Poverty & Development Plans in Bangladesh

Poverty and Development Plans in Bangladesh

Beginning from 1973, successive development plans in Bangladesh have highlighted the issue of poverty. The

Plans also suggested a number of strategies to face the challenge. The First Five Year Plan (1973-78), placed

Emphasis on a socialistic restructuring of the economy so that the benefits of development could be distributed

More equitably among the different groups of people. In a sense, the Plan was pre-occupied more with the task of

Post-independence economic reconstruction and the international economic crisis arising from the oil price hike,

Than with the poverty problem of the country. The Two Year Plan (1978-80) was expected to give the country a

Direction for future planning and development. However, it got bogged down with the task of rationalizing the

Portfolio of on-going projects in the face of acute resource shortage. The Second Five Year Plan (1980-85) made

A renewed effort for bringing in the poverty issue to the forefront through its emphasis on basic needs. In reality,

Its main concern became the reduction of the socialistic bias in the economy in favor of greater reliance on

Market economy and promotion of the private sector. The Third Five Year Plan (1985-90) brought forward the

Idea of group-based plan on the basis of a Social Accounting Matrix using an Applied General Equilibrium

Model. In practice its main pre-occupation was to face the new challenges like aid conditionality, which were

Thrust upon the nation while pursuing macro-economic stability and rapid structural reform. The Third Five Year

Plan noted that poverty, unemployment, rapid population growth, malnutrition, illiteracy all are interactive and

Needed to be addressed simultaneously in the macro plans with both short and long term perspectives. Against

The background of a rising trend in the number of landless, small and marginal holdings in Bangladesh, and the

Process of depeasantization and pauperization, the Fourth Five Year Plan announced a comprehensive approach

Towards poverty alleviation. The Fourth Five Year Plan (1990-95), emphasized on poverty alleviation through

Human resources development as its most important planning objective. The Fourth Five Ye
ar Plan recognized

The role of safety net projects of both the Governmental Organization (Goes) and NGOs, but insisted that the

Primary emphasis for poverty alleviation should be given through bringing the poor and the disadvantaged from

The periphery to the center of the development process.

An overview of the Five Year Plans and other policy documents of the GOB on rural development indicate that

Poverty alleviation has always been a core concern of the development programs. It also depicts a trend of

Priority attachment to poverty alleviation in terms of objectives and strategies. A follow-up review of this policy

Statements, however, manifests that, in effect, in most cases, no serious attempts have been made to translate

4

Such policies into concrete programs and projects within a coherent institutional framework. As a result the

Sect oral programs particularly in agriculture, health, social welfare, infrastructure development, water resource

Development etc. were designed in isolation without having considerable focus on poverty alleviation. Even with

The existing institutional framework there has been a noticeable lack of coordination in the management of the

Projects on poverty alleviation carried out by different agencies of the GOB as well as NGOs (Aminuzzaman and

Nunn E, 1993).

Empirical data also indicate the fact that the actual disbursement of resources to poverty alleviation programs

During the Second and Third Five Plan periods was far low compared to the actual allocations. Further more the

Rate of actual allocation to Poverty Alleviation Projects (Peps) 3 during the Third Five Year Plan also far less

Than its corresponding figure of the Second Five Year Plan period (Gaur, 1994). Consequently the employment

Targets set by the Five Year Plans (Fops) could not be achieved. In aggregate the Fops failed to generate about

3.9 million New jobs as against the target (PKSF, 1992).

An overview of the Annual Development Program (ADP) allocation also demonstrates a passive picture. In spite

Of all importance and priorities attached to poverty alleviation in the plan documents, over the years the actual

Allocation to Peps and other projects with poverty alleviation components never received more than 14 percent

Of total ADP allocation (Ghafur, 1994). The trend of PAP allocations in the ADPs is also not found to be

consistent. (Table:2). On average the ADPs over last ten years allocated about 10 percent resources to PAPs

ranging from 7.04 to 14.07 percent.

Table 2: ADP Allocations to PAPs 1985 - 1995 (in million Taka)

Year Total ADP Allocation for PAP % of PAP

Allocation

1985-86 3826 269.5 7.04

1986-87 4764 379.17 7.96

1987-88 5046 413.08 8.19

1989-90 5803 473.22 8.15

1990-91 5668 547.37 9.66

1991-92 7500 797.31 10.63

1992-93 8650 976.09 11.28

1993-94 9750 682.16 7.00

canal

1994-95 11000 1254.83 11.41

Source: Ghafur (1994)