New map for old problems?

EDITORIAL: That Pakistan’s present governance structure has failed to deliver adequately to a population of around 250 million is increasingly difficult to dispute. The question now gathering force, however, is whether creating new provinces or “administrative units” would actually address that failure, or simply reorganise it.

With senior political and state figures openly discussing changes to the country’s administrative map, this debate deserves to move quickly beyond slogans. If Pakistan is indeed approaching a significant restructuring of the federation, the costs, constitutional implications and likely governance benefits must be examined before political momentum hardens into policy.

The case for smaller units is not frivolous. Provinces containing tens of millions of people can themselves become highly centralised structures, with authority and resources concentrated in provincial capitals while distant districts remain poorly served. Smaller provinces could shorten administrative distances, improve responsiveness and potentially give neglected regions a stronger political voice. Islamabad could conceivably be turned into a province, southern Punjab has long generated demands for separate status, and other possibilities can reasonably be debated.

But every new province would bring substantial consequences. Constitutional amendments would be required, along with the necessary political consensus and, where provincial boundaries are altered, approval from the affected provincial assembly. New governments would require legislatures, cabinets, secretariats, bureaucracies and administrative infrastructure. Their place in federal revenue-sharing arrangements would also have to be settled. If Islamabad, for example, became a province, it would presumably require an agreed share of national resources through the NFC framework. Who has calculated the fiscal implications of such changes, the recurring administrative costs or the disruption involved in implementing them?

There is also the more important governance question. How much would the creation of new units achieve if the political and administrative culture operating inside them remained unchanged? Smaller provinces could still centralise power in new provincial capitals, reproduce the same bureaucratic weaknesses and leave citizens waiting for decisions taken far from their communities. The country therefore needs to examine whether geography is genuinely only the principal obstacle to effective government.

That inevitably brings local government into the discussion. Pakistan already has a mechanism for taking government closer to citizens through meaningful political, administrative and fiscal devolution. Yet provincial governments have consistently resisted transferring substantial authority and resources to elected local bodies. Municipalities and districts are where many of the services that affect everyday life are actually delivered, but they remain the weakest tier of the political system.

The irony is difficult to miss. The most ambitious attempt at empowered local government in recent decades came under General Pervez Musharraf, a military ruler. Since the return to democratic rule, elected political leaderships have repeatedly shown far less enthusiasm for strengthening the third tier, even when pushed towards local elections and devolution by the courts. Provincial autonomy is defended vigorously when authority is flowing from Islamabad to the provinces. The enthusiasm tends to diminish sharply when the same principle requires resources and decision-making power to move from provincial capitals to districts, towns and neighbourhoods.

There is an obvious political reason for this reluctance. Genuine local government disperses patronage, spending authority and administrative control. It places resources closer to voters and reduces the dependence of local communities on provincial legislators and party hierarchies. That redistribution of power has rarely appealed to those who currently possess it.

None of this settles the argument against new provinces, of course. They may ultimately prove necessary, and a serious national debate on their creation is overdue. But that debate must include hard numbers, constitutional pathways, fiscal consequences and clear evidence of how smaller units would improve service delivery. It must also confront the question of why proper grassroots devolution has been resisted for so long.

Pakistan may well need a different administrative map. But before drawing one, it should establish whether the reform being proposed will genuinely move power closer to the citizen, or merely create more places from which it can remain concentrated.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2026