Newspaper reports say the country's overall exports registered a rise of more than 16 per cent during the first half of the current fiscal. Reports further add that as many as 25 overseas Bangladesh missions, out of a total of 51, failed to achieve their export targets during the period, apparently suggesting credit for those which succeeded and discredit for the rest.
The scenario is being viewed from this rather simplistic angle for quite sometime, as though in the age of economic diplomacy our missions abroad are well poised to influence trends of exports. Although ideally, it is expected to be so, the ground realities do not indicate that the country's missions, for varying reasons, are in a position to prevail upon the situation in times of need. On the other hand, there are instances of sudden surge in exports in countries where Bangladesh has no missions at all.
This, however, should not be construed that exports, essentially a buyer-seller relationship, has little or nothing to do with others beyond the immediate stakeholders. But attributing the rise of exports to the good work of certain missions and labelling others as poor performers in case of decline seems to be a thoroughly misjudged proposition. The reality is that the missions, for the most part, are not taken on board in the overall planning for export promotion, let alone setting and achieving export targets. This disconnect is believed to be largely due to the fact that export matters are decided solely by the ministry of commerce and that there exists a lack of coordination with the ministry of foreign affairs, the controlling ministry of the missions.
Export Promotion Bureau (EPB) data show that the missions in Washington, London, Beijing, Canberra, Moscow, Kuala Lumpur and Ottawa are among those which could not achieve their respective targets set by the ministry of commerce, although they posted growth during the period over the corresponding period of the last fiscal. Berlin, Madrid, Paris, Rome, Stockholm, Brussels, Tokyo, Ankara, Seoul and Cairo are among the missions which achieved their targets. The rest of the missions, including those in New Delhi, Bangkok, Dubai, Riyadh, Geneva, Islamabad, Nairobi, Brasilia, Yangon etc., experienced a decline in the export receipts compared to the situation during the same period last year. A quick look reveals that despite growth in some of the overwhelmingly ready-made garment (RMG)-dominated destinations of the US and the European Union (EU), failing to hit targets could be due to unrealistic targets.
Observers often find it intriguing that export targets are seen more as a source of foreign remittance than as an outcome of a realistic plan of action. A target is essentially a destination where one can, in a realistic situation, aspire to reach. Far from being an ambition, it is a practical path to tread on, with conviction and hard work. A target is meant to be achievable notwithstanding the usual hazards that may impede the journey. The outcome may not be an unmixed success all the time.
In Bangladesh, targets are in most cases a misnomer. We tend to confuse targets or goals with ambitions. We set targets for a variety of our activities disregarding the practicalities involved in the achievement. Fixing targets for export is no exception. It is indeed difficult to perceive the mechanism the government adopts while setting targets every year. Do we take stock of the likely exportable surplus every year in a near-approximate manner? Is there a mechanism in place to do so? Do we assess the overseas market conditions, business practices, changing consumer tastes and preferences, procurement trends, and, last but not least, product-wise market requirements that can be met by Bangladeshi exporters at competitive prices? The answer, in all probability, is 'no'.
As part of the traditional practice, the government, while setting export target, sits with the key stakeholders - the business leaders in general and the exporters in particular, and exchange opinions on the expectations of the coming year. But not all business leaders or the exporters are manufacturers themselves. The vital question one may thus be tempted to raise is: how often does the government sit with the manufacturers to discuss their production targets and business plans for the markets at home and abroad?
Assumptions, however thoughtfully done, may run the risk of being a happy hunting ground. An ironic reversal in a positive sense may also happen. A country-specific target of say US$ 200 million may shoot as high as thrice the target because the realities on the ground were much favourable than those that were speculated at the time of setting the target. So, a mechanism has to be in place to do away with the speculative practices.
This write-up may look like it is all for defending the 'failing' missions. But what has been attempted here so far is to relate 'failure' with planning. This is at the policy level. At the functional level, Bangladesh currently has close to 20 economic and commercial wings in the overseas missions, under administrative control of the ministry of commerce and the Economic Relations Division (ERD). Now, who are posted in these wings? Obviously, civil servants. The government may have various criteria for finding out suitable candidates. But how often is the key criterion - that of sufficiently adequate trade and economic background -- considered? Besides these wings, whose only job is to attend trade, economic and investment affairs, how many of the missions which do not have these wings can spare officials to look after these works even on a part-time basis.
While energising the missions with professionally equipped officials is supremely important, there is the critical need to effectively involve the key stakeholders, including the relevant ministries, in not only setting realistic targets but also endeavouring to achieve those.
wasiahmed.bd@hotmail.com
Overseas missions and boosting exports
Wasi Ahmed | Published: February 04, 2014 00:00:00 | Updated: November 30, 2026 06:01:00
Share if you like