PUBLISHED
August 17, 2025
KARACHI:
Despite growing student enrollments, increased PhD production, and persistent public investment over the years, Pakistan’s higher education sector continues to underperform. No Pakistani university ranks in the top 350 globally, and graduates struggle with underemployment and limited research commercialisation. At the root of this dysfunction lies a complex intersection of poor governance, political maneuvering, low returns on education, policy stagnation, and structural economic issues that fail to reward learning.
Higher education in Pakistan, continues to suffer from deep-rooted structural challenges that limit its global competitiveness and national impact. At the heart of these challenges lie governance and accountability issues. Most public-sector universities still operate with outdated management models, where political interference overrides merit-based decision-making.
The situation has been further complicated by the 18th Constitutional Amendment, which created a dual system of higher education regulation — one at the federal level and another at the provincial level. This has led to overlapping mandates, inconsistent policies, and a lack of coordination between key stakeholders.
Governance & structural challenges
A higher education institution (HEI) is subject to numerous governance bottlenecks, including the Council of Common Interests (CCI), Standing Committees of the National Assembly and Senate, the Higher Education Commission (HEC), the Federal Education Ministry, provincial education departments, provincial HECs, the chancellor (governor or chief minister of the respective province), the courts, and finally, the internal approving bodies — the Senate or syndicate or both of the HEI.
For instance, when a public HEI seeks to revise student fees in light of the incessant increase in establishment charges (payroll) resulting from annual BPS faculty salary hikes, the Senate and syndicate — the strategic decision-making bodies, often composed of majorly ex-officio members — block the move due to concerns over political capital depreciation. Similarly, many important decisions, especially the commercialisation of idle assets or the investment (if, fortunately, there are funds available) in profit-oriented but risky opportunities, such as mutual funds, also suffer due to this overreach.
This creates a vicious cycle: political interference obstructs much-needed reforms, increasing dependence on the government’s exchequer, which in turn invites further political interference.
Further, governing boards are often constituted through non-transparent nominations without any defined eligibility criteria, and they lack representation from key professional sectors such as finance, law, or technology. The absence of clearly defined performance evaluation frameworks for both the vice chancellor and statutory bodies has left many universities in a state of administrative paralysis. Internal audit functions are largely nonexistent and, where they do exist, they lack independence and remain directly answerable to the vice chancellor.
Chronic underinvestment, stagnant funding
Financially, over the years, the Higher Education Commission’s budget rose from 47.5 billion rupees in 2014–15 to 65 billion rupees in 2018–19, after which it remained stagnant. However, this stagnation, combined with currency devaluation, has reduced its value to nearly half in dollar terms, from around 470 million dollars to 230 million dollars.
This financial squeeze reflects the chronic underinvestment in education overall and the government’s misplaced priorities. From July to March, only 0.8% of the GDP was spent on education, according to the Economic Survey of Pakistan 2024-25. Far below UNESCO’s recommended benchmark of 4–6%, even after accounting for provincial expenditures. Within the higher education sector, HEC’s performance-based funding to HEIs remains minimal compared to base and need-based grants, leaving faculty and institutions with little incentive to strive for excellence beyond mandatory benchmarks.
Unlike in the US or China, where universities serve as hubs for startups and scientific advancement, Pakistan’s institutions have produced no Nobel laureates or unicorn startups. Offices of research, innovation and commercializalisation (ORICs) and business incubation centres (BICs. exist, but due to limited capacity and lack of attention from both HEIs and the government, commercialisation efforts rarely bear fruit. Yet this is vital, not only for the financial sustainability of HEIs and easing the government’s strained fiscal space, but also for fostering innovation and broader economic prosperity.
Research & employability gaps
Despite a significant rise in the number of PhDs produced (from 287 in 2003 to 3,489 in 2024) and improvements in laboratory infrastructure, Pakistan has failed to fully leverage its research potential. While academic output has increased in both volume and citation quality, it is largely driven by individual incentives, particularly the need for faculty to meet promotion criteria, rather than by a commitment to solving real-world problems or addressing national priorities. Product-oriented research remains largely absent.
This reflects flaws in regulatory policies, which prioritise publication counts over innovation, research commercialisation, industry linkages, pedagogical quality, and the meaningful academic presence of teachers. The result is a race for published papers, often at the expense of impactful research and teaching.
From a student’s perspective, there’s a glaring gap between what the job market demands (practical, skill-based competencies) and what universities continue to teach, which remains largely theoretical. Processes like degree attestation are sluggish and bureaucratic. As noted earlier, poor pedagogy—focused more on churning out research papers than on actual teaching—compounds the issue. Grievance mechanisms, where they exist, are largely symbolic and often fail to function effectively.
Thousands of graduates each year find themselves underemployed or unemployable due to a mismatch between their academic training and the evolving demands of industry. Outdated curricula rooted in rote memorisation continue to dominate classrooms, with little emphasis on critical thinking, analytical reasoning, or hands-on experience.
There is an urgent need to overhaul academic programs to reflect competency-based education models. Internships, project-based learning, and interdisciplinary exposure should be core components of university life to ensure that students are better equipped to contribute to the economy and society upon graduation.
With the recent economic turmoil, households see little incentive to invest in higher education, given the opportunity cost, when the job market does not value it. This is not a reflection of poor effort by students but rather a structural failure of the economy to absorb skilled labour.
Our higher education faces a cycle of underperformance driven by poor governance, underused research, outdated curricula, inequitable access, and much more. Disillusionment with education stems from real economic and institutional failures, not misplaced expectations. The solution isn’t merely to spend more, but to invest more strategically, aligning resources with local needs and long-term national priorities.
Charting the path to effective higher education
Reparation necessitates firstly, to ensure meaningful autonomy for universities. Universities must be empowered to revise fees, design market-aligned programs, and recruit faculty without political interference. The government should prioritise repairing and strengthening existing large, underperforming institutions—rather than churning out new universities for rhetorical or political gains. Without such autonomy and a focus on institutional consolidation, even the most well-crafted policies cannot be implemented effectively.
Secondly, a shift toward performance-based funding is needed. Rather than relying solely on base grants – or worst, mere whims – a significant portion of public funding should be tied to measurable outcomes, such as graduate employability, research commercialisation, innovation output, and teaching quality, not just enrollment figures.
Faculty standards must be raised and teaching capacity enhanced. Recruitment criteria must be strengthened, regular pedagogical training institutionalised, and competitive salaries offered to attract and retain high-performing faculty. Promotion criteria should move beyond paper publication counts to also reflect classroom impact and real-world relevance. Regulator must actively enforce these standards.
Academic programs should be with market needs. The Academic Council must actively incorporate market research to align courses with industry needs, without the looming fear of the regulator’s sword. ORICs and BICs should be revitalised to translate curricular outcomes into commercially viable products. Curricula must prioritise critical thinking, applied learning, and digital skills. Stronger industry linkages, mandatory internships, and project-based learning are essential to make graduates job-ready and economically relevant.
Local governments should be empowered to reduce regional disparities. Provincial and district administrations should be equipped with reliable data systems, timely funding, and real administrative and fiscal autonomy. This will allow them to craft localised solutions with agility, responsiveness, and accountability.
Structural governance reform need to be implemented. University governance must be separated from management. Independent boards, free from political influence, should appoint vice-chancellors based on leadership merit. A national governance code, modelled after corporate standards, must enforce transparency, annual audits, and board accountability. Clear eligibility criteria for key positions, along with key performance indicators (KPI) based performance evaluation mechanisms for each member of strategic committees as well as for the vice chancellor, should be mandated. These evaluations should be conducted by an independent third party to ensure objectivity and credibility.
It is imperative to prioritise equity and inclusion, especially for women. Education policy must centre on gender and geographic inclusion. This requires scholarships, safe transport options, and secure campuses for female students; digital access in rural areas; and targeted faculty recruitment for underdeveloped regions. Prioritising female education will unlock not only individual opportunity but also national productivity.
Reform, not rhetoric, is the only sustainable path forward.
Furqan Ali is a Peshawar-based researcher who works in the financial sector. He can be reached at alifurqan647@gmail.com
Rabia Khan is an Islamabad-based writer and researcher focusing on national and international affairs
All facts and information are the sole responsibility of the authors.
