 3. From 2000 to 2022, the values ranged from 0 to 3.5, reflecting the FDI value of the net inflows of the GDP (Gross Domestic Product).
Table 3. External factors affecting economic growth in Pakistan.
Additionally, the labor market rigidity within Pakistan makes it hard for businesses to respond to changes in demand. The unemployment rate increased slightly from 6.34% in 2021 to 6.42% in 2022 (Figure 2), showing ongoing challenges in the labor market (Table 2).
Figure 2 shows the unemployment rate on the y-axis. Each value indicates the percentage of the workforce that is unemployed each year from 2000 to 2022, ranging from 0.00 to 7.00.
This is worsened by outdated labor laws and a mismatch between the skills available in the workforce and what employers need. On the other hand, external factors like weak governance affect the country’s ability to manage economic policies effectively, which hurts the overall business environment (Table 3). So, while internal factors affect job creation and business operations, external governance issues make it hard for Pakistan to maintain stability and growth in the long term.
Tax evasion is another serious internal problem, with about half of the potential tax base going uncollected. This leads to a shortage in government revenue, which affects public services and infrastructure development (Table 2). Meanwhile, strained relations with neighboring countries, particularly India and Afghanistan, further complicate Pakistan’s economic outlook by limiting trade and foreign investment (Table 3). Although tax evasion hurts Pakistan domestically by reducing the available funds for development, foreign policy challenges limit the country’s access to international markets and opportunities for growth.
Regional inequalities within Pakistan also remain a pressing internal issue. Cities like Karachi and Lahore benefit from better infrastructure, healthcare, and education, while rural areas, especially in Balochistan, lag behind (Table 2). These inequalities create barriers to equal opportunity across the country. On the external side, terrorism and political instability affect both urban and rural areas by creating insecurity, which further discourages investment and hinders development (Table 3). While regional disparities mainly affect parts of the country, external security issues impact the entire nation, making it harder to achieve consistent growth.
Lastly, bureaucracy and corruption are deeply rooted in internal challenges. Complicated administrative processes and corrupt practices slow down business activities and make Pakistan less attractive for investment (Table 2). At the same time, weak governance structures on the external front create similar difficulties in implementing effective policies and reforms, which are essential for sustainable growth (Table 4). Both bureaucracy and poor governance, whether internal or external, make it harder for Pakistan to make meaningful progress.
Table 4. Growth obstacles and corrective measures.
Pakistan’s economic development is beset with serious obstacles from both external and internal sources. The domestic economy is primarily impacted by internal problems that restrict growth prospects, such as labor market inefficiencies, regional disparities, and the challenges faced by SMEs. A wider range of external factors impact Pakistan’s capacity to draw investment and engage in the global economy, including political instability, terrorism, and inadequate governance. Achieving sustainable economic growth will depend on addressing both of these sets of issues, as shown in Table 1, Table 2 and Table 3.

6. Conclusions

This study identifies key internal and external factors hindering Pakistan’s economic growth since independence. Internally, problems include inefficient bureaucracy, corruption, labor market rigidity, tax evasion, inadequate support for SMEs, and regional inequalities. Externally, political instability, weak governance, foreign policy challenges, and inadequate infrastructure discourage investment and disrupt economic activity. In addition, reliance on low-technology exports such as cotton textiles reduces competitiveness in global markets and makes the economy vulnerable to external shocks. Addressing these challenges requires reforms in governance, bureaucracy, and infrastructure, with a focus on supporting SMEs, reducing corruption, and attracting investment. Macroeconomic stability is critical to restoring investor confidence. Adopting circular economy (CE) practices, such as using recycled materials, could improve economic resilience and sustainability. The study is limited by its reliance on historical data and linear econometric models, which may not fully capture current economic dynamics. Regional differences between provinces and sectors may also impact the generalizability of the results. Further research using real-time data and industry-specific approaches would provide more detailed insights. The adoption of CE practices faces challenges including inadequate waste management infrastructure, regulatory barriers, and SME readiness. Political instability and political discontinuity could hinder long-term economic reforms. External factors such as global market changes and fluctuations in foreign investment could also impact the effectiveness of the proposed strategies. The study recognizes these limitations and emphasizes the need for further research and policy development to ensure sustainable economic growth for Pakistan.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/world5040056/s1, Table S1: Overview of data sources, variables, and methods used in this study, including GDP data from the World Bank and sectoral data for recycled materials usage from the Ellen MacArthur Foundation.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, N.A.; methodology, H.A.K.; validation, N.A., H.A.K. and O.K.B.; formal analysis, N.A. and H.A.K.; investigation, O.K.B.; resources, H.I.A.; data curation, N.A. and H.I.A.; writing—original draft preparation, N.A.; writing—review and editing, N.A. and H.A.K.; visualization, H.I.A.; supervision, O.K.B. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Acknowledgments

Naveed Ali was supported by a PhD program in Political Science at the University of Campania “Luigi Vanvitelli”. We also extend our gratitude to Dr. Ahsanullah Unar of the Department of Precision Medicine at the University of Campania “Luigi Vanvitelli” for his invaluable assistance in our study.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. World Bank. Worldwide Governance Indicators, DataBank. 2022. Available online: https://databank.worldbank.org/source/worldwide-governance-indicators (accessed on 11 June 2024).
  2. NDMA. National Disaster Management Authority; National Disaster Management Authority of Pakistan: Islamabad, Pakistan, 2010. [Google Scholar]
  3. Khan, M.K.; Teng, J.-Z.; Khan, M.I.; Khan, M.O. Impact of globalization, economic factors and energy consumption on CO2 emissions in Pakistan. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 688, 424–436. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  4. Ghisellini, P.; Cialani, C.; Ulgiati, S. A review on circular economy: The expected transition to a balanced interplay of environmental and economic systems. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 114, 11–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  5. European Environment Agency, Greenhouse Gas Emissions Under the Effort Sharing Legislation. 2023. Available online: https://www.eea.europa.eu/en/datahub/datahubitem-view/e9ce7eb8-8439-4f2f-96f8-279a36c5fa7a (accessed on 20 October 2024).
  6. International Aluminium Institute. International Aluminium Institute. 2024. Available online: https://international-aluminium.org/ (accessed on 20 October 2024).
  7. Khan, A. Role of Institutions and Policies in Economic Growth: Across Country Analysis. Ph.D. Thesis, Federal Urdu University of Arts, Science and Technology, Islamabad, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  8. Iqbal, Z.; Sattar, A. The Contribution of Worker’s Remittances to Economic Growth in Pakistan; Pakistan Institute of Development Economics: Islamabad, Pakistan, 2005. [Google Scholar]
  9. Azam, A.; Shafique, M. Agriculture in Pakistan and its Impact on Economy―A Review. IJAST 2017, 103, 47–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  10. Wade, G.; Chin, J.K. (Eds.) China and Southeast Asia: Historical Interactions, 1st ed.; Routledge Studies in the Modern History of Asia; Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group: London, UK; New York, NY, USA; p. 132.
  11. Olson, M. Dictatorship, democracy, and development. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 1993, 87, 567–576. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  12. Bardhan, P. Economics of development and the development of economics. J. Econ. Perspect. 1993, 7, 129–142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  13. Barro, R.J. Determinants of economic growth in a panel of countries. Ann. Econ. Financ. 2003, 4, 231–274. [Google Scholar]
  14. Jalal, A. Democracy and Authoritarianism in South Asia: A Comparative and Historical Perspective; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2009. [Google Scholar]
  15. Talbot, I. Pakistan’s hybrid regime. In Routledge Handbook of Autocratization in South Asia; Routledge: London, UK, 2021; pp. 141–150. [Google Scholar]
  16. Ganguly, S.; Fair, C.C. The structural origins of authoritarianism in Pakistan. Commonw. Comp. Polit. 2013, 51, 122–142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  17. Hussain, A. Institutions, Economic Growth, and Participatory Development. In Pakistan: Moving the Economy Forward; Amjad, R., Burki, S.J., Eds.; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  18. Bruns, S.B.; Ioannidis, J.P.A. Determinants of economic growth: Different time different answer? J. Macroecon. 2020, 63, 103185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  19. Pegkas, P.; Staikouras, C.; Tsamadias, C. On the determinants of economic growth: Empirical evidence from the Eurozone countries. Int. Area Stud. Rev. 2020, 23, 210–229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  20. Siddique, O. Total Factor Productivity and Economic Growth in Pakistan: A Five-Decade Overview. Pak. Dev. Rev. 2023, 61, 583–602. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  21. Stahel, W.R. The circular economy. Nature 2016, 531, 435–438. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  22. MacArthur, E. Beyond plastic waste. Science 2017, 358, 843. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  23. Mazzanti, M.; Zoboli, R. Waste generation, waste disposal and policy effectiveness: Evidence on decoupling from the European Union. Resources 2008, 52, 1221–1234. [Google Scholar]
  24. Husain, I. Pakistan’s economy and regional challenges. Int. Stud. 2018, 55, 253–270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  25. Sikander, M. A Tale of 2 Economies: India and Pakistan. Business Recorder. Available online: https://www.brecorder.com/news/40242515 (accessed on 17 May 2023).
  26. Sajjad, S. Pakistan as a Political Economy—Macro Pakistani. Available online: https://macropakistani.com/pakistan-as-a-political-economy/ (accessed on 22 February 2024).
  27. Afraz, N.; Hussain, S.T.; Khan, U. Barriers to the growth of small firms in pakistan: A qualitative assessment of selected light engineering industries. LJE 2014, 19, 135–176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  28. Ali, S.; Jabeen, M.; Khattak, B. Constraints to the growth of small and medium-sized Enterprises in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP), Pakistan: A District-Level Survey Analysis. Bus. Econ. Rev. 2021, 13, 1–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  29. Ishfaq, A. View of Impact of Corruption on Economic Growth in Pakistan: An Analysis. Available online: https://ojs.jdss.org.pk/journal/article/view/399/535 (accessed on 13 February 2024).
  30. Auerbach, J.U.; Azariadis, C. Property rights, governance, and economic development. Rev. Dev. Econ. 2015, 19, 210–220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  31. Attari, I.J.; Kamal, Y.; Attaria, S.N. The causal link between foreign direct investment (FDI) and economic growth in Pakistan economy. J. Commer. 2011, 3, 61–68. [Google Scholar]
  32. Kugelman, M.; Husain, I. Pakistan’s Institutions: We Know They Matter, but how can They Work Better? 2018. Available online: https://www.wilsoncenter.org/publication/pakistans-institutions-we-know-they-matter-how-can-they-work-better (accessed on 25 November 2021).
  33. World Bank. Pakistan Overview: Development News, Research, Data World Bank. 2023. Available online: https://www.worldbank.org/en/country/pakistan/overview (accessed on 6 February 2024).
  34. World Bank. The World Bank Annual Report. 2013. Available online: http://en.cairochamber.org.eg/Encyclo/7542189372270007world%20bank.pdf (accessed on 14 February 2024).
  35. Memon, A.P.; Memon, K.S.; Shaikh, S.; Memon, F. Political Instability: A case study of Pakistan. J. Pol. Stud. 2011, 18, 31–43. [Google Scholar]
  36. Haider, A.; ud Din, M.; Ghani, E. Consequences of Political Instability, Governance and Bureaucratic Corruption on Inflation and Growth: The Case of Pakistan. Pak. Dev. Rev. 2011, 50, 773–807. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  37. Acemoglu, D.; Robinson, J.A. Why Nations Fail: The Origins of Power, Prosperity and Poverty. ASEAN Econ. Bull. 2012, 29, 168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  38. Zaidi, S.A. Issues in Pakistan’s economy. In OUP Catalogue; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2005. [Google Scholar]
  39. Husain, I. Pakistan and Indian Economies Compared; IBA Karachi: Karachi, Pakistan, 2011. [Google Scholar]
  40. Khan, S.; Shamim, S.J. Role of State Institutions in Governance and Public Policy Making in Pakistan: Perspectives from Academia. 2023. Available online: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4579680 (accessed on 20 October 2024).
  41. Ahmed, S.S.; Javed, A.; Manzoor, R. Regional trade and investment value chains in South Asia: Perspectives from Pakistani enterprises. Quest J. Mgt. Soc. Sci. 2019, 1, 165–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  42. Majeed & Partners. A Brief Introduction to the Legal Framework Governing Public Private Partnerships in Pakistan—Majeed & Partners. 2021. Available online: https://www.mplaw.com.pk/2021/04/26/legal-regime-governing-public-private-partnerships-in-pakistan/ (accessed on 15 July 2024).
  43. Khan, A.H.; Kim, Y.H. Foreign direct investment. In Pakistan: Policy Issues and Operational Implications; Asian Development Bank: Manila, Philippines, 1999. [Google Scholar]
  44. Auerbach, A.J.; Hines, J.R., Jr. Taxation and Economic Efficiency; NBER Working Paper; NBER: Massachusetts, MA, USA, 2001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  45. Khalid, M.; Nasir, M. Tax Structure in Pakistan: Fragmented, Exploitative and Anti-growth. Pak. Dev. Rev. 2020, 59, 461–468. [Google Scholar]
  46. Qadir, U. Revitalising Pakistan’s Industrial Sector: A Roadmap for Resilience and Innovation; Pakistan Institute of Development Economics: Islamabad, Pakistan, 2023. [Google Scholar]
  47. Pakistan Economic Survey. Pakistan Economic Survey 2018–2019. 2018. Available online: https://www.finance.gov.pk/survey/chapters_19/7-Inflaton.pdf (accessed on 14 June 2024).
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Article Metrics

Citations

Article Access Statistics

Multiple requests from the same IP address are counted as one view.