Public higher education in Pakistan is facing a crisis that extends far beyond budgetary shortfalls. Across the country, public universities are struggling to pay salaries, retired employees are waiting for pensions, laboratories are losing their capacity to support research, and academic departments are being forced to function with shrinking resources. Institutions established to produce knowledge, train professionals and expand social mobility are increasingly preoccupied with a more immediate concern, finding enough money to keep operating. The promise of higher education as a public investment is giving way to a system struggling to sustain itself.
The roots of this crisis lie in a widening gap between the state’s educational ambitions and its financial commitments. Pakistan spends approximately 1.5 to 1.7% of its GDP on education, well below the widely cited international benchmark of 4%. Higher education receives only a portion of this already inadequate allocation. Meanwhile, the federal development allocation for the Higher Education Commission under the Public Sector Development Programme has reportedly fallen by more than 35% to Rs39.48 billion. Inflation, rising utility tariffs and the declining purchasing power of public funds have further eroded institutional capacity. Universities are being expected to deliver more with less, even as the cost of maintaining academic standards continues to rise.
The financial distress is particularly visible in older public institutions, including the University of Peshawar, the University of Karachi and Federal Urdu University. Their difficulties reflect a structural imbalance rather than a temporary shortage of cash. Salaries, utility bills, pension payments and other recurring obligations absorb an overwhelming share of available resources. In some institutions, pension and post-retirement liabilities alone account for a substantial proportion of annual expenditure. These obligations cannot simply be suspended when revenues fall short. Consequently, universities are increasingly forced to divert funds intended for research, equipment, faculty development and routine maintenance towards meeting their immediate financial commitments.
The consequences reach far beyond university balance sheets. A university that cannot maintain its laboratories, renew its library subscriptions or provide researchers with essential equipment cannot compete academically with institutions that continue to invest in knowledge. Research risks becoming an exercise in fulfilling procedural requirements rather than producing original ideas and discoveries. Young scholars lose opportunities, qualified faculty become increasingly frustrated, and talented academics may seek employment elsewhere. The damage is cumulative. Once research capacity, experienced faculty and institutional credibility begin to disappear, restoring them requires far more than a one-time financial injection.
The crisis in affiliated and provincial degree colleges deserves equal attention. These institutions provide access to higher education for thousands of students outside major urban centres, including young people from families that cannot afford expensive private universities. Yet many operate with inadequate laboratories, outdated libraries, limited digital facilities and insufficient opportunities for professional development. The result is a widening divide between students who can afford well-resourced institutions and those whose educational prospects depend on an underfunded public system. A country that seeks to reduce regional inequality cannot allow the quality of higher education to depend so heavily on a student’s ability to pay.
Universities have increasingly attempted to bridge their funding gaps through self-finance admissions, higher tuition fees and other revenue-generating measures. Although these sources can supplement public funding, they cannot replace the state’s responsibility to sustain public institutions. Repeated fee increases transfer the cost of fiscal neglect to households already struggling with inflation, rising living expenses and uncertain employment prospects. Students from modest backgrounds face a difficult choice between abandoning higher education and placing an additional financial burden on their families. When commercial considerations begin to dominate admissions and academic planning, access and quality can suffer simultaneously. Expanding enrolment without investing in teachers, classrooms and equipment produces larger classes, not necessarily better graduates.
The division of responsibilities between federal and provincial governments has added another layer of uncertainty. The 18th Constitutional Amendment strengthened provincial authority over many areas of governance, while the federal government, through the HEC, continues to play a central role in higher education standards and funding. Yet the precise distribution of financial responsibility for institutional survival remains a source of friction. Universities are caught between competing authorities, each operating within its own fiscal constraints and administrative priorities. Vice-chancellors and college principals are left seeking emergency assistance instead of planning long-term academic development. The absence of predictable funding turns institutional management into an exercise in crisis response.
A lasting solution requires more than occasional bailouts. The federal and provincial governments must establish a transparent, predictable and inflation-sensitive funding framework that reflects enrolment, regional needs, research responsibilities and the actual cost of maintaining academic standards. Historical pension liabilities should be assessed separately, with a sustainable financing mechanism developed in consultation with provincial governments and affected institutions. Universities should also be encouraged to build endowments, develop research partnerships with industry and commercialise intellectual property, provided these initiatives do not compromise academic independence or equal access. Financial accountability must accompany greater institutional autonomy, but accountability cannot become an excuse for withholding the resources required to perform.
Public universities are not ordinary government departments whose performance can be measured by expenditure alone. They are national institutions whose value lies in the knowledge they produce, the professionals they train and the opportunities they create for future generations. Their financial collapse would impose costs far greater than the savings achieved through reduced allocations. Pakistan cannot aspire to a knowledge economy while allowing its centres of learning to struggle for salaries, pensions and basic academic facilities. A state that underfunds its universities today risks paying for that neglect through weaker institutions, lost talent and diminished national prosperity tomorrow.