This is our perspective, and we acknowledge that others may have differing views, which are valid and welcome. I understand that our same logic might apply to many places and situations, but I invite you to consider this scenario for a moment. Imagine you’re in a position to allocate a donor’s contribution of £5000. You have a critical decision to make, one that requires a thorough cost-benefit analysis. You could choose to invest this amount in supporting a student’s foreign education, a long-term investment that may yield returns only 20 years down the line, and perhaps even then only equal to the original donation. Alternatively, you could use these funds for something with a more immediate impact, such as healthcare, social care, or essential community support. My concern lies in guiding donors toward considering not only what they think is valuable but also what communities in Gilgit Baltistan may need most urgently.
A wise adviser once shared that in the UK, every national government, public interest (PI) firm, and donor is motivated to invest in the disability sector. There is an understanding here that investing in disability services, accessibility, and social care creates inclusive societies, boosts the economy, and empowers individuals with disabilities to lead fuller lives. This begs the question: why don’t we see this focus in Pakistan, particularly in areas like Gilgit Baltistan? Why is there a lack of targeted private investment directed at improving the lives of disabled individuals, who face some of the most significant barriers to education, employment, and social participation?
While short-term projects funded by donors are undeniably beneficial to society, sometimes producing immediate visible changes, I believe it’s essential to consider a broader perspective. Simon Sinek once said, “be different,” and this concept applies perfectly here. Why not stand out by addressing areas of unmet need? Why not focus on groups that are often overlooked and marginalized, like disabled individuals, and invest in creating lasting, equitable change for them? Inequality rules the mind
Inequality rules the mind
There’s also an undeniable sense of disparity that colors this discussion—a feeling of imbalance. In Urdu, there’s a phrase that loosely translates to “lack of awareness,” which captures an attitude that may contribute to why disability support is so underfunded. It is as if these issues are taken for granted, brushed aside without full consideration of their importance. This lack of awareness perpetuates an unequal society where certain needs remain unmet simply because they aren’t prioritized.
Let us do a thought experiment. Picture yourself as an elite in the world. Picture yourself with money, maybe 2.5 M$ is your monthly salary. Now imagine giving that to a disabled person
Let’s take a moment for a thought experiment. Picture yourself as one of the world’s elites, enjoying a life of abundance, with a monthly income of $2.5 million. Now, imagine what it would be like to invest even a fraction of that income into the life of a disabled person—someone facing barriers to education, employment, and daily life that we often don’t consider in our day-to-day existence. A small portion of such wealth, directed thoughtfully, could profoundly change the life of a person who lacks access to basic resources.
This disparity, however, reflects something much deeper—a mindset shaped by inequality. There’s an undeniable sense of imbalance here, an outlook that often ignores or underestimates the importance of disability support and social inclusion. In Urdu, there’s a phrase loosely translating to “lack of awareness,” which encapsulates this very attitude. Issues that don’t directly affect us are often taken for granted, brushed aside without adequate thought. This “lack of awareness” can perpetuate an unequal society where certain fundamental needs are unmet, simply because they are not prioritized.
When we look at places like Gilgit Baltistan, we must ask ourselves why this lack of investment in disability support persists. In the UK, for instance, governments, public interest firms, and donors increasingly direct resources toward disability services, accessibility, and inclusive social care. There is a collective understanding that supporting these areas builds an inclusive society, strengthens the economy, and enables individuals with disabilities to contribute and live fuller lives. But in Pakistan, particularly in areas like Gilgit Baltistan, private investment in disability support is almost absent. Why?
While it’s true that many donors focus on short-term projects that offer quick, visible benefits to society, perhaps there’s room for a shift. Imagine what might be possible if donors could look beyond short-term gains and recognize the profound, lasting impact of investing in underfunded areas like disability support. As Simon Sinek suggests, we can “be different.” Standing out sometimes means focusing on areas that are often overlooked and marginalized, like the disabled community, and creating equitable, lasting change for them.
The choice between funding a long-term goal like a foreign education or addressing immediate community needs in healthcare and disability support isn’t always easy, yet it’s essential to recognize the profound impact that can be made by addressing urgent needs. By guiding donors to consider not only what they value but also what communities in Gilgit Baltistan may urgently need, we encourage a holistic approach to development—one that’s deeply rooted in the immediate realities of those we aim to support.
