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

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. Theoretical perspectives on the impact of political regimes on economic development and their application to Pakistan.

Main Argument	Key Findings	Application to Pakistan	Reference
Authoritarian regimes can foster strong developmental states in Southeast Asia.	Southeast Asia’s growth is attributed to state-led development under authoritarian regimes, emphasizing industrial policies and export-driven growth.	Pakistan’s early economic growth under military rule benefited from centralized planning and state-led strategies, similar to Southeast Asia’s development model.	[10]
Democracy secures individual rights, including property rights, essential for growth.	Democracies foster long-term growth by securing property rights, creating stable environments for capitalistic development.	Pakistan’s authoritarian past limited secure property rights and hindered the development of long-term capitalist institutions, impacting growth.	[11]
Democracy’s complexity can hinder collective action but is essential for legitimacy.	Democracy complicates decision making but is necessary for maintaining accountability and decentralization in development.	Pakistan’s political instability and weak democratic institutions led to fragmented governance, impeding effective long-term economic planning.	[12]
Economic growth is influenced by human capital, rule of law, and international openness.	Human capital, rule of law, and openness drive growth, while high fertility rates and high government consumption impede it.	Pakistan’s struggle with political instability and weak governance has limited human capital development and the rule of law, affecting sustainable growth.	[13]
Pakistan is a hybrid regime, with democracy constrained by military influence.	Pakistan’s democratic practices are undermined by military intervention in political and economic decisions, limiting full democratic functioning.	Pakistan’s “grey zone” between democracy and authoritarianism restricts true democratic accountability and stifles long-term economic reforms.	[14,15]
Pakistan’s political instability contrasts with India’s democratic consolidation.	Frequent military coups in Pakistan, in contrast to India’s stable democracy, have contributed to economic instability and delayed constitution making.	Political instability, including military interventions, delayed Pakistan’s democratic consolidation, contributing to its slower economic growth compared to India.	[16]
Pakistan’s economy faced shocks but showed resilience during key periods.	Economic liberalization in the late 1990s and early 2000s helped to stabilize growth, despite regional crises such as sanctions and the global recession.	Pakistan’s vulnerability to external shocks highlights the need for diversified growth and stronger institutions to sustain economic progress in the long term.	[17]

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.

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.

4. Trends and Shocks in Pakistan’s Economic Growth

Pakistan has been one of the Asia’s fastest-growing economies in recent years, with economic growth rates rising from 1.8% in 2000/01 to an average of 6–7% annually over the last five years. These rates, while notable, are a reversion to the country’s long-term average; over a 60-year period, Pakistan’s annual GDP growth rate has averaged 5.2%. During this period, the manufacturing sector experienced growth exceeding 15%, exports doubled in US dollar terms in 5 years, and an open trade regime has allowed imports to triple. Tax revenues increased by 14%/year, reducing the fiscal deficit from an average of 7% in the 1990s to 4%. Pakistan’s external debt burden was halved from 52% of GDP to 26%, and its debt servicing ratio dropped from 60% to 28%, reflecting improved fiscal sustainability [24].

The country also experienced significant reductions in poverty, with official estimates showing a decline from 34% to 24%, while World Bank estimates place it at 29%, Unemployment fell from 8.4% to 6.5%, reflecting an overall improvement in economic conditions [17]. Historically, Pakistan’s growth benefitted from trade with East Pakistan and substantial foreign aid, particularly from the U.S. and oil-rich Middle Eastern nations. Between 1961 and 1980, Pakistan’s annual growth averaged 6%, compared to India’s 4% during the same period [25].

Despite limited natural resources and a fragile political foundation, the country achieved notable growth in the 1960s and early 2000s, demonstrating the impact of government-led planning strategies [26].

Pakistan’s GDP growth rate has fluctuated significantly over the years. In 2004, the economy achieved its highest growth rate of 7.83%, following successful policy reforms and the country’s regained economic sovereignty from the IMF. However, the global pandemic in 2020 caused a sharp contraction in GDP. These fluctuations are visually represented in Figure 1, which illustrates the country’s GDP growth rate from 2000 to 2022, based on data from the World Bank.

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. Internal factors affecting economic growth in Pakistan.

Factor	Description	Corrective Measures	References
Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs)	SMEs significantly contribute to Pakistan’s GDP and employment but face challenges such as limited access to finance, complex regulations, poor infrastructure, and limited market access.	Enhance SME financing options, simplify regulatory processes, improve infrastructure, and support SMEs in international markets.	[27,28]
Labor Market Rigidity	Rigid labor laws, high costs of hiring and firing, and skill mismatches hinder labor market efficiency. Unions also affect productivity through shutdowns and disputes.	Reform labor laws to increase flexibility, invest in skill development programs, and improve employer–worker collaboration.	[29,30]
Tax Evasion	Widespread tax evasion due to a complex tax system and corruption, depriving the government of revenue for public services and infrastructure.	Simplify the tax system, strengthen tax enforcement, and reduce corruption in tax administration.	[7,31]
Regional Inequalities	Significant disparities between urban and rural areas, with urban centers receiving better infrastructure, education, and healthcare, while rural areas, particularly Balochistan and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, lag behind.	Increase investment in rural infrastructure, education, and healthcare, and ensure equitable resource allocation across regions.	[32,33]
Bureaucracy and Corruption	Bureaucratic inefficiencies and widespread corruption slow down business processes, discourage foreign investment, and create an unfavorable business environment.	Streamline bureaucratic procedures, enforce anti-corruption measures, and create transparent business environments.	[29,34]

).

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. External factors affecting economic growth in Pakistan.

Factor	Description	Corrective Measures	References
Political Instability	Frequent government changes, coups, and policy inconsistencies hinder foreign and domestic investment, leading to economic uncertainty.	Strengthen democratic institutions, promote political stability, and ensure policy continuity.	[35,36]
Terrorism and Violence	Terrorism and internal violence, influenced by regional conflicts, create insecurity and discourage both domestic and foreign investment, especially in large projects such as CPEC.	Enhance national security measures, promote cross-border cooperation, and address regional conflicts to create a stable environment for investment.	[37,38]
Weak Governance	Corruption and inefficient governance structures hinder the implementation of policies and regulations, exacerbating economic challenges such as inflation, low growth, and balance of payments issues.	Strengthen governance, improve transparency, and ensure effective regulatory frameworks to promote good governance.	[30,39,40]
Foreign Policy Challenges	Strained relations with neighboring countries, particularly India and Afghanistan, affect trade and limit Pakistan’s ability to attract foreign direct investment (FDI).	Foster diplomatic relations with neighboring countries, resolve trade issues, and create a stable geopolitical environment.	[41]
Foreign Direct Investment (FDI)	There are limited FDI inflows due to security concerns, political instability, and inadequate infrastructure.	Improve the investment climate, stabilize the political environment, and develop robust infrastructure to attract FDI.	[7,31]

). While SMEs struggle with internal barriers, the country’s international image is undermined by security concerns, making it difficult to attract foreign investors.

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. Growth obstacles and corrective measures.

Obstacle	Description	Corrective Measure	References
Infrastructure Deficit	Lack of energy and transportation infrastructure limits productivity.	Invest in renewable energy sources and upgrade transportation systems.	[42,43]
High Macroeconomic Risks	Fiscal instability and inflation reduce investor confidence.	Implement sound fiscal policies to stabilize the economy.	[8]
Low Foreign Direct Investment (FDI)	High country risk and lack of international finance limit FDI inflows.	Enhance political stability and improve the investment climate.	[15,18]
Poor Access to Finance for SMEs	Limited access to credit restricts SME growth.	Expand microfinance and improve banking services for SMEs.	[27,28]
Taxation Inefficiency	Complex tax systems lead to lower revenue collection.	Simplify the tax system and enhance collection efficiency.	[44,45]
Governance Issues	Corruption and inefficient governance hinder economic growth.	Strengthen governance structures, reduce red tape, and enforce anti-corruption measures.	[30,32,33]
Slow Economic Diversification	Over-reliance on a few sectors limits resilience.	Promote innovation and support diversification in technology, services, and manufacturing sectors.	[46,47]

). Both bureaucracy and poor governance, whether internal or external, make it harder for Pakistan to make meaningful progress.

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.