The debate over the creation of new provinces and administrative units in Pakistan is not a new one. Since the country’s independence, proposals to restructure its administrative system have surfaced at different points in time. At times, there have been calls for increasing the number of provinces; at others, proposals for creating new provinces, granting divisional units provincial status, or dividing existing provinces along linguistic, administrative or geographical lines have come under discussion.
Today, the debate appears to be gaining renewed momentum. Interior Minister Mohsin Naqvi’s proposal for the creation of additional provinces, growing political unease in various circles, the influence of powerful political families, and discussions about the need for institutional reforms have once again brought a fundamental question into the national spotlight.
Does Pakistan need a major restructuring of its existing administrative system?
This is not merely a political question. At its core, it is an economic question as well.
Pakistan has experimented with different administrative arrangements in the past. During Ayub Khan’s rule, the One Unit system was introduced. Later, during General Yahya Khan’s rule, One Unit was abolished and the provinces of West Pakistan were restored. However, changes in the administrative map have not always provided permanent solutions to the country’s problems. One major reason is that the backwardness of a region does not automatically disappear simply because it is granted provincial status.
The real issues are governance, resource distribution, employment, education, healthcare, infrastructure and investment.
A sense of deprivation in the urban areas of Sindh gave rise to a major political movement in the past. The demand for a separate province in Hazara Division of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa has also surfaced repeatedly at the political and social levels. In Balochistan, there have been calls for a separate administrative identity for Pashtun-majority areas, while South Punjab has remained the centre of a long-standing demand for a separate province.
This means that the question of administrative restructuring in Pakistan is not simply about drawing new lines on a map. Behind it lie deeper questions of identity, resources, political power and participation in development.
Smaller Provinces, Bigger Questions
The strongest argument in favour of new provinces is administrative convenience. This argument has considerable merit. For an ordinary citizen, it would certainly be better if access to basic public services did not require travelling hundreds of kilometres to a distant provincial capital.
If smaller administrative units are established effectively, access to government institutions could improve, the judicial system could become more accessible, healthcare and education facilities could be distributed more efficiently, and development projects could be implemented more rapidly at the local level.
But this raises a fundamental question: Will increasing the number of provinces also strengthen the economy?
If new provinces merely mean more governor houses, chief minister houses, secretariats, assemblies, government departments and official vehicles, then this would not constitute reform. It would simply create another major increase in government expenditure.
Pakistan is already under severe fiscal pressure. Debt servicing, defence expenditure, pensions, losses of state-owned enterprises and problems in the energy sector place a heavy burden on the national budget. Under such circumstances, every proposal to create new provinces must also answer a critical question: Who will pay for the financial cost of creating them.
A proposed map of Pakistan has also been circulating on social media, showing Punjab divided into six, Sindh into three, Balochistan into five and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa into four administrative units. However, no formal government status has been attached to this map, and it would therefore be premature to regard it as a final or official plan.
Nevertheless, the idea has triggered an important debate.
If Pakistan is to seriously consider creating more administrative units in the future, the criteria should not be political interests but economic viability.
For every proposed province, several questions must be examined: How much revenue can it generate on its own? What is its tax base? What is its potential in agriculture, industry and services? How many employment opportunities can it create? What is the existing state of its infrastructure? And what would be its share in federally collected revenues?
Creating a province merely on the basis of population and geography is not enough.
Another political argument in favour of new provinces is that the existing large provinces are dominated by powerful political families, and that smaller provinces or administrative units could weaken this political monopoly.
This argument, however, is not entirely convincing.
Powerful political families exist in almost every part of Pakistan. From South Punjab to Sindh, Balochistan and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, local political elites continue to exercise considerable influence. If existing provinces are divided into smaller units, it does not necessarily mean that powerful families will disappear. In fact, it could make access to political power even easier for them.
Instead of becoming the chief minister of a large province, an influential family could simply become the chief minister of a smaller one.
Therefore, the real reform should not be limited to changing the administrative map. It should focus on transforming the political and institutional system.
If the restructuring of provinces proves difficult under the existing political system, the idea of holding a referendum may also emerge. Pakistan has experience with referendums, but the most important requirement for any such process would be clarity regarding its constitutional, legal and political status.
If a major restructuring of the provincial system is genuinely considered in the future, political parties, Parliament, provincial assemblies, economists, constitutional experts and civil society will all need to be included in the debate.
A national consensus cannot be created through an administrative decision alone.
This situation raises the question of whether Pakistan is entering a phase of major political or administrative decisions. However, instead of treating political speculation as established fact, these developments should be judged on the basis of their practical consequences.
It is also worth noting that some circles are linking the current debate with the possibility of a national government or a broader political arrangement. But the success of any political system will not be determined by how many political parties participate in it. It will ultimately be judged by the direction in which it takes the economy.
The Real Crisis Is the Power Crisis. The crisis Pakistan is currently facing is not merely political. The electricity crisis, high energy prices, disruption in industrial production, unemployment, inflation, weak exports, a narrow tax base and losses of state-owned enterprises are among the fundamental problems confronting the economy.
If the creation of new provinces is accompanied by a strategy to address these problems, then the debate deserves serious consideration.
For example, if new administrative units are assigned specific industrial corridors, industries are developed on the basis of local resources, agricultural production is linked with value addition, energy generation is connected to local industrial requirements, and clear economic targets are established for each administrative unit, provincial restructuring could become a vehicle for economic development.
But if the objective is merely to create new offices, new assemblies and new political elites, the national economy may not be able to bear the burden of such an experiment for very long.
Pakistan’s younger generation is perhaps the most important stakeholder in this debate.
Young people are asking: Where will I find employment? How will I obtain quality education? Where will I access healthcare? Where will I find the capital to start a business?
The state must create an environment that provides young Pakistanis with employment, skills, education, healthcare, entrepreneurship and investment opportunities-an environment in which they prefer building their future at home rather than leaving the country.
This is precisely where the debate over new provinces must be connected with broader economic reforms.
Ultimately, the most important question is what investors think.
For an investor, the number of provinces matters far less than political stability, policy continuity, affordable and reliable energy, a simple tax system, the rule of law and guarantees for the protection of capital.
If administrative restructuring brings government closer to citizens, improves electricity and gas supplies, establishes industrial zones, simplifies taxation and speeds up business decisions, investors are likely to regard it as a positive development.
But if the division of provinces leads to political confrontation, constitutional disputes, institutional instability and higher government expenditure, investors will see it as a warning sign.
Pakistan needs an administrative system that brings the state closer to its citizens, distributes resources more fairly and creates new centres of economic activity.
But new provinces, by themselves, are not an economic miracle.
We must decide whether we are creating new provinces or a new economy.
If new provinces come with new industrial centres, better education, modern healthcare, affordable energy, employment opportunities, strong local governments and effective accountability, the experiment could potentially change Pakistan’s economic direction.
But if only the political map changes, the number of centres of power increases and government expenditure rises, nothing meaningful will change for the ordinary citizen.
Pakistan’s real problem is not how many provinces appear on the map. The real issue is how many people have access to state resources, how many jobs the economy can generate, and how effectively the government can provide services to ordinary citizens.
Therefore, the debate over new provinces must be taken beyond political slogans and evaluated on the basis of economic feasibility, constitutional requirements, fiscal sustainability and public welfare.
Ultimately, the decision on new provinces should not be made by the map alone.
It is the economy that must have the final say.