From nationalisation to Invest Bangladesh Authority: A journey of continuous change
But the story of Invest Bangladesh Authority goes back much further – to the early years of independent Bangladesh and the country’s evolving economic philosophy.
When Invest Bangladesh Authority formally began its journey today (23 August), unveiling its new logo on its first working day, it marked yet another major change in the way Bangladesh organises its investment machinery.
As reported by The Business Standard, the new authority has been formed by merging the Bangladesh Investment Development Authority (Bida), Bangladesh Economic Zones Authority (Beza) and Public-Private Partnership Authority (PPPA). The Invest Bangladesh Act, 2026 came into force through a gazette notification on 20 August, creating what the government describes as a single, coordinated platform for investors.
But the story of Invest Bangladesh Authority goes back much further – to the early years of independent Bangladesh and the country's evolving economic philosophy.
Keep updated, follow The Business Standard's Google news channel
From nationalisation to private investment
In the early years after independence, Bangladesh adopted a predominantly state-led economic model. In 1972, the government issued the Bangladesh Industrial Enterprises (Nationalisation) Order, bringing many industrial enterprises under state ownership and establishing corporations to control and supervise nationalised industries. However, the policy did not remain unchanged for long.
In January 1973, the country's first Industrial and Investment Policy allowed private investment in medium and small industries, with a ceiling of Tk25 lakh. It also provided a 10-year moratorium on nationalisation of such industries and allowed foreign investment in collaboration with the government.
The policy was subsequently liberalised. The ceiling on private investment was raised substantially in 1973 and again in the New Investment Policy of 1974, while greater scope was created for foreign participation. A World Bank historical review documents these changes, including the raising of the private investment ceiling to Tk3 crore in 1974.
Thus began one of the central themes of Bangladesh's economic history: the role of the state and the private sector kept changing.
The rise of investment promotion
As Bangladesh gradually opened more space for private enterprise, it needed institutions to facilitate investment. The Board of Investment (BoI) was established under the Board of Investment Act, 1989. The BoI became the government's principal institution for promoting and facilitating domestic and foreign investment. But another institutional process was taking place at the same time – the gradual withdrawal of the state from ownership of commercial enterprises.
From Disinvestment Board to Privatisation Commission
The government had already established a Disinvestment Board in 1974. The privatisation drive gathered momentum in the 1980s and especially in the 1990s.
In 1993, the government created the Privatisation Board to accelerate the transfer of state-owned enterprises to private ownership. In 2000, the Board was transformed into the Privatisation Commission.
This created two parallel institutions with increasingly related economic objectives: the BoI was supposed to bring in private and foreign investment, while the Privatisation Commission was supposed to move state-owned enterprises towards private ownership. Eventually, even that division was judged inefficient.
2016: BoI and Privatisation Commission become Bida
The government merged the Board of Investment and Privatisation Commission to create the Bida.
The Bida officially began its journey on 1 September 2016. BIDA's own historical record explicitly confirms that the authority was created through the merger of the two institutions.
But Bida did not absorb every investment-related institution. By then, Bangladesh's investment landscape had become much more complicated.
New institutions for a new economy
The Bangladesh Economic Zones Act, 2010 created the legal foundation for the Bangladesh Economic Zones Authority. Beza was given responsibility for establishing, licensing, operating, managing and controlling economic zones. Its objective was to accelerate industrialisation, employment, production and exports.
Separate institutional track emerged around infrastructure
The government issued its Policy and Strategy for Public-Private Partnership in 2010 and established the PPP Office in September 2010 under the Prime Minister's Office. The office was intended to act as a catalyst for identifying, developing and implementing PPP projects.
The Public-Private Partnership Act, 2015 then created the statutory framework for the PPP Authority, replacing the earlier PPP Office with a formal authority. The act explicitly linked PPPs with attracting domestic and foreign investment and developing infrastructure.
By the middle of the last decade, therefore, Bangladesh had several institutions dealing with different parts of the investment ecosystem: Bida for investment promotion and facilitation, Beza for economic zones and PPPA for public-private infrastructure.
2026: Three become one
A decade after Bida itself was created through a merger, the government has again opted for institutional consolidation. The Invest Bangladesh Bill, 2026 was passed by parliament in July, paving the way for the merger of Bida, Beza and PPPA. The stated objective was to reduce fragmentation and provide investors with a more integrated service platform. The new law subsequently came into force on 20 August.
The new authority is now expected to provide a single point of access covering investment promotion, registration, approvals, incentives, industrial zones and PPP-related services.
Is the journey over?
The history says something important. Invest Bangladesh Authority is not an isolated administrative decision. It is the latest product of more than five decades of economic and institutional change. The journey has moved from nationalisation to private investment, from disinvestment to privatisation, from investment promotion to investment development, and finally towards integrated investment facilitation.
And there is no reason to believe that this is the final institutional destination. Economic priorities change. Investment patterns change. Technology changes. Investors' expectations change. Government itself changes. That is why institutions created to serve one economic reality eventually have to be redesigned for another.
