Investment promotion

Pakistan’s planned merger of the Board of Investment (BOI) and the Special Investment Facilitation Council (SIFC) has reopened a familiar debate about why investment remains difficult to attract in the country. In a recent Dawn opinion piece published on July 22, 2026, the argument was that changing institutions alone will not transform the investment climate unless wider policy problems are addressed first.

The piece said Pakistan has often tried to improve investment by creating new bodies, conferences and facilitation mechanisms, while leaving core issues unresolved. These include taxation, energy pricing, tariffs, foreign exchange access, regulation, long-term finance and contract enforcement. The central point was that investors make decisions based on the commercial environment, not on how many agencies exist to receive them.

The analysis contrasted Pakistan’s approach with examples such as Singapore, Ireland, Costa Rica and Uzbekistan, where investment promotion has been tied to broader economic reform. In Uzbekistan’s case, the article said reform of laws and regulations came before investment promotion began to show results. Pakistan, by contrast, has tended to do the reverse: build institutions first and pursue reform later, if at all.

The merged BOI-SIFC setup should therefore be seen as more than an administrative rearrangement, the piece argued. It should be used as an opportunity to create a clearer investment proposition for the country. That would mean presenting investors with stable tax rules, predictable energy costs, tariff certainty, accessible financing and faster approvals, rather than expecting a single-window system to overcome multiple unresolved policy barriers.

The article also urged Pakistan to be more selective in the kind of investment it pursues. It said success should not be measured by the number of memoranda of understanding or by the headline value of announced projects. Instead, the focus should be on investment that creates productive jobs, increases exports, transfers technology, develops local suppliers and strengthens foreign exchange earnings.

Priority sectors mentioned included minerals processing, food processing, pharmaceuticals, information technology, value-added textiles, engineering products and tourism. Infrastructure projects, too, should be judged by whether they improve export competitiveness rather than simply adding capacity in the domestic market.

Another point made was that the new structure should not focus only on foreign investors. Domestic investment, the piece said, is complementary to foreign direct investment. Pakistani firms can also become suppliers, partners and exporters if the policy environment supports them.

The article further said the private sector should have a larger advisory role in identifying opportunities and understanding investor expectations, while avoiding conflicts of interest. It also noted that successful investment agencies do not stop at attracting new entrants; they help existing investors expand, resolve problems and deepen local supply chains.

The SIFC was described as having helped speed up decision-making on some projects by bringing civilian and military leadership together. But the piece said coordination alone cannot fix deeper problems such as policy inconsistency, weak enforcement and limited access to long-term capital. Investors, it argued, want predictable institutions rather than repeated escalation to top-level committees.

This report is based on a monitored public feed and reflects commentary published by Dawn. Source attribution: Dawn Home. Source: Dawn Home - https://www.dawn.com/news/2017454/investment-promotion