$207.17m Punjab housing programme: WB gives moderately satisfactory rating
The project was approved in March 2022 with the development objective to support the government of Punjab in strengthening its housing institutions and systems, and enhancing the quantity and quality of affordable housing supply.
The project documents revealed that the project cost has been revised from $200 million to $207.17 million. Program implementation is steadily accelerating, with total disbursements reaching $24.54 million to date
Punjab govt moving towards regularizing illegal housing societies
Many of the annual targets for the Disbursement Linked Indicators (DLIs) have been met. Notable achievements include the development and operationalisation of the Housing Market Information System, the Project Management Information System, and the Beneficiary Management Information System. Additionally, the Location and Infrastructure Investment Criteria have been established, and the revised Affordable Private Housing Scheme (APHS) Rules and Regulations have been approved.
A rapid housing assessment has been conducted as a more in-depth comprehensive housing assessment will be part of the assignment when developing the Punjab Affordable Housing Policy. Beneficiary eligibility criteria to better respond to local market conditions and catering to lower-income households are being developed and are expected to be finalized by end August 2025. Innovative design solutions for core housing prototypes and their costing is underway, to be completed by end-August, official documents noted.
Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Recorder
21 hours ago
- Business Recorder
Outsourced power: how aid agencies engineered Pakistan's energy bureaucracy?—I
In Pakistan's power sector, aid doesn't just fund wires and transformers—it writes policy, births institutions, and designs governance frameworks. From WAPDA's unbundling to today's regional micro-hydro initiatives, foreign donors and multilateral lenders have played a decisive role in shaping the country's entire energy architecture. What looks like a domestic public sector is, in fact, a landscape engineered through external influence often with little sustained success. It began in the 1990s, when the World Bank, Asian Development Bank (ADB), and USAID launched structural adjustment programs that led to the fragmentation of WAPDA. This was no organic reform. Under pressure from lending conditions, Pakistan was pushed to carve out the power sector into new corporate entities: generation companies (GENCOs), distribution companies (DISCOs), a transmission company (NTDC), and a regulatory authority (NEPRA). These institutions were seeded, shaped, and staffed under the watchful eyes of international consultants and donor-funded technical assistance. The Pakistan Electric Power Company (PEPCO), too, emerged not from local institutional need, but from the ADB's desire to create a transition vehicle to oversee the corporatization process. NEPRA, established in 1997, was designed with heavy influence from the World Bank and USAID, importing global regulatory frameworks that were alien to Pakistan's administrative and legal culture. Its tariff formulas, licensing structures, and oversight roles mirror donor templates more than they reflect local energy realities. This donor-led architecture didn't stop at institutional birth. ADB funnelled nearly a billion dollars into its Power Distribution Enhancement Investment Program, modernizing grid infrastructure and financing smart metering initiatives. The World Bank launched its own $195 million effort in 2021 to improve governance and efficiency in HESCO, MEPCO, and PESCO. JICA upgraded NTDC's load dispatch systems. IFC and OPIC helped design frameworks to attract private investment in wind, solar, and K-Electric. Even the electricity market itself—the Competitive Trading Bilateral Contract Market (CTBCM)—was conceived, drafted, and piloted through World Bank technical assistance. And when Pakistan recently attempted to unilaterally renegotiate renewable energy contracts signed with private investors, it was the IFC, ADB, and Islamic Development Bank that issued a sharp warning: don't undermine the sanctity of contracts or risk the collapse of $2.7 billion in clean energy investment. At the provincial level, the pattern repeats. Punjab and Sindh's DISCOs were granted $200 million in January 2025 by ADB to upgrade infrastructure and adopt smart systems. Sindh also benefited from the Sindh Cities Improvement Program, which coupled power and sanitation reforms under multilateral guidance. In Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and FATA, the EU-funded PEACE program and USAID-backed Sarhad Rural Support Programme have installed hundreds of micro-hydro plants in off-grid areas. Balochistan, too, saw GIZ and other donors support rural electrification and local governance models through BRSP. These efforts, while not without local champions, largely owe their scale, structure, and sustainability to external designs. Even post-18th Amendment devolution hasn't insulated the provinces from donor penetration. Technical assistance programs by WHO and ADB continue to shape provincial energy planning and system governance. The story is similar, and in many ways worse, in the gas sector. During the mid-1980s to late 1990s, the government agreed with the World Bank to link gas prices to oil; the international market price for fuel oil became the benchmark for domestic consumers and the landed cost (including duties, taxes and other import charges) for all other consumers. The balance between consumer prices linked to international oil prices and revenue requirements of the Suis accrued as fiscal revenues to the government, allowing full-cost-recovery and providing signals to consumers about the true value of gas, thereby encouraging efficiency. However, in 2006, again on advice of the World Bank the government established a ceiling price for gas, effectively delinking it from oil and politicizing the commodity, which caused producers to lose out on significant revenue when oil prices rose sharply in 2008. When gas was made a tool for exerting political influence, the ensuing distortions left no incentives to invest in domestic E&P and no significant gas discoveries were made as a result (Figure 1). The use of gas for power generation had been promoted, both for captive generation by industries and in the grid energy mix. The landmark 1994 Private Power Policy, which allowed and incentivized industries to invest in captive power generation was designed with World Bank support and advisory from the IFC and IBRD and implemented under a PPP framework via the newly created Private Power and Infrastructure Board, again established under the World Bank supported Second Private Sector Energy Development Programme (PSEDP II). Following drying up of investment and activity in E&P and rapidly depleting domestic gas reserves, DFIs provided full support for development of LNG import infrastructure. The USAID's Energy Policy Project, alongside World Bank, IFC and ADB feasibility studies, conducted the technical and financial analyses and PPP structuring that advised Pakistan to develop LNG import capacity. ADB and IFC provided over $160 million in financing and equity to set up the Port Qasim LNG terminal. The Planning Commission's proposals to enter long-term LNG SPAs were based on feasibility studies and policy advice funded or co-commissioned by USAID's Energy Policy Project and the World Bank/IFC and ADB teams. They stressed that only 15–20-year SPAs could unlock commercially-viable financing for both the import terminals and the downstream power plants, otherwise investors could not recover the billions in upfront liquefaction and shipping assets. (To be continued tomorrow) Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Express Tribune
2 days ago
- Express Tribune
End of 'The End of History'
Year 2025 has seen immense turbulence. Since Donald Trump's formal inauguration as President of the United States, 60% of international development funds have been slashed, immigration controls in the West have multiplied exponentially, trade barriers have gone up, AI has wiped out hundreds of thousands of jobs, the Palestinian genocide has entered its final phase, and conflicts involving nuclear powers have intensified. In the words of Antonio Gramsci, "The old world is dying, and the new world struggles to be born: now is the time of monsters." Following the end of WWII, America experienced 25 years of relatively inclusive growth. Real wages - adjusted for inflation - for both white and blue collar trades rose consistently until 1970. Technological breakthroughs were frequent and significant. The digital computer, data storage devices, microchip technology, and packet-switched networks, which served as precursors to the internet, all entered the fray during the '50s and '60s. In aviation, the sound barrier was broken, the first satellites went into orbit, and rockets landed on the moon. In biomedicine, the DNA structure was mapped, the polio vaccine discovered, and oral contraceptives approved. In media, portable radios and colour TVs were made ubiquitous. Perhaps most significantly, basic amenities like food, clothing, shelter, education, and healthcare were easily affordable for single-earner middle class families. Simultaneously, a comprehensive international development architecture was set up. At the Bretton Woods Conference in 1944, the World Bank and IMF were formally established to foster macroeconomic stability in 'developing' countries - particularly following decolonisation - via policy formulation, short term credit agreements, and infrastructure-related assistance. The UN was inaugurated a year later to promote trade, sociocultural exchange, and peace/harmony between nations. The WHO was set up in 1948 to address public health crises. The United States Agency for International Development (USAID), created in 1961, spearheaded development in the domains of economics, governance, and humanitarian assistance across the world for subsequent decades. During this period, these global institutions played a genuinely constructive role in industrialisation, agricultural modernisation, and institutional strengthening in developing countries. While conflicts (such as the Vietnam War and Korean War) broke out in the context of the Cold War, significant people's movements such as the Civil Rights Movement, Anti-war Movement, Counterculture Movement, first two waves of feminism, and several anti-colonial independence movements also took off and expanded liberties and sovereignties worldwide. The tides began to shift in 1971, when the dollar was unpegged from gold by President Nixon - sending shockwaves across global economies. The US Federal Reserve could now print money to its heart's desire: thus triggering massive inflationary pressures that corroded purchasing power. A couple of years later, the mainstreaming of 'finance capital' was observed. 1973's oil embargo sent prices skyrocketing by almost 300%, following which OPEC countries saw a massive influx of dollars - which they parked in US banks due to limited domestic capacity. These reserves were then recycled into US Treasury securities in exchange for military protection. This fueled a movement away from growth/innovation in tangible goods and services in favor of 'speculative trading' in bonds, stocks, derivatives, etc - a trend that led to greater inequality and declining real innovation. Things took an even worse turn under President Reagan, who kickstarted neoliberalism and aggressive imperialism. The first functioned to empower big corporations via massive reductions in taxation, regulation, trade restriction, etc and widespread crackdowns on organised labour - effectively subverting the state apparatus to the interests of big capital. The 1989 Washington Consensus codified 'privatize, liberalize, deregulate' as global economic orthodoxy, trapping the Global South in debt and resource extraction arrangements that revived colonial dynamics. Second, a series of military and intelligence interventions were launched as part of a broad strategy to lay the pressure on the Soviet Union. While Afghanistan was the major confrontation, the backing of several regimes and militia groups - particularly in Latin America - was a central feature of the 'Reagan Doctrine'. The former included the governments of El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Argentina, and Chile; while the latter constituted the Contras in Nicaragua and 'Mujahideen' in Pakistan. This initiated a cycle of violence, with entire economies of arms/ammunition, sex/drug trafficking, and extremist indoctrination projects proliferating across vulnerable communities. Many of these groups were later involved in the 9/11 attacks, triggering decades-long wars in Iraq and Afghanistan that killed millions. This pattern - economic precarity at home, violence overseas - continued throughout the 2000s and 2010s. The 2008 financial crash, Obama's drone warfare, the rise of ISIS, turmoil in Afghanistan, Israel's continued occupation, and the abysmal handling of Covid-19 were all indications of terminal decline. Even in tech, progress almost ground to a halt during the two decades: reduced to marginal annual improvements in consumer electronics (like the iPhone) with hardly any groundbreaking discoveries. Large language models in recent years have admittedly been the major breakaway from this uneventful pattern, but even these potentially revolutionary tools have been deployed to advance military, surveillance, and immigration control systems - accelerating the movement towards fascism. Having withdrawn from the WHO, drastically reduced contributions to UN agencies, ignored directives from the International Criminal Court, and shut down USAID, it is all but evident that the 'rules based international order' led by the US following WWII is drawing to a close. The recent '12 Day War' with Iran only laid bare US vulnerabilities, as the former was able to preserve uranium stockpiles, give Tel Aviv a pounding, and launch attacks on Gulf airbases. Domestically, New York City - the capital of the 'American Dream' - recently voted for a staunchly anti-corporate and pro-Palestine candidate as Democratic nominee for mayorship, thus rejecting two central ideological tenets of Western hegemony, i.e. Capitalism and Zionism. In 1992, shortly after the collapse of the Soviet Union, political theorist Francis Fukuyama proclaimed the 'End of History', asserting liberal capitalism's final triumph. Three decades on, his claim sounds laughable. What comes next is difficult to predict, but two possibilities have been proposed. One is nuclear armageddon, where nations blow each other up following tit-for-tat engagements in 'World War 3'. The other is the ushering in of a 'globalist' order, one premised upon total control and subjugation: an Orwellian nightmare. There is a third path: a break from endless war, exploitation, and despotism. Its name is Socialism.
Business Recorder
3 days ago
- Business Recorder
Poor connectivity, security issues hinder Gwadar Port usage: PDP
KARACHI: Though the lack of road and rail connectivity and suboptimal security are amongst the main issues hindering proper usage of Gwadar Port, but to make this key port fully functional it needs to develop an industrial and manufacturing near it on top priority, said Pasban Democratic Party (PDP) Chairman Altaf Shakoor here Sunday. He said Gwadar Port could really be made a game-changer for regional trade under the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), if the government is serious about working in this direction instead of lip service. He said despite being operational since 2007, Gwadar handles very little cargo compared to other ports like Karachi and Port Qasim. He said the lack of industrial and commercial infrastructure around Gwadar has hindered its growth as a trade hub. He said foreign-backed terrorists and insurgents have plagued Gwadar, with frequent attacks on workers and infrastructure projects. Security threats have discouraged foreign investors and shipping companies from using the port. He said many CPEC-linked projects like roads, railways, power plants meant to support Gwadar's development have been delayed or stalled. The promised Gwadar Free Zone has not attracted significant investment yet. The poor road network had limited logistics growth. Altaf Shakoor regretted that Chinese companies have been reluctant to invest heavily in industries around Gwadar. The government's inability to provide reliable electricity, water, and security has also deterred investors. He said while Gwadar has potential due to its deep-sea port and strategic location, it has so far failed to deliver on its economic promises. Unless Pakistan and China address security, infrastructure, and investment challenges, Gwadar may remain an underperforming asset rather than the 'next Dubai' it was hyped to be. He said that to make Gwadar Port the next Dubai, the government must speed construction of the ML-1 Railway (Peshawar-Karachi) and link it to Gwadar for seamless cargo movement. It should expand the Eastbay Expressway and connect it to the national highway network for better inland freight transport. It should develop a dedicated freight corridor from Gwadar to China (via Khunjerab Pass) to boost trade. It should build power plants (solar, wind, or coal-based) to ensure uninterrupted electricity for industries, besides setting up desalination plants to solve Gwadar's chronic water shortage. He said that unlike Karachi, Gwadar has no major industrial or urban center nearby to drive demand. He said no port succeeds without economic activity. Ports like Dubai (Jebel Ali) and Singapore thrive because they have industries, warehouses, and exports feeding them. Gwadar needs factories, refineries, and logistics hubs to generate cargo demand. He said ships will only dock at Gwadar if there's enough cargo and industries guarantee that. Negotiations with China to use this port for their supply chain will not only make this port fully operational but will also boost industrial development. Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
