Bangladesh has recorded notable social and economic progress over the past 55 years, yet continues to grapple with a fundamental deficit in institutional policymaking capacity, according to a new report. The analysis, published by Dhaka-based The Daily Star, argues that the country has spent five decades 'struggling to move beyond Class 1' in governance quality — a damning verdict on public administration despite development milestones.

The Core Problem: Churn, Not Talent

The report identifies the root cause not as a shortage of skilled professionals, but as a structural failure to preserve institutional memory and accumulate specialised sectoral knowledge. Frequent transfers of policymakers, shortened tenures, and appointments that routinely overlook domain expertise are cited as the primary culprits. Officials who lack prior experience in a sector reportedly spend their limited tenure learning the basics rather than designing or implementing reforms. By the time experienced hands develop the necessary depth, they are either reassigned or retire — before any meaningful reform takes root.

Dr Syed Abdul Hamid, a professor at the Institute of Health Economics, University of Dhaka, said such practices in public administration 'undermine the ability to design and sustain long-term reforms.' His remarks underscore a concern widely shared among governance researchers in South Asia.

What the Report Found

The report highlights that one dimension of governance has remained consistently underdeveloped across administrations. As the report noted: 'One critical aspect of governance remains underdeveloped: our capacity to formulate, implement, evaluate and improve public policies through strong institutions and consistent leadership.'

A concrete illustration offered by the report involves digital public services: when a new platform or approach is launched with every change in leadership, public resources are wasted on overlapping systems and repeated investments — a cycle that yields diminishing returns and erodes public trust. This pattern is not unique to Bangladesh, but the frequency and scale at which it occurs there is, according to the report, particularly damaging.

What Good Policymaking Requires

The report describes effective policymaking as a continuous cycle in which 'problems must be identified, evidence collected and analysed, stakeholders consulted, alternatives assessed, and financial and administrative feasibility examined.' This iterative model — standard in high-performing civil services globally — has reportedly remained aspirational rather than operational in Bangladesh's governance architecture.

Recommendations

Dr Hamid called for concrete reforms: giving greater weight to relevant expertise in key appointments, reducing unnecessary transfers, ensuring reasonable minimum tenures, and maintaining documented records of policy rationales and implementation outcomes. The report further urged stronger coordination across ministries and agencies, with universities, research institutions, professional bodies, and independent experts playing a more meaningful role in policy development and evaluation. It also recommended building reliable data systems and evidence-sharing mechanisms to support inter-agency collaboration.

Broader Implications

This comes amid wider scrutiny of governance frameworks across South Asia, where rapid economic growth has often outpaced institutional development. For Bangladesh — which has graduated from Least Developed Country status and is targeting middle-income benchmarks — the report's findings suggest that administrative reform, not just macroeconomic management, will be decisive for the next phase of development. Without structural fixes to how policymakers are appointed, retained, and empowered, critics argue that even well-funded reform programmes risk being dismantled with each change of guard.