Decision-making process needs to be expedited
Tuesday, 20 April 2010
DECISIONS can go wrong. Even governments of the developed nations never claim that they are always right in their decision-making. The recent global financial turmoil was the product of wrong decision-making by a few globally renowned financial institutions and also governments that claim to be efficient in managing their economies. However, the problem of decision-making at the governmental level in Bangladesh is altogether different from that of the most developed and developing countries. Built-in weaknesses in decision-making have been identified as a major sore point in Bangladesh's striving for achieving the level of economic progress that is necessary to pull a vast majority of its population out of the vicious poverty circle.
Those who are in the know of things about the factors that are pulling the country from behind can gauge well the costs of policy inaction while appreciating the benefits that would have accrued to the economy from the right decisions taken at the right moment. Systemic failure in decision-making has given rise to corruption and non-transparent decisions in Bangladesh. It is high time for the government to reform the system if it really means business about reaping the benefits out of the opportunities that are waiting for Bangladesh. Against this backdrop, Gustav F Papanek, Professor of Economics Emeritus at Boston University, USA, who made a keynote presentation at a seminar last week on investment opportunities in Bangladesh, did befittingly note that results of inaction could turn out to be "catastrophic". Prof. Papanek is on a visit to Bangladesh at the request of the Board of Investment (BoI) to provide advice on how Bangladesh can best attract additional investment to support its development objectives. As a reputed development economist, he has an outstanding record of professional performance, directing the activities of several policy advisory and research teams, mostly focusing on aspects of development strategy. In over 50 years of work on the economics of development, he has provided economic advice to the governments of many developing countries in this region and outside. He is president of the Boston Institute for Developing Economies (BIDE) and has done extensive research and advisory work on the Bangladesh economy. He has, indeed, a long history of engagement with Bangladesh, working here even before the independence of the country since the 1950s and immediately after independence.
In an exclusive interview with this paper that appeared in its Tuesday's issue, Prof. Papanek has highlighted some relevant points that merit consideration for policy actions by the government, sooner than later, to attract investment and facilitate accelerated growth performance of the Bangladesh economy. He has strongly presented the case for expediting the decision-making process. The decision-makers in the government machinery do need to appreciate, in earnest, the need, on their part, for taking up the role of trouble-shooters, instead of perpetuating their role as "trouble-makers". Delayed or inappropriate or non-transparent decisions for whatever reasons choke off the growth potential of the economy. Under such circumstances, investments, both local and foreign, will not gather pace, particularly in areas of physical infrastructures, power and energy. As a result, the objectives of higher growth and poverty alleviation will continue to elude the nation. The political leadership, bureaucracy and all others concerned do, therefore, need to change their old style of decision-making.
Those who are in the know of things about the factors that are pulling the country from behind can gauge well the costs of policy inaction while appreciating the benefits that would have accrued to the economy from the right decisions taken at the right moment. Systemic failure in decision-making has given rise to corruption and non-transparent decisions in Bangladesh. It is high time for the government to reform the system if it really means business about reaping the benefits out of the opportunities that are waiting for Bangladesh. Against this backdrop, Gustav F Papanek, Professor of Economics Emeritus at Boston University, USA, who made a keynote presentation at a seminar last week on investment opportunities in Bangladesh, did befittingly note that results of inaction could turn out to be "catastrophic". Prof. Papanek is on a visit to Bangladesh at the request of the Board of Investment (BoI) to provide advice on how Bangladesh can best attract additional investment to support its development objectives. As a reputed development economist, he has an outstanding record of professional performance, directing the activities of several policy advisory and research teams, mostly focusing on aspects of development strategy. In over 50 years of work on the economics of development, he has provided economic advice to the governments of many developing countries in this region and outside. He is president of the Boston Institute for Developing Economies (BIDE) and has done extensive research and advisory work on the Bangladesh economy. He has, indeed, a long history of engagement with Bangladesh, working here even before the independence of the country since the 1950s and immediately after independence.
In an exclusive interview with this paper that appeared in its Tuesday's issue, Prof. Papanek has highlighted some relevant points that merit consideration for policy actions by the government, sooner than later, to attract investment and facilitate accelerated growth performance of the Bangladesh economy. He has strongly presented the case for expediting the decision-making process. The decision-makers in the government machinery do need to appreciate, in earnest, the need, on their part, for taking up the role of trouble-shooters, instead of perpetuating their role as "trouble-makers". Delayed or inappropriate or non-transparent decisions for whatever reasons choke off the growth potential of the economy. Under such circumstances, investments, both local and foreign, will not gather pace, particularly in areas of physical infrastructures, power and energy. As a result, the objectives of higher growth and poverty alleviation will continue to elude the nation. The political leadership, bureaucracy and all others concerned do, therefore, need to change their old style of decision-making.