The economic incompetency and corruption of political administrations are debatable issues among developing countries. Economic growth always starts with diverse and difficult situations. Sustainable economic growth is out of the question without the common interest of the nation [1, 2]. Since Bangladesh's separation from Pakistan, there has been immense economic and social change, while in Pakistan, the economic and social situation has declined with time [3, 4]. Economic development undoubtedly relies heavily on resources, but corruption or improper use can lead to their leakage. The military justified its coups by citing economic incompetence and corruption in society. They view these issues as significant challenges to the nation's unity [5, 6]. As an institute, military men consider themselves better in all walks of life as compared to civilians. They are professionals in their field, but that does not mean that they can manage the economic affairs of our country [7]. In military regimes, bureaucrats and the elite class of society gain an advantage as compared to others because the life standard of military officials is quite high. The monetized amount of perks and subsidies makes the actual amount of salary quite high for high-ranking officers in the country [8, 9].
Pakistan’s per capita income increased by 2% between 1947 and 1996, while social factors did not improve at the same pace. Figure 1a summarizes the GDP growth rate of Pakistan from 1956 to 2009. The GDP growth rate was higher during the Military coup. More specifically, during all four military coups in Pakistan, the GDP growth rate was higher than that of the democratic regimes. Figure 1b compares the GDP rate of Pakistan during the Four Military coups. There was a 6.7% increase in GDP during Ayyub Khan's regime. In his regime, the quality of the social sector was improved to a satisfactory level [10]. East Pakistan's autonomy created an environment of destabilization in the country. General Yahan Khan, the military head and president of Pakistan, appointed a military to suppress this movement, and economic growth declined [11]. The eleven years of Zia’s regime did not produce such significant improvement in the economic as well as social sectors. Pakistan's parliament system was not fully established due to an unstable political system, corruption, weak law enforcement agencies, crises of leadership, and professionalism [12].
Figure 1
(a) Overall GDP and GDP (b) during the military coup in paksitan.
In the Musharaf regime, 11.8 million jobs were created, and Pakistan's reserves increased from US$1.2 billion to US$10.7 billion, but socially, his regime was not more than a military one. Democracy is more likely to experience smaller rates of economic growth because it leads to the stretched-out role of superior categories that inhabit the effective allocation of resources, ensuing growth. It always deems it necessary to provide justice, education, and health services to all without any discrimination [13, 14]. In most developed countries, democracy exerts a positive impact on economic growth by ensuring liberty, poverty reduction, job availability, good governance, and better fiscal policies, but the democratic system is not as good as dictatorship in terms of reforms for retirement benefits, welfare, unemployment, health, and subsidies for the nation [15]. The dictators also seek motivation from perks and subsidies, such as wage earners. Pakistan's economic position was favorable, with significant growth in economic indicators. However, persistent increases in poverty and unemployment led to serious challenges for the country, despite assistance from the World Bank and IMF to address these issues. Social performance measures from the democratic era such as health, education, and poverty have mostly not changed [16].
It is an attempt to measure Pakistan's economic and social development aspects during democratic and dictatorial regimes. We use comparative analysis to investigate economic and social growth rates, utilizing secondary data for this purpose. The coefficient of variance (CV) is used to identify the level of variance between two regimes, while the T-test and F-test are used to analyze data.