THE Federal Government’s PKR 17.573 trillion budget for 2025–26 includes a 20% increase in funding for the Benazir Income Support Programme (BISP), raising its allocation from PKR 592.48 billion to PKR 716 billion.
This underscores the government’s commitment to social protection and poverty alleviation.
But can poverty be tackled through cash transfers alone?
Or does lasting impact require enabling self-reliance through structural, long-term support?
BISP is rightly considered one of Pakistan’s most effective social safety nets.
It helps millions of vulnerable households—particularly women-led families—meet essential needs.
In areas where employment opportunities and services are scarce, even a small stipend offers relief.
Take the example of a woman caring for five children and an ailing husband, with no steady income.
Her BISP stipend helps her buy essentials like flour, lentils, and medicine.
Yet each month ends with the same anxiety: “How will I survive the next?
” While crucial, this assistance is a temporary fix—it doesn’t break the cycle of poverty.
Across southern Punjab, interior Sindh, and parts of Balochistan, countless families rely on BISP, yet remain trapped without access to education, skills, or economic opportunities.
This is where Pakistan’s approach to poverty must evolve.
Globally, cash transfer programs have succeeded when embedded in wider development strategies.
Brazil’s Bolsa Família and Mexico’s Prospera programs linked aid to conditions like school attendance and healthcare visits, thereby improving education and health outcomes along with reducing poverty.
Bangladesh’s BRAC advanced this approach with its “Graduation Model,” targeting ultra-poor women with a combination of cash, productive assets (such as a goat or sewing machine), skills training, mentorship, and market access.
Within a few years, over 75% of participants began earning independently.
This illustrates how smart design can drive long-term change.
BRAC is now the world’s largest NGO, operating across multiple sectors globally.
For Pakistan, adopting such an integrated model is not just desirable—it’s essential.
The country faces economic stagnation, inflation, widening inequality, and high youth unemployment despite increasing educational attainment.
In this context, unconditional cash transfers alone risk fostering dependency rather than solving structural poverty.
A phased, empowering model is needed.
Currently, no national policy exists to transition BISP recipients from survival to stability.
Ideally, beneficiaries would move through three stages: initial unconditional aid, followed by conditional support tied to education, health, or skills training, and finally, economic empowerment through microfinance, vocational programs, and market access.
Without this structure, social protection keeps people afloat—but doesn’t teach them to swim.
The government could pilot this integrated model in select districts in Sindh, KP, or Balochistan, with gradual scaling based on results.
While the increased budget for BISP is commendable, it must be complemented by a strategic vision.
Pakistan must shift from a mindset of relief to one focused on empowerment, dignity, and long-term growth.
Crucially, attention must also extend beyond BISP beneficiaries.
Inflation, unemployment, and rising production costs are straining countless households.
Combating poverty requires supporting SMEs, equipping youth with market-relevant skills, and revitalizing local industries.
Sustainable development hinges not on how much we give, but how effectively we build people’s capacity to stand on their own.
—The writer is Barrister, Solicitor & Notary Public, Usman Law Professional Corporation, based in Canada. (usmanlawoffice@gmail.com)
