Imagine a father carrying his sick child past an unfinished hospital, forced to travel many more miles to find treatment. When construction began, the hospital promised care close to home. Years later, its gates remain shut, while families continue to bear the cost of travel, lost wages and delayed treatment.
To them, a stalled project is a hardship they live with every day. Bangladesh's development efforts must be measured by how efficiently they ease that hardship. Approval makes a promise; a functioning service keeps it.
Give expert advice a place in government decisions
In her article published in Prothom Alo on 12 October, 2026, "Prokolper songkha noy, dorkar bastobayon dokkhota", Fahmida Khatun emphasises the importance of preparation, prioritisation, professional management and accountability.
I examined related concerns in "The projects we build and the system that breaks them" in The Business Standard on 27 March and "Building Assets, Losing Time: Why Bangladesh's Projects Stall and How to Fix the System" in Dhaka Courier on 3 April, 2026. Such contributions deserve consideration through a documented government response.
Every approval must carry a delivery commitment
The Executive Committee of the National Economic Council (Ecnec) reportedly held ten meetings between 6 April and 7 October 2026 under the current government, resulting in 97 project approval decisions.
These include new schemes, extensions and revisions; the total should therefore not be presented as 97 new projects. The government should publish these categories separately, alongside implementation progress. Each approval creates a commitment whose value depends on successful implementation.
Bangladesh can adapt three key principles from global best practices: visible ownership, timely resolution of obstacles and rigorous appraisal before committing public funds.
Why projects fall behind
Weak preparation creates problems later: The Implementation Monitoring and Evaluation Division (Imed), in its July assessments, identified weaknesses in feasibility studies, economic analysis, financing plans and site selection. Unresolved design, land and utility requirements become costly obstacles during construction. Major investments should follow sound technical and economic preparation.
Timelines ignore the work before construction: Completion dates must reflect the time required for financing, procurement and site access. The planning state minister reportedly noted in July that procedural formalities and the issuance of work orders could take one and a half to two years after ECNEC approval. Such delays consume the implementation period before construction begins.
Shared responsibilities leave gaps: Delivery depends on ministries, implementing agencies, utilities and contractors. A project director cannot resolve every obstacle alone. Coordination meetings achieve little when participating institutions have no clearly assigned responsibilities or deadlines.
Monitoring does not always lead to corrective action: IMED has arrangements for inspection, evaluation and scrutiny of extensions. Their existence, however, does not ensure that findings lead to timely correction. Assessments must distinguish negligence from constraints beyond the project director's authority and examine construction quality and service delivery alongside expenditure.
What Bangladesh can learn from other countries
Britain formalises senior ownership of major projects through appointment letters and parliamentary accountability. India's Pragati platform brings implementation obstacles before senior officials from ministries and states. South Korea's Public and Private Infrastructure Investment Management Center evaluates and re-evaluates major investments. Bangladesh can adapt three principles from these practices: visible ownership, timely resolution of obstacles and rigorous appraisal before committing funds. Their usefulness depends on disciplined application suited to our institutions.
Five actions to improve project delivery
Decide the future of delayed projects every 90 days: IMED and sponsoring ministries should review physical progress, remaining costs, expected benefits and unresolved obstacles. Each review should produce a reasoned decision: complete, redesign, suspend or discontinue. Continuation should depend on future costs and benefits rather than on money already spent.
Agree on delivery commitments within 30 days: Within 30 days of approval, the project director and supporting institutions should agree on financing, realistic schedules, monthly milestones, land access, utilities, procurement and necessary permissions. Each institution's obligations must be recorded.
Assess project directors every six months: Reviews should examine verified milestones, quality, reporting accuracy and decisions within the director's authority. Negligence or misconduct should be addressed through due process. Effective leadership should be recognised, and capable directors retained. Supporting agencies must also answer for failures within their responsibilities.
Resolve obstacles monthly and report progress quarterly: Senior reviews should settle outstanding issues, naming responsible officers and action dates. Quarterly public reports should explain physical progress, cost changes and revised deadlines. Independent checks should verify reported achievements and construction quality.
Track expert recommendations and government responses: The Ministry of Planning should designate a focal point. Relevant Planning Commission divisions should examine policy proposals, while IMED addresses implementation concerns. A quarterly register should record each recommendation, source, supporting evidence, government response, responsible institution, deadline and status. Acceptance, modification or rejection should carry reasons.
A project is complete when it serves people
Commissioning, staffing, utilities, maintenance funding and handover to the operating agency must form part of project completion. A hospital without staff or an industrial estate without electricity has yet to fulfil its promise. I urge the government to connect expert advice with accountable decisions and clear delivery commitments. Development should ultimately be judged by the public benefits that investments deliver.
Md Nazrul Islam, PhD is a retired Major General from the Bangladesh Army. He was the Executive Chairman of BEPZA and also served in BEZA. He is a regular columnist and writes on technology, workforce transformation and industrial competitiveness.
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and views of The Business Standard.