Adil Najam and Asad Umar Reveal Significant Facts, Determinants and Decisive Details About The Debated UNDP Report
The UNDP reports allegedly ranking Punjab’s performance above KPK statistically stirred a public debate just before the general elections. The report says that the mega-projects have proved to be significant for Punjab’s welfare. While, on the other hand, KPK, despite chanting slogans of change, is only imaginatively fantasizing development but with a contrasting approach.
It said that KPK has laid emphasis on delivering services and changing the contemporary methods on how education is imparted. But, across Pakistan, there are only six districts that are ranked as high human development districts among which four are from Punjab and none are from KPK. The report added that there are two main components of human developments. That is, i.e. health and education, and Punjab is leading in both.
The satisfaction with health facilities in Punjab was measured at 78% in contrast to KPK that stands at 73%. With these significant factors, Youth development Index puts KPK in the low achievers as well. After the report became the centre of discussion on mainstream and social media it also initiated debates. Adil Najam came forward to clarify the significant determinants that were used to sketch out the reports and save it from being politically manipulated. In a series of tweets, he said that the report is not the analysis of any party’s performance in a particular province but is an analysis of a decade (2005 – 2015).
He further added that development is not usually short-term that produces results in one or two years. Adil explicitly clarified that the report is not focused on advocating any party’s performance. He said that he is pleasantly optimistic how people are judging a party’s performance and determining whom they should vote based on actual development which for sure is revolutionary.
However, he expressed disappointment over how the findings of the reports were being manipulated by even some of the well-reputed and respected media channels without credible analysis. Here is what he had to say:
Sorry to disappoint everyone😉
1/ #pkNHDR is NOT an analysis of party performance in any province. It is disingenuous & unethical to present it as such.
2/ Development is long-term. Results don't always show up in 1 or 2 years.
All data & full report here: https://t.co/mHK7vtKny2— Adil Najam عادل نجم (@AdilNajam) May 20, 2018
…cont
3/ Unit of analysis was decade (2005-15) not political tenure.
4/ Development data always becomes available with a lag. Data for 2017 mostly becomes available in 2018.
4/ #pkNHDR has no connection to elections and never mentions any political partyhttps://t.co/SYBglRDYMj— Adil Najam عادل نجم (@AdilNajam) May 20, 2018
…cont
6/Do hope people read report. All data+analysis clearly gives relevant info as per accepted research norms.
7/Disappointed in some TV comments/reports that misreported #pkNHDR finding, especially in giving wrong impression that its a political/party performance analysis. pic.twitter.com/AJOlu8xXrL— Adil Najam عادل نجم (@AdilNajam) May 20, 2018
… cont
8/V.happy people linking political choice to development.
9/Data+analysis for policy always good. But long-term development reflect historical trends, multiple actors,etc. Cannot be attributed only to political tenure. Certainly not in short term.https://t.co/IGVr3gV8ji— Adil Najam عادل نجم (@AdilNajam) May 20, 2018
Disappointing everyone😉…. LAST
10/Every province has districts that showed significant improvement, even over shorter-term with good policies. This has imp lessons for elsewhere. This is not good for political pointscoring. But is excellent for policy.https://t.co/SYBglRmnUL— Adil Najam عادل نجم (@AdilNajam) May 20, 2018
After that, Asad Umar took to twitter saying that he is amused by how the report has been manipulated and thanked Adil Najam for his in-depth analysis of human development on the national sphere. He said that the period under study was 2005 – 2015 and the positive element is that all provinces showed improvement in their HDI.
Its hilarious to see the absurd spin being given to the undp report as if it says punjab has performed very well. Will share an analysis of the report tomorrow to sift fact from fiction. Uss waqt tak noon waloon ko baradarana mashwara mithai par paisa zaya mat karein😊
— Asad Umar (@Asad_Umar) May 20, 2018
One can debate the pace but results are definitely there to an extent. He said that as per HDI between the period under study, KPK improved by 30.7%, Balochistan by 29.9%, Punjab by 20.9% and least improvement was shown in Sindh that stands at 10.9%. He added that the report under debate covers the tenure that was mostly dominated by PMLN and PPP and the fact that they are the least improving provinces speaks about their performance.
Now for some facts about the report. It covers the period 2005 to 2015. The good news is that all provinces of Pakistan saw an improvement in their human development index. However, the pace of the improvement is less than what all of us would like to see.
— Asad Umar (@Asad_Umar) May 21, 2018
Hopefully as democracy matures in the country the provinces & political parties will compete on the basis of their performance on important performance metrics such as human development index rather than how many projects were inaugurated and which leader is still alive or dead!
— Asad Umar (@Asad_Umar) May 21, 2018
The provincial improvement in HDI index between 2005 and 2015 is as follows: 1) kp improved 30.7% 2) Balochistan by 29.9% 3) punjab 20.9% and the least improvement in index is in sind at 10.9% only.
— Asad Umar (@Asad_Umar) May 21, 2018
In terms of performance in the decade covered by the report punjab and sind have been run by PML N and PPP respectively for 7 out of 10 years. The facts that these are the 2 least improving provinces in this period speaks volumes.
— Asad Umar (@Asad_Umar) May 21, 2018
اور undp رپورٹ پر اخری بات۔ نون لیگ کے لیڈران سے التماس ہے کے اردو ترجمہ آنے کا انتضار کر لیا کریں۔ آ پ کی مہربانی
— Asad Umar (@Asad_Umar) May 21, 2018
What are your views on this? Share with us in the comments bar below.
Comments are closed.