When it comes to economic growth, the old Pakistani clich that dictators are better than democrats while

e broadly true is too generalised a statement and hides some rather interesting variations.

The Express Tribune took the trouble to go through Pakistans historical GDP growth rates and compared various governments. We used GDP growth numbers from the Pakistan Bureau of Statistics records, which go all the way back to fiscal year 1952. We then calculated the geometric average (which calculates the compound average growth rate) rather than the simple arithmetic average to calculate the growth rates during the entire tenure of a government and then we ranked them. The results were somewhat surprising.

For instance, former President Ayub Khan widely regarded as Pakistans best ruler when it comes to economic growth is actually in second place. The number one spot is held by former President Ziaul Haq, who averaged 5.88% growth during his 11 years in office.

For fans of President Ayub who insist that his record before the 1965 war was better, we checked: it is not true. Pakistans growth rate during that period averaged 5.73% per year, which is actually lower than President Ayubs own overall average of 5.82%. Having said that, industrial growth from the 1958 coup to the 1965 war averaged 9.21%, higher than any Pakistani rulers record, including Ayubs own overall average of 8.51%.

Another surprising insight: if one ranks the ten rulers Pakistan has had since 1952 according to the average economic growth rate during their tenure, both the top five and the bottom five include three dictators and two democrats.

Yes, the top three slots are undoubtedly all taken up by the usual suspects: former Presidents Ziaul Haq, Ayub Khan and Pervez Musharraf, in that order. The next two are somewhat surprising: Benazir Bhutto comes in at fourth place and her father Zulfikar Ali Bhutto is not far behind. The supposedly pro-markets Nawaz Sharif comes in at seventh place.

Yet another surprise: Benazir Bhuttos average was 5.08%, not far off from Pervez Musharrafs 5.14%. She beat her rival Nawaz Sharif by a full percentage point: Pakistans economic growth averaged 4.06% during Nawaz Sharifs both terms as prime minister.

Length of time in office appears to matter far more than whether the ruler was a dictator or a democrat. The top three were all in office for at least nine years, with the top two each in office for eleven years. Yahya Khan, Iskandar Mirza and Ghulam Muhammad none of whom was democratically elected or subject to a popular mandate all come in close to the bottom of the rankings. None of them had longer than four years in office.

But the more intriguing question to ask is why both the Bhuttos vastly outperform Nawaz Sharif.

The answer lies in the breakup of the GDP number: while Nawaz beat both Bhuttos on industrial growth, he was abysmal when it comes to agriculture. Benazir Bhutto was the best in Pakistani history for agriculture, which grew at an average of 6.65% during her five years in office.

Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, meanwhile, had blowout growth in services, averaging 10.63% during his only term in office, the highest of any Pakistani ruler. (Oddly enough, the elder Bhutto had a poor track record on agriculture, despite his family background. Agriculture grew at a paltry 2.12% per year during his tenure, worse even than Nawaz.)

For those who are currently pessimistic about Pakistans economic prospects, you may find some comfort in knowing that the numbers back you up: President Asif Ali Zardari ranks dead last in terms of economic growth, averaging a paltry 2.62% during his term in office so far.

Report on economy: Fix what is wrong with agricultural sector, Policy Institute report says LAHORE:

The government needs to reconsider its policies and figure out the factors that have constrained growth in the agriculture sector in the last four years, a recently launched report on provinces economy recommends.

In 2007-11, the average annual growth rate of agriculture sector in the province has been 2.5 per cent. The figure for rest of the country in this period is 2.7 per cent.

The report prepared by the Institute of Public Policy (IPP) at Beaconhouse National University says services has been the only sector in which the province has performed (slightly) better than rest of the country.

The average annual growth rate of services sector in the province was 5.1 per cent (over 2007-2011).

The figure for rest of the country is 5 per cent.

The report attributes poor performance in industry at least partially to electricity and gas shortages.

Overall, it says, the economic performance of the province during most of the current governments tenure (2007-11) has remained poor in comparison to the rest of the country as well as the province over the previous five-year term (2002-07).

The average annual growth rate in the Punjab has fallen by more than half the growth rate for 2007-11 period is 2.5 per cent and for 2002-07 is 5.6 per cent.

The growth rate for 2007-11 (2.5 per cent) is about 25 per cent less than the figure for rest of the country 3.4 per cent. The report says public investment in the province during this period has been inadequate. This, it says, is reflected in the fall in the overall standards of physical infrastructure.

The provinces share in the national economy has declined to 54.9 per cent from 55.7 per cent share in year 2006-2007.

The per capita gross regional product (gross economic output of the province) for 2010-11 is estimated at $1,140. This, the report says, is two per cent lower than the average GRPs of other provinces for the year.

The report says slow economic growth in the province (in 2007-11) has been accompanied with a decline in its contribution to the federal revenue. Progress card: Punjabs economy not looking so bright LAHORE:

The government might have significantly overstated Punjabs growth rate. This was revealed at the launch of the fifth annual, The State of Economy: The Punjab Story, report of the Institute of Public Policy at Beaconhouse National University on Wednesday at the Lahore Grande. Institute of Public Policy Vice Chairman and Dean of School of Liberal Arts and Social Sciences Dr Hafiz Ahmed Pasha said Punjabs economy had a slower growth rate over the past decade compared to the rest of the country due to the scarcity of irrigation water and the energy shortfall. He was speaking at the launch of the report.

Dr Pasha said while the economy had done poorly throughout the country, Punjab had done far worse. From 2002-03 to 2009-10, Dr Pasha said, the agricultural sector in Punjab had only a 3 per cent growth rate as opposed to a 5 per cent growth rate in the rest of the country.

Dr Pasha said that from 2006-07 to 2009-2010, gas consumption had gone up by 14 per cent in the rest of the country but in the Punjab it had declined by 13 per cent.

The report states that there was a decline in regional inequality in all districts of the province, the trend being most pronounced in provision of social services. Despite there being demands for a new province, the Punjab has the least regional inequality amongst the provinces, said Dr Pasha. However, he said, a separate south Punjab province would be food sufficient.

The report goes on to state that regional inequality had increased in terms of some social indicators including secondary education, sanitation, health services and water supply. The report says that with limited access to infrastructure and social services districts in south Punjab are less developed, a phenomenon termed a classic North-South divide by Dr Pasha.

Beaconhouse National University Vice Chancellor Sartaj Aziz said long term projects in hydel power should be taken up seriously to limit energy dependency on foreign sources. Aziz said with the country entering the election year it was essential that such reports be used to establish policy guidelines for the current as well as the prospective government.

LUMS pro-chancellor Syed Babar Ali said that over the past several years, the countrys economic policy had never addressed the needs of the common man to ensure his welfare. Ali said scholarly critique should be used by policy makers to strengthen institutions. Never put an inefficient person in charge of an efficient person said Ali.

Planning and Development Department secretary Ali Tahir expressed dissatisfaction with the methodology used in the compilation of the report. Tahir said that urban development paved way for economic growth of any country and hence growth in cities, like Lahore, Multan and the like, was of immense significance.

The year 2012 promises to be yet another difficult year economically, said Dr Aisha Ghaus Pasha, the director of the Institute of Public Policy. Dr Pasha said Pakistan, particularly for Punjab, would be facing a period of great financial difficulties. She identified lack of political stability and shortage of energy as hurdles in economic growth. She said there had been a growth in the rural economy along with an increase in revenue collection showing the resilience of the economy.

Good governance and zero tolerance for corruption will tackle the economic crisis in the next 3 to 4 years, said MNA Ahsan Iqbal. Iqbal said the debate about a new province in Punjab should be set aside until there was greater stability adding that a new province was bound to demand a new NFC award and a water accord.

Climate change could cost the economy $14 billion a year due to natural disasters and other losses, which is almost 5% of the GDP, stated a former state minister for environment according to a press release.

Former environment junior minister Malik Amin Aslam was addressing a seminar on Outcomes of post-Durban climate change negotiations, organised by the Pakistan Institute of Development Economics (PIDE) in Islamabad on Thursday.

PIDE Vice-Chancellor Dr Rashid Amjad said, Instead of upholding individual interests and blaming one another for [greenhouse gas emissions], we should look for practical and collective preventive measures.

In a detailed presentation, Aslam said that the Durban Climate Change Negotiations were a very important platform to discuss the three major environment challenges like resuscitating the Kyoto Protocol, deliver climate finance to vulnerable countries and how to survive in the overall economic recession.

Pakistan, he said, is a very low emitter of greenhouse gases but one of the worst victims of climate change Germanwatch places Pakistan as the most affected country for 2010 and in top 10 for 1990-2010.

He said that Pakistan has been focusing on its red lines to ensure that its development pathway not be constrained, which we have achieved so far. He added that Pakistan is highly vulnerable to climate change, which is compounded by the fact that it has a sharply rising emissions future.

Pakistans vulnerability, he said, comes from the fact that it is in the region of glacial melting zone, which means living in a neighbourhood of unavoidable vulnerability, with the main issue being water.

About 90% of the natural disasters in Pakistan are due to the changing climate, he said. The most alarming thing is that the frequency of these natural disasters is going up with 60% occurring in the past ten years. The food-water-energy nexus Pakistan walking a tightrope Globalisation has reshaped the world today, making it more interconnected and interdependent. Unfortunately, its benefits have not been equally distributed across countries. Business is surrounded by issues of disparity and equity, both at national and international levels. Politically, there are resurgent signs of social fragmentation, populism and nationalism. The rise of a new world order is imminent and economics is changing.

The lack of sound local and global governance poses a larger risk than we may anticipate today. Country risk at the individual level varies due to conflict of interests, differing norms and values, scarcity of resources and war. World bodies like the UN and G20 have yet to endorse a decision to combat global risk effectively. We are surrounded by demographic challenges, and there is huge fiscal pressure on advanced economies, leading to a higher risk of social stability within emerging economies. There is a prevalent risk of war and the possibility of renewed nuclear proliferation between states.

Food production requires water and energy, the extraction of water requires energy, and energy production requires water. Food prices are highly sensitive to energy costs which indirectly affect the GDP of a country as high costs of processing, irrigation, fertiliser and transportation affect production and lead to lower exports.

This nexus poses a challenge to governments and population. The lack of energy security, lower agriculture yields and higher cost of relief goods is leading us towards unrest and uncertainty. This

threatens our masses, our government and our business as 70 % of our countrys production is dependent on our agricultural sector.

Hunger and poverty are on the rise while we remain clueless about the future. Our reservoirs need to be secure and more dams need to be constructed faster, as draught and famine are fast turning into a possibility.

Agriculture, in Pakistan or elsewhere, consumes more than 70% of global water demand. For example, countries that produce meat require up to 20,000 litres of water for every kilogramme of meat produced, compared to at least 1,200 litres to produce a kilogram of grain. We do not realise the need for secure water resources due to illiteracy and lack of community awareness.

Climate change, in the shape of torrential rains, has also affected our country; we are one of the few countries facing a chronic food emergency today.

Economists forecast that global demand for energy will increase by 40% by 2030, and that this energy will draw heavily on freshwater resources. Over 75% of global demand for energy from 2012-2030, will be dependant on fossil fuels predominantly coal. The Thar coal reserves need to be developed rapidly, as this is the only way to ensure job security, resource mobilisation, income and prosperity for the population. It makes good business sense for leaders to work on this. Furthermore, we have to ensure fast-tracked building of dams between now and 2015, a failure to do so may lead us to bankruptcy, as people will lose faith in the nations ability to sustain itself and business will suffer colossal damages.

We need good business and we need to understand the difference between dependency on others and self reliance. Bad governance is a major issue in Pakistan, eating up business and politics and leading us to ruins. Pakistan faces risks ahead as its next big war will not be over power or money it will be over food, water or energy. All are vital as we struggle to survive. For Pakistan, failure is not an option.