Sunday, April 21, 2019
05:38 AM (GMT +5)

Go Back   CSS Forums > CSS Optional subjects > Group I > Economics

Reply Share Thread: Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook     Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter     Submit Thread to Google+ Google+    
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
  #1  
Old 1 Week Ago
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: In Thoughts
Posts: 3
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Arvind is on a distinguished road
Post The economics of CPEC

The writer is a public policy fellow at the Woodrow Wilson Centre, Washington, D.C.
IN a country where negativity and cynicism reign supreme, critics and detractors of all kinds are revered, and
emotional outbursts and fabricated stories dominate the air waves and social media, it is difficult to present a
dispassionate analysis of national issues.
Since China announced the China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), more time and energy has been spent
in finding faults, poking holes and raising doubts based on speculation and conjecture. Had this investment
been announced in another developing country, the national reaction would be: how do we plan to ensure
maximisation of benefits to the economy? What are the weaknesses and deficiencies in the existing set‐up
we need to overcome? But this type of thinking is not in our DNA. We are either in a mood for celebration
and self‐congratulations or outright condemnation and depiction of exaggerated pitfalls.
There are three types of reservations against CPEC. First, those who believe that this whole endeavour is
designed to benefit Punjab to the neglect of the three smaller provinces. Fanning parochial and ethnic
prejudices, doubts are created about the narrow impact of these projects. Second, that the country would be
saddled with costly external loans and outflows forcing Pakistan to go for another bailout. Frightening
numbers such as totals of $110 billion are floating around. Third, some Baloch youth believe that they would
become a minority in their own province. Mistrust and not perceived economic gains underlies such anxiety.
The government has not helped matters as it has not placed all the data and information about capital
structure, detailed sources of financing, project sponsors etc pertaining to CPEC, in the public domain.
There are three types of reservations against CPEC. How can we
address them?
This article, to allay some of the reservations, proposes that the Planning Commission and PIDE use the well‐
established framework of cost‐benefit analysis to evaluate and monitor the net benefits of CPEC projects.
Benefits can be of three kinds: (a) direct, measured by incremental contribution to gross value added in
energy and infrastructure. Assuming energy elasticity of greater than one, a two per cent growth in energy
production and usage would increase GDP by more than 2pc from the current level (b) indirect, measured by
the multiplier effect of activities resulting from the direct demand of goods and services and (c) induced
effects or externalities: eg bringing in roads and electricity may make some economic activities feasible and
reduce outmigration of skilled labour from those areas. Costs can be of four types: (a) direct costs associated
with investment in electricity generation , transmission and distribution or construction of roads; (b) indirect
costs: large scale investment projects create scarcity premiums and domestic prices of some goods and
services are bid up. These premiums get reduced when competition sets in; (c) unavoidable incremental
costs: in the absence of the required amount of domestic supplies of quality and specifications, imports have
to make up the shortfall; and (d) avoidable incremental costs: proper planning, coordination and active
management can substitute high‐cost inputs by low‐cost inputs keeping quality intact.
Net benefits are thus estimated as the difference between the discounted flow of aggregated benefits and
the discounted flow of all types of costs over the given time horizon. This calculation is not straightforward
and is beset with many conceptual, empirical and measurement difficulties. The most problematic area is the
aggregation of easily quantifiable direct benefits or costs with estimated indirect and induced benefits and
costs. The latter are sensitive to the assumptions on which they are based. Economists, by setting up
monitoring experiments, discover new data that helps in fine‐tuning and refining the original estimates. The
outcomes therefore depend upon minimisation of avoidable costs and expansion of induced benefits thus
enlarging the quantum of net benefits.
The avoidable costs phenomenon can be illustrated with the help of two examples. If the Chinese managers,
skilled and technical staff continue to be deployed throughout the duration of the project, the unit cost of
labour after taking into account the expatriate wage premium, security, housing and mobility expenses would
be relatively much higher compared to a situation where preponderantly Pakistanis were employed. If the
government makes advance plans for these positions to be transferred to Pakistanis over a staggered period
through training, on the job apprenticeship, attachments and under study assignments supervised by Chinese
trainers, cost savings would be substantial and net benefits much larger. This requires coordination, target
setting, monitoring and outsourcing to vocational and technical training institutes, private providers and the
provincial governments.
Similarly, it is guesstimated that at least 100,000 additional trucks would be needed to transport construction
materials, movement of export‐import trade and increased volume of goods. If investment in the sub sector
is not carried out well ahead of the CPEC projects’ peak load demand, the prices of trucking would escalate,
putting Pakistani exports at a competitive disadvantage. The cost matrix of CPEC projects would also move
upwards thus increasing the indirect costs. However, if Pakistani truck manufacturers are provided ballpark
figures they can invest in expansion of existing capacity in tandem with the suppliers of parts and
components. Indirect benefits would increase through creation of new jobs in the industry and efficiency
gains from the economies of scale.
On the benefit side, it must be ensured that the most dynamic and enduring benefits from CPEC accrue to the
people living in the deprived districts of Balochistan and southern KP. The opening up and integration of
these districts with the unified national market of goods and services would make their fisheries, mining,
livestock, horticulture and other activities economically feasible, creating incomes and jobs and helping lift
them out of poverty. Roads and electricity are precursors for broad‐based development as they minimise
post harvest losses, waste and spoilage of perishable agriculture commodities, reduce the cost of delivery to
market towns, and confer purchasing power in the hands of farmers who then use it to buy consumer goods,
generating a second round of economic activities in these districts
By playing a more active role in maximising the benefits to the people of deprived districts and containing
avoidable costs, the government would be able to allay a lot of misapprehensions and doubts.
__________________
Useless

Last edited by Arvind; 1 Week Ago at 12:04 PM. Reason: There was some mistakes due to unappropriate words i just corrected it
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
CPEC China Pakistan Economic Corridor Nadiralisiddiqui Current Affairs Notes 8 Saturday, January 19, 2019 09:43 AM
ESSAY: CPEC: Challenges and prospects saddam hassain Essay 7 Monday, January 14, 2019 09:53 PM
China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) Iamsterdam Current Affairs 3 Sunday, May 27, 2018 08:33 PM
CCE 2013 Candidates List Needed (Karachi Region) Sana Siddiqi SPSC (CCE) 6 Sunday, October 29, 2017 02:33 PM
Economics an overview Naseer Ahmed Chandio Economics 0 Wednesday, December 13, 2006 08:40 AM


CSS Forum on Facebook Follow CSS Forum on Twitter

Disclaimer: All messages made available as part of this discussion group (including any bulletin boards and chat rooms) and any opinions, advice, statements or other information contained in any messages posted or transmitted by any third party are the responsibility of the author of that message and not of CSSForum.com.pk (unless CSSForum.com.pk is specifically identified as the author of the message). The fact that a particular message is posted on or transmitted using this web site does not mean that CSSForum has endorsed that message in any way or verified the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any message. We encourage visitors to the forum to report any objectionable message in site feedback. This forum is not monitored 24/7.

Sponsors: ArgusVision   vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.