By Dr Taimoor ul Hassan
The debate on how best to govern Pakistan’s growing population is neither new nor simple, yet it remains urgent. Since independence in 1947, Pakistan has struggled with centralization of power and the challenges of ensuring equitable distribution of resources. The population has now crossed 240 million, but the administrative map of the country remains largely the same as it was decades ago.
Large provinces, especially Punjab, continue to dominate the political and administrative landscape, creating a persistent imbalance in representation and service delivery. The argument for creating smaller provinces and administrative units is therefore not about identity politics or fragmentation, it is about efficiency, accessibility, and effective governance.
The history of Pakistan provides ample evidence that centralized control has often resulted in alienation rather than integration. The separation of East Pakistan in 1971 was, in part, a result of the denial of political autonomy and administrative independence. The lesson from that tragedy is clear, a system that ignores local aspirations and administrative efficacy is unsustainable. Within the existing constitutional framework, Article 140A requires the establishment of local governments, ensuring political, administrative, and financial responsibility is devolved to elected representatives of the people. Yet, successive governments have failed to empower local bodies meaningfully, often treating them as rivals rather than partners in governance.
The Constitution also allows the creation of new provinces under Article 239, which requires a constitutional amendment passed by two-thirds majority in parliament along with consent from the concerned provincial assembly. While this clause presents political hurdles, it also reflects a recognition of the need for flexibility in administrative structures. Creating new provinces or smaller units is therefore not unconstitutional, rather it is embedded in the logic of the federal structure.
Globally, there are examples of countries that have adopted smaller administrative divisions to enhance governance. India, for instance, reorganized its states multiple times since independence, often dividing larger states into smaller ones to better respond to linguistic, cultural, and administrative needs. The creation of states like Uttarakhand, Chhattisgarh, and Jharkhand in 2000 was justified on the grounds of improved governance and service delivery. Today, India has 28 states and 8 union territories, a structure that has helped manage a population of over 1.4 billion. Nigeria, another large developing country, also moved from three regions at independence to 36 states today, responding to administrative demands and ethnic complexities. These examples demonstrate that smaller units need not be a source of division, rather they can strengthen national cohesion by making governance more responsive and inclusive.
In Pakistan, demands for new provinces are not new either. The calls for a South Punjab province have been consistent, citing the neglect of underdeveloped districts. Similarly, people of Hazara, Bahawalpur, and Karachi have raised voices for greater administrative independence. While some critics argue that creating new provinces would encourage ethnic fragmentation, the counterargument is stronger. Smaller units allow better management of resources, more direct accountability of representatives, and quicker responses to local problems. They reduce the sense of alienation felt in remote districts of oversized provinces where resources and decisions are concentrated in a few urban centers.
The example of former Mayor of Lahore, Mian Amer Mahmood, is instructive in this regard. During his tenure, he strongly advocated for smaller administrative units, arguing that governance in Pakistan’s large provinces is too distant from ordinary citizens. His experience of running local government in Lahore provided practical evidence that empowering smaller units leads to more efficient provision of services such as health, education, and infrastructure. His argument remains logical and prudent in today’s context where citizens increasingly demand delivery rather than promises.
The critics of creating smaller provinces often claim that the move would increase administrative costs and create more political complications. Yet this concern overlooks the heavy costs already borne by inefficiency and lack of access. When people have to travel hundreds of kilometers to provincial capitals for basic services, when local grievances go unheard due to distance from power, and when large populations are governed through remote bureaucracy, the costs are far higher than the expenses of additional administrative units. Smaller units would bring governments closer to the people, cutting down inefficiency, reducing corruption, and increasing trust in the state.
The efficacy of smaller administrative units is also visible in Pakistan’s own history. The creation of districts and divisions in the past allowed for more manageable governance. The introduction of local government systems, whenever genuinely empowered, demonstrated improved delivery at the grassroots level. Unfortunately, political elites often dismantled these systems out of fear of losing control. A consistent, constitutionally protected system of devolved governance, whether through smaller provinces or stronger local governments, would create a balance between central authority and local empowerment.
Moreover, smaller units can play a significant role in addressing feelings of deprivation in marginalized areas. In Balochistan, for example, vast distances and sparse administrative presence contribute to alienation. Creating smaller units with devolved powers could ensure that resources are distributed more equitably and local needs are prioritized. In Sindh, the urban-rural divide has fueled political tensions, but administrative restructuring could help bridge these divides by ensuring governance is tailored to the needs of each locality.
The world today recognizes that governance is most effective when it is closest to the people. Large federations like the United States, India, and Nigeria show that diversity and large populations can only be effectively managed by creating multiple, smaller administrative divisions. Pakistan’s insistence on maintaining oversized provinces goes against this global trend and undermines its ability to govern a rapidly growing population.
The demand for smaller administrative units is therefore not a call for division, it is a call for better governance. It is rooted in history, supported by constitutional provisions, and justified by international experience. Pakistan must rethink its governance structures if it is to meet the demands of the 21st century. The choice is between clinging to outdated administrative boundaries or embracing a model that brings government closer to the people, enhances service delivery, and strengthens national unity. The latter option is clearly the more prudent path forward.
Note: Dr Taimoor ul Hassan is Professor of Mass Communication at the University of Central Punjab. He is a leading academic, researcher, and columnist with extensive experience in higher education, journalism, and media policy. He has served as Dean at multiple universities, worked on international collaborations, and published widely on issues of governance, media, and society.
Disclaimer:
The views and opinions expressed in this article/Opinion/Comment are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the DND Thought Center and Dispatch News Desk (DND). Assumptions made within the analysis are not reflective of the position of the DND Thought Center and Dispatch News Desk.
