Real Estate Blog

The China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, commonly known as CPEC, is currently passing through an important phase of transition. For more than a decade, the initiative was largely identified with power plants, highways, port infrastructure and other major development projects. Pakistan and China are now seeking to move the programme into its second phase, widely described as CPEC 2.0. Under the official policy framework, the new phase is expected to place greater emphasis not only on infrastructure, but also on industrial development, exports, agriculture, technology, employment generation and regional connectivity. It would be an oversimplification to describe CPEC’s first phase as either a complete success or a complete failure. A number of major energy and transport projects were completed under the programme. According to official CPEC records, projects such as the Multan-Sukkur Motorway, the Havelian-Thakot Highway, the Lahore Orange Line and the optical fibre link from Khunjerab to Rawalpindi were among the key infrastructure developments completed during the first phase. Several large power generation projects were also brought online. The more important question now is whether this infrastructure can help Pakistan increase industrial production and expand exports. Following the 14th meeting of the CPEC Joint Cooperation Committee in September 2025, Pakistan and China agreed to focus the second phase on five broad areas: growth, livelihoods, innovation, green development and regional connectivity. Pakistan has also proposed deeper cooperation in the digital economy, artificial intelligence, modern agriculture and technology. This shift is significant because Pakistan now requires more than loans and large construction projects. The country needs foreign direct investment, industrial expansion, technology transfer and stronger export capacity. If Chinese companies establish production facilities in Pakistan and special economic zones become fully operational, the second phase of CPEC could have a more sustainable economic impact than the first. However, the challenges remain substantial. Delays in project implementation, the investment climate, financial problems in the energy sector, policy continuity and security concerns involving Chinese nationals and projects have all affected CPEC’s progress over the years. For that reason, the implementation of new commitments will be more important than announcements alone. Gwadar also remains a central part of the wider CPEC vision. The government says steps have been taken to connect Gwadar with the national electricity grid and improve the operational capacity of the port. Yet transforming the city into a fully functioning commercial and industrial hub will require greater business activity, stronger connectivity and more private investment. Official engagement between Pakistan and China in 2026 indicates that CPEC has neither ended nor moved into the background. Instead, both sides are attempting to redirect the initiative towards industrialisation, agriculture, mining and broader socio-economic development. The Pakistan-China joint statement issued in May 2026, along with statements from Pakistan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, also presented CPEC 2.0 as the next stage of bilateral economic cooperation. CPEC’s current phase can therefore be described as a transition from infrastructure building to economic production. The first phase delivered roads, power projects and other physical infrastructure. The test for the second phase will be whether Pakistan can convert those assets into higher industrial output, employment, investment and exports. The future of CPEC will not be determined by new agreements alone. Its real success will ultimately be measured by how many industries are established, how much exports increase and how far the initiative produces a measurable improvement in the economic lives of ordinary Pakistanis.

Real estate has long been regarded in Pakistan as an important means of preserving wealth and earning returns. However, a significant share of investment in the sector has traditionally flowed into vacant plots and land purchased in anticipation of future price increases, rather than into houses, apartments, offices or income-generating properties. This trend has contributed to the growing problem of speculation and plot-based investment.
In real estate, speculation generally refers to purchasing property not for immediate use or development, but primarily to hold it until prices rise and then sell it at a profit. Real estate investment is not inherently problematic. The concern arises when buying and selling is driven mainly by expectations of price appreciation rather than genuine residential or commercial demand, creating wider consequences for the housing market.
In Pakistan’s major cities, the launch of new housing schemes is often followed by active trading in plots and, in some cases, property files. Investors may purchase multiple plots within the same project and hold them for months or even years. When actual construction remains limited while plot prices continue to rise, land begins to function more as a tradable financial asset than as a resource for housing and productive development.
One of the most significant consequences of this trend is its impact on land and housing prices. Additional demand from investors can push urban land prices above levels supported by genuine housing needs. As a result, families seeking to buy a plot for the construction of their own homes may find land increasingly unaffordable.
Pakistan is already facing serious challenges related to housing availability and affordability. Government planning documents have repeatedly identified the housing shortage as a major national issue, while development institutions have also emphasized the need to improve access to affordable housing and housing finance.
Another major concern associated with plot-based investment is that land is sold, but homes are not necessarily built. A housing scheme may sell thousands of plots, yet if a large proportion remain vacant for investment purposes, population growth, local businesses and public services in the area may develop far more slowly than anticipated. Even where roads and other infrastructure have been provided, the land may remain economically and residentially underutilized.
This pattern can also contribute to unnecessary urban sprawl. New areas continue to be converted into housing schemes even while large numbers of plots in previously approved developments remain vacant. This can require governments and development authorities to extend roads, water supply, sewerage, electricity and other public infrastructure over increasingly large urban areas.
The solution is not to discourage real estate investment, but to encourage investment that supports construction and productive economic activity. Policies addressing the cost of holding vacant plots, more accurate property valuation for taxation, transparent transactions, stronger development approvals and improved ownership records could help move the market in that direction. Clear and verifiable property titles are also essential for the expansion of formal housing finance.
Pakistan’s real estate market can become more sustainable if investment gradually shifts from simply holding land for future appreciation toward housing, apartments, rental properties and commercial development. Buying and selling land may generate private wealth, but developed real estate creates housing, employment and wider economic activity. That distinction should remain central to Pakistan’s future housing and urban development policy.

The Partition of India is generally remembered for mass migration, communal violence and the drawing of new borders. But another major consequence of 1947 receives far less attention: what happened to the homes, shops, farmland, businesses and other properties worth enormous sums that people left behind on the other side of the border?
Imagine a family that owns a house in Delhi, shops in Lucknow and agricultural land in Amritsar. These assets may have been built up over several generations. Then 1947 arrives, violence spreads and survival becomes the immediate priority.
The family locks its home, takes only the most essential belongings and leaves for Pakistan. At the time, it may be believed that the displacement is temporary and that it will return once conditions improve. But the border becomes permanent, and the return never happens.
That raises a fundamental question: what became of the property left behind?
Did the Indian government take control of it? Was it allotted to other people? Could Muslims who migrated to Pakistan later reclaim their assets? And, most importantly, did all such property eventually fall under India’s well-known Enemy Property Act?
To understand the issue, it is important to distinguish between two different legal phases: the immediate aftermath of Partition in 1947 and the period following the India-Pakistan wars of 1965 and 1971.
In 1947, property left behind by Muslims who migrated from India to Pakistan was not automatically classified as Enemy Property. The principal legal category was Evacuee Property.
India later formalised this system through the Administration of Evacuee Property Act, 1950. The law covered people who had left India after March 1, 1947, under circumstances linked to Partition, communal disturbances or fear of such violence.
In practical terms, this meant that a house left behind in Delhi, Amritsar, Lucknow or elsewhere was not simply treated as an abandoned building. It could be formally declared Evacuee Property and placed under the administration of a Custodian, a government-appointed authority responsible for managing such assets.
Partition, therefore, created not only a humanitarian crisis but also a vast legal and administrative challenge involving land, buildings and ownership rights.
Pakistan faced a similar problem.
Just as large numbers of Muslims left homes, farms and businesses in India and moved to Pakistan, many Hindus and Sikhs migrated in the opposite direction, leaving behind residential, commercial and agricultural property in the areas that became Pakistan.
The newly created Pakistani state had to manage these abandoned properties while also dealing with the enormous task of resettling incoming refugees. In later years, certain religious, charitable and educational properties linked to evacuee trusts came under the management of the Evacuee Trust Property Board.
Partition, therefore, was not merely a transfer of populations. It also disrupted property ownership on an extraordinary scale on both sides of the new border.
The legal story changed significantly nearly two decades later.
In 1965, India and Pakistan went to war. At that point, the issue was no longer simply about people who had migrated during Partition. The two countries were now formally at war.
Certain movable and immovable assets belonging to Pakistani nationals in India were placed under the Custodian of Enemy Property for India. A similar legal framework was also applied in the context of the 1971 war.
India gave this system a permanent statutory basis through the Enemy Property Act, 1968.
This distinction is crucial.
Evacuee Property arising from Partition in 1947 and Enemy Property linked to later wartime legislation were not legally the same thing.
It is therefore inaccurate to say that every property left behind by a Muslim who migrated to Pakistan in 1947 was confiscated under the Enemy Property Act. The most obvious reason is that the Enemy Property Act itself was enacted only in 1968.
Another important development came after the 1965 war.
In January 1966, India and Pakistan signed the Tashkent Declaration. The agreement included provisions for continued discussion on property and assets taken over by both sides in connection with the conflict.
However, the issue was never resolved in a way that simply restored every house, shop or parcel of land to the family that had originally owned it.
As the decades passed, the legal questions became even more complicated.
Consider a case in which a Pakistani national owned property in India that had been classified as Enemy Property. The original owner later died, but some of his or her legal heirs were Indian citizens.
Could those heirs inherit the property?
This question became the subject of litigation and political debate in India.
In 2017, significant amendments were made to India’s enemy property law. The amended framework made the legal position considerably stricter. It clarified that property vested in the Custodian would not automatically cease to be Enemy Property merely because the original owner had died, changed nationality or left behind heirs who were Indian citizens.
In effect, the owner could die, generations could change, but the legal status of the property could remain intact.
This is what makes the property history of Partition so complex.
For a family, a house in Delhi or Lucknow might have remained an ancestral home filled with memories of childhood, business and generations of family life.
For the state, however, that same house could eventually become part of an entirely different legal and administrative category.
For the family, it remained a memory.
For the government, it became a legal file.
The story of 1947, therefore, cannot be fully understood simply by saying that millions of people moved from India to Pakistan and from Pakistan to India.
They did not cross the border carrying only a few clothes and boxes. They also left behind homes, mansions, farmland, shops, businesses and wealth accumulated over generations.
The same was true of Hindu and Sikh families who migrated from Pakistan to India.
That is why the history of Partition is not only a story of religion, politics and borders. It is also a story of land, ownership, law, citizenship and inheritance.
Partition divided people.
The wars of 1965 and 1971 added another layer of legal complexity.
And the laws that followed determined the fate of properties whose original owners — and, in many cases, several generations of their descendants — had long since moved to the other side of the border.
So perhaps the biggest question is not only who went where in 1947.
It is also this:
What ultimately happened to the billions worth of homes, land, shops and businesses they left behind?

Real estate marketing in Pakistan is rapidly shifting away from traditional methods and towards social media platforms. Until a few years ago, property dealers, newspaper advertisements, banners and roadside signboards were among the main tools used to market houses, plots, shops and commercial buildings. Today, Facebook, YouTube, Instagram, TikTok and WhatsApp have become important channels for property promotion. The shift has given the real estate industry access to a much wider audience, but it has also raised new questions about transparency, credibility and consumer protection.
One of the biggest advantages of social media is its ability to connect property sellers and developers with thousands, and in some cases millions, of potential buyers within a short period of time. Images, videos, maps, prices and payment plans for housing societies, residential schemes and commercial projects can now be shared instantly. Overseas Pakistanis, in particular, are increasingly able to explore property opportunities and new developments without being physically present in the country.
Video marketing has also become a major feature of the industry. Property agents routinely produce video tours of houses, plots and commercial buildings, while drone footage is used to showcase housing projects, road networks and surrounding areas. Such content allows prospective buyers to form an initial impression of a location from their homes and enables agents to expand the reach of their marketing campaigns.
However, the rapid growth of social media marketing in real estate has a more troubling side. Not every online advertisement is accurate or trustworthy. In some cases, unapproved housing schemes, disputed land or properties with unclear legal status are promoted through professionally produced videos and attractive advertisements. Prices, locations, development progress and expected investment returns may also be exaggerated to attract buyers.
The risks become more serious when investors make decisions solely on the basis of a social media post or promotional video. Property is a major financial investment, which makes due diligence essential. Before making any payment, buyers should verify land ownership, approvals from the relevant development authority, the project's no-objection certificate, official records, and the legal status of the person or company offering the property for sale.
Another emerging issue is the growing use of celebrities and social media influencers to promote real estate projects. This raises an important question: when an influencer endorses a housing or commercial project, has its legal status actually been verified, or is the endorsement simply part of a paid advertising arrangement? The trend highlights the growing need for clearer rules on disclosure, advertising standards and accountability.
The answer is not to discourage social media marketing in Pakistan's real estate sector. Digital platforms are efficient, modern and increasingly important. The challenge is to make their use more transparent and responsible. Regulatory authorities need to monitor the online promotion of illegal or unapproved projects, while buyers must understand that a Facebook post, YouTube video or TikTok clip cannot replace proper legal verification.
The future of successful real estate marketing in Pakistan will therefore depend not only on attractive videos and ambitious claims, but also on accurate information, regulatory compliance and, above all, the confidence of buyers.

Pakistan’s housing challenge is no longer limited to the difficulty of buying a home. Finding a suitable and affordable rental property is also becoming an increasingly serious problem for middle and lower income households. Rapid population growth in major cities, migration in search of employment, limited additions to affordable housing stock and persistent inflation have combined to deepen the shortage of rental homes and push rents higher.
Every year, thousands of families move to Karachi, Lahore, Islamabad, Rawalpindi, Faisalabad and other major urban centres in search of jobs, education and better public services. However, the supply of reasonably priced housing for low and middle income households has not kept pace with this rising demand. As more tenants compete for a limited number of homes in the same neighbourhoods, landlords are in a stronger position to increase rents.
Inflation is another major factor behind the growing rental burden. Rising costs of construction materials, land, maintenance, electricity, water and other services eventually feed into rental prices. Many landlords increase rents substantially each year, while salaries and household incomes often fail to rise at the same pace. As a result, some families are forced to spend a large share of their monthly income on rent, leaving less money for education, healthcare, food and transportation.
The absence of a well regulated and organised rental housing market further complicates the situation. In Pakistan, most rental arrangements are negotiated privately between landlords, property dealers and tenants. In many cases, tenancy agreements lack clarity, security deposits are high and advance rent places an additional financial burden on tenants. Unregulated brokerage charges and unreliable information in parts of the property market also create difficulties for people searching for accommodation.
Students, young professionals, small families and people relocating from other cities are among those most affected by the shortage. When affordable apartments are unavailable, many are forced to live in shared accommodation, hostels or distant suburban areas. This not only reduces housing choice but also increases commuting costs and travel time.
To address the problem, the government should move beyond housing policies focused primarily on home ownership and formally include affordable rental housing in the national housing framework. Public private partnerships could be used to develop rental apartment projects specifically designed for low and middle income households.
Greater emphasis on vertical housing, improved public transport and better infrastructure in suburban areas could also reduce pressure on expensive central neighbourhoods. At the same time, clear and enforceable rules are needed for tenancy agreements, annual rent increases, security deposits and property agent fees.
If Pakistan fails to address the rental housing challenge in a timely manner, declining housing affordability could contribute to deeper urban poverty, the expansion of informal settlements and widening social inequality in the years ahead.

Pakistan’s housing crisis is becoming one of the country’s most serious development challenges. Rapid population growth, expanding cities, rising construction costs and limited access to housing finance have created a situation in which millions of families struggle to obtain adequate and affordable homes. Unless addressed through long term policy and institutional reform, the problem will place increasing pressure on Pakistan’s cities, infrastructure and household finances.
The scale of the demographic challenge is substantial. According to the Pakistan Bureau of Statistics (PBS), the 2023 Population and Housing Census was Pakistan’s first digital census and provides detailed information on population, households and housing conditions across the country. Pakistan’s population reached approximately 241.5 million in 2023, making the provision of adequate housing an increasingly complex national challenge.
A figure frequently cited in public debate is a national shortage of around 10 million housing units. This number, however, needs to be treated carefully. Researchers at the Pakistan Institute of Development Economics have challenged the conventional interpretation of the 10 million figure, arguing that housing deprivation cannot simply be equated with millions of families having no physical shelter. Housing inadequacy also involves overcrowding, poor quality structures and inadequate facilities. Therefore, Pakistan’s housing problem is better understood as a combination of shortage, affordability and inadequate housing conditions, rather than merely the absence of houses.
The affordability dimension is particularly serious. The World Bank has described affordable and accessible housing as being in high demand in Pakistan and has supported programmes aimed at increasing affordable housing supply, improving land tenure and expanding mortgage access for lower income households. In 2022, it approved $435 million for three initiatives covering housing finance, urban land systems and affordable housing in Punjab.
Access to finance remains another structural weakness. World Bank figures have previously shown just how underdeveloped Pakistan’s mortgage market has been: in 2018, mortgage finance represented only 0.25 percent of GDP, compared with a South Asian average of 3.4 percent at the time. The institution also reported that nearly one third of Pakistan’s population did not own homes.
The consequences extend well beyond individual households. When formal housing is unaffordable or unavailable, urban growth can shift toward informal settlements and poorly serviced peripheral areas. Cities then face greater pressure on roads, public transport, water supply, sewerage, electricity, schools and healthcare. At the same time, uncontrolled outward expansion can consume valuable agricultural land and substantially increase the cost of providing urban infrastructure.
Pakistan therefore needs to treat housing as essential national infrastructure rather than simply a real estate commodity. Increasing the number of housing units alone will not solve the problem. New homes must be affordable, properly located, legally documented, connected to employment centres and supported by transport and municipal services.
A sustainable response requires better land use planning, digitised and reliable land records, stronger regulation of housing developments, expansion of long term housing finance and incentives for private developers to produce genuinely affordable units. Rental housing should also become an important part of national housing policy instead of measuring success exclusively through homeownership.
Pakistan’s housing challenge has developed over decades and cannot be solved through a single housing scheme. What is required is a consistent national strategy that connects housing, land, finance, transport and urban planning. Without such reform, population growth will continue to widen the gap between the homes Pakistanis need and the homes they can actually afford.

In Pakistan, owning a home is not merely a financial decision but a lifelong aspiration for millions of families. Some people purchase a five-marla plot through years of savings, others invest money earned through hard work abroad, and some even hand over their entire retirement savings to a housing scheme. The problem begins when, years later, it is discovered that the project in which the investment was made never had full approval from the relevant development authority.
This issue is no longer limited to a few questionable projects. According to reports surfaced in May 2026, the Planning Wing of the Capital Development Authority declared 99 housing and agro-farming projects in Zones III and IV of Islamabad as illegal or unauthorized, warning citizens against investing in them.
These figures raise a fundamental question: how do such a large number of projects reach the stage of collecting funds and running marketing campaigns?
According to the CDA, a formal legal framework exists for the planning and development of private housing and farm housing schemes in Islamabad, and the approval process consists of two stages. Simply purchasing land, presenting a map, or issuing an attractive advertisement does not prove that a project is fully approved.
This is precisely the distinction that ordinary buyers often overlook. Marketing campaigns showcase appealing visuals of gates, parks, mosques, schools, commercial areas, and wide roads. They also promise low prices, easy installments, and extraordinary future returns. Buyers purchase files, but rarely verify the legal status of the scheme, the extent of approved land, or whether the block in which they are being sold a plot is even part of an approved layout plan.
The Rawalpindi Development Authority also clearly advises citizens not to invest in illegal, fake, or unapproved housing societies. Interestingly and concerningly, the RDA has also urged people not to trust fake screenshots circulating on social media and to verify the status of any society directly through the official website.
The real issue is not only the existence of illegal projects but also a system in which an ordinary citizen can risk their life savings without fully understanding the legal status of a scheme.
For regulatory bodies as well, issuing notices alone is not enough. There must be an effective mechanism to stop the advertising, booking, and sale of plots or files in unapproved projects at an early stage. If a project raises large-scale funds from thousands of people through marketing without legal approval, later action cannot immediately return the lost capital to affected families.
The lesson for buyers is clear: in property investment, brochures, social media campaigns, celebrity endorsements, grand offices, or assurances from dealers should not be considered substitutes for legal approval. Verification of the NOC, approved layout plan, land ownership, and the legal status of the specific block must be obtained from the relevant development authority.
Pakistan’s real estate market needs investor confidence, but trust is not built on attractive advertisements alone. It requires transparent approvals, effective oversight, and a system in which an ordinary citizen does not have to choose between protecting their dream and safeguarding their life savings when setting out to buy a home.

Faisalabad remains one of the most important pillars of Pakistan’s industrial economy, but the growing overlap between its expanding residential areas and industrial units is emerging as a challenge that can no longer be viewed solely through the lens of environmental pollution. The issue now directly intersects with urban planning, land use, real estate, public health and the future direction of industrial development.
Recent figures from a survey conducted by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) underline the seriousness of the situation. A total of 782 industrial units are operating across 105 union councils of Faisalabad, providing employment to approximately 43,612 people. However, the more troubling finding is that 568 industrial units are located within just 0.5 kilometres of residential areas, while 441 units are operating either inside populated neighbourhoods or immediately adjacent to them.
This suggests that, in many parts of Faisalabad, the clear physical separation between industrial and residential land uses — a fundamental requirement of orderly and sustainable urban development — has effectively disappeared.
The problem extends beyond factory locations. According to the survey, major risks include emissions from industrial boilers, untreated wastewater, the use of hazardous chemicals and the close proximity of industrial activity to residential communities. Even more concerning is the finding that 734 industrial units are operating without the required No Objection Certificates from the EPA.
The situation raises a fundamental question: has Faisalabad’s urban expansion taken place under a coherent planning framework, or has the city simply allowed industries and residential neighbourhoods to grow around one another in an increasingly unregulated manner?
The district administration’s decision to jointly inspect 441 industrial units and take action against those found violating regulations is an important step. But shutting factories alone cannot provide a sustainable solution, particularly when thousands of families depend on these industries for their livelihoods.
What Faisalabad now needs is a comprehensive industrial relocation policy under which hazardous and non compliant industries are gradually shifted to properly planned industrial zones equipped with adequate infrastructure, wastewater treatment facilities, chemical safety systems, fire protection measures and transport connectivity.
The implications of such a transition could also be significant for Faisalabad’s real estate market.
If industrial units operating within or near residential neighbourhoods are relocated in a planned manner, substantial parcels of urban land could become available for redevelopment under appropriate planning and land-use regulations. These sites could potentially support new residential, commercial or mixed-use projects. Reduced industrial pollution and heavy traffic could also improve the liveability of surrounding neighbourhoods and may, over time, enhance property values.
However, there is also a risk. If land vacated by relocated industries is opened to unplanned commercialisation or high density construction without a comprehensive master plan, the city could end up replacing one urban problem with another.
The real choice before Faisalabad is not between industry and housing. It is about placing both in the right locations.
The city needs its industrial sector because it remains central to its economic strength and provides livelihoods to tens of thousands of people. At the same time, residents have an equally legitimate right to cleaner air, safer neighbourhoods and better urban infrastructure.
If the findings of the current survey are used not merely to issue notices and conduct inspections, but as the foundation for a broader review of Faisalabad’s land use policy and master planning framework, the present environmental challenge could also become an opportunity to reshape the city into a more organised, safer and more valuable urban real estate market.

Pakistan’s major cities are facing growing pressure from rapid population growth and urban expansion. In cities such as Lahore, Karachi, Islamabad, Rawalpindi and Peshawar, uncontrolled outward growth is no longer just a housing issue. It is increasingly affecting agricultural land, traffic congestion, basic infrastructure and overall urban planning.
Against this backdrop, vertical housing, including apartments and high-rise residential buildings, is increasingly being viewed as an important part of Pakistan’s future urban development. The key question, however, is whether the country is adequately prepared for such a transition.
Traditionally, home ownership in Pakistan has been associated with owning a separate plot and building an independent house. This preference has contributed to the continuous expansion of housing societies around major urban centres.
As cities have spread outward, distances between residential areas and workplaces have increased, placing additional pressure on roads and transport systems. At the same time, governments and developers have been required to extend water supply, sewerage, electricity and other essential services to increasingly distant settlements.
Vertical housing offers a potential alternative.
By accommodating more families on a smaller area of land, high-rise development can help reduce pressure on urban land. When supported by proper planning, it can also allow residents to live closer to schools, hospitals, commercial centres and public transport networks.
Vertical development could also help protect agricultural land and green belts from continuous urban encroachment.
However, the shift towards high-rise living in Pakistan comes with significant challenges.
One of the most important concerns is urban infrastructure. Constructing a tall residential building is not enough. Such developments require reliable water supply, sewerage systems, electricity, parking facilities, adequate road access, fire safety infrastructure and effective emergency response services.
If thousands of new residential units are added to an area already struggling with water shortages, traffic congestion and weak drainage systems, vertical development could intensify existing problems instead of solving them.
Another major concern is the enforcement of building codes and fire safety regulations.
High-rise residential buildings require properly designed emergency exits, fire escapes, sprinkler systems, firefighting equipment and evacuation plans. Regulations alone cannot ensure safety unless authorities consistently monitor and enforce compliance.
Investor and buyer confidence is another challenge.
Many people remain cautious about investing in under-construction apartment projects because of concerns over delays, regulatory approvals, construction quality and whether developers will deliver projects according to promised specifications.
Housing finance is equally important if apartment living is to become accessible to a broader segment of society.
If middle-income families cannot obtain long-term and affordable financing to purchase apartments, the construction of high-rise developments alone will not solve Pakistan’s housing affordability problem.
Pakistan does need greater vertical development, but simply constructing taller buildings should not be confused with effective urban planning.
Successful vertical housing requires an integrated approach in which residential development is planned alongside transport, water, sewerage, parking, environmental protection, fire safety and access to essential services.
If Pakistan wants to limit uncontrolled horizontal urban expansion, vertical housing can become an important part of the solution. But before building higher, the country must first raise the standard of its urban planning.