While the accountability agenda is flying high on the current politico-economic scene of Pakistan, the one that relates to promised reforms appears to be virtually non-existent. The government is completing one year in its office. However, the dream of bringing changes in the crumbling and inefficient governance structure does not appear to come true any time soon. The government has already spent 20 per cent of its life loud-mouthing the accountability mantra. Now, the remaining time should be focused on working on the other significant half of PTI’s election manifesto: bringing qualitative change in the lives of the people.
A capable and professional civil service is intrinsic to the success of several other policy objectives, spanning the large swath of public administration. Though it has higher visibility on the national and international development to-do list, it does not receive the same impetus in the implementation of public policies as it should.
Since inception, Prime Minister Imran Khan has taken up the proverbial heavy mantle of Civil Service reforms and given it to the old horse: Dr Ishrat Hussain. Since the latter’s much-anticipated report is yet to see the light of the day, we have to rely on his last, which may be a continuing effort. Going by this report published in 2008, he intends to bring about “Sea Changes” in the bureaucratic structure by (a) removing discrepancies between services; (b) slimming down the support staff; (c) an efficient system of reward and punishment and (d) introducing lateral entry of technocrats in various bureaucratic cadres. All these efforts may culminate into forming a new structure-National Executive Service (NES).
The agenda sounds music to the ears but it is too big to be implemented in the remaining short life of the government. While it appears too good on paper, but it is bound to remain unsuccessful.
The political economy in a country conditions the effectiveness of civil service reforms. Given the politico-economic environment in developing countries, including Pakistan, wholesale changes and a complete system overhaul-in a short period- does not achieve its promised goals due to the following reasons:
It takes about 20 years to see the fruits of structural reforms, which far exceed the average term of a government
Firstly, civil service reforms are too dear to be implemented for a shorter period of time. Their benefits are to be placed in future, which does not incentivise the political governments that come for a short time. According to De Weijer and Pritchett (2011), it takes about 20 years to see the fruits of structural reforms, which far exceeds the average term of a government.
Secondly, political elites in developing countries are not attuned to systems, which function as “limited access orders.”
These elites shun meritocratic recruitment systems that can result in the breakage of their elite parochial and patronage networks (Douglas North et al, 2007). Their deep-rooted interests in their social and parochial belongings incentivise them to maintain the status quo.
Thirdly, bureaucracy likes to see the things as they are when they flow smoothly for them. Their intrinsic inertia (prevalent in Weberian models) provides resistance to any changes at a grand level. They may accept these changes being disciplined, but they will clearly lack the motivation to put those changes into effect (Simone et al, 2012). This is particularly true for our governance structure where salaries are meagre and public officials turn to informal or illegal means to earn extra incomes.
Fourthly, the political governments are interested in those reforms only where their suffrage see and acknowledge the potential benefits of the proposed reforms. As argued in the first point, it takes 20 years on average to see the qualitative effects of the reforms. Hence, if these structural reforms are to be implemented, people won’t see them functioning during the life of this government. This would leave them even more disillusioned.
We need to have a paradigm shift – from “creating a better civil service” to “creating better citizenry experience.” Rather than allowing itself to be swallowed by “endless reforms” for the sake of reforms, the government may just emphasise only one aspect, that is changing the daily lives of people. What I mean to say is changing the focus from the bureaucrat to the man on the street. The latter may not be interested whether the former is properly incentivised or timely promoted. What he wants is an overall improvement in his daily life experiences. How to do this would be discussed in the next episode.
The writer is a former member of the Planning Commission of Pakistan