Pakistan may need to rethink how it divides and governs its territory as its population grows and public-service demands increase. The World Economic Forum (WEF) has highlighted administrative redesign as a possible way to decentralise authority and improve governance.
The country’s population could reach 265 million by 2030, increasing pressure on institutions to deliver services effectively. The WEF’s Centre for Regions, Trade and Geopolitics argues that administrative boundaries should evolve when existing structures can no longer meet society’s needs.
However, the proposal does not prescribe one ideal number of provinces or administrative units. Instead, it encourages Pakistan to consider different governance models that bring decisions, resources and accountability closer to citizens.
WEF Outlines Different Models for Pakistan’s Administrative Structure
One relatively modest proposal would divide each existing province into four units. This approach would create 16 first-tier governments and reduce the average population per unit from approximately 60 million to 15 million.
More ambitious alternatives could establish 23 to 25 units based on population balance or geographical coherence. Another option would build on existing administrative divisions, potentially creating more than 30 units.
Each model would bring different benefits and challenges. Fewer, larger units could simplify legislation and financing, while additional units could bring provincial capitals, budgets and political authority closer to communities.
Nevertheless, creating more governments would increase transition costs and require stronger administrative capacity. Therefore, the debate should focus on governance outcomes rather than finding a single supposedly correct administrative map.
Why New Administrative Units Alone Cannot Fix Governance
The WEF centre cautions that changing boundaries does not automatically improve public services. New administrative units need capable institutions, transparent fiscal transfers and comparable performance data to become more responsive.
Governments must also create incentives for local revenue mobilisation. Without these measures, additional units could increase administrative fragmentation without delivering meaningful improvements.
The central objective, therefore, is to align administrative scale with authority, resources and accountability. Effective decentralisation requires institutions that can respond to local needs while managing public finances responsibly.
Provincial Tax Collection Remains a Major Challenge
Pakistan’s provinces handle significant public-service responsibilities, yet their own-source revenue remains limited. According to the WEF centre, provincial taxes generated Rs983 billion in the 2024–25 fiscal year.
That amount represented less than 0.9 per cent of Pakistan’s gross domestic product. The figures highlight the challenge of financing provincial responsibilities through locally collected revenue.
Agriculture contributes 24 per cent of value added, but taxes on agricultural income have historically generated limited revenue relative to the sector’s size.
The International Monetary Fund estimates agriculture’s effective tax rate at just 0.3 per cent. Meanwhile, agricultural income tax revenues have remained below expectations, even after rates increased in 2025.
Provincial tax authorities have struggled with limited administrative capacity, weak enforcement and insufficient information. Consequently, identifying taxable agricultural income and collecting the appropriate revenue have remained difficult.
Recent reforms aim to address some of these weaknesses. However, their effectiveness will depend on better data-sharing with the Federal Board of Revenue, greater automation and stronger provincial enforcement.
Can Fiscal Decentralisation Improve Accountability?
Weak local revenue systems can make it difficult for citizens to connect taxation with the services they receive. Greater fiscal proximity could strengthen this relationship if authorities design it carefully.
The WEF centre highlights Pakistan’s exposure to climate risks and social pressures when explaining the importance of local governance.
“For a country exposed to floods, water stress, rapid urbanisation and youth employment pressures, proximity is not a luxury; it is part of resilience,” the centre says.
However, the centre warns against creating more administrative units simply for the sake of expansion. Some countries have struggled with fragmented local bodies that lack sufficient funding or institutional capacity.
Pakistan must therefore consider whether proposed units could raise revenue, manage budgets and deliver services effectively. Without these foundations, administrative redesign might create additional layers of government without improving citizens’ lives.
Pakistan’s Decentralisation Reforms Have Left Important Gaps
Successive governments have introduced significant measures to decentralise authority and respond to demographic changes. These include the 18th Constitutional Amendment and the seventh National Finance Commission award.
Despite these reforms, many decisions remain distant from the communities affected by them. Differences in district populations demonstrate why uniform policies can struggle to address local conditions.
Lahore district has approximately 13 million residents, while Harnai district in Balochistan has around 128,000. As a result, provincial policies must accommodate communities with vastly different population sizes and administrative needs.
The contrast raises questions about whether existing governance structures distribute resources and decision-making authority effectively. Smaller administrative units could bring officials closer to communities, but only if they receive adequate powers and funding.
Education Disparities Highlight Uneven Development
Education outcomes provide another example of the differences between districts. The Planning Commission’s District Education Performance Index found that none of the 134 assessed districts reached the “very high” performance category.
Meanwhile, recent household survey data indicate that 28 per cent of children aged five to 16 are out of school nationwide.
Provincial differences remain substantial. The out-of-school rate stands at 21 per cent in Punjab, compared with 45 per cent in Balochistan.
These figures highlight continuing challenges in delivering education across Pakistan. They also illustrate the importance of understanding district-level needs when allocating resources and evaluating government performance.
The WEF centre links these disparities to the distance between policymakers and districts, budgets and outcomes, and authority and accountability.
What Administrative Redesign Could Mean for Pakistan
Pakistan’s administrative reform debate extends beyond deciding how many provinces or government units the country should have. It also concerns how effectively public institutions respond to demographic growth and regional disparities.
A larger number of units could improve access to decision-makers and bring budgets closer to local communities. However, such changes would require capable institutions, reliable funding and stronger revenue collection.
Similarly, retaining larger administrative units could remain workable if governments improve service delivery and accountability. The choice ultimately depends on which structures can best meet local needs.
As Pakistan’s population grows, the WEF’s proposal raises a fundamental question about the country’s governance model. The challenge is to ensure that administrative boundaries support development rather than restrict it.
For the latest updates, visit and follow The Truth International website (www.thetruthinternational.com) and subscribe to the YouTube Channel.
