nssd dialogues in partner countries

Annex 1. Terms of Reference for the Mid-term Review of the Pakistan National Conservation Strategy.

I. BACKGROUND

A 1998 review of strategies for sustainability carried out for the World Bank observed that national sustainable development strategies ‘are imperative in that they provide a framework for analysis and a focus for debate on sustainable development. In addition, they institutionalize processes for negotiation, mediation and consensus building, for issues, which are inherently conflictual. Furthermore, they facilitate planning and the implementation of action, which can change or strengthen values, knowledge, technologies and institutions with respect to priority issues. Strategies can assist countries [to] solve interrelated economic, social and environmental problems by developing their capacities to treat them in an integrated fashion... Cross-sectoral strategy initiatives...provide a foundation from which a national sustainable development strategy can be developed.’

The Pakistan National Conservation Strategy (NCS) situated Pakistan’s socio-economic development within the context of a national environmental plan. The NCS began with a two-year start-up phase, followed by three years of preparation, during which a strategy document was prepared, reviewed, revised and submitted to cabinet for approval. Pakistan’s NCS was approved by cabinet in March, 1992, and has been regarded as one of the largest and most comprehensive documents of its kind in the world. The authors and stakeholders of the document endeavored to make this the central document against which sustainable development in Pakistan would be measured. The main implementation phase was launched with a donor conference in January 1993, although some implementation began in 1991, with allocations in the federal budgets of 1991-2 and 1992-3.

The strategy has been commonly referred to as more than just a product, but a process based on a participatory methodology that had the net effect of creating an "environmental movement" within Pakistan, committed to implementing its goals and objectives. This development is key to the central tenet of the NCS, which postulates that documents and policies do not make change, only people do.

The NCS has three macro objectives.:

Conservation of natural resources;
Sustainable development; and
Improved efficiency in the use and management of these resources.

Achievement of these objectives is contingent on the viability of the three key operating principles: achieving greater partnership in development and management, merging environment and economics in decision-making; and focusing on durable improvements in the quality of life of Pakistanis.

The NCS contained three sections. The first, Pakistan and the Environment, addressed the global environmental context, Pakistan’s resources use and environmental impacts, and existing institutions and policies related to the environment.

After outlining the environmental problems and the means of mitigating them, the second part, Elements of the National Conservation Strategy, focuses on opportunities for improvement in the primary, secondary and tertiary sectors.

Part three, Implementation Arrangements, identified 14 core theme areas for priority implementation, along with the detailed commitment needed by government, NGOs and the private sector over ten years 1991-2001:

maintaining soils in croplands
increasing irrigation efficiency
protected watersheds
supporting forestry and plantations
restoring rangelands and improving livestock
protecting water bodies and sustaining fisheries
conserving biodiversity
increasing energy efficiency
developing and deploying renewables
preventing and abating pollution
managing urban waste
supporting institutions for common resources
integrating population and environment programs, and preserving the cultural heritage

From these core themes, 68 programs were identified. Each program was presented in detail with communication, extension, research and training components, as well as long-term goals, outputs, and the resource investments required. The NCS indicated how to integrate these programs into existing and proposed national, sectoral and subsidiary plans. It then proposed building institutions to support the action agenda and implementation plan, paying particular attention to federal-provincial leadership, increasing inter-agency cooperation, enhancing departmental capacities, improving district level coordination, involving the corporate sector, and cooperation with communities and NGOs. Community-based management is identified as the key means of meeting these commitments. The report called on government, NGOS and donors to support and nurture local participatory organizations for the management of common resources throughout the country.

The Pakistan NCS has been called ‘over-ambitious in scope’,, and early implementation plans were scaled down to more practical dimensions. Nevertheless, as one of the most comprehensive early National Conservation Strategies, it broke new ground as a planning document for the country’s future sustainable development, and became a model for other countries in South Asia.

An NCS Mid Term Review Committee, comprising The Environment Section of the Planning Commission, the NCS Unit of the Ministry of the Environment, IUCN and the Sustainable Development Policy Institute, has met during the second half of 1998 to develop terms of reference for the NCS Mid Term Review.

II. PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES OF THE MID TERM REVIEW

This section aims to answer the following questions:

Why? What is the review trying to achieve?
For whom? Who is going to use the results of this review?
What is going to be assessed?

In order to articulate a purpose, the important considerations were: do we want to generate a rationale that the context and circumstances have changed so much that we need another NCS -- OR do we want to refocus and reprioritize our sustainable development process in a more effective direction -- OR do we want it to act as a signpost that warns our implementing and supporting institutions about the major gaps and shortfalls in our approaches.

Purpose

Keeping in view the time and magnitude of effort that went into the development process of current NCS, the NCS Mark 2 seems to be an unrealistic and untimely endeavour. Hence a more appropriate target that can be achieved through this exercise would be:

The NCS MTR will enable the stakeholders (government, civil society and supporting institutions) to take stock of the current situation and take necessary steps for mid-course correction

Specific Objectives

To assess the progress achieved since the adoption of the NCS, taking into account all the influential factors.
To analyse and collate lessons learned so far, draw conclusions and formulate recommendations regarding adjustments of NCS as a holistic and integrated strategic guideline for sustainable development in Pakistan.

Objective No. 1: This would entail: achievements with regard to the core programme areas; institutional development; capacity development; legal framework development; policy development; (financial instruments, fiscal incentives, monetary and credit policy links, sustainable trade policy). The above will be approached through an assessment of public sector programmes, donor funded programmes and projects and initiatives undertaken by NGOs and private sector organizations.

Objective No. 2: It clearly suggests that the MTR should be seen as a forward-looking study. In examining the achievements and problems of the past, it should point clearly towards the future in its recommendations. It should offer clear direction on the following questions:

to what extent should the NCS be reformulated, refocused or rewritten to take into account new developments and changes in the context?
what should be the future role of supporting institutions, including national and provincial governments, donors, NGOs and others?

In the above context some key questions have been identified by the PEP Steering Committee for MTR. These will be widely circulated in order to seek comments from as many stakeholders as possible.

III. METHODOLOGY

For a meaningful review of the NCS, following tasks are envisaged:

AGREE ON AN ANALYTICAL FRAMEWORK for COVERING CONSERVATION AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT PROCESSES AND OUTCOMES – both to encompass the many dimensions of sustainable development, and to provide a rigorous ‘filing system’ for the varied findings on NCS progress, which will be evident at many levels such as inputs made into and outputs achieved from NCS implementation. In addition, to assess whether sustainable development is being achieved, we need to assess the actual outcomes (or impacts) of the activities. Or, if impacts are not yet evident (many will take time to appear), we need to assess the quality of the various processes that help to make the transition to satisfactory outcomes. If we can assess both of these so much the better.
FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSIONS ON THE CHANGING CONTEXT, AND ON PROGRESS AND NEW PRIORITIES IN ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT – issues not really covered by the NCS - globalisation of markets, new international obligations, etc. We need many perspectives on this, to regroup the priorities. Furthermore, a contextual discussion will help to focus and revise the sustainable development analytical framework; and it will reveal people who have useful information, for later detailed interviews, etc.
REVIEW DEVELOPMENT OF THE MAIN INSTITUTIONS PROPOSED BY THE NCS – the institutions provide the only continuity and ‘glue’ for the NCS. Their work defines, de facto, how the NCS is evolving. A lot has been achieved in setting new institutions up, and it is time to take stock of how they are working - individually and together. Furthermore, each institution is facing constraints, which need to be identified and removed for further progress.
REVIEW PROVINCIAL AND DISTRICT STRATEGIES – Such a review should also be a helpful exercise for people involved in the provincial strategies, giving them both a chance to reflect on their own strategies, and to feed back to the NCS.
REVIEW LEGISLATION / POLICY CHNAGES PERTAINING TO NCS – legislative and/or policy changes and amendments as required for the implementation agenda of the NCS is due consideration here.
REVIEW MASS AWARENESS ON ENVIRONMENTAL/CONSERVATION ISSUES – the NCS advocates access to information on environmental and conservation issues in order to ensure NCS implementation in a holistic fashion.
REVIEW FINANCIAL ADJUSTMENTS PERTAINING TO THE NCS – reflect on the resource allocation and funding allotted by external concessional lending, domestic resource mobilisation, and private investments for NCS implementation.

CREATE A DATABASE OF ALL PROJECTS RELATED TO THE NCS - Such a database would reveal the changing ‘shape’ of government/donor commitment and investment in different types of SD activities. Seeing the ‘big picture’ may reveal the real-life priorities, which can then be compared to the NCS’s goals and assumptions.
REVIEW PROGRESS AND IMPACTS OF A SAMPLE OF NCS PROJECTS - Identifying projects which have been successful will reveal what processes are helpful for them (those processes connected to NCS, and other processes that might need to be accommodated by it). Finally, the involvement of PEP personnel in project reviews will give them useful feedback on the actual outcomes of projects and the effective processes that contributed.
REVIEW THE OVERALL NCS PROCESS AND ITS MANAGEMENT - This should help future promotion of the NCS. It is obviously also needed for adjustment of the whole process in the second half of the NCS term.
PRODUCE A DRAFT SYNTHESIS REPORT, SUMMARISING FINDINGS AND WAYS FORWARD - to bring together all the evidence in a form, which enables debate on findings, recommendations and next steps.
DEBATE MTR FINDINGS AND PROPOSED WAYS FORWARD - the results of the MTR must be widely ‘owned’ if people are to act on them. Up to this point, there will have been much discussion with individuals and focus groups. Now the ideas need to be put to those at the ‘centre’ of the NCS - the PEP partners, and especially the NCS Unit, and others - including a multi-stakeholder workshop.
PRODUCE AND DISSEMINATE FINAL NCS-MTR REPORT - to summarise the changed contexts and challenges, to communicate findings and any agreed adjustments to NCS to all NCS stakeholders and to act as a basis for funding discussions with donors.

IV. RESPONSIBILITIES AND COMPOSITION OF THE EXTERNAL MTR TEAM

A four-person team will carry out the external review mission. If possible, the Team Leader should be identified early in Phase I and should be involved in designing the data-gathering exercise. It is envisaged that the team should include at least one senior Pakistani in addition to senior international consultants.

The External Review Team will prepare a draft final report of the MTR and present it to a multisectoral workshop. Based on comments received at the workshop, a final report of the MTR will be submitted to the Ministry of Environment for wider circulation to stakeholders and further action.

The ERT will conduct its work from a combination of materials prepared in advance by the NCS MTR Team, from interviews and field visits in various areas of Pakistan, from review of documents of the NCS and other development efforts in Pakistan, through limited comparisons with ‘best-practice’ strategies in other countries, and from the individual experience of the ERT members. Background work and responses regarding the design and preliminary products arising from the advance work commissioned through IUCN-Pakistan will take place in the months prior to the ERT meetings. Team activities within Pakistan are scheduled for a three-week period during March - April 2000. It is anticipated that the final report will be produced by mid of April 2000.

V. TIME PERIOD

It is envisaged that the overall MTR will take approximately 10 – 12 months starting from May 1999.

Annex 2. Pakistan National Conservation Strategy Mid Term Review – External Review Team Members

Arthur John Hanson (Team Leader)

Dr. Hanson is presently Distinguished Fellow and Senior Scientist at the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) in Winnipeg, Canada. He is a member of Canada’s National Round Table on Environment and Economy which advises the Prime Minister, the Canada Foundation for Innovation and the Canadian Bitechnology Advosiry Council which advises seven federal ministers. He is a member of the China Council for International Cooperation on Environment and Development. Dr. Hanson is member of the board for the Great Plains Institute in Minneapolis. Between 1992 to 1998, Dr. Hanson served as the CEO and Member of the Board for IISD. Prior to that he was Professor of Environmental Studies at Dalhousie University, Canada and from 1978 to 1987 he served as the Director of the School for Resource and Environmental Studies at the same university.

He has extensive experience with international agencies, including the World Bank, UNDP and the Canadian International Development Agency. He has initiated a number of major capacity building and research activities in Asia, North America and globally. Dr. Hanson has particular expertise in Southeast Asia, where he lived for a number of years working with the Ford Foundation.

His academic training is in ecology and natural resource management, with a PhD from the School for Natural Resources at the University of Michigan, and other degrees from the University of British Columbia. He is currently working on how nations affected by convergent economic and environmental crises can secure pathways for sustainable development.

Stephen Michael John Bass

Stephen Bass is an environmental planner and forester with 15 years of international experience, principally in Western Asia, Europe, the Caribbean and Southern Africa. He has served as the Director of the Forestry and Land Use Programme of the International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED) for the past 6 years. Prior to that he was the Associate Director for the same programme at IIED. He has also served as the projects manager for Southern Africa and the Caribbean with IUCN (The World Conservation Union) in Zimbabwe and consulted for the Conservation for Development Centre of IUCN in Zimbabwe, Pakistan and Switzerland. He has provided principal input to national conservation strategies for the three countries.

Stephen Bass has specialized in the development, implementation and monitoring of natural resource and forest policy, in particular national conservation strategies and forest monitoring systems including certification.

His experience in Pakistan has also been along the same lines. He has carried out natural resources monitoring for the Joint Donors for AKRSP in Pakistan. He has conducted field analysis and design for the forestry component of the AKRSP in Northern Areas and other forestry projects in Baluchistan and Karachi with IUCN.

Ghulam M. Samdani

Dr. Samdani recently retired from the Government of Pakistan. His last posting was Secretary, Ministry of Population Welfare. He has been extensively involved with the formulation and implementation of population policy of the government of Pakistan. He has served as Secretary for the Ministry of Environment. In addition to these roles, Dr. Samdani has supervised liaison with multilateral and bilateral donors on behalf of the government. He also has served as Chairman for the Agricultural Prices Commission. His extensive tenure within the government has been one of great resilience and buoyancy. Dr. Samdani’s multi-sectoral background on policy and implementation work is evident in his understanding of the government’s operating procedures and priority setting.

Dr. Samdani holds a Doctorate in Urban and Regional Planning. He specialized in Human Settlements. He has also served as teaching assistant and research associate at Cornell University. He has carried out advisory work for the UN Centre for Housing in New York and the UN Centre for Human Settlements. In addition, Dr. Samdani has also worked with HABITAT and ESCAP for their human settlement and environment programmes.

Aziz Bouzaher

Dr. Bouzaher is currently working as a Senior Environment/Natural Resource Economist and Team Leader for Pakistan/Afghanistan, Nepal and Bhutan Environment with the World Bank in Washington D.C. Before this he worked as Environment and Resource Economist for Europe and Central Asia, Middle East and North Africa Regions for Bank. He has been the Head of the Project Preparation Unit (Mediterranean Environmental Technical Assistance Programme) for the Bank in Cairo Egypt. His experience in the Bank covers both "brown" and "green" environmental issues, as well as policy and institutional development issues, with extensive involvement in natural resource management and agriculture.

Prior to his assignment with the World Bank, his work focused on environmental economics. Mr Bouzaher was an Assistant Professor, Agricultural and Resource Economics at the University of Illinois during 1984-1988. Between 1988 to 1990 he served as a Senior Advisor to the Algerian Government and a lecturer at the University of Algiers teaching Engineering Economics. He was Senior Researcher and Visiting Associate Professor at the Center for Agricultural and Rural Development for Iowa State University in USA between 1990-1992 and later he joined as Director, Resource and Environmental Policy Division at the same institution.

With a doctorate in Operations Research and Economics from Georgia Tech in Atlanta Georgia USA, Mr. Bouzaher’s work experience has familiarized him with social and economic environments in many countries of North Africa, the Middle East, Europe and Central Asia, South and East Asia. He holds numerous publications to his credit in the field of ecological-economic studies.

Annex 3.
Analytical Framework for MTR Assessment
as Proposed by MTR Committee.

Key Outcomes Core Processes/Systems	Ecological processes and natural resources conserved (Soil, Forests, Watershed and Water bodies)	Biological diversity conserved	Resource product-ivity maintained (rangeland, live stock and fisheries)	Resource quantity, and efficiency maintained (energy, irrigation, renewable)	Pollution controlled (pollution abatement and urban waste manage-ment)	Integrated population and environ-ment programs	Culture conserved
Improving awareness /education /advocacy/knowledge management for C/SD
Supportive legislation
Institutional strengthening (good governance)
Economic resourcing/ guarantees
Improving participation in C/SD debate/action
Improving research /analysis/ monitoring and learning on C/SD
Capacity building technology and resilience
Gender equity incorporated where needed
‘Mainstreaming’ NCS into sector policies, plans and budgets
Ensuring coherence and coordination between sectors/ agencies/ departments and actors
Empowerment where it is needed

Annex 4.
Key Activities and Commissioned Studies for the NCS MTR.

Developing the focus, scope and methodological framework of NCS MTR was a task that needed careful thinking. In May 1999, at the beginning of NCS MTR, the foremost step was to revise the TORs in order to define the purpose, scope and expected outcomes of this exercise (Annex 1).

The next step was to develop a methodological framework for collection of information. The methodological framework evolved over a period of 4 months assisted by Dr. Stephen Bass, who joined the MTR team at NCS Unit for a brief duration of 3 days. During this time, a task list was identified for taking the MTR process forward. In addition, an analytical framework was developed that served as a springboard for information collection. The following tasks were identified to make NCS MTR a viable exercise.

Agree on an analytical framework on sustainable development, for use throughout Review
Focus group discussions on the changing context
Review development of institutions proposed by the NCS (Secondary review)
Review the progress of provincial and district strategies
Create a database of all projects relating to the NCS
Review a sample of these projects
In light of the above, review the overall NCS process and its management
Produce a draft synthesis report, summarising findings and recommendations
Multi-stakeholder debate on findings and ways forward
Produce and disseminate final report.

The first five were to be carried out by the internal MTR Team as phase one of the exercise. While the last five tasks were to be handled by the external review team in addition to review and verification of the information collected during phase one of NCS MTR. The external review team, in order to verify the collected information, was also envisaged to hold meetings with key actors and visit field projects across Pakistan.

The task list for information collection went through further refinement in that it was decided that there would be nine background studies feeding into the final review report. These nine studies constitute the main dossier for the external review team. A significant development took place in December 1999 when UNDP extended its collaboration to MTR process. Subsequently it was decided that two out of the nine background studies would be managed by UNDP.

The nine studies are listed below:

A Report on Public Consultations at Federal and Provincial Levels – Prepared by the NCS Unit MELGRD.
A Database on Public Sector Investments in the Core Areas of NCS 1992/93 – 1999/2000 – Prepared by the NCS Unit MELGRD.
Environmental Strategy Background Report – Prepared by Dr. Tariq Banuri and Dr. Shaheen Rafi Khan, SDPI, through the World Bank.
Mid Term Review of National Conservation Strategy – Environmental Legislation – Prepared by Hagler Bailly Pakistan.
Institutional Development For NCS Implementation – Prepared by Dr. Aamir Matin and Mr. Aqil Shah, Sub Regional Resource Facility, UNDP Islamabad.
A Review of Provincial and District Conservation Strategies – Prepared by Mr. Haroon Ayub Khan.
The Mid Term Review of National Conservation Strategy – Mass Awareness Initiatives – Prepared by Hagler Bailly Pakistan.
A Study of The Contribution of The Private Sector and Non-Governmental Organizations Towards The Implementation of The Pakistan National Conservation Strategy – Prepared by Arshad Zaman Associates [Annexes for this study are separately compiled and are available with the MTR Coordinator].
A Study of Resourcing For National Conservation Strategy Implementation – Currently being prepared by Mr. Akhtar A Hai, Applied Economic Research Centre, University of Karachi, through UNDP.

In addition to the above studies, each PEP partner prepared a working paper that highlights their respective contribution to NCS implementation. These working papers were submitted to the external review team.

The information collection phase continued over a period of twelve months: May 1999 to April 2000.

The external review took place from March 13 to April 16, 2000 with the write-up completed during May and June.

ANNEX 5. List of Persons Consulted by NCS MTR (ERT)

Mr. Omar Asghar Khan Minister of Environment, Local Government and Rural Development UBL Building, Jinnah Avenue Islamabad

Mr. Rana Rafiq Ahmed Inspector General Forests Ministry of Environment, Local Government and Rural Development UBL Building, Jinnah Avenue, Islamabad

Dr. Mushtaq Ahmed Environment Section P&D Division Islamabad

Ms. Razina Bilgrami Manager GEF UNDP Saudi Pak Tower Islamabad

Mr. Aart van der Horst First Secretary (Rural Devp) Royal Netherlands Embassy Islamabad

Mr. Chaudhry Inayat Ullah Sustainable Development Advisor UNDP Saudi Pak Tower Islamabad

Mr. Naseer Ahmed, Joint Secretary (NCS), M/o ELG&RD, UBL Building, Jinnah Avenue, Islamabad

Mr. Mahboob Elahi Director General (Environment), M/o ELG&RD, Islamabad

Mr. Asif Shuja Khan Director General, Pakistan Environmental Protection Agency, Islamabad

Mr. Shafqat Ezdi Shah Secretary, M/o ELG&RD, UBL Building Jinnah Avenue, Islamabad

Mr. Onder Yucer, Mr. Chaudhry Anayatullah, UNDP Islamabad

Ms. Sabira N. Qureshi PEP Gender Consultant, Islamabad

Dr. Shahrukh Rafi Khan Executive Director, SDPI Islamabad

Mr. Ruedi Hager Resident Coordinator, SDC, Islamabad

Mr. Syed Asad Sibtain Deputy Secretary (NCS Unit), M/o ELG&RD, Islamabad

Mr. Zafarullah Khan Secretary, M/o Water & Power, "A" Block, Pak Secretariat, Islamabad

Mr. Justice Faqir M. Khokhar Secretary, Room 308, "S" Block, Ministry of Law, Justice & Human Rights, Pak Secretariat, Islamabad

Mr. Malik Saeed Khan Member, Room 216, 2^nd Floor, "P" Block, Planning Commission, Islamabad

Mr. Muerz, Councillor (Economic Affairs), Embassy of Germany, Islamabad

Mr. Muhammad Arshad Gill, Advisor (NORAD), Royal Norwegian Embassy, Islamabad

Mr. Watanave First Secretary, Embassy of Japan, Diplomatic Enclave, Islamabad

Mr. Ali Akbar, Chief Executive, SPO Islamabad

Mr. Jamie Banks Second Secretary (Devp.), British High Commission, Islamabad.

Mr. Victor Carvell Counsellor, Canadian High Commission, Islamabad.

Mr. Louis L. Bono, Economic Officer, US Embassy, Islamabad

Mr. Musharraf Rasool GoNWF Peshwar

Mr. Masood ul Mulk Chief Economist, PE&D Department Peshwar

Mr. Philippe Zahner Team Leader SDC, Peshwar

Mr. Afzal Latif Director BADP Peshawar

Mr. Mustafa Aziz Executive Director FRC Peshawar

Mr. Shuja SPCS Peshawar

Mr. Sethi SPCS Peshawar

Mr. Iftikhar Malik SPCS Peshawar

Mr. Arshad Samad Khan SPCS Peshawar

Dr. G. M. Khattak 45 D1, Phase I, Hayatabad Peshawar

Mr. Bashir Ahmed Khan Director KARI Juglote, Gilgit

Mr. Stephen Rasmmussen General Manager AKRSP Baber Road, Gilgit

Mr. Pervaiz Ahmed Manager Social Devp / Training AKRSP, Gilgit

Mr. Safdar Parvez Programme Manager AKRSP, Gilgit

Mr. Anwar Ali Khan Coordinator Forestry AKRSP, Gilgit

Mr. Irshad Khan Abbasi Project Manager / Head NAs Gilgit Conservation Center NLI Colony, Near Imamia Eid Gah, Shahrae Quaid-e-Azam, Jutial, Gilgit

Mr. Shams ul Haq Memon Secretary Forest, Wildlife & Environment Sindh Secretariat Barrack No. 10, Frere Road, Karachi

Mr. Mehboob Alam Ansari Wild Life Conservator Karachi

Mr. Shahid lutfi EPA Sindh Karachi

Mr. Umar Khan District Administrator West Karachi

Mr. Alauddin Orangi Welfare Project Karachi

Dr. M. Ishaq Mirza SUPARCO Karachi

Dr. Syed Ali Ghalib

Zoological Survey, Karachi

Dr. Shahid Amjad NIO, Karachi

Dr. Quddosi Kazmi Marine Reference Collection Centre Karachi University, Karachi

Mr. Azharuudin Khan ETPI, Karachi

Mr. Shahzeb / Ms. Rafia Haider FEJP, Karachi

Mr. Younas Bandhani Bahnn Beli, Karachi

Ms. Meher Marker Nosherwani Shirkat Gah, Karachi

Ms. Anisa Mumtaz St. Patrick College, Karachi

Mr. Qazi Faez Isa SHEHRI, Karachi

Dr. Saleem Akhter PELA, Karachi

Dr. Qadeer Baig NGORC, Karachi

Mr. Shams Kassim Lakha AKU, Karchi

Dr. Robert Baaker IED – Institute or Educational Development, Karachi

Ms. Seema Malik TRC, Karachi

Prof. Atta ur Rehman HEJ, Karachi

Dr. EjazWWF, Karachi

Dr. Tanveer Arif SCOPE, Karachi

Mr. Karamat Ali PILER, Karachi

Mr. Mohammad Ali Fisher Folk Forum, Karachi

Mr. Zafarullah Khan ENGRO, Karachi

Dr. Samiuzaman FPCCI, Karachi

Mr. Mirza Arshad Baig Pakistan Environment Assessment Association, Karachi

Ms. Nargis Alavi IUCN Karachi

Ms. Dhunmai Cowasji IUCN Karachi

Mr. Ali Raza Rizvi IUCN Karachi

Mr. Umar Afridi IUCN Karachi

Ms. Shireen IUCN Karachi

Mr. Iqbal Hussain Zaidi, Chief of Environment Section, P&D Sindh, Tughlaq House, Karachi

Mr. Muhammad Sharif

Secretary Education, M/o Education, Tughlaq House, Karachi.

Mr. Safdar Javed Syed, Secretary, Environment Protection Department, Lahore

Mr. A. R Siddiqi Manager Kasur Project Kasur

Mr. Ali H. Habib, WWF, Lahore

Mr. Suleman Ghani, Secretary, Irrigation and Power, Government of Punjab, Lahore,

Mr. Muhammad Afzal Chaudhry Conservator Forests, Government Punjab, Lahore,

Mr. Malik Sadiq Senior Chief, P&D Department, Govt. of Punjab, Lahore

Ms. Shaista Khalid, Community Support concerns Lahore

Ms. Surayya Jabeen Family Planning Association of Pakistan Lahore

Ms. Furkhunda Tabassum Health Education and Literacy Lahore

Mr. Abbas Rashid, Society for Advancement of Education, Lahore

Ms. Arifa Subuhi, Administrator Lahore Municipal Corporation, Lahore

Dr. Asif Hussain, Director Environment P & D Development Department, EPA, Muzafarabad, AJK

Mr. Chaudhry Niaz Ahmed Chief Conservator Forestors AJK Muzzafarabad, AJK

Mr. Sardar M. Latif Khan Secretary, M/o Communication & Works, Govt. of AJK, Muzaffarabad,

Mr. Sardar Riaz Ahmed Khan, Secretary, M/o Industries & Commerce Deptt. Govt. of AJK, Muzaffarabad,

Mr. Chaudhry Muhammad Saddique, Secretary, Forest, Fisheries Wildlife & Tourism, Govt. of AJK, Muzaffarabad.

Mr. Shaukat Jan Director General, Wildlife & Tourism, Govt. of AJK, Muzaffarabad,

Mr. Sardar M. Abdul Rashid Khan, Additional Chief Secretary (Devp), Govt. of AJK, Muzaffarabad,

Mr. M. Ali-ul-Hasnain Fatimi Managing Director, AKLASC, Govt. of ADJK, Muzaffarabad

Ch. Saddaqat Ali, Secretary,Agriculture & Lives Stock, Govt. of AJK, Muzaffarabad

Mr. Mir Mohammad Ejaz, Conservator Officer, WWF, H D-161, Chattar Housing Society, Upper Chattar, Muzaffarabad

Mr. Shakil Durrani, Chief Secretary, Govt. of AJK, Muzaffarabad

Dr. Raja M. Arif, Secretary, Population, Cooperatives Social Welfare Department, Govt. of AJK, Muzaffarabad

Mr. Hafiz-ur-Rehman Sheikh Secretary, Environment & Presidential Affairs, Govt. of AJK, Muzaffarabad

Mr. Sheikh Qayyum, Ex-DG Tourism & Arch. Govt. of AJK, Muzaffarabad

Dr. M. Saleem, Range Land Advisor, UNDP - ADP Sariab Road, Quetta

Dr. Syed Bashir Hussain Shah, UNDP-ADP, Sariab Road, Quetta

Mr. M. Yousaf Chaudhri Programme Coordinator, UNDP-ADP Sariab Road, Quetta

Mr. Iqbal Qadwai, Community Field Operation Coordinator, UNDP-ADP Sariab Road, Quetta

Dr. Bashir Hussain Shah, Watershed Management Advisor UNDP-ADP Sariab Road, Quetta

Dr. Mohammad Saleem Range Ecology Advisor UNDP-ADP Sariab Road, Quetta

Mr. Mohammad Ria, GIS Specialist, UNDP-ADP Sariab Road, Quetta

Dr. Shaheena Waheed, Gender & Development Advisor UNDP-ADP Sariab Road, Quetta

Mr. Abdul Rauf Kasi, Director General EPA, Balochistan

Mr. Rashid Javed Director General Livestock Department GoBalochistan Quetta

Mr. Irfan Ahmed Kasi Director General QDA, GoB Quetta

Mr. Amjad Durrani, General Manager BDA GoB, Quetta

Mr. Arif Masood Ansari Director Planning, Agriculture Department GoB, Quetta

Mr. Javed Bashir Director Fisheries Department GoB, Quetta

Mr. Zafar ur Rehman Deputy Director, Industries Department GoB, Quetta

Mr. Manzoor Ahmed Conservator Forest Department GoB, Quetta

Mr. Mohammad Yousef, DFO Wildlife GoB, Quetta

Mr. Mohammad Ali Batur Research Assistant, EPA GoB, Quetta

Mr. Wazir Ahmed Jogazai Minister Environment, Forest, Wildlife, Food, Agriculture & Cooperative Department GoB, Quetta

Mr. Ghulam Rasool Hasni Secretary Environment, Forest, and Wildlife Department GoB, Quetta

Mr. Sardar Naseem Tareen President STEP Quetta

Mr. Kamal Hassan Siddiqui Member BCC&I Quetta

Dr. Shahida Jaffery, Chief Executive BRSP Quetta

Ms. Sajida Qureshi Principal Women Technical Training Centre Quetta

Mr. Asghar Ali Subject Specialist Bureau of Curriculum Education Department Quetta

Ms. Mudasar Israr Head of Botany Department, University of Balochistan Quetta

Mr. Tauseef Ahmed, Economic Department University of Balochistan Quetta

MR. Ahmed Bakhsh Lehri, Additional Chief Secretary (Development) Quetta

Syed Saleem Chishti, Secretary P&DD, Quetta

Mr. Haji M. Rashid, Chief Economist, P&DD Quetta

Mr. Muhammad Azam Kasi, Chief of Section (Environment) Quetta

Ms. Aban Marker Kabraji, IUCN Regional Director Asia, Karachi Office

Mr. Muhammad Rafiq, IUCN Pakistan Country Representative, Karachi

Mr. Abdul Latif Rao Head, IUCN Balochistan Office, Quetta

Mr. Gul Najam Jamy Head, Sarhad Office, Peshawar

Dr. Ahsan Ullah Mir Head, Gilgit Office

Mr. Jullian T. Inglis PTA NACS, Gilgit

Hamid Raza Afridi Programme Coordinator IUCN – Islamabad Office

Mr. Aljoscha Glokler,Rural Socialogist MACP – NAs Gilgit Office

Ms. Ajeeba Khatoon Communication Coordinator NACS Support Project – NAs

Mr. Faiz Ali Biodiversity Specialist IUCN – Gilgit (NA)

Mr. Ata ud Din Social Organizer IUCN – MACP NA’s Office, Gilgit

Ms. Tahira Syed PEP Gender Coordinator IUCN – Islamabad

Ms. Musarrat Bashir Deputy PEP Manager IUCN – Islamabad Office

Annex 7.
Achievement of NCS Outputs by 2001.
(Based on Tables 10.1 to 10.14 in NCS Chapter 10,
as judged qualitatively by ERT.)

A. Summary by Core Area - Progress in achieving NCS outputs anticipated by 2001.

NCS CORE AREAS	ACHIEVED	PROGRESS	UNCERTAIN	NO/LITTLE PROGRESS	NUMBER OF OUTPUTS ASSESSED
1 Soil		1		6	7
2 Irrigation		3	1		4
3 Watersheds		2			2
4 Forests		3			3
5 Rangelands		2		2	4
6 Water/Fish		2		2	4
7 Biodiversity		7	1	2	10
8 Energy Effic		2	1	2	5
9 Renewables		2		3	5
10 Pollution	1			6	7
11 Waste				4	4
12 Commons	1				1
13 Population	1			1	2
14 Heritage		1		1	2
TOTALS	3	25	3	29	60

B. Outcomes as listed in the 1992 NCS, with assessment assigned by ERT. Where appropriate some categories have been clustered, as indicated by numbers).

MAINTAINING SOILS IN CROPLANDS

All cultivated soil protected/drained by field border trees @25 trees/ha; at 25% of cultivable waste (2.93 mha) upgraded by plant cover, with regional variations recognizing differences in water availability. NO

2 mha of sodic soils improved with gypsum applications. NO

(1) Through organic manure application, soils with > 1.2% organic matter to spread from 4% to 20%; another 50% to have >0.8% organic matter content. (2) Improved organic matter content of about 20% of cropland by direct and indirect return of residues. NO

1 mha of moderate and severely saline tracts brought under plant cover in different regions of the country (including halophyte plantations). NO

Increased biological nitrogen fixation in priority areas (e.g. sandy soils); about 15-20% of cropland. NO

25% of barani croplands with effective soil conservation coverage. NO

Partial physical drainage in schemes with least downstream environmental impact. PROGRESS

INCREASING IRRIGATION EFFICIENCY

(1) Financially feasible reduction of losses in 35,800 km of canal system, with priority to reduction in saline groundwater (SGW) zones. (2) Economically feasible reduction of losses in selected distributaries. PROGRESS

Economically and organizationally feasible reduction of losses in 39,000 water courses with priority to those in SGW zones. PROGRESS

Increase in the water reaching the root zone of crops in 60,000 + hectares. UNCERTAIN

Financially and organizationally feasible improvement in water harvesting in selected torrent-irrigated areas. PROGRESS

PROTECTING WATERSHEDS

Protection, management and maintenance of the priority water sheds in active monsoon area most prone to surface erosion and silt production; 10% of total watershed area or more specifically 33% of Mangla and Tarbela watersheds. PROGRESS

Organized communities in 10% of upland watershed villages. PROGRESS

SUPPORTING FORESTRY AND PLANTATIONS

(1) Intensive management of 0.1 mha of high hill closed forests by departments; improved management of priority watershed, riverine, and mangrove forests. (2) Trees planned on 50,000 ha marginal agriculture lands by private owners; improved management of all plantations. (3) 220,000 ha of community land afforested, and 100,000 ha regenerated, being the best 2% of poor forest and rangeland. PROGRESS

(1) An average of 5 fruit and shade trees in and outside courtyards of projected 25 million dwelling units in 2001. (2) An additional 25% of the 200,000 km of canals and roadsides planted; the maintenance of present 36,000 km, and new avenue plantations. (3) Urban plantations in open spaces and along main roads, where and to extend possible, maintained by urban governments and local authorities. PROGRESS

Field border trees in cultivated land, on cultivable waste, and as part of the watershed programme (see boxes 10.1 and 10.3 in NCS) PROGRESS

RESTORING RANGELANDS AND IMPROVING LIVESTOCK QUALITY

A 25-30% increase in rangeland productivity from the current 25m tonnes TDN/annum. NO

Selective stabilization of dunes adjacent to water supply channels and major highways. PROGRESS

30% of the non-descript cattle population (75% of total) converted to fewer numbers of crossbreeds. NO

15% increase in feed per animal; more stall feeding in fragile mountain areas, to ease grazing pressure. PROGRESS

PROTECTING WATER BODIES AND SUSTAINING FISHERIES

Reduced pressure on the mangroves from control of harvesting, clear felling, and pollution. PROGRESS

Sustainable harvesting of marine capture fisheries. NO

(1) 12,000 ha of watershed under fish farming and 6,000 ha under fish ponds, up from 5,000 ha under both in 1990. (2) Improved pen fish culture in 5,700 ha of small reservoirs. PROGRESS

Significant deployment of integrated pest management as an alternate to exclusive use of chemical pesticides. NO

CONSERVING BIODIVERSITY

15 national parks. PROGRESS

5 new wetland reserves. PROGRESS

15 national parks and 5 wetlands of international importance with management plans. PROGRESS

Proper maintenance of 5 existing priority parks and improved maintenance of other existing and new parks. NO

Management plans and proper maintenance of 20 representative sanctuaries (at least 3 in each zone); improved maintenance of 20 others; basic patrol of rest. NO

20 community game reserves (at least 3 in each of 6 zones). PROGRESS

20 private game breeding farms (at least 3 in each of 6 zones) with attendant benefits of resulting legitimate trade. UNCERTAIN

Substantial headway in saving 5 priority species from extinction. PROGRESS

Functional institutions in these areas. PROGRESS

First listing of data base completed and preservation programme for priority germplasm and medicinal plants instituted. PROGRESS

INCREASING ENERGY EFFICIENCY

Revenues from 425 MW supply by reducing transmission and distribution losses from 24.6% in 1986-87 to 15% by 2000. UNCERTAIN

9.1 MTOE through 10% energy savings by conservation in large industry sector. NO

0.352 MTOE savings per annum in other industry, construction, domestic sectors. NO

25-40% fuel saving for 1.2 m households. PROGRESS

Up to 500 MW additional cogenerated energy. PROGRESS

DEVELOPING AND DEPLOYING RENEWABLES

(1) Energy needs of 600,000 households met from biogas plants. (2) 18 MW equivalent from open-core gasifiers and solid-state fermentation units, serving 50,000 households. PROGRESS

115,000 direct solar cookers; 30,000 solar water heaters installed in households. PROGRESS

5 MW from windmill pumps for lifting water and for energy supply to households and small industry in deserts. NO

25 MW from woodfuel-based plantations for local electricity supply. NO

Additional 40 MW from micro and mini-hydel generation. PROGRESS

PREVENTING/ABATING POLLUTION

A shift of about 10% in the composition of forthcoming industry towards innocuous, inert, biodegradable, or non-toxic processes, wastes, and products, which in addition either use the wastes of another industry, support on environmentally benign practice, contribute to energy conservation, make pollution abatement equipment, or substitute a safe process for an environmentally degrading one. NO

Post-1991 large industry in the most, moderately, and potentially hazardous categories in compliance with EPA standards by incorporating pollution abatement technologies. NO

Around 750 most hazardous, 1,250 moderately hazardous, and 2,500 potentially hazardous units in compliance with EPA standards, after a grace period, by retrofitting pollution abatement equipment. NO

70,000 small industry units in 10 industrial centres covered by a waste collection system; 10 central industrial waste treatment plants (CIWTP) in operation. NO

Petrol lead content brought down from 0.42 – 0.63 gm/l to 0.15 gm/l. NO

75 CNG stations set up. ACHIEVED

U.S. EPA vehicular emission standards, 1975, applied and adhered to (in grams per mile

CO = 15.0, HC = 1.5, NOx = 3.1). NO

MANAGING URBAN WASTES

Improved solid waste management and efficient use of solid waste values in the eight cities and 60 small towns selected under this programme. NO

Energy generation from waste in 12 cities. NO

Four cities with Werribee type sewage farms; 13 towns with oxidational ponds; in addition, about 40% of urban population served by some form of improved effluent management. NO

Capacity to monitor and absorb advanced world technology for recycling plastics; and expanded indigenous plastics recycling non-formal industry. NO

SUPPORTING INSTITUTIONS FOR COMMON RESOURCES

8,000 rural and 3,550 urban grassroots organizations undertaking community development initiatives under this programme. ACHIEVED

A 33% reduction in TFR, from 6.6 to 4.4. ACHIEVED

A sharper decline of population growth in the ecologically fragile areas; relatively more of incremental population retained in robust rural areas; relatively more rapid growth in selected medium sized cities with investment opportunities. NO

PRESERVING THE CULTURAL HERITAGE

Expanded preservation programmes for priority sites among the presently designated archaeological and historic monuments and heritage sites; designation and conservation of priority old city and historic towns, buildings and localities of architectural merit. PROGRESS

Inventory of threatened and preservation of regionally significant resource conserving practices, either live or in recorded form. NO

		Updated 5 March, 2004