What is misleading in this statement is that the authors use only the per capita GDP as their criterion and tend to submit themselves to what we call "group think" or "perceptual defense." As you will see below, out of 232 countries we cannot classify all 198 countries which have lower per capita GDP than Bangladesh as the poorest countries of the world. Per capita GDP measures the distribution of GDP over the population. GDP per capita is not the only measure of economic performance of a country. In this short note I have used macro-economic data from available sources to show that Bangladesh's economic condition is not among the poorest countries in the world as is commonly assumed.

Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and Purchasing Power Parity (PPP)
First, let us look at GDP and PPP adjusted GDP for Bangladesh for 2005. PPP adjusted GDP for Bangladesh is $299.9 billion (estimated). World Factbook ranked 232 countries on PPP adjusted GDP where Bangladesh ranks 34th. Again, Bangladesh GDP in official exchange rate is $64.8 billion and it ranks 57th out of 232 countries. Either by PPP adjusted GDP or by official exchange rate GDP it is not justifiable to classify Bangladesh as one of the poorest countries in the world.

The table below shows the PPP adjusted GDP ranks for six countries out of 232 ranked countries.

Let us look at the data from a different direction. Economists consider land, labour, and capital as three factors of production. Let us take land and compare productivity of Bangladesh by the size of geographical area with other countries. For simplicity we took the size of geographic area as land. We computed GDP per sq. km for selected countries to compare the performance of Bangladesh. PPP adjusted GDP per sq. km are: Bangladesh $2.08m, India $1.1m, Pakistan $0.448m, Malaysia $0.755m and US $1.3m. Bangladesh without question shows a very high productivity rate for its land. We should focus on this high productivity rate of land and people and capitalize on our strengths which lie in the rural economy.

In order to compare the productivity from a different perspective, I transposed the population density of Bangladesh for selected countries and computed GDP per capita for these countries with population density of Bangladesh. GDP per capita of these countries if they had the population density of Bangladesh are: Bangladesh $2,100, India $1,115, Pakistan $484, Malaysia $754, China $842 and US $1,281. Again, we can deduce that Bangladesh is a highly productive country.

Revenue budgets for 2005
The World Factbook provided data for 2005 revenue budgets for 236 countries of the world. The 2005 revenue budget for Bangladesh was $5.9 billion and it was a surplus budget. More than half of the countries (54 percent) had revenue budgets below the revenue budget of Bangladesh. Countries like Bahrain, Sri Lanka, and Jordon had budgets lower than Bangladesh. While the budgets of Sudan and Syria were $5 to $6 billion. Bangladesh's budget cannot be above 50 percent of the countries of the world and be one of the poorest countries in the world.

Out of 113 countries reported in the World Factbook, Bangladesh ranks 56th in public debt expressed as a percentage of GDP (higher rank means lower debt). While Singapore ranks 113th and has the lowest public debt as per percent of GDP (1.2 percent). Many advanced countries have much higher debt percentages than Bangladesh (46.1 percent). For example, US's public debt is 64 percent of GDP, Pakistan's 54 percent, and Indias 82 percent.

When we consider external debts, out of 207 countries US ranks second (first rank is given to the world as a whole) with $8.8 trillion, Pakistan ranks 44th with $39 billion, India ranks 30th with $119 billion and Bangladesh ranks 60th with $39 billion. It has been observed that, generally more developed countries have higher public and external debts. The economic expansions and political ambitions of developed countries beyond their means put the future of their children at risk who will eventually pay these debts. We should ask the same questions which are being asked in developed countries by concerned citizens before we plunge into more debt.

The above data and analyses show that Bangladesh is not among the poorest countries as is generally conceived. It is an efficient economic engine though it is beset with 1) corruption, 2) political mismanagement, and 3) misaligned economic emphases.

In spite of the rosy pictures I tried to paint, 82 percent of the people live on less than $2 a day. (At the current price, I think $3 a day per capita would be sufficiently subsistence level income for a rural family). The literacy rate is 43 percent and which is 32 percent for the female population. Sixty-three percent of the population is employed in agriculture and about 11 percent in industry (FY 05/06). This demographic data clearly indicates where our problems are and what we should emphasize. If I may, I would isolate three factors for our primary focus -- value added education, income distribution, and agriculture.

Conclusions
Bangladesh dubbed as one of poorest countries in the world does not tell the whole story and solve the problems. Bangladesh showed tremendous progress in all sectors of the economy. People look at the per capita income and presume a dismal picture. It cannot be denied that more than 80 percent of the people live in poverty. Ten percent of the population enjoys the quality of life of countries having per capita income of more than $40,000 and 80 percent live with income less than $600 a year.

The failure of the economy to bring the benefit to the poor is due to inefficient and ineffective government and incongruent external influence. For example, IMF on the one hand pressures the government to relax import controls and on the other asks to raise the diesel price. Unrestricted imports drain foreign exchange reserves for non-valued added luxuries and raising diesel price will increase the cost of agricultural production and reduce the firm income. World Bank and IMF are acting as double edged swords. We should work for market economy and not hurt the rural economy. In August 2003, the World Bank Group in Bangladesh has identified five key areas to reduce poverty and invigorate social development: 1) pro-poor economic growth, 2) human development through education, 3) women's advancement, 4) social safety net for the poor, and 5) participatory governance. On paper this looks very good, but in 2006 things remain where they were three years ago in terms reducing the poverty level of the poor.

The economy instead of becoming pro-poor is increasingly becoming pro-rich.

Some suggestions
Not all of my suggestions are new. What is new is the focus and re-examination of efforts and ideas.

- I think over-centralization and more focus on urbanization of the economy is hurting the pro-poor economic initiatives.

- We should change our focus from urban culture to agriculture and decentralize economic activities and government ministries to different districts and even at rural levels. This will reduce pressure on Dhaka and the adjoining areas and reduce concentration of economic activities at one place. Poor people from rural areas need not have to come to Dhaka for jobs and livelihood. True, it will increase the cost of doing business for certain services and industries. We cannot continue to compete on low input costs we must also compete on high quality. Wages for Bangladeshi workers need not have to be one of the lowest. Export prices for Bangladeshi raw materials and wages are among the lowest in the world. The exportable raw materials are produced by the rural poor and the labor comes from the same source. If the input price is not adjusted to competitive prices the lots of rural poor will never get better. Free market policy will not help advance the economic condition of the rural poor.

- Try to make education value added for the rural people. Education today does not support the rural economy. The British education systems we inherited are geared towards creating clerks and bureaucrats. It may be noted that 80 percent of the people live in villages and 60 percent of the labor force work in agriculture. To support agriculture and rural people at least at the primary and secondary level education should deal with subjects teaching the tools and techniques of improving agricultural yields and marketing the agricultural products. Now education at the rural level is not valued-added to develop agriculture.

- Don't guide the planning efforts taking Bangladesh as one of the poorest countries in the world and pump money in the hands of the rich. It is to the advantage of stakeholders to keep the economic disparity so that more development funds and NGO funds keep coming.

- Foreign exchange earned by the rural people (expatriate earnings) should be spent for their benefit. By that the government does not have to restrict imports. To import luxury items the parties must earn their foreign exchange. Similarly, multinational corporations, like mobile phone companies, should not take foreign currency out unless they earn foreign currency.

Finally, political, economic and social corruption must be addressed at all levels. We need pragmatic and agriculture oriented plans and interventions introduced systematically and implemented earnestly. Otherwise, the poor continuously become poorer and the rich richer, with increasing debt burden and perpetuating poverty. Our 35 years of history does not tell a different story.

Dr. Mawdudur Rahman is Professor, Suffolk University, Boston, MA.