Sectoral Study of Capacities of Frameworks, Key Stakeholders and Institutions for the Conservation and Sustainable Management of Biodiversity and Agro-biodiversity in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan

Submitted to GIZ-BKP Project

December 2013

i

Legal Disclaimer

Content

GIZ reserves the right not to be responsible for the topicality, correctness, completeness or

quality of the information provided.

The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this report are entirely those of the

author.

Liability claims regarding damage caused by the use of any information provided, including any

kind of information which is incomplete or incorrect, will therefore be rejected.

Referrals and links

The author is not responsible for any contents linked or referred to from this report. If any

damage occurs by the use of information presented there, only the author of the respective

pages might be liable, not the one who has linked to these pages.

ii

Contents

1. Introduction and Context 1

1.1. Ecological Context 1

1.2. Khyber Pakhtunkhwa 2

1.2.1. Swat District 4

1.2.2. Chitral District 6

1.3. BKP Project 7

2. Policy and Legal Framework for COSMOB in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa 10

2.1. The Constitution of Pakistan, 1973 11

2.2. Policies and Strategies 12

2.2.1. Pakistan National Conservation Strategy, 1992 12

2.2.2. Sarhad Provincial Conservation Strategy, 1996 14

2.2.3. NWFP Forest Policy, 1999 16

2.2.4. Biodiversity Action Plan for Pakistan, 2000 16

2.2.5. National Environment Policy, 2005 17

2.2.6. NWFP Agriculture Policy, 2005 18

2.2.7. NWFP Horticultural Policy, 2009 19

2.2.8. National Forest Policy, 2010 (Draft) 19

2.2.9. National Rangeland Policy, 2010 (Draft) 21

2.2.10. Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Economic Growth Strategy, 2011 22

2.2.11. National Climate Change Policy, 2012 22

2.2.12. National Sustainable Development Strategy, 2012 23

2.2.13. National Disaster Risk Reduction Policy, 2013 25

2.2.14. Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Community Driven Local Development

Policy, 2013 25

2.2.15. Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Agriculture Strategy and Policy, 2013

(Draft) 26

2.2.16. Pakistan’ Vision 2025 27

2.3. National Laws 27

2.3.1. Pakistan Environmental Protection Act, 1997 27

2.3.2. CITES Act, 2012 28

2.3.3. Access Benefit Sharing Bill, 2012 (Draft) 28

2.4. Provincial Laws 29

2.4.1. West Pakistan Fisheries Ordinance, 1961 (amended in 1982 and

1991) 30

iii

2.4.2. Dir, Chitral and Swat (Administration) Regulation, 1969 30

2.4.3. North-West Frontier Province Wild-life (Protection,

Preservation, Conservation and Management) Act, 1975

(amended in 1976 and 1984) 31

2.4.4. North-West Frontier Province Forest Development Corporation

Ordinance, 1980 31

2.4.5. Hazara Forest (Amendment) Ordnance, 1997 31

2.4.6. North-West Frontier Province Forest Commission Act, 1999

(amended in 2005) 32

2.4.7. North-West Frontier Province Forest Ordinance, 2002 32

2.4.8. North-West Frontier Province River Protection Ordinance, 2002 33

2.4.9. Sharia Nizam-e-Adl Regulation, 2009 33

2.4.10. Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Farm Services Centres Act, 2013 (Draft) 34

2.4.11. Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Local Government Act, 2013 34

2.5. National Reporting to CBD 36

3. Stakeholder Analysis for COSMOB in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa 39

3.1. Climate Change Division 40

3.1.1. Biodiversity Directorate 42

3.1.2. National Council for Conservation of Wildlife 42

3.2. Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Planning and Development Department 42

3.3. Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Environment Department 44

3.3.1. Offices of the Chief Conservators of Forests 44

3.3.2. Office of the Chief Conservator of Wildlife 46

3.4. Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Agriculture, Livestock and Cooperation

Department 48

3.4.1. Agriculture Extension 50

3.4.2. Agriculture Research 51

3.4.3. Agricultural Engineering, Soil Conservation and On-Farm Water

Management 52

3.4.4. Livestock and Dairy Development 53

3.4.5. Fisheries 54

3.5. District Government in Swat and Chitral 55

3.6. Other Public Sector Institutions 56

3.6.1. Economic Affairs Division 56

3.6.2. Pakistan Agricultural Research Council 56

3.6.3. Pakistan Science Foundation 57

3.7. Academia 57

iv

3.7.1. University of Agriculture, Peshawar 57

3.7.2. Pakistan Forest Institute 57

3.7.3. Centre of Plant Biodiversity, University of Peshawar 58

3.7.4. University of Swat 58

3.7.5. Shaheed Benazir Bhutto University, Chitral Campus 59

3.8. Civil Society Organizations/Initiatives 59

3.8.1. Helvetas Swiss Intercooperation Pakistan 60

3.8.2. Aga Khan Rural Support Programme 60

3.8.3. Sarhad Rural Support Programme 60

3.8.4. Thrive/Chitral Integrated Area Development Programme 61

3.8.5. Pakistan Poverty Alleviation Fund 61

3.8.6. Mountains and Markets Project 61

3.8.7. MEAD/Entrepreneurs Project 62

3.9. Communities in Swat and Chitral 63

4. Capacity Gaps at Policy, Institutional and Personnel Level 65

4.1. Lack of overarching policy and legal framework for biodiversity

conservation 65

4.2. Ineffective implementation of existing laws 65

4.3. Conceptual contradictions about biodiversity conservation and

sustainable resource use 66

4.4. Lack of trust and coordination amongst relevant stakeholders 67

4.5. Non-competitive and non-incentivising public sector 68

4.6. Dearth of and inaccessibility to conservation knowledge 68

4.7. Lack of mass awareness about value of biodiversity 69

4.8. Inadequate human resource capacity 70

5. Fiscal Support for COSMOB in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa 72

5.1. Public Sector Development Programme of Pakistan 72

5.2. Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Annual Development Programme 72

5.3. Fiscal Opportunities for COSMOB in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa 76

5.3.1. Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Comprehensive Development Strategy

2010-17 77

5.3.2. Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Medium Term Fiscal Framework 2013-16 79

5.3.3. Khyber Pakhtunkhwa District Governance and Community

Development Programme 80

5.3.4. Multi Donor Trust Fund 80

5.3.5. Global Environment Facility 82

v

5.3.6. Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Forest Development Fund 82

6. Perception about Capacities and Benchmarking 83

7. The Way Forward – Recommendations to Tackle the Challenges 87

7.1. General Recommendations 87

7.2. Specific Recommendations for BKP Project 89

7.3. Other Recommendations 92

Annexes

I. Interview guide used for interviews

II. List of key policy and legal instruments for Khyber Pakhtunkhwa

III. Multilateral Environmental Agreements signed/ratified by Pakistan

IV. Aichi Biodiversity Targets

V. Membership of the Biodiversity Working Group

VI. NGOs in Swat and Chitral (non-exhaustive list)

VII. Recommendations from BKP Inception-cum-Planning Workshop 2013

VIII. List of key stakeholders and persons met

IX. Bibliography

vi

Acronyms and Abbreviations

ADP Annual Development Programme

AKRSP Aga Khan Rural Support Programme

AUP Agriculture University Peshawar

BAP Biodiversity Action Plan

BKP GIZ’s Biodiversity Conservation in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Project

BWG Biodiversity Working Group

CARAVAN Community Awareness Raising & Advocacy Ventures around Needs

CBD [United Nations] Convention on Biological Diversity

CBOs Community Based Organizations

CCBs Citizen Community Boards

CCD Climate Change Division

CCF Chief Conservator of Forests

CDLD Community Driven Local Development

CDS Comprehensive Development Strategy

CIADP Chitral Integrated Area Development Programme

CLL Concurrent Legislative List

COSMOB Conservation and Sustainable Management of Biodiversity

CSOs Civil Society Organizations

DDS District Development Strategy

DfID [UK] Department for International Development

DFO Divisional Forest Officer

DGCDP [EU supported] District Governance and Community Development Programme

EAD Economic Affairs Division

EIA Environmental Impact Assessment

FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations

FATA Federally Administered Tribal Area

FDF [Khyber Pakhtunkhwa] Forest Development Fund

FFD Farmers Field Day

FFS Farmer Field School

FPA Foreign Project Assistance

FSCs Farm Services Centres

GEF Global Environment Facility

GIS Geographical Information System

GIZ Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit GmbH (German

Society for International Cooperation)

GLOF Glacial Lake Outburst Flooding

GoKP Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa

GoNWFP Government of North-Western Frontier Province

vii

GoP Government of Pakistan

HDI Human Development Index

HEC Higher Education Commission

HUJRA Holistic Understanding for Justified Research and Action

IC Helvetas Swiss Intercooperation Pakistan

IEE Initial Environmental Examination

IUCN International Union for Conservation of Nature

JFMCs Joint Forest Management Committees

JICA Japan International Cooperation Agency

KfW Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau ([German] Reconstruction Credit Institute)

KP Khyber Pakhtunkhwa

LASOONA Society for Human and Natural Resource Development

LDC Least Developed Countries

LSOs Local Support Organizations

MACP Mountain Areas Conservancy Programme

MAPs Medicinal and Aromatic Plants

MDGs Millennium Development Goals

MDTF Multi Donor Trust Fund

MEAs Multilateral Environmental Agreements

NARC National Agricultural Research Centre

NBSAP National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan

NCCW National Council for Conservation of Wildlife

NCS [Pakistan] National Conservation Strategy

NRM Natural Resource Management

NSDC National Sustainable Development Council

NSDS National Sustainable Development Strategy

NTFPs Non Timber Forest Products

NWFP North-Western Frontier Province

O&M Operation and Maintenance

OFWM On-Farm Water Management

P&DD Planning and Development Department

PARC Pakistan Agricultural Research Council

PATA Provincially Administered Tribal Areas

PBSAP Provincial Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan

PCNA Post Crisis Need Assessment

PEPA ‘97 Pakistan Environmental Protection Act, 1997

PES Payment for Environmental Services

PFI Pakistan Forest Institute

PIF Project Identification Form [for GEF]

PKR Pakistani Rupees

viii

PMNH Pakistan Museum of Natural History

POPs Persistent Organic Pollutants

PPAF Pakistan Poverty Alleviation Fund

PSDP Public Sector Development Programme

PSF Pakistan Science Foundation

R&D Research and Development

REDD Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation

RFO Range Forest Officer

SDC Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation

SDFO Sub-Divisional Forest Officer

SDPF Strategic Development Partnership Framework

SDPI Sustainable Development Policy Institute

SPCS Sarhad Provincial Conservation Strategy

SRSP Sarhad Rural Support Programme

UAE United Arab Emirates

UNCCD United Nations Convention on Combating Desertification

UNDP United Nations Development Programme

UNEP United Nations Environment Programme

UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

WAPDA Water and Power Development Authority

WB [The] World Bank

WWF World Wide Fund for Nature

ix

Executive Summary

Ecosystems provide valuable goods and environmental services for our social and economic

wellbeing but these are hardly recognised. While forests are managed for timber and fuel wood,

the protected areas are primarily managed for game specie. The term ‘biodiversity’ is yet to be

recognised in its holistic meanings, including agrobiodiversity. The heavy reliance of mountain

and rural communities on natural resources, and depleting resource base due to

overexploitation and climate induced disasters, results in high level of vulnerability for

communities to food and livelihood insecurity. The challenges of climate change, disasters and

food insecurity have to be rooted in conservation of biodiversity. Realising the need to promote

ecosystem based adaptation, this study is an attempt to understand the policy, legal,

institutional and stakeholders’ capacity for conservation and sustainable management of natural

resources in particular context of agriculture and climate change at all tiers of action.

Endowed with variety of ecosystems and biomes, Pakistan is bestowed with a rich faunal and

floral biodiversity. However, the biodiversity degradation, especially of forest ecosystem, has

been rampant. The biodiversity in Pakistan is threated by deforestation, overgrazing, soil

erosion, salinity and waterlogging, non-sustainable agricultural practices and hunting in the

absence of systematic management of protected areas, enabling policy and legal environment,

effective coordination among government departments and research organizations, and active

role playing by NGOs. Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, with five major agro-ecological zones out of nine for

the entire country, has diverse range of habitats and biodiversity. However, it is facing the same

problems in conservation and sustainable management of biodiversity.

The Biodiversity in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (BKP) with an aim to engage public and private actors

at provincial and district level to promote the experience gained in the pilot measures for

sustainable management and conservation of biodiversity, and climate change adaptation to in

Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. Implemented by GIZ over a period of four years, the Project will work

with the provincial departments of P&D, Environment and Agriculture. It has selected Swat and

Chitral Districts as its pilot districts and will engage wide range of stakeholders in its

implementation.

Pakistan as well as Khyber Pakhtunkhwa have good quantum of policies and laws regarding

natural resource management, however in most cases the focus is on resource development

and exploitation for revenue generation. Since independence of Pakistan, various policies have

been framed and laws enacted for natural resource management but weak implementation of

policy and legal instruments has resulted in deterioration of valuable ecological resources.

Absence of a comprehensive biodiversity policy covering all of its elements as well as a

corresponding legal framework has multiplied the negative impact of weak resource governance

and compartmentalisation of the state apparatus responsible for management of biodiversity.

There is a long list of stakeholders for the sector, including legislative forums and administrative

offices, technical and service delivery agencies, educational and capacity building institutions,

extension and outreach organizations, the private sector, and the users and beneficiaries.

However, in most cases their efforts for biodiversity conservation and natural resource

management have been disjointed and ad hoc.

x

Using the simplest definition of governance, ‘the manner in which power is exercised in the

management of a country's economic and social resources for development’1, it can safely be

concluded that governance of natural resources in Pakistan is far below the satisfactory level. It

is even worse when it comes to the biodiversity conservation – a subject which does not have a

political lobby. The problem is manifested in many ways: the requisite policies, laws and rules

for biodiversity conservation are either non-existent or inadequate, the application of law is

ineffective, the capacity to implement the legal regime is weak, there is lack of clarity and

coordination amongst the relevant stakeholders, the scientific rigour for generating and

managing conservation knowledge is missing, and the skills required to conserve and manage

natural resources in sustainable manner are either missing or need to be updated.

Within a resource constrained economy, financial allocation for NRM in general and biodiversity

conservation in specific has always been low. With less than 0.01% allocation at the national

level and a little above 2% in the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, no major improvement can be expected

in the state of biodiversity and ecosystems. While many funding windows are available

internationally, especially for ecosystem based adaptation, lack of capacity constrains access to

such opportunities. In this scenario, BKP can play an important role to bridge the capacity gap

and help the sector through investing into and attracting more international support for

biodiversity conservation. Additionally, it can leverage upon the domestic opportunities in

Khyber Pakhtunkhwa such as CDS 2010-17, Medium Term Fiscal Framework 2013-16, District

Governance and Community Development Programme, Multi Donor Trust Fund, Forest

Development Fund, and Pakistan Poverty Alleviation Fund.

While the study has assessed perception about capacities for biodiversity conservation and

setup a benchmark against five indicators of BKP Project, it will be important to update the

ranking periodically to keep track of the Project’s progress.

Summarily, the study in general recommends that:

� Resource governance should be improved through creating ownership and political will,

framing a biodiversity policy and law, developing provincial BSAP, strengthening regulatory

and scientific authorities (including federal Biodiversity Directorate, Provincial Biodiversity

Cells/Units and Biodiversity Working Group) in terms of human and financial resources,

improving coordination between the federal and provincial governments, and undertaking a

well-designed reform process in NRM line departments.

� Conservation capacity of the communities and relevant stakeholders should be enhanced

through generation of and access to conservation knowledge, equipping the staff with

required skillsets, incentivising conservation efforts, introducing energy alternates in the

forest areas, and supporting ecosystem based adaptation and DRR strategies.

� The communities should be supported in their livelihood diversification efforts through

access to quality inputs, value chain development and access to markets.

In particular, the BKP Project is recommended to:

� Focus on its role as envisaged during the design phase, i.e., supporting the integrated

watershed planning and land use planning through liaising with the line departments and

1 The World Bank, 1991. Managing Development: The Governance Dimension. Washington, DC: WB.

xi

facilitating them to develop and implement biodiversity conservation initiatives through its

leverage being strategically placed in P&D Department.

� Work closely with P&D Department and district management, and the District Development

Committees to mainstream biodiversity conservation into planning, implementation and

monitoring of the community-driven local development initiatives at grassroots level.

� Support institution of an institutional coordination mechanism, housed in Khyber

Pakhtunkhwa P&DD with a mandate to coordinate biodiversity related initiatives and

facilitate allocation of financial resources.

� Support development of the Provincial Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan through a

consultative process with provincial targets aligned with Aichi Targets and the national ones.

� Support the local authorities and relevant stakeholders in developing Integrated Valley Plans

for its select valleys.

� Help the NRM sectors in general, and biodiversity is specific, to access public funds and

international assistance.

� Develop and implement a comprehensive capacity building plan through onsite and offsite

trainings, direct and virtual exposure to best practices, research and academic linkages

between local and foreign institutions, and a follow-up plan to keep the capacities

refreshed.

� Support universities to deliver on research and development, and academic networking

through on-line access to academic libraries, helping students to undertake research on

critical agro-biodiversity issues and undertaking split programmes of study, and linking the

universities with on-ground research facilities.

� Support establishment of knowledge hub with at least three elements:

a. A repository for data, information and knowledge regarding conservation status,

policies, laws, rules, strategies, actions plans, success stories, lessons learnt, and reliable

facts and figures.

b. An interactive blog amongst line department officials, professionals, academia, service

providers, civil society actors, media and beneficiary communities to freely exchange

ideas and information for betterment of biodiversity and NRM sectors.

c. A virtual extension and outreach tool to disseminate new techniques, news and alerts,

and to serve as a helpline for the beneficiary communities.

� Sensitise political leadership and policy makers, opinion leaders such as imam masjid (prayer

leader) and tribal elders, and media to communicate biodiversity conservation to masses.

� Undertake in-depth studies on various aspects of biodiversity conservation, detailed

baseline, socio-economic and resource surveys of selected valleys, and dynamics of value

chain development.

� Pilot various interventions including introduction of energy alternatives, high yielding fodder

cultivation, sustainable harvest of NTFPs and MAPs, fruit grading and packing, and

Community Livestock Extension Workers for improving livelihoods of communities.

1

1. Introduction and Context

Ecosystems provide valuable goods and environmental services for social and economic

wellbeing of a nation. Recently, conservation of ecosystems has gained global importance for

their role in mitigation of climate change and for conservation of biodiversity – the ‘web of life’.

Pakistan is endowed with a rich diversity of ecosystems but unfortunately a very small

percentage of this natural heritage is managed for conservation of biodiversity. Although the

state forests were gazetted both to meet the timber, fuel wood, and to meet and soil and water

conservation needs, major emphasis of forestry in Pakistan has been on production of timber

and fuel wood. The protected areas are primarily managed for game species and charismatic

species like snow leopard and brown bear. The term ‘biodiversity’ was coined as recently as

1968 and gained attention of global conservation community with the ratification of Convention

on Biological Diversity in 1992. While the terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems are integral part of

our environment, unfortunately in Pakistan the environmental concerns have mainly focused on

the brown environment – the built human environment and its associated water and air

pollution and the need to keep it clean. The abovementioned oversimplification of the

environmental issues and the low priority attached to the same has been a major factor for

deteriorating health and condition of the ecosystems, loss of biodiversity and growing pollution.

Though notions of biodiversity conservation and sustainable management of agro-biodiversity

are commonly used in scientific and academic literature, these are a rare citation in the policy

and legal context of Pakistan. Compartmentalisation of the sectoral policy making and

development planning in biodiversity (perceived merely as forests and wildlife by most of the

NRM practitioners and policy makers) and agriculture (including livestock and fisheries) has led

to a complete disjuncture between the two sectors.

Heavy reliance of mountain and rural communities on natural resources, and depleting resource

base due to overexploitation and climate induced disasters, results in high level of vulnerability

for communities to food and livelihood insecurity. The challenges of climate change, disasters

and food insecurity have to be rooted in conservation of biodiversity, and hence the need to

promote ecosystem based adaptation, necessitate understanding the policy, legal, institutional

and stakeholders’ capacity for conservation and sustainable management of natural resources in

particular context of agriculture and climate change at all tiers of action. This study is an attempt

at identifying these capacity gaps and making recommendations for addressing the same.

1.1. Ecological Context

Pakistan is endowed with variety of ecosystems and biomes, and a rich faunal and floral

biodiversity. Nine major ecological zones are recognized in Pakistan. Pakistan has 195 mammal

species (including 13 sub-species) of which six are endemic. There are 668 bird species, of which

25 are endangered. The reptile species are 177 in number of which 13 are endemic species. The

reptiles include 14 turtles, one crocodile, 90 lizards and 65 species of snakes. There are 22

amphibians of which 9 are endemic. Freshwater fish species are 198 with 29 endemics. So far

more than 5000 species of invertebrates have been identified. There are over 5700 species of

flowering plants with over 400 species endemic to Pakistan. Pakistan is rich in indigenous crop

diversity with an estimated 3000 taxa and around 500 wild relatives of crops.2

2 Government of Pakistan, 2009. Pakistan Fourth National Report [to CBD]. Islamabad: Ministry of Environment, GoP.

2

With less than one third (30.24%) of the total geographical area being arable3, the challenge of

food security can easily be realised though with increasing concerns for conservation of

biodiversity – a first line victim of agricultural expansionism. There has been an alarming

decrease in the area under natural forests (from 3.59 million ha in 1992 to 3.29 million ha in

2001), keeping the issue of reducing forest density aside. According to Landsat-based forest

assessment, the mean annual rate of deforestation of natural forests is 27000 ha. This concern

exacerbates even more in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa which has around 42% of Pakistan’s total

forests4 and where about 75% of the population (above 25 million) is at least partly dependent

on agriculture5 and more than 3.5 million people directly depend on the use of forest and

agricultural resources for their livelihood.

The major threats to biodiversity in Pakistan include deforestation, overgrazing, soil erosion,

salinity and waterlogging, non-sustainable agricultural practices and hunting which require

systematic management of protected areas, enabling policy and legal environment, effective

coordination among government departments and research organizations, and active role

playing by NGOs.6 Pakistan’s Fourth National Report to CBD notes with concern the degradation

of natural ecosystems in Pakistan due to anthropogenic pressures and an exacerbation by the

impacts of the climate change manifested by increase in extreme weather events and glacial

melt, resulting in flash floods. The agro-biodiversity has suffered seriously due to introduction of

high-yield varieties of food and cash crops, and use of agrochemicals. The major threats to

terrestrial ecosystems are from overgrazing and deforestation due to increasing population

pressure and poverty. The diversion of water for irrigation has adversely impacted the ecology

of the mangroves and riparian ecosystems. Game birds and animals are heavily hunted using

modern technology and some species are persecuted for their depredation of livestock and

crops. The fisheries from inland and marine ecosystems are harvested to the full limit, and

pollution and disposal of untreated sewage and industrial affluent in the rivers and sea are

major threats to aquatic biodiversity. Though Pakistan started collecting indigenous plant

germplasm in the early 1970s, having over 15600 germplasm accessions from more than 40

different crops at the Plant Genetic Resources Institute, National Agricultural Research Centre,

there is no in-situ conservation and promotion of cultivation of wild relatives of these crops.7

1.2. Khyber Pakhtunkhwa

Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, renamed from the North Western Frontier Province (NWFP) in 2010, has

diverse geo-ecological formation, ranging from Dera Ismail Khan at 250 metres above mean sea

level in the South to 7708 metres high Tirich Mir in Chitral District. In its total geographic area of

about 10.17 million hectares, the major land uses are agriculture, forestry and grazing. The

Province has five major agro-ecological zones. About 17% of the province is forested with trees

of varying density and age, and nine major vegetation types. The Province has rich wildlife and

3 Pakistan Bureau of Statistics: Land Utilisation Statistics

(http://www.pbs.gov.pk/sites/default/files/tables/Land_Utilization_Statistics.pdf). Accessed on 8 Dec 2013.

4 Government of Pakistan and FAO, 2009. Pakistan Forestry Outlook Study. Bangkok: Office of the Inspector General

of Forests, Ministry of Environment, GoP and FAO Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific.

5 Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, 2010. Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Comprehensive Development Strategy 2010-2017.

Peshawar: Planning and Development Department, GoKP.

6 IUCN, 1997. Biological Diversity in Pakistan. Karachi: IUCN.

7 Government of Pakistan, 2009. Pakistan Fourth National Report [to CBD]. Islamabad: Ministry of Environment, GoP.

3

plant resources which are facing decline due to lack of political will for conservation, absence of

appropriate policy and legal cover and extension in commercial interests. The conservation

efforts so far have mainly been in terms of protected areas management comprising of forest

preservation and wildlife protection.

4

Khyber Pakhtunkhwa has wide variety of mammals including brown bear, stoat, long-eared bat,

ibex leopard cat, goral, snow leopard, brown bear, Altai weasel, long-tailed marmot, Kashmiri

grey langur, rhesus macaque, grey wolf, Kashmir red fox, Himalayan black bear, stone marten,

yellow- throated marten, leopard, leopard cat, musk deer, grey goral, Royle’s pika, Indian giant

flying squirrel, small Kashmir flying squirrel, and Indian crested porcupine. The woolly flying

squirrel and Murree vole are two of the six endemic mammals of Pakistan. The birds found in

the Province include seven of the eight bird species endemic to the Western Himalaya including

western tragopan, cheer pheasant, Tytler’s leaf warbler, Brook’s leaf warbler, white-cheeked tit,

white-throated tit, orange bull finch and red-browed finch. The Province also supports 12 of the

internationally threatened endemic and migratory bird species. It also hosts the Asian cobra –

an internationally threatened reptile. The waters in the foothills of Hazara and Malakand

support a great variety of fish. Invertebrates have been little studied but several butterfly

species are found in different parts of the Province.

Out of about 5500-6000 species of vascular plants recorded in Pakistan, about 90% occur in the

areas making up and adjoining Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. About 1500 species are reported in the

Swat and Kaghan Valleys including the Himalayan elm which is an internationally threatened

tree species found largely in the Palas Valley of Kohistan District. Of the 18 habitats in Pakistan

defined by Roberts (1977), 12 are found in the NWFP; many of these are concentrated in the

northern mountainous portion of the province. The protected areas system – two National Parks

and five Wildlife Sanctuaries – covers only 0.6% of the land area of the Province. The principal

threats to biodiversity in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa are no different from elsewhere in Pakistan and

include deforestation, overgrazing, soil erosion, water pollution, uncontrolled hunting and

fishing, indiscriminate netting, construction encroachment in rivers, municipal pollution and

spread of modern agriculture which threatens wild plants and indigenous varieties of fruits and

livestock.8

BKP Project has selected Swat and Chitral Districts as its pilot districts; more details about the

same are provided below:

1.2.1. Swat District

Swat was declared a district under the Dir, Chitral and Swat (Administration) Regulation, 1969

ending rule of Wali-e-Swat and extending all applicable laws and governance structures of the

province. Swat has seen relatively more influx of tourists and development assistance primarily

due to its proximity to the national and provincial capital, hence is more advanced in terms of

agriculture, education and connectivity. However, communities in the rural areas are no

different from rest of the province; deprived of water and sanitation services and livelihood

opportunities. The rise of militancy in 2007 harmed the peaceful serenity of the District, making

it one of the most dangerous places to visit. The earthquake in 2005 and floods in 2010, 2011

and 2013 multiplied the devastation resulted from militancy and counterinsurgency measures

during 2007-2009. With concerted efforts of the Government of Pakistan and generous support

by the donors, especially the European Union, GIZ, United Arab Emirates, Japan, UNDP and FAO,

the District is peaceful again and on the road to development. However, confidence of the

tourists, a major source of income for the local population, is still to be restored for which

Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Pakistan Army regularly organised festivals.

8 Government of NWFP and IUCN, 1996. Sarhad Provincial Conservation Strategy. Karachi: IUCN & Planning,

Environment & Development Department, GoNWFP.

5

Swat District covers 7.16% (5337 km2) of the

total provincial geographical area and

accounts for about 7.09% (according to 1998

Census) of the Provincial population, which is

currently extrapolated as about two million.

Since it is still an unsettled district for the

most part, the land use and area statistics

vary from source to source. Forests

constitute roughly 27% and cropped area

about 36% of the District’s total area.

According to 2006 Livestock Census, there are

about 236229 goats, 80048 sheep, 253790

cattle, 117101 buffaloes and 1141678 poultry

birds in the District. Total rainfall in 2011 was

1465 mm while mean minimum temperature

was recorded as 12°C and mean maximum as

26°C.9 However, due to nomadic movement

of livestock, the actual number may vary in

case of goats and sheep. Goats are preferred

by pastoralist communities as their milk is

considered best for making cheese. Swat

bears the brunt of transhumant population

from Chitral as well as from its own parts. Not only Gujars keep migrating according to changes

in the temperature but about a quarter of the population in Kalam also migrates to lower part of

the Swat Valley in winters.

There are dense forests in upper Swat. The District is also called fruit basket of Pakistan,

especially with 80% of the country’s peach production. It produces variety of fruits (including

peach, apple, peer, apricot and plum) and cereal crops (including wheat, maize, tobacco, soya

bean and sunflower). The defunct Wali-e-Swat had sent Prof. Shah Alam Khan to Italy for

learning olive farming, who later planted many olive trees in Swat. With around 80% of the

farms just below 2.5 ha size10, there is great potential for medicinal and aromatic plants, off-

season vegetables and cut-flowers if transportation links are reliable, and institutional support is

available. The District is historically known for its variety of medicinal plants; one reason for

selecting one of its Valleys (Kalam) for implementation of the GEF/UNDP supported Mountains

and Markets Project. Despite around 27% of the area being under forest, the protected areas

representation is quite poor in Swat. At present, it has only one Game Reserve (Sewagalai), and

eight Community Game Reserves (Sigram, Mankial, Bhan, Dab Manpithai, Tang Banr, Amluk

Banr, Dheran Pattay and Alam Ganj).

Education is one hallmark of Swat with University of Swat, Jahanzeb College and hundreds of

other educational institutions. Swat also has good media presence with reporters from all major

9 Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, 2013. Development Statistics of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. Peshawar: Bureau of

Statistics, GoKP.

10 Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, 2013. Development Statistics of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. Peshawar: Bureau of

Statistics, GoKP.

Transhumant Gujars have historically been

allowed by local communities in Swat and

Chitral to graze their livestock (mainly goats)

in high altitude pastures. In return, the

communities either get money (locally called

Kalang) or get their livestock is also grazed

by Gujars. In winters, when there is no grass

available, branches of oak and even of

deodar trees are cut to feed the livestock.

The extensive grazing has resulted in

degradation of vegetative cover, soil erosion

and flooding which communities have

started realising, however, vested interest of

few community members allows Gujars to

continue this practice. Some of the disputes

have been taken to courts and one has

reached the Supreme Court of Pakistan (CP

300-P/2008) which has ordered the Forest

Department to settle the case under NWFP

Community Participation Rules, 2004.

6

national newspapers and channels. There are four local newspapers, Awaz-e-Swat11, Azadi12,

Chand13 and Khabarkar14.

1.2.2. Chitral District

Like Swat, Chitral was also declared a district under the Dir, Chitral and Swat (Administration)

Regulation, 1969 stripping powers of the Mehtar (ruler of Chitral) and extending all applicable

laws and governance structures of the province to this former princely state. Chitral’s landscape

is dominated by high mountains, leaving hardly 3% of the land available for cultivation limiting

the livelihood options for the people. Chitral has been isolated, mainly because of limited access

to rest of the country throughout winter season due to heavy snowfall and closure of Lowari

Top, and unpredictability of PIA flights. With occasional opening of the under construction

Lowari Tunnel, the people of Chitral have felt little ease but the Tunnel needs to be completed

at the earliest to provide reliable passage to the commuters.

Chitral accounts for only 2% (currently estimated as about half a million) of the Provincial

population but covers about 40% (14850 km2) of its geographical area. A little more than a

quarter (28.5%) of the region is covered in glaciers, snow-clad mountains, bare rock and barren

ground, and 62% of the land supports only pasture with sparse vegetation. Of around 1485000

ha of total geographical area, only 98671 ha fall under ‘reported area’, of which about 23.7% is

cropped area while roughly 42.5% is under forest. According to 2006 Livestock Census, there are

about 347977 goats, 181146 sheep, 174842 cattle, only 296 buffaloes and 423749 poultry birds

in the District. Total rainfall in 2011 was 610 mm while mean minimum temperature was

recorded as 7°C and mean maximum as 24°C.15 The district’s most important productive

resource is irrigated farmland totalling 45017 ha, which feeds and provides employment to the

majority of its people. About 80% of the landholdings are less than two hectares.16

Free grazing, especially of goats, is causing severe erosion of vegetation and soil leading to

increased landslides. While goats may be found in only 5% of the households in Chitral, almost

every household has at least one cattle. Forests cover 70045 hectares, mainly in Chitral and

Drosh tehsils; of which about 25000 ha are suitable for commercial harvesting. Despite

widespread hunting by the local people, the remote mountain valleys of Chitral are home to a

considerable variety of wildlife.17 At present, Chitral has two National Parks (Chitral Gol and

Broghil), one Wildlife Sanctuary (Agram Basti) and five Game Reserves (Drosh Gol, Gehrait Gol,

11 Daily Awaz-e-Swat (http://www.awazeswat.com/). Accessed on 14 Dec 2013.

12 Daily Azadi (http://www.dailyazadiswat.com/epaper/2013/). Accessed on 8 Dec 2013.

13 Daily Chand (http://dailychand.com/epaper/2013/12/08/). Accessed on 8 Dec 2013.

14 Daily Khabarkar (http://pknewspaper.com/epaper-daily-khabarkar-swat). Accessed on 8 Dec 2013.

15 Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, 2013. Development Statistics of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. Peshawar: Bureau of

Statistics, GoKP.

16 District Director Agriculture, Chitral.

17 Government of NWFP and IUCN, 2004. Chitral – An Integrated Development Vision. Karachi: IUCN & Planning,

Environment & Development Department, GoNWFP.

7

Puritgol & Chinar, Tooshi Gol and Golen Gol),

and seven Community Game Reserves

(Begusht, Tooshi Shasha, Arkari, Gehrait,

Golen Gol, Madaklasht and Manur).18

Chitral has great potential for biodiversity

conservation and sustainable use of wildlife

and NTFPs including medicinal and aromatic

plants, and ecotourism. It also has potential

for environment friendly mining of gold and

antimony using international best practices.

There is need to exclude Chitral from security

regime and protocol currently in place for the

entire Malakand Division so that sustainable

economic development activities could be

promoted. The communities, despite low level of formal education, are quite aware of

biodiversity’s value and are supportive of its conservation. However, their economic needs and

harsh climatic conditions compel them have high dependence on forests for timber and fuel.

The communities have rights over the state forests and receive financial benefits from

commercial logging administered by the Forest Department. The community gets 60% of the net

harvest proceeds from the commercial logging which is further distributed amongst the relevant

right holders in a particular forest area. In most cases, each individual right holder gets between

Rs. 500 to 2000 every year. The communities are agreeable to ending commercial logging if loss

of income can be made up from other sources of economic development. However, this issue

needs in-depth study and analysis in the backdrop of joint forest management approach and

availability of new alternatives like REDD+. With operation of 108 MW hydel power station at

Golen of which 30 MW have been promised for Chitral by 2015, the District will have enormous

potential for biodiversity, especially forest, conservation and value chain development. The solar

energy may also be good alternate of fuel wood for cooking and heating.

Despite the economic hardships the people in Chitral are eager for education of their children.

Chitral is also on media-scape through its newspapers Daily Chitral19, Chitral Post20 and Chitral

Times21.

1.3. BKP Project

Realising the need to augment people’s and governments’ efforts for ‘conservation and

sustainable management of biodiversity’ (COSMOB), particularly in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, the

Government of the Federal Republic of Germany decided to launch a long term project, to be

implemented by the Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH.

18 Protected Areas of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (http://www.wildlifeofnwfp.gov.pk/protected%20areas.html). Access on 8

Dec 2013.

19 Daily Chitral (http://www.dailychitral.com/). Accessed on 8 Dec 2013.

20 Chitral Post (http://chitralpost.net/index.php). Accessed on 8 Dec 2013.

21 Chitral Times (http://www.chitraltimes.com/). Accessed on 8 Dec 2013.

Kalash community, mainly residing in

Bamburet, Barir and Rumbur valleys is one

marginalised population group which is

under tremendous social and economic

pressures. They are heavily reliant upon

natural resources, not only for the livelihood

but also for their cultural rituals. For

example, on death of a community member

about 60-70 goats and one or two cattle are

sacrificed, wine made of local grapes is

freely offered to participants of the burial

ritual, and walnut oil is used in all sorts of

cooking.

8

The overall objective of the Project is that public and private actors (public administration,

NGOs, entrepreneurs, development organisations) at provincial and district level increasingly

apply the experience gained in the pilot measures for the sustainable management and

conservation of biodiversity and for adaptation to climate change in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.

Through advice at provincial level, the Project encompasses the whole of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa,

but will concentrate in the current phase on implementation of pilot measures in districts of

Swat and Chitral.

The target groups are women and men among the poor rural population in Khyber

Pakhtunkhwa whose livelihood depends heavily on the use of biodiversity in the agriculture and

forestry sectors. The Project will contribute to securing and improving the livelihoods of these

sections of the population, improving their ability to adapt to changing environmental

conditions and, with that, to reducing their vulnerability.

The lead executing agency at provincial level is the Planning and Development Department. The

main implementing partners of the project are primarily the Environment Department and also

the Agriculture Department in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa as well as national and international

government and non-governmental organizations engaged in the same pilot regions.

In terms of content, the Project will concentrate on three fields of activity:

1. At pilot district level the focus is on the preparation and implementation of best

practices in areas where the conservation and management of biodiversity can improve

livelihoods and raise the standard of living. This also includes the development of value

chains of NTFPs and/or traditional agricultural crops.

2. At provincial authority level in KP, the Project will provide advice for drafting a

biodiversity action plan as a strategic framework for implementing a policy for

conserving biodiversity while simultaneously reducing poverty in the province.

3. A third field of activity involves knowledge management and raising awareness of

biodiversity issues among institutions and individuals.

The German contribution comprises sectoral advice, further training, networking, learning and

knowledge exchange in workshops and conferences as well as setting up, guiding and evaluating

Development of policy framework and instruments for implementation of sustainable

use (management) of biodiversity.

Pilot projects of direct benefit to the local population

Knowledge management and raising awareness

9

pilot measures (including local subsidies). The Project is for four years (from Jan. 2012 to Dec.

2015) in the current phase with an estimated German contribution of € 5 million.22

By end of the term, the Project is supposed to make progress on the following five indicators:

1. A biodiversity action plan, including measures for sustainable land, forest and water

resource management, has been adopted for the province.

2. The provincial government (Environment Department) has taken account of the results

of 5 best practices from the management of watersheds and protected areas, agro-

biodiversity, sustainable forest management and the (economic) use of non-timber

products in relevant policy documents (e.g., biodiversity action plan, climate adaptation

strategy) under gender aspects.

3. In each of 2 districts, at least 1 value chain contributes to the sustainable economic use

of traditional plants or non-timber products (e.g., medicinal plants, traditional

agricultural varieties, honey) particularly to improve income for women.

4. Experience from pilot measures has been systematically compiled by the responsible

government agencies and included in the planning activities of the provincial

government as specific inputs to improve disaster-preventive land use planning.

5. Experience gained as part of the measure in the sustainable management of biodiversity

in KP is channelled into national reporting to CBD.23

22 GIZ, 2011. Conservation and Sustainable Management of Biodiversity in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan [Project #

2011.2206.8]. Project Document.

23 GIZ, 2013. Successful conservation and sustainable management of biodiversity in KP - What does it take?

Presentation to the Stakeholders Workshop on 29 Oct 2013.

10

2. Policy and Legal Framework for COSMOB in Khyber

Pakhtunkhwa

Pakistan inherited a large number of laws after its independence in 1947 which either continued

to be in practice as such or were amended from time to time to cater the changing

requirements of the country or the provinces. In addition to promulgation of new legislation,

rules were also framed for the existing laws. The content and quality of these laws and rules can

be debated but the relevant departments and constituent assemblies have performed their

function well. However, policies are altogether a different story as different democratic and

autocratic governments drafted and announced policies which suite them well. Not only this,

but at times, new and modified policies were announced by the incumbent governments just to

inscribe their presence. This has resulted in compartmentalised and at times contradictory

policies, especially in case of natural resource management, including biodiversity.

Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, relatively better off in terms of social capital and having a colonial legacy

of relatively mature polity, has a long list of laws and regulations developed from time to time. A

few policies have also been formulated by the government but at times these have not been in

synch with the relevant laws. As commented by Yusuf (2009) regarding forest management in

Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, “the analysis suggests that the problem can generally be summed up by

highlighting two key constraints: (i) a major disconnect between the policies and their

implementation; and (ii) serious institutional bottlenecks that have prevented transformation

and forced perverse implementation practices to linger.”24

Historically, the Federal Government has abstained from legislating natural resource

conservation and use, except when it was required for international trade or national security,

as the subject of ecology was on Concurrent Legislative List of the Constitution of Pakistan,

allowing both federation and the provinces to legislate. Hence, the law-making to regulate

natural resource management, especially of forests and wildlife has been exclusive domain of

the provinces. While a few pre-Independence laws remained in force even late after partition of

Indian Subcontinent in 1947, most of the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (formerly NWFP) laws governing

natural resources were promulgated in 1948 and afterwards. Almost half of the legal

instruments in force today were adopted in the 1970s, mostly in the form of ordinances, rules

and regulations. The majority of NWFP statutes on natural resources deal with forests. NRM

related legislation adopted prior to the 1990s focuses largely on regulating the exploitation of

natural resource. It was only in the late 1990s that NWFP legislation began to include references

to sustainable development.25

There is reasonable quantum of policies and laws at least indirectly related to biodiversity (a list

of biodiversity and agro-biodiversity related policies and legal instruments in force in Khyber

Pakhtunkhwa is given at Annex II). However, implementation of these instruments has always

been in question with weak political will, fragmented socio-political fabric and lack of adequate

capacity in both public and private sectors as the main stumbling blocks. With the emerging

challenges of climate change and dwindling food security for which little policy and legal

frameworks exist in the country, the issue becomes even more complicated. With such

24 Yusuf, M., 2009. “Legal and Institutional Dynamics of Forest Management in Pakistan.” In McGill International

Journal of Sustainable Development Law and Policy, 5 (1): 45-71.

25 IUCN, 2003. Environmental Law in Pakistan: Governing Natural Resources and the Processes and Institutions that

Affect Them - North-West Frontier Province (Volume 1: Description and Analysis). Karachi: IUCN.

11

backdrop, the robust policy and legal framework for ecosystem based adaptation becomes

absolutely a necessity.

2.1. The Constitution of Pakistan, 1973

The Constitution of Pakistan26, being the supreme law of the land, provides for constitutional

powers of the state (defined in Article 7 as the Federal Government, Majlis-e-Shoora

(Parliament), a Provincial Government, a Provincial Assembly, and such local or other authorities

in Pakistan as are by law empowered to impose any tax or cess), of the federal and provincial

legislatures to legislate, of the executive authority to apply the laws, and the relationship

between federation and the provinces. Despite the fact that the Constitution was significantly

amended quite recently (during 2010–2012), it is devoid of the words such as environment,

ecology, biodiversity, biological diversity, agro-biodiversity, forest, wildlife, agriculture, natural

resources, climate change, conservation or sustainable development. As explained by the

Honourable Chief Justice of Pakistan27 (2012), “the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan

does not articulate the issue of environmental protection and preservation in any of its

provisions, however, the superior courts of Pakistan have interpreted ‘right to life’ used in

Article 9 of the Constitution and have held that the word ‘life’ used in the said Article

encompasses the environment in all its dimensions. Thus, the right to life is the most basic

principle of environmental justice.” It was only the last year (2012) that, under the auspices of

the Supreme Court of Pakistan, the South Asia Conference on Environmental Justice

recommended in its Bhurban Declaration 2012 that “the right to clean and healthy environment

be incorporated as a Fundamental Right in the Constitution of Pakistan”. It validates the

common perception that environment stands extremely low on subjects of governance in

Pakistan.

The Constitution (Eighteenth Amendment) Act, 2010 amended the Fourth Schedule of the

Constitution by amending the Federal Legislative List (Part I and Part II) and omitting the

Concurrent Legislative List (CLL) in order to increase the extent of Provincial autonomy.

'Environmental pollution and ecology' was one of the subjects in the CLL which has now been

transferred to the legislative domain of the Provincial Assemblies. This has far-reaching

implications for environmental governance in the country, not only in terms of future law-

making, but also for implementation of existing environmental laws, rules and regulations and

Pakistan's obligations under multi-national environmental agreements. Environment was

exclusive provincial jurisdiction under 1956 and 1962 Constitutions. The 1973 Constitution

through its Fourth Schedule empowered both Parliament and the Provincial Assemblies to make

laws with respect to matters relating to 'Environmental pollution and ecology'. Exercising these

powers, the Pakistan Environmental Protection Act [PEPA ’97] was enacted by the Parliament in

1997. After the 18th Amendment, legislation related to environment and ecology has again

become exclusive domain of the Provincial Assemblies, though the Parliament is still

empowered to legislate on ‘International treaties, conventions and agreements and

international arbitration', 'national planning and national economic coordination including

planning and coordination of scientific and technological research', 'Inter-provincial matters and

co-ordination' and a few other interprovincial or international issues. However, Article 270AA

26 Government of Pakistan, 2012. The Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan (as modified up to the 28

th

February 2012). Islamabad: National Assembly of Pakistan, GoP.

27 Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, Chief Justice of Pakistan in his Special Address to the Inaugural Session of the

South Asia Conference on Environmental Justice at Bhurban on 24 Mar 2012.

12

(6) still provides that PEPA ‘97 shall continue to remain in force until repealed or amended by

the respective Provincial Assembly.28 The Punjab and Balochistan Provinces have already

enacted the provincial environmental legislation while Sindh and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa have

drafted their respective environmental protection bills which are pending enactment by the

respective Provincial Assemblies.

In particular reference with pilot districts of BKP, it is important to note that the Constitution

declares Swat and Chitral (including Kalam) as part of Provincially Administered Tribal Areas

(Article 246) where any act of parliament or the Provincial Assembly will have to be extended

through direction by the Governor with the approval of the President of Pakistan (Article 247).

The jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of Pakistan and the Peshawar High Court is also extended

in the same fashion. This constitutional provision distinguishes Swat and Chitral districts from

rest of the districts in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.

2.2. Policies and Strategies

State policies are best explained as statements of intent by a particular polity; so these remain

so in terms of their implementation – good intentions but without the required political will to

act. Though Pakistan inherited a good legal inventory at the time of its independence, policy

formulation is relatively recent phenomenon in Pakistan. In case of environment, it is even more

novice and rare. Since approval of the Pakistan National Conservation Strategy (1992), a few

policies have been formulated in the domain of environment and related disciplines, though

only some of these were approved by the relevant policy making forums – i.e., the Federal

Cabinet in the case of national policies and the Provincial Cabinets for the provincial policies. In

most cases, the policies are developed by the relevant Ministry or Department, and at the best

approved and announced by the respective Minister. For example, none of the national forest

policies was approved by the Federal Cabinet.29 In the absence of clearly defined and approved

‘policies’, even the conservation and sustainable development strategy documents (including

the National Biodiversity Action Plan) have been practically considered as policy frameworks for

biodiversity conservation. However, the interest in developing policies denotes some level of

commitment and political will for conserving natural resources.

In addition to the national level policies which are equally applicable to Khyber Pakhtunkhwa as

well, the Province itself has formulated a few policies which cover the subjects of biodiversity,

natural resource management and agro-biodiversity. However, all national policies put the onus

of implementing policies on provinces without elaborating coordination and fiscal support

mechanisms for the provinces. Hence, most of the national policies have little relevance for the

provinces unless the same are translated into provincial strategies or action plans.

2.2.1. Pakistan National Conservation Strategy, 1992

The Pakistan National Conservation Strategy30 was developed in 1987-91 and approved by the

Federal Cabinet in 1992. It was then presented at the United Nations Conference on

Environment and Development (informally known as the Earth Summit) at Rio de Janeiro in

28 IUCN, 2012. Legal Implications of the 18

th Amendment relating to Environment (Typescript). Islamabad: IUCN.

29 Personal communication with officials of the Climate Change Division.

30 Government of Pakistan and IUCN, 1992. The Pakistan National Conservation Strategy. Karachi: IUCN and

Environment & Urban Affairs Division, GoP.

13

1992 by the Prime Minister of Pakistan. The Strategy proposed

14 Programme Areas for priority implementation. Its objectives

included (1) conservation of natural resources, (2) sustainable

development, and (3) improved efficiency in the use and

management of resources. Preservation of biodiversity of natural

resources was part of its first objective. All the provincial and

district level conservation and sustainable development

strategies following NCS had more or less the same objectives

and core programme areas.

NCS introduced a consultative and participatory policy

development process which has improved with passage of time,

evinced by the fact that the Federal Government held

consultation on 22 November 2013 with 1000+ eminent

stakeholders for on its Vision 2025 and 11th Five Year Plan (2013-18) which previously used to be

a closed in-house exercise.

NCS established the following long term targets for Conserving Biodiversity:

• 35 national parks covering all ecosystems.

• Wetland reserves, covering all 27 wetlands of international importance.

• Management plans for all parks and wetlands.

• Proper maintenance of all parks.

• Proper management plans and maintenance of all 74 wildlife sanctuaries in the 6 zones

of Pakistan.

• Network of community game reserves covering all species and ecosystems.

• Network of private captive breeding farms for managing prize species.

• Successful conservation of all species on endangered list.

• International standard biodiversity data base; research and public awareness.

• Proper database and preservation of all germplasm and medicinal plants.

However, the interesting fact regarding treatment of biodiversity conservation in the first ever

dedicated policy document for sustainable development of Pakistan is that out of expected

investment portfolio of Rs. 150.7 billion for 14 Programme Areas of NCS over 10 years (1992-

2001), only one billion rupees were earmarked for biodiversity conservation which was the

lowest amongst all.31 This trend has continued till today when the entire Climate Change

Division has been allocated a Public Sector Development Programme (PSDP) of only Rs. 59

million for 2013-2014 out of a total PSDP of Rs. 789 billion32.

After reviewing the implementation of NCS, the Mid Term Review Mission (2000) concluded the

following:

• Achievements under the NCS have been primarily awareness raising and institution

building rather than actual improvements in the quality and productivity of environment

and natural resources.

31 Government of Pakistan and IUCN, 1992. The Pakistan National Conservation Strategy. Karachi: IUCN and

Environment & Urban Affairs Division, GoP.

32 Government of Pakistan, 2013. Public Sector Development Programme 2013-14. Islamabad: Ministry of Finance,

GoP.

14

• The NCS was not designed and is not adequately focused as a national sustainable

development strategy.

• The NCS process has strengthened civil society institutions and their influence, and

enhanced the capacity of public institutions.

• NCS implementation capacity requires much improvement.

• NCS continues to have a major catalytic role in furthering Pakistan's sustainable

development agenda. However, it needs refocusing and closer link to achievable

development outcomes; this should constitute the agenda of the next phase of NCS.33

The Government of Pakistan responded to the Mission’s findings with formulation of the

National Environment Policy (2005) and the National Sustainable Development Strategy (2012).

In the meanwhile, all provinces except Punjab have developed their conservation or sustainable

development strategies, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa being the first amongst them having developed

the Sarhad Provincial Conservation Strategy in 1996. Despite lower than required financial

allocations for implementation of NCS, the Strategy implementation received reasonable

bilateral and multilateral support. The Pakistan Environment Programme (1994-2007) funded by

the Governments of Canada and Netherlands with an overall portfolio of about US$ 13 million

supported the institutional mechanisms for NCS implementation, such as creation of SDPI, NCS

Unit in the Ministry of Environment and Environment Section in the Planning Commission.

However, still the environmental agenda could not be trickled down to the grassroots level.

Similarly, the attention towards conservation of biodiversity remained low.

2.2.2. Sarhad Provincial Conservation Strategy, 1996

The Sarhad Provincial Conservation Strategy was formulated during 1992-98 through province-

wide public consultations and developing sub-strategies for SPCS sectors, and was approved by

the Provincial Cabinet of NWFP (now Khyber Pakhtunkhwa) in 1998. As compared to NCS, SPCS

gave more attention to biodiversity conservation and proposed to allocate Rs. 1.052 billion for

biodiversity conservation and protected areas management out of a total layout of Rs. 65.578

billion over a decade. Additionally Rs. 5.34 billion were proposed for forestry and rangeland

management while Rs. 3.189 billion were proposed for agriculture and animal husbandry.34

The strategic measures proposed in SPCS regarding management of resources were adopted as

policy guidelines in the NWFP Forest Policy, 199935. As recommended in SPCS, the Government

of NWFP collaborated with IUCN to prepare conservation strategies for Chitral36 (2004),

Abbottabad37 (2004) and Dera Ismail Khan38 (2007) to provide baseline data and to propose long

term development framework for the districts.

33 Government of Pakistan and IUCN, 1992. The Pakistan National Conservation Strategy. Karachi: IUCN and

Environment & Urban Affairs Division, GoP.

34 Government of NWFP and IUCN, 1996. Sarhad Provincial Conservation Strategy. Karachi: IUCN & Planning,

Environment & Development Department, GoNWFP.

35 Ashfaq, Raja M. and Munir A. Awan, 2008. Policy and Legal Reform Study (Typescript). Islamabad: Ministry of

Environment, GoP.

36 Government of NWFP and IUCN, 2004. Chitral – An Integrated Development Vision. Karachi: IUCN and Chitral

District Government, GoNWFP.

37 Government of NWFP and IUCN, 2004. Abbottabad – An Integrated Development Vision. Karachi: IUCN and

Abbottabad District Government, GoNWFP.

15

Through SPCS, the Provincial Government committed the

following policy actions, some of which have been materialised:

• Rehabilitation of the environment and improvement of

the socio-economic conditions of mountain farmers

through launching participatory integrated projects

encompassing forestry, agriculture, livestock and grazing

lands and the conservation of biodiversity.

• Creation of a high-powered non-political Forestry

Commission.

• Promotion and encouragement of joint forest

management.

• A management review of the Forest Department to

improve its effectiveness and efficiency.

• Enhanced forest management plans, improved legislation and updated forest education.

• Improvement in service delivery for agriculture and livestock sector through pre-service

and in-service training for the staff.

• Streamlined agricultural marketing infrastructure.

• Improved access to credit for the small farmers.

• Prevention of good quality agricultural land from expropriation to urban and other uses.

• Enforcement of improved regulatory mechanisms for the use of agricultural pesticides

and integrated pest management.

• Amelioration of soil-related problems, improved crop breeding, improved productivity

of livestock and conservation of agricultural biodiversity.

• Integration of soil conservation and rangeland improvement measures, and inclusion of

grazing management in all integrated natural resource management projects and

programmes.

• Launch of an expanded programme of investigation of genetic plant resources.

• Establishment of a Biodiversity Round Table to oversee the provincial aspects of the

Biodiversity Action Plan.

• Institutional strengthening activities protected areas management planning.

• Establishment of a Sustainable Development Round Table with participation of local

village representatives, the union councils, religious authorities, district administrators,

rural support programme personnel, the military, and adventure travel companies.

• Institutional training initiative for conservation and sustainable management of

biodiversity.

• An active programme to collect and use traditional and indigenous knowledge.39

As with NCS, only partial implementation of the commitments could be ensured with far less

allocation of financial resources to implement the Strategy. However, SPCS remained a guiding

framework for provincial policy making (Forest Policy 1999, Agricultural Policy 2005) for natural

resource. Even today, it can provide good basis for BKP work towards action planning for

biodiversity conservation in terms of a Provincial Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (PBSAP).

38 Government of NWFP and IUCN, 2007. Dera Ismail Khan – Integrated Development Vision. Karachi: IUCN and Dera

Ismail Khan District Government, GoNWFP.

39 Government of NWFP and IUCN, 1996. Sarhad Provincial Conservation Strategy. Karachi: IUCN & Planning,

Environment & Development Department, GoNWFP.

16

Unfortunately, there has not been an effort to assess the implementation status of SPCS,

especially in terms of institutional support mobilised and financial allocations made to

implement the strategy. Such an assessment can serve as a good launching pad for PBSAP.

2.2.3. NWFP Forest Policy, 1999

Following the policy guidelines provided by NCS and SPCS, the provincial Forest Policy40 was

formulated in 1999 through a consultative process with major stakeholders. The Policy

incorporated modern concepts of community participation, joint forest management, integrated

natural resource management, decentralisation of administrative and financial authority and

incentivising conservation efforts by communities. Acknowledging active role of civil society, it

called for setting up a Forestry Commission and also proposed a Forestry Development Fund to

support the sustainable forest management efforts. It provided for revision of forestry laws to

accommodate participation of communities and the private sector in forest management,

restructuring of the Forest Department, and revision of forestry research and education system.

In addition to forests, it covered management of other elements of forest ecosystem, i.e.,

rangelands, medicinal plants, wildlife, fisheries, sericulture, wastelands, watersheds and farm

forestry; hence, providing an integrated approach for conserving biodiversity and ecosystems

holistically.

2.2.4. Biodiversity Action Plan for Pakistan, 2000

Responding to the Article 6 of the UN Convention on Biological Diversity, the Government of

Pakistan formulated the Biodiversity Action Plan for Pakistan in 2000 through an extensive

consultative process. It has 13 components, corresponding to specific Articles of the CBD:

planning and policies, legislation, identification and monitoring, in-situ conservation, ex-situ

conservation, sustainable use, incentive measures, research and training, public education and

awareness, environmental impact assessment, access issues, exchange of information, and

financial resources. For its implementation, it recommends:

• Policy and institutional reform, and institutional

strengthening.

• Greater collaboration between government agencies,

local communities and NGOs.

• Ministry of Environment (now Climate Change Division)

to have overall responsibility for the implementation of

BAP.

• Establishment of a small Biodiversity Secretariat within

Ministry of Environment, Local Government and Rural

Development to coordinate implementation and foster

linkages between, and within, different sectors affecting

biodiversity.

• Establishment of Federal Biodiversity Steering

Committee, Provincial Steering Committees and a broad-based Biodiversity Working

Group (BWG).41

40 Government of NWFP, 1999. NWFP Forest Policy 1999. Peshawar: Forestry, Fisheries & Wildlife Department,

GoNWFP.

41 Government of Pakistan, IUCN and WWF, 2000. Biodiversity Action Plan for Pakistan. Rawalpindi: IUCN, WWF

Pakistan and Ministry of Environment, Local Government and Rural Development, GoP.

17

The Plan elaborated 25 objectives under 13 components and proposed 76 priority actions to be

implemented in short to medium term. Reviewing the implementation of BAP, Anwar and

Sheikh (2005) concluded that overall implementation has been less than satisfactory with only

13% of the priority actions properly addressed, 42% partially addressed and the remaining 45%

actions were not even initiated. They attributed the slow progress in BAP implementation (till

2005) to lack of policy guidelines and technical guidance, weak coordination among government

departments, insufficient available funding, weak technical expertise of departments,

insufficient know-how about BAP, lack of ownership of BAP by provinces and others, and non-

integration of BAP into development plan and policies.42

On positive note, the Biodiversity Steering Committees at federal and provincial levels and the

Biodiversity Working Group have been notified. The Biodiversity Directorate was also

established in 2006, though its first Director could only be appointed in 2012. Since 2000, many

biodiversity conservation projects have been initiated. The Biodiversity Action Plan is now

planned to be updated in the form of National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (NBSAP) for

which UNEP has provided support to the Climate Change Division.

Given that provinces have their specific biodiversity characteristics requiring province specific

strategy and action plan for conservation of biodiversity, BKP support to Khyber Pakhtunkhwa

for developing its PBSAP is a timely intervention, especially if it can be synchronised with

formulation of NBSAP through enhanced coordination and joint consultative sessions.

2.2.5. National Environment Policy, 2005

In an effort to update the Pakistan National Conservation Strategy (1992), the Government of

Pakistan prepared the National Environment Policy which was approved by the Federal Cabinet

on 29 June 2005. The Policy provided sectoral guidelines for water supply and management, air

quality and noise, waste management, forestry, biodiversity and protected areas, climate

change and ozone depletion, energy efficiency and renewables, agriculture and livestock,

multilateral environmental agreements, as well as cross-sectoral guidelines on poverty,

population, gender, health, trade, local governance and natural disaster management. The

policy also pledged integration of environment into development planning, provision of

legislation and regulatory framework, capacity development, economic and market based

instruments, public awareness and education, and public-private-civil society partnerships.

In order to promote the conservation and sustainable use of Pakistan's biodiversity and effective

management of protected areas, and the equitable sharing of benefits arising thereof for the

well-being of the nation, the Policy proposed the following measures:

a. Ensure effective implementation of the Biodiversity Action Plan.

b. Revise and update the Biodiversity Action Plan in line with developments taking place at

the national and international levels.

c. Create new national parks and protected areas.

d. Develop and implement protected areas system plan for in-situ conservation of

biodiversity with community involvement.

e. Encourage involvement of local communities in conservation and sustainable use of

biodiversity through provision of incentives and responsibilities.

42 Anwar, Maqsood and Kashif Sheikh, 2005. Review of the Implementation of the Biodiversity Action Plan for

Pakistan: Current Status and Future Steps (Typescript). Islamabad: IUCN.

18

f. Prepare a national strategy and action plan for combating spread of invasive species.

g. Enforce biosafety rules and guidelines and adopt necessary biosafety related legal

framework.

h. Establish a National Institute of Biodiversity and Ecosystem Sciences at the Federal level

with the objective of enhancing training and research capabilities in the fields of

biodiversity conservation and ecosystem management.

i. Promote ex-situ conservation of biodiversity through establishment of botanical

gardens, gene banks, zoos and captive breeding of animals and plants.

j. Develop National Zoological Gardens Act.

k. Devise guidelines for accreditation and registration of private wild animal captive

breeding centres.

l. Prepare and implement integrated coastal zone management plans for protection of

marine life.

m. Develop and implement a comprehensive National Wetlands Policy.

n. Develop policy and regulatory framework for conservation, cultivation and marketing of

medicinal/economic plants.

o. Create protected areas for conservation of marine eco-systems.

p. Ensure that any mining activity within and in the vicinity of national parks does not

compromise the objectives of protected areas.

q. Harvest fisheries on a sustainable yield basis.

r. Protect fish habitats against both encroachment and pollution.

s. Use full potential of inland fisheries to promote aquaculture.

t. Improve quality management for fish catches for export and domestic utilization.

u. Develop and implement area conservation strategies for urban centres and towns of

historical and cultural significance.

v. Promote eco-tourism concept and practices.43

Some of the measures such as related to BAP, biosafety guidelines and ABS legislation have

been taken while the rest need to be pursued seriously. Unfortunately, the monitoring

mechanism in the form of National Environment Policy Implementation Committee, though

established, could not function effectively. The Environment Policy Directorate is yet to be

established and chances are dismal given downsizing of the Ministry of Environment. Lack of

political will, low priority accorded to the subject and lack of requisite institutional capacities are

major impeding blocks in effective implementation of the Policy.

2.2.6. NWFP Agriculture Policy, 2005

Being first ever agriculture policy of the Province, the North-Western Frontier Province

Agricultural Policy 2005 was well received by all relevant stakeholders, including farmers,

private sector and agriculture/livestock experts. It announced tax cuts for small farmers (in fact

no tax for farmers holding up to five acres), multi-billion rupees investment programmes, legal

reforms and facilities for farmers’ community. Aimed at attaining self-sufficiency in food

security, poverty alleviation through creation of jobs in the agriculture, livestock and

horticulture sectors, the Policy intended to integrate and improve service delivery system,

strengthen public/private partnership, mainstream gender considerations, ensure increased

participation of farming community in decision making, introduction of participatory

technologies, upgrading and strengthening existing legislation, tax relief in agriculture sector,

and research and development. The Policy also provided for multi-stakeholders district

43 Government of Pakistan, 2005. National Environmental Policy 2005. Islamabad: Ministry of Environment, GoP.

19

agricultural coordination forums/committees for advising on sustainable agricultural practices.

The Policy also envisaged formation of Livestock Development Board, chaired by a private sector

representative to work for achieving growth and bringing investment in the livestock sector

Following the Policy, the Government pledged an investment of Rs. 1 billion for 100 bulldozers

to be available free of rent, Rs. 150 million for model farms services centres at all 24 districts, Rs.

8.5 million for establishing biological control laboratories at Peshawar and Dera Ismail Khan to

help prevent pest attacks on sugarcane crop, Rs. 20 million support project for farmers to

mitigate effects of termite in the affected parts of the province, Rs. 150 million investment to

bring baron land in different parts of the province under cultivation and Rs. 17.5 million

investment to establish soil testing laboratories in seven districts of the province. It was

anticipated that the federal government would provide Rs. 6.06 billion for water courses in

various parts of the Province while Rs. 8 billion were to be arranged by the Provincial

Government.44

Though putting forward new ideas and approaches, the Policy had no mention of biodiversity,

ecosystems and agro-biodiversity, and conservation of these key elements of diverse agro-

ecological zones in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. In the absence of such measures, there is always risk

of ignoring the value of forests when developing land for agriculture, the carrying capacity of

rangelands when promoting livestock development and value of conserving agro-biodiversity

when new and high-yielding crops and cultivars are being introduced. Realising the need to

update its Policy commitment, the Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa has formulated another

Agriculture Policy and Action Plan (see Section 2.2.15) which is in the process of approval by the

Provincial Cabinet.

2.2.7. NWFP Horticultural Policy, 2009

Developed by the Agriculture Extension and Research Sections of the Agriculture Department

with assistance from the Pakistan Agribusiness Project, the Policy envisaged reorientation of

research and development, improving efficiency and profitability of horticulture, improved

public private partnership and market development.45 Following the Policy, there has been lot of

emphasis on horticultural research and tens of varieties have been introduced by the

Agricultural Research Institutes and Centres. However, due to weak research-extension link the

benefits have not reached the farmer community to the fullest potential. The Policy needs to be

transformed into an action plan for realisation of the proposed policy actions.

2.2.8. National Forest Policy, 2010 (Draft)

Forests, being precious natural resource which can generate revenue, have always been subject

to policy development and regulation through legislation, no matter at what level these were

approved. Pakistan inherited the Indian Forest Policy 1894 which resulted in a small, well-

preserved public forest estate, but provided nothing for improving and extending forests. It also

lacked participation of forest communities, and allowed forest rights and concessions to

multiply to the point where right holders’ demands could not be satisfied without damaging

44 “NWFP unveils agricultural policy.” Daily Dawn, 15 Jun 2005. http://www.dawn.com/news/143546/nwfp-unveils-

agricultural-policy.

45 Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, 2013. Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Agriculture Strategy and Policy: A Ten Year

Perspective (Typescript). Peshawar: Department of Agriculture, Livestock and Cooperation, GoKP.

20

forest growth46. It even allowed agriculture practices on forest land47. Pakistan’s first National

Forest Policy was announced in 1955 which, guided by the Central Board of Forestry

(established in 1952), aimed at increasing the area under forests. This was then replaced by the

National Forest Policy 1962 with a primary objective of revenue generation and maximisation of

yield from forest. It was followed by the National Forest Policy 1975 which is considered

relatively people friendly policy as it recognised owners’ right to manage guzara forests. This

was again replaced by the National Policy on Forestry and Wildlife 1980 which emphasised

planting of fast-growing species and fuel wood, and involvement of people for tree plantation

and nature conservation. The Pakistan Forest Policy 1991 was primarily influenced by donors’

interest to promote forestry programmes at the grassroots levels. Good at intentions, it also

could not achieve objectives of sustainable forest management. It set a very ambitious target of

increasing the afforested area from 5.4% to 10%, which even today is a dream. This policy was

again targeted at increasing the revenue at the expense of people’s rights on natural resources.

In 2002, another National Forest Policy was announced which emphasised the role of local

governments in forest management as the Local Government Ordinance 2001 was just

promulgated. It attracted lot of criticism by the advocacy organizations in Pakistan for allowing

the Provincial Governments to resume sustainable commercial timber harvesting in the

Reserved, Protected, Guzara and Private Forests.

The latest in the series is the draft National Forest Policy 201048. Though it has many common

threads running from the previous policies, especially in terms of commercial value of forests

and management by the Forest Departments, it is considered much better and forward looking.

The salient features of the National Forest Policy 2010 include:

� The Policy considers itself a framework for sustainable management of forests and allied

natural resources, namely watersheds, rangelands, wildlife and associated biodiversity. It

has special emphasis on protection and development of forest ecosystems to serve the

objective of biodiversity and wildlife conservation.

� It puts the onus of forest management on the provincial governments along with

recognising communities’ role and promoting joint forest management. At the same time it

holds the Federal Government responsible for coordination, facilitation and international

cooperation for realizing targets of Forestry sector, both in terms of environmental services

and forest products.

� Though it also proposes ‘increasing productivity of forests’ and ‘encouraging sustainable

utilisation of wood and non-wood forest products’ but also introduces wood substitution by

alternative renewable energy resources, e.g., biogas and solar energy.

� It introduces the concepts of carbon sequestration, EIA, corporate social responsibility,

wood substitution, import liberalization, forest Carbon trading through Clean Development

Mechanism (CDM) and Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation

(REDD) mechanism.

46 Shahbaz, Babar, Tanvir Ali and Abid Q. Suleri, 2007. “Critical Analysis of Forest Policies of Pakistan: Implications for

Sustainable Livelihoods”. In Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, 12: 4 (May 2007), pp. 441-453.

47 Ashfaq, Raja M. and Munir A. Awan, 2008. Policy and Legal Reform Study (Typescript). Islamabad: Ministry of

Environment, GoP.

48 Government of Pakistan, 2010. National Forest Policy 2010 (Draft). Islamabad: Ministry of Environment, GoP.

21

� It proposes establishment of a Forest Development Fund/Endowment Fund (at the federal

level) to be managed as an independent company and governed by a Board of Directors

representing Federal Government, Provincial Forest Departments, NGOs and Civil Society.

� NFP 2010 has fully endorsed the role of forest ecosystems in mitigation of climate change

and conservation of biological diversity, and commits to build capacities at all levels to cope

with the challenges of environmental degradation more efficiently as well as to meet the

MDGs targets committed at the national level.

As explained earlier, this version of the National Forest Policy is also without approval of the

Federal Cabinet. It was sent to the Federal Cabinet for approval but was referred to the Ministry

of Interprovincial Coordination for its comments and consensus among the provinces, as an

aftermath of 18th Constitutional Amendment (2010). Since then, it is pending for approval by the

Competent Authority, the Prime Minister in this case, and given post 18th Constitutional

Amendment scenario it is likely to remain a draft policy.

2.2.9. National Rangeland Policy, 2010 (Draft)

Envisioned “to manage the rangelands of Pakistan to potential productivity level, contributing

significantly to improve living conditions of the dependent communities towards enhancement

of livestock share in national economy besides maintaining ecological functions and mitigating

impacts of climate change and loss of biodiversity” and with an overall goal “to rehabilitate the

degraded rangelands and pastures close to their potential for increased productivity enhance

their environmental and regulatory functions and services, increase and conserve rangeland

biodiversity besides mitigating the negative impacts of global climate change through

collaborative and holistic rangeland resources to contribute to the livelihood improvement of

the rangelands dependent communities as well as to the national economy”49, the policy is still

to be formally approved by the Competent Authority. The Policy puts a thrust at ecosystem

restoration and biodiversity conservation through:

• Identifying and demarcating biodiversity hotspots in the rangelands

• Introducing ecotourism

• Conducting studies on rangeland biodiversity and preparing database of rangeland

biodiversity with characterization, mapping and identification of the genetic differences

of the rangeland resources

• Promoting use of bio-technology

• Participation of consumers and other stakeholders

The Policy proposes a National Range Conservation and Development Fund to be established

and a coordination mechanism for implementation of the Policy to be established involving the

federal environment ministry, provincial forest, agriculture and livestock departments, national,

regional and international organizations and relevant communities. It also proposed creation of

a position of the Chief Conservator of Rangelands in the existing Forest Departments. Trickling

down the policy direction, the Policy suggests formulation of Provincial Rangeland Policies and

enactment of National and Provincial Rangeland Management Acts with relevant rules and

49 Government of Pakistan, 2010. National Rangeland Policy 2010 (Draft). Islamabad: Ministry of Environment, GoP.

22

regulations to be framed. The Federal and Provincial Committees have been proposed to

monitor implementation of the Policy.

The Policy was a timely step in the right direction in the backdrop of practical efforts being made

by the federal and provincial governments for sustainable land use planning. The issue is also of

relatively lesser degree of disagreement, hence there is a consensus of most of the policy

directions presented through the Policy.

2.2.10. Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Economic Growth Strategy, 2011

Reinforcing core priorities of the Comprehensive Development Strategy (2010) of the Province,

the Strategy50 identifies the potential ‘growth/priority sectors’ of the provincial economy

including agricultural value addition and agro-processing industries, mining, oil and gas, hydel

power, and tourism. Recognising the role of private sector and need to conducive policy and

legal environment, the Strategy presents an economic development framework with following

commitments:

1. Promotion of growth sectors with comparative advantages of indigenous raw materials,

e.g. minerals

2. Investments into value added industrial sectors i.e. livestock, horticulture, dairy

processing, and light and high value mineral products

3. Focus on developing the competitive advantages for industrial sectors through reduced

input costs related to Energy and Power, Water, Transport

4. Focus on Improving the skills level of the Labour force through greater emphasis on

Technical and Vocational education/training

5. Achieving consolidation, rationalisation of the public spending to do away with

inefficiencies; improving the service delivery instead of piling up resources into brick and

mortar

6. Creating an enabling, business friendly environment for private sector enterprises

Though not mentioning biodiversity per se, the Strategy emphasises on development of

agriculture sector through value addition in terms of fruits, horticulture, agro-forestry and

livestock as compared to low yielding traditional cereal crops.

2.2.11. National Climate Change Policy, 2012

The National Climate Change Policy51 was approved by the Federal Cabinet on 26 September

2012. With an overall goal, ‘to ensure that climate change is mainstreamed in the economically

and socially vulnerable sectors of the economy and to steer Pakistan towards climate resilient

development’, the Policy puts forward comprehensive policy objectives of sustained economic

growth, integration of climate change into inter-related national policies, pro-poor gender

sensitive adaptation and cost-effective mitigation, water, food and energy security, DRR,

effective decision making and coordination, creating awareness, building capacities, and

conservation of natural resources and long term sustainability. It also seeks effective use of

financial opportunities, and public and private sector investment in adaptation measures.

50 Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, 2011. Economic Growth Strategy. Peshawar: P&D Department, GoKP.

51 Government of Pakistan, 2012. National Climate Change Policy. Islamabad: Ministry of Climate Change, GoP.

23

The last objective of conservation of natural resources and long term sustainability has further

been elaborated through specific measures under the Section ‘Forestry, Biodiversity and Other

Vulnerable Ecosystems’. Particularly the biodiversity related policy measures include:

a. Encourage empirical research on flora and fauna in the context of their responses to

current and historical climatic changes.

b. Set National Biodiversity Indicators and provide the requisite financial resources for

implementation of the Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP).

c. Establish gene banks, seed banks, zoos and botanical gardens to conserve the biological

diversity of valuable species.

d. Integrate conservation and protection of biological diversity into various disciplines such

as forestry and marine and pastures.

e. Encourage involvement of local communities in conservation and sustainable use of

biodiversity.

f. Take necessary measures to establish nature reserves in areas that are rich in

biodiversity to preserve their existence.

g. Establish protected areas in all vulnerable ecosystems, particularly in coastal and marine

areas.

h. Ensure that ‘ecosystem based adaptation’ is part of an overall climate change

adaptation strategy at all levels (national to local).

i. Assist genetically impoverished species or those that have important ecosystem

functions by providing natural migration corridors as well as assisted migration.52

The Policy suggests establishment of Climate Change Policy Implementation Committees at

federal and provincial levels. The Provincial Committees are to report to the National

Committee which in turn would report to the Prime Minister’s Committee on Climate Change. A

national level Climate Change Fund is also proposed to support implementation of the Policy.

This is one the best policies in terms of recognising value of biodiversity and ecosystems in

ensuring sustainable development.

2.2.12. National Sustainable Development Strategy, 2012

Developed through an extended and reiterative process spread over six years (2006-2012), the

NSDS envisions ‘to evolve a just and harmonious society in the country through promotion of a

vibrant and equitable economic growth without overexploitation of natural resources with fair

distribution of development dividends to all; in particular to the marginalized, poor and

vulnerable in the society and to future generations’. The Strategy is aligned with the emerging

concept of ‘green economy’ as an alternate to the Framework for Economic Growth (2011),

prepared by the Planning Commission of Pakistan during the previous regime. In the backdrop

of the classic model of sustainable development, the Strategy puts forward the following priority

areas for action:

1. Sustainable and Inclusive Economic Growth

a. Population Dynamics and Sustainability

b. Agricultural Productivity and Food Security

c. Energy for Sustainable Development

d. Sustainable Consumption and Industrial Production (SCP)

52 Government of Pakistan, 2012. National Climate Change Policy. Islamabad: Ministry of Climate Change, GoP.

24

e. Trade for Sustainable Development

f. Water Resource Management

g. Sustainable Tourism for Growth and Development

h. Green Economy Fuelled by Green Jobs

2. Social and Human Development

a. Poverty Eradication

b. Gender Equality and Women Empowerment

c. Food Security

d. Health and Sustainable Development

e. Education for Sustainable Development

f. Water Supply and Sanitation

g. Social Protection

3. Environmentally Sustainable Development

a. Environmental Sustainability

b. Air Quality and Pollution

c. Water Pollution and Quality Deterioration

d. Solid and Hazardous Waste Management

e. Forestry and Land Degradation

f. Biodiversity Protection

4. Climate Change and Sustainable Development

In particular, the Biodiversity Protection requires the following measures:

a. Promote the future environment conservation, management and resource use based on

a three-pronged approach i.e. equitable sharing of benefits of environmental

management, increasing community management of natural resources, and integrating

environmental issues into socio-economic development planning through the concept

of payment for ecosystem services (PES) to achieve sustainable development.

b. Save the natural resources from depletion and stress, especially water and land,

focusing on eco-based interventions especially designed for the varied ecological zones

of the country.

c. Preservation of the diverse wetlands and forests of the country that are repositories of

the country’s biodiversity.

d. Develop Protected Area Systems plan for protecting flora and fauna of global

significance as well as ensuring that the National Parks of the country are effectively

managed.

e. Take steps towards creation of a gene pool/bank as a bio-repository that can preserve

genetic material for the plants, animals as well as forest biodiversity present in the

country.

f. Conserve life support systems, habitats, species and genetic diversity as the assets of

mankind and promote tangibly defined efforts such as doubling of forest cover by 2030,

as envisaged in Vision 2030.

g. Prepare a list of national lists of threatened species including those which are nationally

rare and declining; those which are nationally rare, not declining, but otherwise at risk

and those which are highly localized in distribution; and those which are still widespread

and common but suffering significant decline.

25

The Strategy proposes implementation of the focused agenda at federal, provincial and local

levels steered by a National Sustainable Development Council (NSDC) by remitting the existing

Pakistan Environmental Protection Council. NSDC is further proposed to be trickling down in the

form of Provincial Sustainable Development Councils and the Local Sustainable Development

Councils. The implementation of the Strategy is proposed to be supported through a Sustainable

Development or Climate Change Fund (already proposed through the National Climate Change

Policy 2012). Proposing facilitating factors such as a dedicated financing mechanism, enabling

human and institutional capacity, incorporating targeted incentives, ensuring accountability and

transparency, providing a legal backing to the NSDS, enacting a science and innovation support

network and leveraging civil society and private sector support to ensure success of the strategy,

the Strategy puts in place a monitoring and reporting system for course correction and update

of NSDS after every three years.53

2.2.13. National Disaster Risk Reduction Policy, 2013

The Policy54 prepared by the National Disaster Management Authority under the supervision of

the Climate Change Division is first of its kind in Pakistan. The Policy fully recognise the role of

climate change in causing natural disasters, and stresses upon building response capacities at

national, provincial and local levels to cope with the climate change impacts and climate

sensitive development planning. It also recognises the role of provincial, district and municipal

governments, together with civil society groups, to promote and support risk-reduction

behaviour among vulnerable communities and taking disaster risk-reduction measures in

collaboration with the federal government. However, strangely the Policy has totally missed the

ecosystem based DRR measures and the need to protect ecosystems to provide natural shield

against disasters like tsunamis, cyclones, flash floods and glacial lack outburst flooding.

2.2.14. Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Community Driven Local Development Policy, 2013

Realising the need to devolve service delivery and developmental action at the lowest level of

governance (Union Council and village) and involving organised communities in undertaking the

development activities through challenge fund mechanism, the Government of Khyber

Pakhtunkhwa has recently formulated its policy on Community-Driven Local Development.55

With an overall goal “to achieve a sustainable improvement in the coverage and quality of front-

line public service delivery through the active involvement of local communities” the Framework

has the following objectives:

• Put in place a fiscal and regulatory framework for CDLD where local communities are in

charge of executing local development/service delivery initiatives.

• Build the capacity of the relevant public sector entities and functionaries at the district

level to operationalise CDLD.

• Provide an enabling environment for CBOs to access public funds earmarked for CDLD

initiatives.

53 Government of Pakistan, 2012. National Sustainable Development Strategy. Islamabad: Ministry of Climate Change,

GoP.

54 Government of Pakistan, 2013. National Disaster Risk Reduction Policy. Islamabad: Ministry of Climate Change, GoP.

55 Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, 2013. Community-Driven Local Development: A Governance Framework.

Peshawar: Finance Department, GoKP.

26

The implementation arrangements for the Policy include development of a robust monitoring

framework, output based budget at departmental level, third party validation and embedment

of the monitoring system into district management office.

The Policy is devoid of any reference to ecosystem preservation or environmental

considerations while undertaking development activities in the domains of education, health,

and water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH). However, this gives a window of opportunity to BKP

for working with the key players of this Policy (especially the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Finance

Department and the District Administration in Swat and Chitral) to integrate biodiversity

conservation into development planning and implementation.

2.2.15. Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Agriculture Strategy and Policy, 2013 (Draft)

The recently drafted Policy56 which is in the approval process envisions the following policy

objectives:

• Building on local agricultural skills, practices and traditions carried forward by farmers,

traders and entrepreneurs in the Province.

• Involving all stakeholders to serve the farmer for creating synergies through better

coordination and integration between government services, civil society organizations,

academia and private sector.

• Creating a ‘fit for purpose’ public support system as the current staff of the Department

may not be suitable for its new role and needs to move out of directly implementing

projects and activities.

• Building human resources as the quality of staff working in agriculture needs to be

improved and upgraded, especially in case of junior to mid-level technical staff along

with an improved system for technology generation and adaption.

• Factoring in climate change and disasters while preparing strategies and capacities to

respond.

It presents quite practical implementation strategies and envisages an integrated

implementation by governments, CSOs and the private sector. It also prescribes actions to be

taken in the short term and their tentative cost, given below:

Policy Actions Cost

(million Rs.)

Enhancing and strengthening the commodity chain for key commodities 2500

Strengthening systems for technology generation, assessment and dissemination 1000

Creating accredited laboratory and inspection system for product certification 1000

Agriculture zoning for development 200

Capacity development and registration of NGO/CSO service providers 200

Specific actions for promoting private sector investment 500

Targeted Support to Selected Poor Areas 3000

Rangeland development 2000

56 Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, 2013. Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Agriculture Strategy and Policy: A Ten Year

Perspective (Typescript). Peshawar: Department of Agriculture, Livestock and Cooperation, GoKP.

27

Policy Actions Cost

(million Rs.)

Disaster Risk Preparedness 500

Transforming the Farm Service Centres into Community Service Centres 300

Restructuring of the Departments of Agriculture and Livestock 500

Review of Seed Act, Market Acts, Consumer Rights Act, Plant Breeder’s Rights 300

Following this policy initiative, a legislation to provide legal protection to the Model Farm

Services Centres is also being drafted.

2.2.16. Pakistan’ Vision 2025

Announced recently, the Pakistan 2025 is the country’s long–term development blueprint which

aims to create a globally competitive and prosperous country providing a high quality of life for

all its citizens. It aspires to transform Pakistan into an industrialized and knowledge based

middle income country by 2025. Its Priority Areas include integrated energy, modernisation of

infrastructure, indigenous resource mobilisation, institutional reforms and governance, value-

addition in commodity producing sectors, export promotion and private sector led growth, and

social capital.57 While its details are still being worked out and an extensive consultative meeting

inviting 1000+ stakeholders has been convened on 22 November 2013 for seek feedback and

input from them, it is obvious that environment in general and biodiversity conservation in

particular does not appear anywhere on government’s long term agenda.

2.3. National Laws

Given that the most obvious elements of biodiversity, forest and wildlife, were always a

provincial subject, there has been limited effort to legislate for NRM subjects at the national

level. Baring those which continued from the pre-independence period, rest of the national laws

in NRM sectors have been enacted either to fulfil the international obligations under

multilateral environmental agreements (a list of MEAs signed/ratified by Pakistan is given at

Annex III) or to cover interprovincial issues.

2.3.1. Pakistan Environmental Protection Act, 1997

Repealing the Pakistan Environmental Protection Ordinance 1983, PEPA ‘97 has been the key

environmental legislation instrument for the entire country until the 18th Constitutional

Amendment through its Section 101(3) omitted the Concurrent Legislative List (CLL) from the

Fourth Schedule; transferring the responsibility of environmental legislation and management

to the provinces. Responding to the need, Punjab (in 2012) and Balochistan (in 2013) have

already enacted their provincial environmental protection acts while Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and

Sindh have prepared the draft environmental protection bills which are waiting for their

respective legislative assemblies to enactment the same. Nevertheless, PEPA ’97 is still valid for

the Islamabad Capital Territory, other areas in the Federation not forming part of any Province,

and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Sindh who have not yet passed their provincial Acts. A Committee

has been constituted at the Climate Change Division to propose some amendments to PEPA ’97

in order to align it with the federal functions regarding environmental protection.

57 Government of Pakistan’s Vision 2025 (http://www.pc.gov.pk/?page_id=73). Accessed on 9 Nov 2013.

28

The Act established a Pakistan Environmental Protection Council, chaired by the Prime Minister

of Pakistan, and the Pakistan Environmental Protection Agency, and the Provincial

Environmental Protection Agencies. The Act, in turn, resulted in framing of relevant rules and

National Environmental Quality Standards which are still valid and have already been adopted

by the provinces. However, PEPA ’97 was more focused on environmental protection in general,

primarily through controlling pollution, rather than promoting ecosystem based measures for

conservation of biodiversity. Also, it was more regulatory rather than inclusive and participative

in its nature.

2.3.2. CITES Act, 2012

In order to fulfil its commitments under the United Nations Convention on International Trade

in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora 1973, the Government of Pakistan has

promulgated the Pakistan Trade Control of Wild Fauna and Flora Act, 2012 (CITES Act) which

extends to whole of Pakistan. It prohibits export, re-export and import of any specimen included

in any Appendix of CITES and fixes punishment for contravention.58 It provides for establishment

of a Management Authority with representation from all provinces for making concessions on

scientific and legal grounds.

This law has significant implications for sustainable harvesting of non-timber forest products,

especially medicinal and aromatic plants as it would not only help checking unsustainable

harvesting practices but would also encourage the beneficiary communities to make sure that

the such species are conserved and protected so that a sustainable use regime could be put in

place to take full advantage of such species.

The National Council for Conservation of Wildlife (NCCW) is the designated CITES Scientific and

Management Authority in Pakistan.

2.3.3. Access Benefit Sharing Bill, 2012 (Draft)

The draft legislative bill was drafted by the Climate Change Division with the help of IUCN in

2012 “to provide for facilitating access to genetic resources and their derivatives for

environmentally sound uses, protecting traditional knowledge associated with them, equitably

sharing benefits derived from them, and promoting technology transfer and building scientific

knowledge and technological capacity associated with them”. Applicable to in-situ and ex-situ

genetic resources and the relevant traditional knowledge, the bill is a legislative requirement

under the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture (ITPGRFA) to

which Pakistan is a Party. The draft bill protects the community rights in respect to genetic

resources, i.e., (1) the inalienable right to use their traditional knowledge in their customary

ways, (2) the right to regulate the access to their traditional knowledge, and (3) the right to

share the benefits arising out of the utilisation of their traditional knowledge.59

The Bill covers almost all aspects of access to and sharing of benefits arising out of use of genetic

resources and traditional knowledge, except for consensus on constitution and locale of the

‘permitting authority’. The provinces want this to be provincial body while the federal

government fears that having provincial/subnational ‘permitting authorities’ will fail the

58 Government of Pakistan, 2012. Pakistan Trade Control of Wild Fauna and Flora Act, 2012.

59 Government of Pakistan, 2012. Pakistan Access to Genetic Resources and Benefit-sharing Act (Draft). Islamabad:

Climate Change Division, GoP.

29

purpose of equitable benefit sharing in a competitive business environment. If consensus could

be built on this institutional issue, it can get enacted by the legislature. Given its subject matter,

this bill can truly be called a biodiversity law in entirety.

2.4. Provincial Laws

The history of statutory legislation in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa is more than two centuries old dating

back to colonial period, before which precedential and customary laws were in practice

constituting the statecraft.60 Management of natural resources, especially forests, has

traditionally been under tribal customs until the colonial government decided to bring forests

under state control to generate revenue. The collective inventory of laws accessed from the

Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa61 and the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Provincial Assembly62

mentions 858 laws dating back to 1798. Removing duplications and adding some of the missing

laws, it can safely be concluded that there about 800 laws promulgated in the Province. Initially

the federal or laws enacted in other territories (like Bengal and Punjab) were simply extended to

the province and later were passed by the provincial assembly or promulgated by the Chief

Executive (during Martial Law regimes). Out of these about 90 laws relate to natural resource

management (land, forests, agriculture, livestock, fisheries and water). Though covered under

forestry, wildlife, land, water and livestock laws, there is not a single law dedicated to deal with

biodiversity conservation. Understandably, most of the laws relate to land and forests, both

being the revenue generation subjects.

Figure 1: NRM Laws in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa

Source: Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Provincial Assembly of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa

The first time use of term biodiversity in any provincial legislation was in the North-West

Frontier Province Forestry Commission Act, 1999 (amended in 2005) which just defined

biodiversity and biological diversity. However, later the North-West Frontier Province Forest

Ordinance, 2002 pledges biodiversity conservation through assigning power to the Forest

Department (under Section 105) to lease out the whole or any portion of a reserved forest,

protected forest, wasteland, or other forest (a) to plant trees, and increase production of forest

produce, (b) to implement agro-forestry and social forestry schemes for the benefit of the local

60 IUCN, 2004. Chitral: A Study in Statecraft (1320–1969). Karachi: IUCN Pakistan.

61 Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Rules, Regulation, Acts, Laws (http://www.khyberpakhtunkhwa.gov.pk/Gov/Rule-Regulations-

Laws-Acts.php). Accessed on 4 Nov 2013.

62 Provincial Assembly Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Acts Advanced Search

(http://www.pakp.gov.pk/index.php/acts/adv_search/en). Accessed on 4 Nov 2013.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Agriculture Forests Fisheries Land Livestock Water Wildlife

# o

f la

ws

30

communities, (c) to operate farms for breeding of wildlife and conservation of biodiversity and

nature reserves. The natural resource management legislation prior to NCS is largely for

exploitation of resources. The term ‘sustainable development’ appeared for the first time in the

North-West Frontier Province Forest Ordinance, 2002. Laws relating to land tenure are

fundamental for the management and conservation of natural resources but these hardly

mention biodiversity conservation of sustainable natural resource management. Most of the

legal instruments governing land use and tenure are related to agriculture and irrigation.

In general, integration of contemporary concepts of sustainable management of natural

resources into legislation is a recent phenomenon. The existing legislation governing extractive

industry in the Province provides limited, discretionary protection for trees but does not require

or provide guidelines for managing the effects of mining operations on natural resources.

Khyber Pakhtunkhwa being rich in hydel energy potential hardly has any laws or regulations for

protecting environment in setting up such projects. Same is very much true for the tourism

industry.63

2.4.1. West Pakistan Fisheries Ordinance, 1961 (amended in 1982 and 1991)

Fisheries development and management in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa is still regulated under this

more than half century old piece of legislation which was partially amended through NWFP

Fisheries (Amendment) Ordinance, 1982 and NWFP Fisheries (Amendment) Act, 1991. It

prohibits use of explosives or poison for fish catch and puts restrictions over catch of certain

species and size of fish (mentioned in the First Schedule), and authorises the Government to

declare any water as fish sanctuary and prohibit use of certain types of nets. On violation of

such prohibition, the Court may order confiscation of the fishing gear.

The Government framed the North-West Frontier Province Fisheries Rules, 1976 to further

clarify the conditions for leasing out waters, issuing fishing licences and catching certain types

and sizes of fish. There rules were framed for while of the Province, especially Charsadda, Dir,

Mardan, Peshawar, Swat and Malakand.

2.4.2. Dir, Chitral and Swat (Administration) Regulation, 1969

Declaring princely states of Dir, Chitral and Swat as districts, the Dir, Chitral and Swat

(Administration) Regulation, 1969 stripped the rulers of their powers and extended all

applicable national and provincial laws and regulations to these districts. The employees of

these states were inducted into the provincial service. Under this regulation, the land owned by

the royal families was declared as state land which was challenged in the court of law and is still

pending for final settlement. For example, the defunct Mehtar Chitral and the Khyber

Pakhtunkhwa Wildlife Department are in litigation over his private property within the core

zone of the Chitral Gol National Park. Even after 44 years of enactment of this law, affairs of

PATA are being managed under its authority without realising the need for changes required to

make it meaningful and realistic in terms of equality of law for all citizens of the state. For

example, PATA are tax free, have a different judicial system under the Sharia Nizam-e-Adl

Regulation 2009 and land tenure settlement is yet to be made.

63 IUCN, 2003. Environmental Law in Pakistan: Governing Natural Resources and the Processes and Institutions that

Affect Them - North-West Frontier Province (Volume 1: Description and Analysis). Karachi: IUCN.

31

2.4.3. North-West Frontier Province Wild-life (Protection, Preservation, Conservation

and Management) Act, 1975 (amended in 1976 and 1984)

Repealing the Wild Birds and Animals Protection Act 1912, the West Pakistan Wild-life

Protection Ordinance 1959 and the North-West Frontier Province Wild-life (Protection,

Preservation, Conservation and Management) Ordinance, 1975, this is the only comprehensive

law in the Province for management of wildlife and protected areas. The Act provides for

establishment of the North-West Frontier Province Wildlife Management Board, chaired by the

Chief Minister, in order to (a) advise the Government on policy decisions relating to

conservation and development of wildlife and game management in the Province, (b) scrutinise

the development schemes relating to wildlife and game management, and (c) review the

progress of development activities in the field of wildlife protection, preservation, conservation

and management in the Province. It prohibits unlawful hunting and provides for game

regulation through licensing. Later, the community managed trophy hunting programme was

supported through this law. It also provides for declaring any biologically hotspot geographical

area as National Park, Wildlife Sanctuary, Game Reserve or Private Game Reserve.

The Act unfortunately does not specify the office or authority responsible for the management,

protection or conservation of wildlife, while functions of the Wildlife Management Board are

merely advisory. The Act regulates hunting but contains no provisions to ensure the protection

or sustainable use of wild animal resources or the conservation of ecosystems that support their

habitat.

The North-West Frontier Province Private Game Reserve Rules, 1993 specify mechanisms for

declaring and managing private game reserves owned by an individual, family, tribe or village

community in order to carry out captive breeding for sport hunting and biodiversity

conservation. The private game reserve must be of at least 50 acres and the Wildlife

Department provides assistance in management and protection of these areas by the owners.

Though private reserves, game licence are issued by the Government and 25% of the permit fee

(issued by private reserve owners) goes to the Government. However, hunting of protected

species is not permitted.64

2.4.4. North-West Frontier Province Forest Development Corporation Ordinance,

1980

Repealing the North-West Frontier Province Forest Development Corporation Act of 1977, the

Ordinance provides for establishment of a Forest Development Corporation in the Province with

the objectives of economic and scientific exploitation of forests, sale of forest produce,

establishment of primary wood-processing units, and regeneration in blank areas. It also

provided for establishment of a Corporation Fund to run the Corporation independently which

later was merged into the Forest Development Fund established under NWFP Forest Ordinance,

2002.

2.4.5. Hazara Forest (Amendment) Ordnance, 1997

Amending almost half a century old Hazara Forest Act 1936, which was primarily to establish

command and control regime by the Forest Department over the forest resources, the

64 IUCN, 2003. Environmental Law in Pakistan: Governing Natural Resources and the Processes and Institutions that

Affect Them - North-West Frontier Province (Volume 1: Description and Analysis). Karachi: IUCN.

32

Ordinance allowed the Government to considers management of the forests with the help and

active participation of village community. This was in fact the first legislative effort towards joint

forest management as recommended by SPCS.

2.4.6. North-West Frontier Province Forest Commission Act, 1999 (amended in 2005)

Taking the reform process further, the Act instituted a three member Forestry Commission to

oversee and guide the forestry sector reform process. It also solemnised the Forestry

Roundtable established in 1998 to seek advice from the relevant stakeholders, providing it legal

cover. The Roundtable was mandated to advise the Commission. To make the Commission really

powerful, it was made responsible to the Chief Minister of NWFP. The Act was further amended

in 2005, primarily to accommodate the administrative changes in the Forest Department, the

membership of the Commission and role of the Commission. The primary objective of the

Commission was to protect, manage and develop forests in the province. It was supposed to

formulate a framework for forest management, and oversee the process of institutional and

legislative reform in the sector. The Commission was also given power to take suo moto action

to investigate matters related to forestry. However, the Forestry Commission could not be

notified due to disagreements on its membership and Chairmanship.

2.4.7. North-West Frontier Province Forest Ordinance, 2002

Khyber Pakhtunkhwa inherited the Indian Forest Act 1927, amended it from time to time and

kept on adding other pieces of legislation, such as Hazara Forest Act 1936, Kohat Mazri Control

Act 1953 and NWFP (Sale and Sawing Timber) Act 1996, as per needs. Consolidating all legal

instruments, the Province promulgated the North-West Frontier Province Forest Ordinance in

2002 as a comprehensive forestry law for the Province. Even the laws which were not repealed

by the Ordinance were bound to be consistent with provisions of the Ordinance where in case of

inconsistency, the 2002 Ordinance is to prevail.

The Ordinance classifies four types of forests on the basis of management as well as the nature

of proprietary rights in those forests including reserved forest, village forests, protected forest

and Guzara forests. However, the rules for village forest management are still to be drafted. The

Ordinance governs timber and non-timber forest products. It also provides for penalties to deal

with offences related to cutting, felling, uprooting trees, encroachment and construction within

a forest as well as polluting the soil or dump sewage, domestic waste and industrial waste in a

forest. The Ordinance also provides for establishment of a Forest Development Fund for

collection of proceeds from timber harvesting, fines and cesses (see Section 5.3.6).

The Ordinance allows the Divisional Forest Officer to designate any suitable person in the

community as Village Forest Officer to facilitate social forestry. Further emphasising the need

for social forestry, the Ordinance provides that:

• Government owned/managed forests and wastelands are to be managed in accordance

with forest management plans prepared and facilitate the involvement of local

communities and other interested parties, including women, to the extent possible.

• Commercial harvesting of timber will be permitted only in accordance with approved

management plans or regeneration schemes which ensure participation of

communities, including women and nomads.

• The Forest Officer may enter into agreements for the joint management of forests and

wastelands with community organisations, and assign rights of management over any

protected forest, guzara forest or protected wasteland to any village forest community,

village organisation or Joint Forest Management Committee.

33

• The Forest Department may lease out forests or wastelands for specified purposes,

including social forestry.

The North-West Frontier Province Joint Forest Management (Community Participation) Rules,

2004 framed under the Ordinance further elaborate the concept of joint forest management

through community participation, the process of Village Land Use Planning and development of

Village Plans, and the formation of Village Development Committee (VDC), Women Organization

(WO) and Joint Forest Management Committee. Keeping in view the emerging needs, the

Government is planning the revised the rules to accommodate grazing issues.

The Ordinance is considered quite comprehensive covering almost all aspects of forest

management. If need be, rules can be framed under the Ordinance to cover any specific legal

requirement.

2.4.8. North-West Frontier Province River Protection Ordinance, 2002

The Ordinance provides for protection of aquatic ecology and water quality, as well as the

economic and environmental value of rivers and tributaries in the Province. Any activity which

undermines these protection objectives is prohibited within 200 feet of the high water mark of

rivers or their tributaries, and in any area between the banks of a river. Effluents have also to be

within the limits set by the National Environmental Quality Standards. This Ordinance has

inherent provision of land use planning in the watershed areas, though hardly put to practice.

Similarly, the hotels and residential establishments dump their waste and sewage in tributaries

and rivers, and sand and stone mining is common in the riverbeds but authorities seldom use

this law to prohibit such activities.

2.4.9. Sharia Nizam-e-Adl Regulation, 2009

Succumbing to the public pressure for implementing Islamic Sharia’h for the judicial system in

the Provincially Administered Tribal Areas of NWFP (except the Tribal Areas adjoining Mansehra

District and the former State of Amb), the Provincial Government proclaimed the Sharia Nizam-

e-Adl Regulation65 in 2009 under Article 247 of the Constitution of Pakistan. While re-extending

all applicable laws and rules extended earlier, it declared any law, instrument, custom or usage

having the force of law not corresponding to the injunctions of Quran Majeed and Sunnah as

non-existent. The Regulation changed nomenclatures of the judicial officers, gave limited judicial

powers to the executives (Assistant Commissioners and Deputy Commissioners) to decide

certain cases, put a maximum limit on number of cases for a specific judicial officer, and

mandated the judicial officers to decide the civil cases within six months and criminal cases

within four months. The Regulation also provides for appointment of Musleh (arbitrator), with

the consent of both parties, before starting legal proceedings.

The Swat and Chitral districts being part of PATA fall under jurisdiction of this Regulation which

has empowered the district executives to punish for all offences punishable with imprisonment

up to three years with or without fine. Many of the offenses under the NWFP Forest Ordinance

2002 fall under this category.

65 Government of NWFP, 2009. Sharia Nizam-e-Adl Regulation 2009 in Extraordinary Government Gazette of North

West Frontier Province (16 Apr 2009).

34

2.4.10. Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Farm Services Centres Act, 2013 (Draft)

The draft Act provides legal cover to previously established, and to be established Farm Services

Centres in all districts of the Province. Under this law, the Centres will become ‘body corporate’.

Functions of these Centres have been defined as:

a. safeguard farmers rights and interests;

b. enhance farmers knowledge and skills;

c. boost the modernization of agriculture;

d. increase crop yields;

e. improve farmers livelihood;

f. develop rural economy;

g. purchase certified seed, fertilizers, animal husbandry services, quality veterinary health

care services and medicines, farm machinery, expertise and technology for the provision

to the members who are registered with the Centre on affordable rates in comparison

to open market rates;

h. provide or extend the facility of loan to the members, subject to the availability of fund,

from its own resources on such terms and conditions as may be prescribed by Board;

i. facilitate its members to avail the facilities of laboratories established and maintained

by Government on such charges as may be prescribed from time to time by

Government; and

j. make marketing arrangements for all types of surplus produce at Centres.

General Body of each Centre (comprised of all members) will elect a Management Committee

for a period of three years to manage the Centre, facilitated by a government official. Each

Centre will have its own fund, comprised of Provincial allocations, grants, membership fee,

contribution, income from own resources, donations, trusts, bequests endowments and any

other sources of income. There will be a Farm Services Centre Board at the provincial level, to be

chaired by the Secretary, Agriculture, Livestock and Cooperation Department. The Board will be

the monitoring, controlling and policy decisions making body of the affairs of Centres.

2.4.11. Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Local Government Act, 2013

Repealing the nascent Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Local Government Act of 2012, the recently

passed Act has devolved the service delivery and local resource governance to the village

and neighbourhood level through establishing City District Government for district Peshawar,

District Governments for districts other than Peshawar, Tehsil Municipal Administrations for

Tehsils; Town Municipal Administrations for Towns in the City District of Peshawar, Village

Councils for villages in the rural areas, and Neighbourhood Councils for Neighbourhoods in areas

with urban characteristics. Though all powers related to service delivery, development activities

and maintenance of law and order have been devolved to the democratically elected Nazims

(administrators) of the local governments, the Chief Minister will have the powers to suspend

Nazim or set aside orders of a local government (Articles 58-60) if it is felt that the Nazim of the

local government is not functioning within the policy framework of the Federal of Provincial

Government.

Empowering the District Nazim as Executive Authority of the district government, the Act

devolves the administrative and the financial authority for the management of the Government

offices of NRM sectors – including Agriculture (Extension), Livestock, On-Farm Water

Management, Soil Conservation & Soil Fertility, Fisheries, Social and Farm-forestry – to the

District Government. A complete list of 24 such offices is given in the Part A of the First Schedule

35

of the Act. Additional list of devolved offices to the City District Government is given in the Part

B of the Schedule. In addition to general seats, it also provides reserved seats for women,

peasants and workers, youth and non-Muslims (as given in Second Schedule).

Restoring the concept of unity of local level command, as envisaged in Local Government

Ordinance 2001, the Act has made the District Nazim as sole executive authority for the entire

district, though to functions within the ambit of federal and provincial policy and legal

framework. The District Councils have been empowered to make bye-laws for devolved

functions, approve taxes (defined in Third Schedule), long term and short term development

plans, annual and supplementary budgets, and intra-district fiscal transfers. The Standing

Committees of the District Council will oversee matters and service delivery obligations of

devolved district government offices. In addition to devolved district government offices, the

Nazim will call for quarterly reports from other government departments in the district, present

the same to district council and forward them to Government along with recommendations of

district council and his comments for consideration and action. She/he would also be authorised

to inspect the tehsil municipal administrations, and village and neighbourhood councils in the

district.

Almost similar powers have been devolved to the lower tiers of the local government for their

respective jurisdictions. The Act also provides for establishment of district fund, tehsil fund,

village fund and neighbourhood fund for each respective local government. A Provincial Finance

Commission will be established for fiscal distribution to and a Local Government Commission

will be established for supervision of the local governments. The Act declares cutting of trees an

offence which is chargeable in the court of law; however the Act is more focused on civic

offences causing public nuisance.

The Provincial Government has pledged to provide 30% of the annual development programme

to district governments and village councils. The opposition parties in the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa

Assembly have shown reservations on devolving the governance structures down to village level

instead of union council level and have threated to approach courts of law to obstruct this

move. Over 4000 village and neighbourhood councils would be established in the province on

non-party based elections.

The Act is not much different from the NWFP Local Government Ordinance 2001 except for

establishing Village Council instead of Union Councils. However, the most important element of

administrative control in the district, the District Administration, has been discussed cursorily in

Articles 5, 11, 12, 13, 21, 36, 66-69, 71 and 121. The 2001 Ordinance had dealt with this aspect

in detail and each section has elaborated the relationship between the Nazim and the District

Coordination Officer and other relevant officers of the government so that the local government

functions smoothly. The 2013 Act has left this key aspect unattended, rather does not mention

the office of Deputy Commissioner or District Coordination Officer as such. The Act only

provides for the Provincial Government to frame rules in this regards. It seems that the Act has

been drafted in haste without adequate level of homework which would make its

implementation quite difficult. It would also leave way for varying interpretations by different

stakeholders, litigations in the court of law, and obstacles in normal business of the

government. The Local Government Commission established under this Act has limited role in

defining the relationship between elected representatives and government officials. The

National Reconstruction Bureau set up to conceptualise and support the local governance

system 2001 was largely supported by international community, hence was quite successful in

ironing out the issues cropping up during implementation of the system. Even then the fiscal

devolution remained an elusive dream. It is also unclear as to how the police, which is primarily

36

the government’s arm to maintain law and order, will report to the local government in the

backdrop of Police Order 2002.

Another challenge the Provincial Government has accepted through this Act, is delimitation of

village and neighbourhood councils. As compared to about 950 union councils across the

province, the Act envisages establishing 3500 villages and neighbourhood councils across the

province which in itself will be a gigantic task to coordinate and manage. Without clearly declare

the local governments as ‘body corporate’, it empowers them to acquire, hold or transfer any

property, movable and immovable, to enter into contract and to sue or be sued in its name.

From the biodiversity conservation perspective, it seems that the confusion arising out of newly

enacted local governance system would further weaken the capacity of provincial departments

related to NRM sectors, especially during the transition period. Devolution of these functions at

the local level and weakening of their link with the respective provincial department, as

happened after 2001 Ordinance, would degrade the research and development efforts which

have remained the provincial jurisdiction. For example, while social and farm forestry has been

devolved, forestry per se remains a provincial government’s responsibility resulting in a

disjointed community based forest management. Similarly, the District Government has been

empowered to frame byelaws regarding forests, while the Forest Ordinance 2002

comprehensively covers all aspects of forest management. At this juncture, BKP can play a vital

role by supporting the Provincial Government in developing a comprehensive Biodiversity

Strategy and Action Plan which bridges this gap.

2.5. National Reporting to CBD

Pakistan became a signatory to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) in 1992 and a Party

by ratifying the same on 26 July 1994. Pakistan as a State Party is obliged to develop and keep

the National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (NBSAP) updated (under CBD Article 666) and

submitting a periodic National Report to CBD Secretariat (under Article 2667) biennially. So far,

Pakistan has submitted four National Reports at irregular intervals and the Climate Change

Division has just signed an agreement with IUCN for preparing the Fifth National Report, to be

submitted in 2014. All these reports have been prepared through a consultative process, though

to varying levels of effort, and cover status of biodiversity conservation across the country. The

First Report68 was the most elaborate report, setting a baseline of biodiversity in Pakistan. It was

contributed by a large number of experts and stakeholders through a wide consultative process

and their professional input. The First Report available on CBD website (http://www.cbd.int/) is

not the original draft which was initially developed by LEAD Pakistan in 1997-99, rather an

improvised draft by the Ministry of Environment in 2008. The subsequent two reports, Second

66 CBD Article 6: “Each Contracting Party shall, in accordance with its particular conditions and capabilities: (a)

Develop national strategies, plans or programmes for the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity or

adapt for this purpose existing strategies, plans or programmes which shall reflect, inter alia, the measures set out in

this Convention relevant to the Contracting Party concerned; and (b) Integrate, as far as possible and as appropriate,

the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity into relevant sectoral or cross-sectoral plans, programmes

and policies.”

67 CBD Article 26: “Each Contracting Party shall, at intervals to be determined by the Conference of the Parties,

present to the Conference of the Parties, reports on measures which it has taken for the implementation of the

provisions of this Convention and their effectiveness in meeting the objectives of this Convention.”

68 Government of Pakistan, 2008. First National Report of Pakistan to the Convention on Biological Diversity

(Typescript). Islamabad: Ministry of Environment, GoP.

37

National Report69 (submitted in 2001) and Third National

Report70 (submitted in 2006), were primarily filled-in pro forma

reports compiled in perfunctory manner.

The Fourth National Report71 (submitted in 2010) is the most

comprehensive report so far, prepared through an extensive

consultative process led by the Ministry of Environment (now

the Climate Change Division) and ensuring engagement of the

relevant provincial stakeholders (particularly the Forest and

Wildlife Departments) and key environmental organizations like

IUCN and WWF Pakistan.

As envisaged in the Article 26 of CBD, an effective system of

national reporting can be useful in documenting the lessons

learned by Parties in the implementation of the Convention; identifying gaps in capacity for

policy research and analysis at the national, regional and global levels, including technical and

financial requirements; and formulating appropriate requests and guidance to Parties and to its

subsidiary bodies, the Secretariat, the financial mechanism, and other organizations with

expertise relevant to the implementation of the Convention. Public availability of national

reports also assists relevant actors (e.g. intergovernmental agencies, specialist non-

governmental organizations and scientific bodies) to formulate focused strategies and

programmes to assist Parties, individually or collectively, with implementation. This also assists

individual Parties or groups of Parties to identify common issues to be addressed, thus

facilitating the development of cost-effective and mutually-supportive regional initiatives for

implementation.72

However, the process to develop the Fourth Nation Report underlined the chronic lack of

regular coordination mechanism between the provinces and CBD Focal Point. The provision of

information from provinces has been reactive, development and implementation of institutional

mechanism and a structured monitoring system to periodically report on CBD implementation

status remained elusive, and capacities in terms of adequate human and financial resources

have been far from adequate. It also noted that the progress on implementation of the

Convention was much better in those thematic areas and cross-cutting issues where country

had sufficient institutional and human resources, e.g., forestry, wildlife and protected areas, as

compared to more productive sectors like agriculture, livestock and fisheries. The actions on

new areas, e.g., access and benefit sharing, bio-safety and invasive alien species, remains

extremely slow due to lack of human resource capacity and absence of relevant institutions to

deal with these issues.73

69 Government of Pakistan, 2001. Second National Report on Implementation of Convention on Biological Diversity

(CBD) in Pakistan (Typescript). Islamabad: Ministry of Environment, Local Government & Rural Development, GoP.

70 Government of Pakistan, 2006. Third National Report on Implementation of Convention on Biological Diversity

(CBD) in Pakistan (Typescript). Islamabad: Ministry of Environment, GoP.

71 Government of Pakistan, 2009. Pakistan Fourth National Report [to CBD]. Islamabad: Ministry of Environment, GoP.

72 About [CBD] National Reporting (http://www.cbd.int/reports/intro.shtml). Accessed on 4 Nov 2013.

73 Government of Pakistan, 2009. Pakistan Fourth National Report [to CBD]. Islamabad: Ministry of Environment, GoP.

38

The National Report may now be evolved beyond status updates on species and start

highlighting key challenges, response by the country as well as provinces and other

stakeholders, and success and failure stories in biodiversity conservation. The Fifth National

Report is expected to cover all these parameters and in tandem with the revised National

Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (NBSAP) will set new baseline aligned with Aichi Targets (as

translated in the form of national and provincial targets).

The coordination between federal and provincial stakeholders for developing the National

Reports has been occasional, primarily through consultative workshops organised to seek input

for developing the report. The Biodiversity Working Group (BWG), comprising of federal and

provincial biodiversity experts and officials (membership proposed by BAP 2000 is given at

Annex V) was established following recommendation by the National Biodiversity Action Plan

(2000). It was supposed to be the institutional coordination mechanism for a regular input to

the reporting process but has met only occasionally due to lack of funds to host meetings. The

meetings which have taken place were, in most cases, supported by donor assisted projects. It is

important that all provinces, especially the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa in the context of BKP Project,

have their Biodiversity Cells or Directorates to function as provincial focal points for generating

and contributing biodiversity related information to the Biodiversity Directorate at the Climate

Change Division. An interactive web portal can be developed for virtual meetings of BWG and

sharing of information which in turn can become an inventory of biodiversity related data and

status. This would ensure regular reporting to CBD at the desired intervals (biennially) but more

importantly flagging the key issues for biodiversity conservation within the country.

Khyber Pakhtunkhwa has been quite active in providing the required input for the National

Reports, but the effort has been individualistic rather than institutional. The proposed dedicated

capacity within the Planning & Development Department of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (see Section

3.2 for further details) may be the best suited institutional focal point for collecting biodiversity

related information in a systematic manner and conveying the same to the federal mechanism

at regular intervals.

39

3. Stakeholder Analysis for COSMOB in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa

Biodiversity being a cross-cutting theme has its stakeholders in every sphere of life. From federal

to provincial and local, and from public sector to private sector, civil society and communities,

biodiversity either influences or is influenced by their actions and interactions. Categorising

these biodiversity related stakeholders along the functional lines, the following groups of

stakeholders can be identified:

� Legislative and administrative

• Senate of Pakistan, National Assembly of Pakistan, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Assembly,

Governor, Chief Minister, Ministers, District Councils, Village Councils, Nazims and

elected members to these legislative and representational forums.

• Supreme Court of Pakistan, Peshawar High Court, and District and Session Courts, and

Judicial Magistrates/Forest Magistrates in the districts.

• Federal Economic Affairs Division, Climate Change Division including its Forestry Wing,

Biodiversity Directorate and

Zoological Survey

Department; Ministry of

National Food Security and

Research including the

Pakistan Agricultural Research

Council and the National

Agricultural Research Centre;

Pakistan Science Foundation,

and Pakistan Museum of

Natural History.

• Khyber Pakhtunkhwa’s

Planning and Development

Department, Environment

Department, and Agriculture,

Livestock and Cooperation

Department

• Deputy Commissioner and

subordinate administrative

officers at Swat and Chitral.

� Technical and service delivery

• Chief Conservator of Forests I, and Chief Conservator of Forests (Malakand Circle),

Conservators of Forest (Malakand East and West), Divisional Forests Officers, Sub-

Divisional Forest Officers, Range Officers, Deputy Range Officers, Foresters and Forest

Guards at Swat and Chitral.

• Chief Conservator of Wildlife, Conservator of Wildlife (Northern Circle), Divisional

Forests Officers (Wildlife), and Range Officers (Wildlife) and Watchers at Swat and

Chitral.

• Director NTFPs, Deputy Director NTFPs, and Assistant Directors and Development

Officers at Swat and Chitral.

• Director General Agriculture Extension, and District Directors, Subject Matter Specialists,

Assistant Directors, Field Officers and Field Assistants at Swat and Chitral.

Users and beneficiaries

Legislative and

administrative

Technical and service delivery

Educational and capacity

building

Extension and outreach

40

• Directorate General Agriculture Research, and Directors of Research Institutes and

Centres, Principal Research Officers, Senior Research Officers, Research Officers,

Technical Assistants and Field Workers.

• Directorate General of Livestock and Dairy Development, and District Directors

Livestock, Directors of Veterinary Research Labs., In-charges of Veterinary Hospitals,

Field Assistants and field staff at Swat and Chitral.

• Directorate General On-Farm Water Management, and District Directors OFWM.

• Directorate of Agriculture Engineering, Deputy Director, and Assistant Directors at the

district level.

• Director Fisheries, Deputy Directors Fisheries, and Assistant Directors Fisheries at Swat

and Chitral

• Director Soil Conservation, and District Directors Soil Conservation at Swat and Chitral

• National Council for Conservation of Wildlife

• Biodiversity Working Group

• Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Forestry Round Table

• Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Wildlife Board

� Educational and capacity building –

including educational and specialised

training institutions such as Peshawar

University through its Centre of Plant

Biodiversity, Pakistan Forestry Institute,

University of Agriculture Peshawar,

University of Swat through its Institute of

Plant Sciences and Biodiversity, Shaheed

Benazir Bhutto University, Agricultural

Training Institute, Animal Husbandry In-

service Training Institute, and Sarhad

Forest School.

� Extension and outreach by civil society

organizations including Aga Khan Rural

Support Programme, Sarhad Rural Support

Programme, HUJRA, EPS, CARAVAN,

LASOONA; agribusiness firms like Jaffar

Brothers, Engro, Four Brothers, AgriMart and local service providers; and contemporary

development initiatives like Mountains and Market, and Entrepreneur.

� Users and beneficiaries – including men, women, children and marginalised groups in the

communities, particularly communities in Chail, Lalku and Shamozai valleys of Swat District,

and Golen and Rumbur valleys of Chitral District in the context of BKP project.

The following sections present only the key stakeholders which are directly related to the BKP

Project.

3.1. Climate Change Division

Ministry of Environment was carved out of the Environment and Urban Affairs Division of the

Government of Pakistan as a result of the momentum generated following development of the

Communities

Federal Government of Pakistan

Provincial Government

of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa

District Government

& Line Agencies

CSOs & Initiatives

41

Pakistan National Conservation Strategy and its presentation at the Rio Conference (1992) by

the Prime Minister of Pakistan. It continued to expand and created its niche as an environmental

and biodiversity management organ of the state, gaining centrality in multilateral environmental

negotiations, reporting to international commitments and proving technical backstopping to the

nascent environmental departments in the provinces. It had fullest support from the donors and

international organizations like IUCN and WWF Pakistan to build its capacities and bring

environmental and biodiversity management issues on the national agenda.

As a result of the 18th Constitutional Amendment in 2010, the Federal Ministry of Environment,

which so far has been institutional home of biodiversity management in Pakistan, has been

revamped changing its nomenclature from the Ministry of Environment to the Ministry of

National Disaster Management, and then to the Ministry of Climate Change and recently the

Climate Change Division. This grossly affected its institutional credibility and authority, diluting

the coordination role for conservation and sustainable management of biodiversity. The change

has also affected the federal-provincial relationships in terms of forest and protected areas

management which in fact has always been a provincial subject. Resultantly, the Forest Institute

has been transferred to the Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa which used to be the national

forestry educational institution.

These changes in the status of the Climate Change Division have also resulted in weakening of

the link between CCD, and the legislature and the executive. By virtue of downgrading the

environment function at federal level from a full scale Ministry of Environment to a Climate

Change Division which is under administrative control of the Cabinet Division, effectively the

Prime Minister is now the relevant minister for the Climate Change Division. With other

important portfolios under his command, climate change is not a priority for the Prime Minister.

Hence, there is no political head of CCD to represent it in the Cabinet, parliamentary

committees, and important decision-making forums. Unfortunately, at present there is no

Standing Committee of the National Assembly on Climate Change while the Senate’s Standing

Committee on Climate Change has no representation of the Climate Change Division.

On the other hand, in provinces where the environment as a whole should have emerged as a

stronger sector as a result of the devolution of power to the provinces, it is still a weak function

due to lack of capacity and fiscal leverage. Competence is not the criterion for allocation of

environmental portfolio to a minister and it is usually accepted as a least preferred portfolio.

Though it may not have been intention of the 18th Constitutional Amendment to weaken the

institutions, the unpreparedness on the part of political leadership and public officials has

resulted in governance degradation, especially in the case of environment.

Consequent to the 18th Constitutional Amendment, the Government of Pakistan issued many

notifications to shuffle and assign various environmental functions to different Federal

Ministries and Divisions. After three years, though most of the environmental functions have

again been housed in the Climate Change Division, the morale and moral authority of this vital

institution has been eroded significantly.

Climate change being an emerging phenomenon was never a focus for environmental legislation

at the provincial level. Though the Climate Change Division is making efforts to chalk out climate

change adaptation strategies and actions following the National Climate Change Policy 2012, the

provinces are yet to organise and focus their efforts towards this key challenge which would

affect them the most in terms of water and food security, and climate triggered disasters.

Ecosystem based adaptation, as a key response strategy to climate change challenge would

42

need more focused and better coordinated efforts on

the part of federal and provincial governments.

3.1.1. Biodiversity Directorate

The Biodiversity Directorate was established in 2006 at

the Climate Change Division (then Ministry of

Environment) following recommendation of the

National BAP. However, it kept on working in ad hoc

manner as its first Director was appointed in 2012. It

houses the newly established Clearing House

Mechanism (the national database of species) under the

Nagoya Protocol. The Biodiversity Working Group which

was supposed to be serving as technical think tank and

coordination mechanism for conservation of biodiversity has been constituted but has met only

occasionally. It was reconstituted in 2011 (list of current members is given at Annex V) and two

consecutive meetings were held under a UNEP funded project but it has become dormant again.

The Directorate is responsible for collecting, compiling and synthesising biodiversity related

information and submitting the National Report to the CBD Secretariat though active

coordination with the provinces. With the meagre human and financial resources, the

Directorate cannot be expected to play its role effectively.

3.1.2. National Council for Conservation of Wildlife

NCCW was established in 1974 in the Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Livestock. It has an

advisory role and is responsible for coordinating, formulation and implementing wildlife policies

at the federal and provincial levels, coordinating activities with international agencies and

promoting conservation in general.74 NCCW is the designated Management Authority for CITES

and responsible for issuing quota for sustainable use of species mentioned in Appendix II of the

Convention. For rest of the species, either Ministry of Foreign Affairs or the Provincial Wildlife

Departments can issue licenses.

3.2. Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Planning and Development Department

Being the apex development planning institution in the Province, the P&D Department is

responsible for implementation and monitoring of the overall development plans of the

Province. It is mandated for policy making, appraisal and processing of development

projects/schemes, ADP compilation, allocation of funds, recommendation for approval by the

competent authority, monitoring the financial releases and inter-sectoral re-appropriations, and

evaluations.

Looking closely at the departmental human resource structure, one can realise that while it has

wide base of professionals, the midlevel senior staff that are primarily responsible for advising

approval of policies, programmes, plans and project are extremely overburdened. The

interesting fact is that after devolution of powers at the local level, many staff members were

transferred to districts but the work load remained the same at the provincial level. This issue

74 Wildlife of Pakistan

(http://www.wildlifeofpakistan.com/WildlifeBiodiversityofPakistan/intiativestoconservewildlifeinPakistan.htm).

Accessed on 8 Dec 2013.

Inspector General Forests

Director Biodiversity

Deputy Director (Vacant)

Assistant (Vacant)

43

can be addressed through devolving more authority at the lower level and building critical skills

at the mid-career level, for example macro and micro economic analysis, cost-benefit modelling,

critical thinking and problem-solving, and medium to long term fiscal planning.

NRM remains a low priority sector at P&D not only due to low visibility factor but also due to

reactive approach of the NRM related line departments. Very few proposals and PC-1s are

received from these line departments which can further be presented to the potential donors or

for allocations in the Annual Development Programme. It is important that the line departments

keep their proposals ready and duly approved by the Department Development Working Part so

that the same could be presented to the donors on demand. The Chiefs of Agriculture and

Environment Sections need to be strengthened in terms of dedicated human resource equipped

with in-depth understanding of biodiversity conservation and planning processes to facilitate

annual development planning for NRM sectors with due consideration for biodiversity

conservation. The same arrangement can gradually transform into an institutional mechanism

setting the basis for a Biodiversity Cell or Unit.

Figure 2: Organogram of the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Planning and Development Department

Deputy Secretary

Admin

DG Special

Development Unit

Secretary

Planning & Development

DG M&EChief Economist /

Director PP&I

Chief

Foreign Aid

Senior Minister

Finance & Planning

Additional Secretary

Chief Environment

LEGEND:

Provincial Administrative Cadre

Provincial Technical Cadre

Additional Chief Secretary

Development

Chief

Agriculture

Assistant Chief

Foreign Aid

Section Officers

Assistant Chief

Environment

Section Officer

Assistant Chief

Agriculture

Source: Khyber Pakhtunkhwa P&D Department.

Note: The organogram primarily shows functions related to BKP.

The role of Director General, Monitoring and Evaluation has increasingly become crucial as in

addition to evaluation of the projects after submission of PC-4 forms, the office is now also

responsible for handling complaints regarding the projects and producing an annual monitoring

report on the use of public exchequer.

Ineffective coordination amongst the line departments and with the P&D Department is a major

stumbling block in increase of NRM portfolio. In order to facilitate the planning function in each

line department, a Chief Planning Officer has been designated within the line departments.

However, due to lack of capacity at the line agency level very few proposals are received by P&D

Department.

44

There is a Training Section in P&D Department which is responsible for improving capacity of the

government staff throughout the Province. However, junior officers are often ignored at the

time of making nominations for training programmes. BKP in collaboration with the Training

Section in P&DD may organise hands-on trainings on proposal (especially PC-1) development,

resulting into ready-to-submit proposals for natural resource management.

3.3. Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Environment Department

The Environment Department under the Minister and the Secretary is responsible for

administrative supervision of the Offices of the Chief Conservator of Forests and Chief

Conservator of Wildlife, Directorate of Transport, Pakistan Forest Institute, and Directorate

General of Environmental Protection Agency.75

Figure 3: Organogram of the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Environment Department

Source: Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Environment Department.

Note: The organogram primarily shows functions related to BKP.

The Environmental Protection Agency has limited mandate of implementing the Pakistan

Environmental Protection Act, 1997 (which will soon be replaced with the provincial

environmental protection law). EPA is only indirectly responsible for biodiversity conservation,

habitat protection and ecological sustainability in broader terms and is more focused at the

policy level and combating pollution issues. However, its role becomes crucial as guardian of

environmental safeguards through Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and Initial

Environmental Examination (IEE), especially if such project is having any negative effect on a

protected area or biological hotspot.

3.3.1. Offices of the Chief Conservators of Forests

Commonly known as the Forest Department, the Office was established in 1871. From time to

time, it has been subject to number of policy directives and gone through diverse changes

ranging from colonial regime to One Unit and a province. However, its primary function has

75 Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Rules of Business 1985 (http://www.khyberpakhtunkhwa.gov.pk/Gov/Rule-

of-Business.php). Accessed on 2 Dec 2013.

45

remained forest management, either for commercial objectives or to protect the forest

ecosystem. Administratively, the Forest Department reports to the Environment Department.

The department has three Chief Conservators of Forests. CCF Central & South is designated as

head of the department to whom CCFs for Malakand and Hazara report for administrative and

financial matters while they report to Secretary Environment for technical matters. CCFs are

assisted by Conservators of Forests, and at the district level by Division Forest Officers (DFOs),

assisted by Sub-Divisional Forest Officers (SDFOs), Range Forest Officers (RFOs) and Deputy

Rangers, Forester and Forest Guards. In Chitral, there are three RFOs functioning as SDFOs and

47 Forest Guards to manage the state forest spread over approximately 100000 ha, although

standard practice demands at least one guard over an area of 1000 ha. In Swat District, DFO

Swat is assisted by two SDFOs, two RFOs and 80 Forest Guards while DFO Kalam is assisted by

two Deputy RFOs, one Forester and 75 Forest Guards (Figure 4).

Following NWFP Forest Policy 1999, a process of structural reforms was initiated in the

Department, reorganising it into managerial and specialised units. Matrix management was

introduced to improve coordination and performance of managerial and specialised staff.

However, the institutional reform process could not be operationalised fully leaving much room

for improvement. The Specialised Units have been created but without adequate career

structure for the staff. The allocation of resources is also far behind the actual requirements.

The integration of the Specialised Units across the organization and with other stakeholders is

not optimal. There is need to review the original reform design and implementation so far, and

to devise a strategy to fill the gaps.

Figure 4: Organogram of the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Office of the Chief Conservator of Forests

Chief Conservator of Forests

Central & South

DFO Planning

DFO Direction

Secretary

Environment

Managerial Units

Chief Conservator of Forests

Hazara Circle

Conservator of Forests

Watershed Circle

Chief Conservator of Forests

Malakand Circle

Specialised Units

Director

I&HRD

Director

NTFP

Director

CDEGAD

Director

R&D

Director

Planning & Monitoring

Minister

Environment

DFO SwatDFO Chitral

Forest Guards

SDFOs / RFOs

Forest Guards

SDFOs / RFOs

LEGEND:

Provincial Administrative Cadre

Provincial Technical Cadre

District Level Technical Cadre

I&HRD: Institutional and Human

Resource Development

CDEGAD: Community

development, Extension and

Gender & Development

DFO Kalam

Deputy Rangers

Forest Guards

Conservator of Forests

Malakand East

Conservator of Forests

Malakand West

Dy. Rangers/

ForestorsDy. Rangers/

Forestors

Deputy Chief

Conservator of Forests

Source: Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Office of the Chief Conservator of Forests

Note: The organogram primarily shows functions related to BKP.

The Forest Department being the oldest department dealing with most elements of biodiversity

has been the custodian of policies, laws and rules related to forests and wildlife. Through

addition of specialised units following the NWFP Forest Policy 1999, it became an integrated

46

working unit to deal with habitat. Though separation of the Office of Chief Conservator of

Wildlife affected its sole representativeness of biodiversity, it is still considered to be the leading

department dealing with biodiversity issue in general. However, being trained into a specific

mind-set, the forest staff hardly considers anything more, or even equally, important than

forests in the context of biodiversity conservation. This creates a situation where entire

biodiversity becomes subservient to the forest ecosystem and hardly leaves any space for other

forms of biodiversity to be considered, thought of and planned for. This also restricts the role of

other line departments who can play an effective role in biodiversity conservation.

The Directorate of Institutional and Human Resource Development, is one of the most

important specialised units of the Department. The Directorate is responsible for strategizing

sustainable management of forests through developing a team of forest professionals equipped

with updated technical knowledge. The Community Training Centres at Abbottabad, Swat,

Nowshera and D I Khan are quite useful in building understanding and capacity of communities

in forest management but need to be strengthened in terms of physical and human resource

requirements. The Sarhad Forest School at Abbottabad also has great potential to serve as a

capacity building venue and a showcase of forest biodiversity but may need to be reoriented to

align it with the modern concepts and techniques of forest management.

The Directorate of NTFPs, though quite small in its human resource capacity (a Director assisted

by one Deputy Director, 7 Assistant Directors and a few Development Officer), is contributing

significantly towards biodiversity conservation through its research and extension activities. It

has produced number of research based booklets/brochures to popularise sustainable

harvesting and processing of NTFPs and medicinal and aromatic plants (MAPs), and indigenous

honeybee (Apis cerana) farming. The Directorate is also distributing NTFPs kit to potential NTFPs

and MAPs growers. There is need to enhance the capacity of the Directorate through enhanced

allocation of human and financial resources, exposure to best examples, and training in

conservation and propagation of NTFPs and MAPs, processing, certification and marketing. BKP

can also use expertise of the Directorate to pilot its value chain development activities.

Under Forest Ordinance 2002, the Forest Department is allowed to acquire legal services on

need basis, though with meagre allocation for compensation, to support its litigation against the

offenders; but Department’s own capacity to collect evidence, prepare a case and prosecute is

extremely weak. There are two SDFOs (Litigation) in the Department but they are unable to

provide desired level of support in prosecution. Mostly, the junior staff is not well-versed with

the legal provisions and techniques how to collect evidence and prepared a case. Hence, when

they appear in the court of law, they cannot face the defence counsels, especially when huge

commercial stakes are involved. The district judiciary also considers cutting of branches or some

old trees by community members as minor offence, prima facie motivated by poverty or

immediate needs; hence is lenient towards such offenders, especially in the absence of

adequate prosecution. Since the punishment prescribed in the law is dependent upon damage

assessment undertaken by the Forest Department, the adjudication process remains hinged

upon capacity of the Forest Department.

3.3.2. Office of the Chief Conservator of Wildlife

Commonly known as the Wildlife Department, it was separated from the Office of the Chief

Conservator of Forests in 1994. Administratively, the Office reports to the Environment

Department. At present, it has 17 DFOs (for 15 Wildlife Divisions) who are its real

implementation arm on ground. In Chitral, its two DFOs are assisted by two SDFOs, two Range

47

Officers and 73 Watchers. The DFO Wildlife for Swat and Shangla Districts is assisted by one

SDFO, two Ranger Officers and 40 Watchers.

The Department lacks adequate human and financial resources for its effective functioning.

There is need to have dedicated staff with adequate qualification and training in social

mobilisation and prosecution making community managed conservation a success.

Figure 5: Organogram of the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Office of the Chief Conservator of Wildlife

Chief Conservator of Wildlife

DFO HQ

DFO Extension

Secretary

Environment

Managerial Units

Conservator of Wildlife

Southern Circle

Conservator of Wildlife

Northern Circle

Minister for

Environment

DFO (Wildlife)

Swat & Shangla

DFO (Wildlife)

Chitral

SDFO / RFO (Wildlife)SDFO / RFO (Wildlife)

LEGEND:

Provincial Administrative Cadre

Provincial Technical Cadre

District Level Technical Cadre

WatchersWatchers

Planning Officer

DFO (Wildlife)

Chitral Gol

SDFO / RFO (Wildlife)

Watchers

Source: Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Office of the Chief Conservator of Wildlife

Note: The organogram primarily shows functions related to BKP.

In 2001, establishment of a wildlife fund was approved by the Wildlife Management Board to

overcome resource constraint for wildlife conservation but it could never materialise. The

political will for the wildlife conservation can be judged by the fact that the Board meeting was

called only once (in 2012) in the five year tenure (2008-2013) of the last elected government. At

present all kinds of revenue (including 20% of trophy hunting permit fee) as well as any kind of

wildlife cess goes to the provincial treasury and is seldom made available to the Department in

full. However, the Department itself is satisfied with this arrangement as onus of bridging the

gap in revenue and expenditure for the Wildlife Department remain on the Provincial

Government.

48

3.4. Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Agriculture, Livestock and Cooperation

Department

Commonly known as the Agriculture Department, under the Minister and the Secretary it is

responsible for administrative supervision of the Directorate General Agriculture Extension,

Directorate General Agriculture Research, Directorate of Livestock and Dairy Development,

Directorate General On-Farm Water Management, Directorate of Agriculture Engineering, and

Directorate of Fisheries.

The Department is one of the largest provincial departments contributing significantly in the

provincial economy and food security. A recent assessment shows that out of about 4000 staff

of the Department, only 15% are professionals while another 7% are in managerial and

administrative roles, while the rest (78%) are support staff (including peons, drivers and

cleaners). The Research function has the highest number of staff (40%) followed by Extension

Services (18%).76

The high proportion of support staff not only puts heavy burden on the provincial current

budget but also limit the chances of sustainable agricultural and livestock growth which can

otherwise be made possible through having more technical staff for undertaking up-to-date

research and providing dynamic extension services.

76 Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, 2013. Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Agriculture Strategy and Policy: A Ten Year

Perspective (Typescript). Peshawar: Department of Agriculture, Livestock and Cooperation, GoKP.

49

Figure 6: Organogram of the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Agriculture, Livestock and Cooperation

Department

Source: Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Agriculture, Livestock and Cooperation Department.

Note: The organogram primarily shows functions related to BKP.

In order to reach out to the farmers and other relevant stakeholders, and to showcase success

stories in agricultural research and development, the Department has planned to establish a

Model Village at Urmar Village (near Agricultural Research Institute, Tarnab) with the help of

University of Agriculture, Peshawar. This can provide good opportunity for BKP to collaborate

with the Department for and creating awareness about agro-biodiversity amongst the masses

visiting the Model Village and highlighting value and viability of agrobiodiversity. Since the

initiative is at nascent stage, BKP can become part of the initiative from very beginning. The

Agriculture Department is already enthusiast and willing to work with BKP from provincial to

district level.

The Department has established Agricultural Training Institute and Animal Husbandry In-service

Training Institute at Peshawar for pre-service and in-service training of its staff. However, the

faculty of these institutes may not be able to impart training in the emerging disciplines. BKP

may build capacity of these institutes to provide better in-service training to staff in Agriculture

and Livestock Departments. Another option could be of using the Agricultural Research

Institutes for on-site training and capacity building.

While the Agriculture Department has wide range of functions, the sections below cover only

those which have direct relevance with BKP work:

50

3.4.1. Agriculture Extension

About 18% of the workforce in the Department is under this function of which only 9% are

professionals while rest are managerial, administrative and support staff. This explains the

reason behind less than desirable extension services available to the farmers. The district level

offices are headed by District Director, assisted by Subject Matter Specialists, Agriculture

Officers, Field Assistants and Agriculture Inspectors.

The Extension Services are mandated to diffuse innovations and improved technology among

the farmer community and to communicate their questions and problems from fields to the

agricultural researchers. However, both functions does not seem to being served to their best

evinced by low growth in agricultural produce and slow technology adoption process.77 Realising

this gap, the private sector has come forward in the form of farm advisory services (free of cost

in most cases) in addition to marketing agricultural supplies. There may be questions over

motives of these advisory services but these are fulfilling the much needed knowledge vacuum.

The Agriculture Department may take advantage of this window, by forging partnerships with

the private sector, linking its research efforts with privately operated extension services and

regulating the private sector by framing relevant rules, to cover most of the farmer community

without additional costs.

In general, the extension services staff is quite experienced but need refresher courses on new

agricultural and value chain development techniques as well as exposure to best practices. A

few areas of capacity enhancement identified by the relevant staff include social mobilisation,

mass communication, value chain development, high efficiency irrigation, social marketing,

agrobiodiversity, integrated pest management, development and sustainable harvesting in

horticulture and climate change adaptation. In-service capacity building programmes should be

designed and delivered on regular basis.

The Directorate General of Agricultural Extension also has a vital function of providing certified

inputs (like seed and plant protection supplies) and organising farmer communities. The most

successful experience in this regard has been of Farm Services Centres (FSCs) established along

the line of private public partnership and cooperative approach. Out of more than 100 FSCs,

Swat has the maximum number of FSCs in a single district. The five FSCs in Swat District (at

Kabal, Barikot, Matta, Khwazakhela and Madyan) have 5911 members with a total fund of 9.15

million rupees of which 3.55 million have been contributed by FSCs members. A Model FSC has

also been constructed in Mingora with Asian Development Bank funding which would house all

relevant government line agencies at one place. In this regard, the draft Khyber Pakhtunkhwa

Farm Services Centres Act, 2013 is ready to be passed by the Provincial Assembly. These FSCs

are quite democratic in their operations as the General Body (comprised of all FSC members)

elects its President, Vice President, General Secretary and Finance Secretary to constitute the

Management Committee for a period of three year. FSCs are quite helpful in providing the

farmers technical advice and trainings, short-term easy loans, and agricultural inputs like

certified seeds, saplings, fertilisers, pesticides and agricultural machinery on relatively affordable

rates. However, an alternate view point considers FSCs economically nonviable as the market

driven private sector may soon outweigh the subsidised FSC operations.

77 Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, 2013. Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Agriculture Strategy and Policy: A Ten Year

Perspective (Typescript). Peshawar: Department of Agriculture, Livestock and Cooperation, GoKP.

51

The idea of Farmers Field School (FFS) has been experimented at few places in Swat and Chitral

as source of participatory technical development and has been quite successful at least to

provide hands on training to farmers as well as communicating the issues at hand to the

Agriculture Department. However, it is felt that the Department does not have adequate

understanding to add value to this initiative. For example, there is need to identify critical stages

in cropping and to arrange FFS sessions accordingly.

There are a few ‘islands of excellence’ spread across the province. For example, sustainable use

of water and other agricultural inputs has been promoted on model farms. These success stories

need to be documented and disseminated widely. In this regard, collaboration may be forged

between the extension services and the universities.

3.4.2. Agriculture Research

Agricultural research is one of the vital functions of the Agriculture Department aimed at

maximising the agricultural productivity with highest number of staff (40%) in the Department.

However, ironically only 21% of staff under this function is technical while the remaining are

managerial, administrative and support staff. Starting at Tarnab in 1908, the Department has 13

Agriculture Research Institutes/Centres with several substations in the Province. Though

administratively responsible to the Agriculture Department, the Directorate General Agriculture

Research works under guidance from the University of Agriculture, Peshawar. There is a

reasonable quantum of research being undertaken by the Research function but unfortunately

the outcomes are not reaching to farmers due to weak coordination between research and

extension services and traditional retroactive attitude of the extension services staff. Some

awareness-raising and informative material has also been produced by the research staff which

can be disseminated to the farmer community through extension services.

Swat

The Agricultural Research Institute (ARI) at Mingora is well equipped as compared to the one at

Chitral. The Institute has imported new varieties of germplasm from Italy which after

localisation will be distributed amongst farmers. Cultivation of oyster mushroom is also being

experimented. The Institute has established model farm for apple, cherry, peach, apple and

apricot where both conservation and diversification approaches are being demonstrated. The

Institute has germplasm of about 70 local varieties of apricot and walnut, and 12 varieties of

peach.

Through one of its projects, GIZ has supported the ARI Swat with establishment of molecular

biology lab with ELISA facility where research is being undertaken on viral diseases of fruit and

mushroom. The entomology, and soil and water testing labs have also been provided

equipment; however, in the absence of a few accessories, the labs are not fully functional. The

Entomology lab has identified about 40 species of fruit flies which are disastrous especially for

stone fruits. Now the Institute is working towards developing flies control strategies, of which

mass trapping is one which requires high level of motivation and support to the farmers.

The soil and water testing lab of the Institute receives about 4000-5000 soil samples every year

from across the Malakand Division, based on what the Institute has developed soil maps for the

entire Division which may be made available online through the proposed knowledge hub. The

Institute is also producing onion’s seed (Swat 1) at farmers’ site; however, the plant nurseries

need to be certified so those diseased saplings are not provided to the farmers.

52

The Institute is serving as experimentation lab for students of various universities. It may be

useful to support some university students to research on critical agro-biodiversity issues

through encouraging linkages between ARI and universities. The technical brochures being

produced by the Institute need to be disseminated through extension services, even in easily

comprehensible format so that the latest research can reach to the farmer communities.

Chitral

Operational since 1990, the Agricultural Research Centre (ARC) at Chitral is small in size and

human resources, given limited scale of agricultural activities in the District. The Centre provides

certified seed and plant saplings to the farmers. The Centre is adequately equipped but needs

human resource to take advantage of unique agro-biodiversity in the area. The staff needs to be

trained in agro-biodiversity, value chain development and seed production. The Centre has its

germplasm unit over 7 acres which may be increased to accommodate more samples. With

variation in sowing season and introduction of better seed, wheat production has increased

about 10 times. With BKP’s technical support, the Centre can provide valuable services to the

communities.

3.4.3. Agricultural Engineering, Soil Conservation and On-Farm Water Management

Though quite important from land development and utilisation, water harvesting and

conservation, and agricultural development perspectives, these functions in the Agriculture

Department have hardly been given due attention. These functions have been subject to various

structural reforms and are commonly believed to serving as auxiliary functions to the Agriculture

Department.

All these functions started in project mode, became full scale organizations and shrunk to Wings

or Cells due to lack of resources in the absence of donor funded projects. With limited local

component, these functions have mostly been dependent upon project financing by donors like

USAID, the World Bank and the Asian Development Bank. Cumulatively, these functions have

reasonable number of staff (more than 600) but very few (2% which means just 12 for the entire

Province) are in the technical category.78 These units are mandated to reclaim and develop

culturable waste land for improving its productivity through rental operation of bulldozers,

augment irrigation water supplies by sinking privately owned irrigation tube-wells through

rental operation of drilling rigs, and provide free of cost technical advice to the farmers on

maintenance and operation of tractors, implements and other farm machinery, and irrigation

tube-wells. They also help farmers in protecting their lands from soil erosion by water and wind,

and conserving rainfall water for raising crops. These Units can be potential counterparts with

BKP in promoting water harvesting, and soil conservation and stabilisation techniques through

pilot projects in the select valleys.

Through these Units, the Agriculture Department has helped communities in construction of

protection spurs, protection bunds, spillways, check dams, water inlets/outlets, water pond, and

terracing and contour farming/afforestation. In addition to assisting the farmers with improved

irrigation channels, the Department has also demonstrated and assisted the farmers to apply

high efficiency irrigation systems. Funds permitting, such assistance is provided on 50-50 cost

sharing basis between the land-owner and the Department.

78 Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, 2013. Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Agriculture Strategy and Policy: A Ten Year

Perspective (Typescript). Peshawar: Department of Agriculture, Livestock and Cooperation, GoKP.

53

Deteriorating water quality due to pollution by sewerage and marble industry is of grave

concern but in the absence of adequate technical capacities, it is difficult to assess and monitor

quality of fresh and ground water. Traditional irrigation conveyance system results in water

losses but nobody pays any heed as water is considered nature’s gift and the farmers do not

have to pay the real price of water. There is need to incentivise the use of high efficiency

irrigation systems and a study on water pricing needs to be undertaken to chalk out a

sustainable water management strategy.

With limited staff at the district level and even more limited financial allocations for

development schemes, these agencies are not able to play their due role effectively. The

available legal instruments are irrigation oriented; hence of little help in water conservation

efforts. The district level technical staff needs capacity development in social mobilisations,

modern techniques for community infrastructure development, and use of Computer Assisted

Drawings (CAD) software.

3.4.4. Livestock and Dairy Development

Administratively the department reports to the Agriculture, Livestock and Cooperation

Department and operates under the Director General Livestock and Dairy Development,

assisted by Directors, Deputy Directors, and District Directors, Senior Veterinary Officers and

Veterinary Officers at the district level. As compared to other functions under the Agriculture

Department, relatively reasonable (20%) of the staff is in technical category while less than 1% is

in managerial and administrative positions and the remaining are support staff.

The Directorate is mandated for development of livestock sector to raise farmers’ income and

living standard, provision of animal health facilities and services through curative and

prophylactic measures at veterinary hospitals, dispensaries and centres, improvement of local

breeds of cattle and buffalo through artificial insemination, provision of livestock production

extension services, provision of pre-service and in-service training in animal husbandry,

extension and animal health disciplines, to the students, staff and farmer community,

improvement of poultry production, provision of ante-mortem and post-mortem examination

services to relevant authorities in meat, and collaborating with other departments and projects

for development of the livestock sector.

The Livestock Department, as it is commonly known, has its own Semen Production Unit at

Cattle Breeding and Dairy Farm, Harichand (District Charsadda), a Buffalo Breeding and Dairy

Farm at Dera Ismail Khan, a Livestock Research Station at Jaba (Mansehra) for research on sheep

and goats, and a Poultry Farm and its Animal Husbandry In-Service Training Institute at

Peshawar.

Established since 1949, the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Veterinary Research Institute at Peshawar is

the pioneer veterinary research institution in Pakistan. It has established Veterinary Research

and Diagnostic Laboratories (VR&DL) at Dera Ismail Khan, Swat, Mansehra and Kohat to extend

research and diagnostic facilities to remote areas of the Province. A Centre of Animal

Biotechnology was also established in 1992 for better disease diagnosis and control in animals

through advanced techniques like ELISA and electrophoresis etc.

It also has a chain of veterinary hospitals, dispensaries and centres to provide veterinary health

and artificial insemination services to farmers. There are 12 Veterinary Hospitals and 16

Veterinary Dispensaries in Swat District, and six Veterinary Hospitals and 18 Veterinary

54

Dispensaries in Chitral District.79 The technical staff in these facilities is well-trained but lack

sufficient resources to provide adequate veterinary services. The communities are also not

making any effort to keep their livestock healthy. Due to poverty and lack of communities’

interest in access to veterinary services, commercialisation of these services is not an option

which otherwise could have been a sustainable service delivery solution. Diseases such as goat

pox, contagious caprine pleuro-pneumonia (CCPP), peste des petits ruminants (PPR) also known

as ‘goat plague’ and common in goats while cattle are suffering from foot-and-mouth disease

(FMD) and black water disease. Enterotoxaemia and fascioliasis (liver flukes) are commonly

found in sheep and cattle. Under normal circumstances, communities do not take pain for

vaccination of their animals. In case of an outbreak, they rush for vaccination but then it is too

late. There is hardly any concept of Community Livestock Extension Workers, hence total

reliance is on the public sector veterinary services which are not adequate due to lack of human

and financial resources.

Artificial Insemination (AI) which is a successful method to improve cattle breed, is suffering in

both Swat and Chitral due to inappropriate planning. The veterinary staff is unable to meet its

target just because the quantity of liquid nitrogen (required to store semen straws) issued by

the Directorate to the field staff is insufficient. In 2011-12, a total of 16020 animals in Swat and

893 animals in Chitral were artificially inseminated.80 Availability of adequate human resources

is another requirement which can be fulfilled by providing necessary training to the existing

support staff. The staff may also be trained in community mobilisation to convince the

communities for better hygiene and nutrition.

3.4.5. Fisheries

Established since 1958, the Directorate operates under the Director Fisheries, assisted by

Deputy Directors Fisheries and Assistant Directors/District Officers Fisheries. Administratively

the Fisheries Department reports to the Agriculture, Livestock and Cooperation Department. As

with other functions under the Agriculture Department, only 4% of the staff is in technical

category while 2% are in managerial and administrative positions and the remaining are support

staff.

The Department is mandated to prepare policies, take regulatory measures, undertake research

and training, and provide extension services to the private sector and fish farmer for

development, conservation and management of fisheries in the Province. At the district level,

the Department manages and develops fish in public waters, provide extension services to

private sector for promotion and development of fish farming and fish hatcheries, lease fishing

rights of public waters and ensure judicious exploitation of fish under the Fisheries Ordinance

1961. The Department also enforces ban on fishing during 1st October to 9th March for cold

waters and from 1st June to 31st August for warm waters. However, illegal fishing continues

unabated under the garb of private contracting, especially in Swat.

The Department also coordinates with NGOs and have organised 46 Fish Protection Committees

and number of Community Fish Farms. The Department has established Trout Culture &

Training Centre at Madyan (Swat) and Trout Hatcheries at Bamboret and Jaghor (Chitral) for

79 Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, 2013. Development Statistics of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. Peshawar: Bureau of

Statistics, GoKP.

80 Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, 2013. Development Statistics of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. Peshawar: Bureau of

Statistics, GoKP.

55

seed production and sale of fish. Swat is ranked 3rd in fish production amongst districts of

Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.81

Unfortunately, the Department is not playing an active role in developing and promoting this

key nutritional element which also has potential of sustainable exploitation and value addition if

the indigenous fish species are protected and promoted through establishment of dedicated

hatcheries.

3.5. District Government in Swat and Chitral

The District Government will be established in the districts under the newly enacted Khyber

Pakhtunkhwa Local Government Act 2013 after local bodies elections, planned for early next

year. Once in place, the local level governments will be headed by the Nazims at district and

village level. However, the administrative authority would still lie in the hands of government

officials designated by the Provincial Government. At present, the district administration is

headed by the Deputy Commissioner, assisted by Assistant Commissioners and Additional

Assistant Commissioners. The line departments are represented through their district level

heads, already mentioned in previous sections.

Under normal circumstances, the District Administration has hardly any role in biodiversity

conservation or NRM until an issue arises which has the potential to become public nuisance or

law and order situation. The responsibility of taking cognizance of offences under NWFP Forest

Ordinance, 2002 lies with the judiciary and the district administration helps in implementing the

law.

However, in Malakand Division, including Swat and Chitral districts as well, the Deputy

Commissioner has the powers of District Magistrate and the Assistant Commissioner of the

Executive Magistrate under the Sharia Nizam-e-Adl Regulation, 2009. By virtue of these powers,

the Assistant Commissioner assumes the authority of Forest Magistrate who otherwise has to

be a Judicial Magistrate of the First Class especially appointed for taking cognizance of the

offences under the NWFP Forest Ordinance, 2002. The Executive Magistrate has the authority to

punish the offenders of all offences under Pakistan Penal Code or Local and Special Laws

punishable with imprisonment up to three years with or without fine. Hence, most of the

offenses under the Forest Ordinance, 2002 can be punished by the Executive Magistrate having

powers of the Forest Magistrate.

In addition to adjudicative responsibilities, the district administration helps and coordinates with

the development initiatives to implement their activities, and provides these initiatives the

necessary administrative support. The office of the Deputy Commissioner is envisaged to play a

pivotal role in implementation of the Community Driven Local Development Policy under which

EU funded Khyber Pakhtunkhwa District Governance and Community Development Programme

will be implemented.

81 Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, 2013. Development Statistics of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. Peshawar: Bureau of

Statistics, GoKP.

56

3.6. Other Public Sector Institutions

3.6.1. Economic Affairs Division

After 18th Constitutional Amendment, the role of the Economic Affairs Division has changed to

some extent from a very proactive fund raising agency to the coordination and monitoring

agency for the foreign funded projects. However, the Division can still play an important role by

identifying and fostering linkages between potential donors and the provincial governments.

Heavily occupied with natural and human induced disasters and response requirements, the

donor community has moved away its attention from environment and natural resource

management sectors. In most cases, environmental investment is made to fulfil safeguard

compliance requirement. In this backdrop, role of EAD becomes even more important from the

perspective of resource mobilisation for biodiversity conservation. However, the Division will

have to be assisted through development of policy briefs, long and medium term perspectives,

and programme and project proposals. With limited capacity of federal and provincial

institutions, BKP will have a window of opportunity to fill this gap through its technical

assistance.

3.6.2. Pakistan Agricultural Research Council

Pakistan Agricultural Research Council (PARC) is the apex agricultural research organization. It is

managed by a Board of Governors responsible for the control, direction and superintendence of

the affairs of PARC. It is mandated to:

• Undertake, aid, promote and coordinate agricultural research.

• Arrange expeditious utilisation of research results.

• Establish research establishments mainly to fill in the gaps in existing programs of

agricultural research.

• Arrange the training of high level scientific manpower in agricultural sciences.

• Generate, acquire and disseminate information relating to agriculture.

• Establish and maintain a reference and research library.

Its four technical divisions Plant Sciences, Animal Sciences, Social Sciences and Natural

Resources provide technical lead for research and development in agriculture, livestock,

fisheries and land and water resources.

One of its research establishments, National Agricultural Research Centre, plays an important

role through research and development and serving as a repository of germplasm as a centre of

excellence.82 It will be important for BKP to establish and foster research linkages between

NARC, universities in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and research institutes/centres under the Agriculture

Department for sustainable management of agrobiodiversity. BKP can also engage select staff of

PARC for the development and implementation of trainings and sensitisation programmes for

agrobiodiversity.

The Agriculture Poly Technique Institute (APTI) established at NARC organise trainings for

agriculture scientists and extension workers, farm managers, staff of NGOs working in the rural

areas, livestock and dairy development officers, and progressive growers through its in-house

82 Pakistan Agricultural Research Council (http://www.parc.gov.pk/). Accessed on 8 Dec 2013.

57

and visiting faculty. BKP may link APTI with training institutes in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa for

exchange of ideas and expertise to build better human capacities.

3.6.3. Pakistan Science Foundation

Pakistan Science Foundation (PSF) is the apex body for promotion and funding of scientific and

technological research and science popularization in the country. PSF has two subsidiary

organizations i.e. Pakistan Museum of Natural History (PMNH) and Pakistan Scientific and

Technological Information Centre (PASTIC). The Foundation is mandated for establishment of

comprehensive scientific and technological information dissemination centres, promotion of

research in the universities and other institutions, establishment of science centres, museums,

promotion of scientific societies, organisation of periodical science conferences, exchange of

visits of scientists with other countries, prizes and fellowships to individuals engaged in

developing processes of consequence to the economy of the country.83 PSF can be a good match

to BKP’s efforts for building capacities and creating awareness regarding biodiversity

conservation.

3.7. Academia

3.7.1. University of Agriculture, Peshawar

Founded in 1981, the Agriculture University is prime educational institution in the Province not

only building human resource base in agriculture and other allied subjects but also undertaking

valuable research in agricultural development. It offers graduate and postgraduate degrees in

Agricultural Sciences, Veterinary Medicine, Biotechnology & Genetics Engineering, and

Management Sciences.

The University needs to establish an Agriculture Museum which can also house gene bank to

serve needs of the Province. The University is also a collaborating partner with the Pakistan

Agriculture Research Council (PARC), National Agriculture Research Centre (NARC), and Nuclear

Institute for Food and Agriculture (NIFA). It has established linkages with number of universities

within the Country and abroad.

The University intends to revitalise the dormant Agro-Biodiversity Network, once established

with IUCN’s assistance, to play an active role in providing advice and guidance on agro-

biodiversity issues. The Directorate of Planning and Development in the University will be an

ideal home for such initiatives.

In collaboration with Helvetas Swiss Intercooperation Pakistan, a Climate Change Centre has

recently been established at the University. The Centre aims at conducting cross-sectoral

climate change research to devise adaptation strategies for agriculture and allied sectors, and

offers good avenues for collaboration with BKP. University is also willing to offer its facilities to

BKP as venue for awareness and training workshops, video-conferencing and hosting its

knowledge hub.

3.7.2. Pakistan Forest Institute

Starting in 1947 at Faisalabad, moving to Murree and Abbottabad and then finally setting in

Peshawar, PFI is a centre of excellence in forestry education and research in forest utilization,

83 Pakistan Science Foundation (http://www.psf.gov.pk/index.php). Accessed on 8 Dec 2013.

58

forest entomology, forest botany, forest chemistry, medicinal plants and silviculture. Its

Arboretum has 271 species of forest trees, shrubs, and climbers providing an excellent learning

opportunity to forestry students as well as students of other educational organizations on the

main university campus.84

Most of the students are selected through the Provincial Public Service Commission for pre-

service forestry training while some are admitted directly on general seats. The Institute would

soon be given status of degree awarding institution, bringing the other forestry education

institutions (such as Sarhad Forest School at Abbottabad) under its academic supervision. PFI

also offers in-service training through MS degree as well as refresher courses. It has recently

started a series of trainings on Carbon accounting and Carbon stock assessment to support the

REDD+ initiative in Pakistan.

3.7.3. Centre of Plant Biodiversity, University of Peshawar

One of the oldest universities in Pakistan (established in 1950), the University of Peshawar has

around 12000 students enrolled with 557 faculty members of whom 182 are PhDs. The

University offers PhD, MPhil, MS and BS degrees in more than 30 disciplines.85 The Centre of

Plant Biodiversity is one of the elite centres of excellence offering PhD, MPhil and BS degrees

with more than 200 students at present. Established in 2006, the Centre is located on 83 acres

of land at Azakhel, Nowshera including herbarium, museum, research laboratories, botanical

nurseries, green houses, conference hall, lecture theatres, library, and faculty offices. The

Centre also provides forum for exchange of mutual ideas by arranging conferences, seminars,

workshops and other gatherings. The Centre was established to fulfil country’s responsibility as

signatory to the Convention on Biological Biodiversity (CBD) and following recommendation of

the Global Strategy for Plant Conservation, National Conservation Strategy (NCS), Sarhad

Province Conservation Strategy (SPCS) and National Biodiversity Action Plan.

Envisioned for conservation, education, sustainable utilisation and capacity building in the field

of Plant Biodiversity to serve the innocent creatures and humanity86, the Centre can be a

potential partner with BKP in research and exposure on agrobiodiversity. The Centre is trying to

promote plantation of Mazri as a cash crop through its research on its germination process. The

Botanical Garden, which is member of the Botanical Gardens Conservation International

network, offers an opportunity for field based awareness and sensitisation along with building

capacities of students and plant scientists.

3.7.4. University of Swat

Established in 2010 in a rented building, the University of Swat87 is one of the few universities in

Pakistan offering discipline of biodiversity. It has around 2000 students at present and would

grow many times once it is shifted in its under-construction campus on 50 ha in Char Bagh. The

Institute of Plant Sciences and Biodiversity at the University, with highly qualified (5 PhDs)

faculty is a nascent but well directed teaching and research facility for students of this

84 Pakistan Forest Institute (http://pfi.gov.pk/). Accessed on 8 Dec 2013.

85 University of Peshawar (http://www.upesh.edu.pk/?q=home). Accessed on 9 Dec 2013.

86 University of Peshawar, Centre of Plant Biodiversity

(http://www.upesh.edu.pk/academics/faculties/departments/?q=39&sid=45). Accessed on 9 Dec 2013.

87 University of Swat (http://uswat.edu.pk/). Accessed on 8 Dec 2013.

59

biodiversity rich valley. At present the Institute has five PhD, 11 MPhil, 80 postgraduate and 60

graduate students. The Institute offers research on medicinal plants, collaborates with

international organizations for development in the field of plant biology and is in process of

establishing its botanical garden over an area of 20 kanal and setting up genebank/herbarium.

Through HEC supported Office of Research, Innovation and Commercialization, the Institute has

provided training to around 200 farmers in sustainable harvesting. The Institute has also

developed training modules and can be one of the potential partners in capacity building efforts

of BKP.

Another worth mentioning educational institution in Swat is Government Post Graduate

Jahanzeb College88, established by the Ruler of Swat in 1952. The College offers MS courses in

Botany, Physics and Chemistry.

3.7.5. Shaheed Benazir Bhutto University, Chitral Campus

Though small in its establishment, the University is providing extremely important facility to

poor youth of Chitral District by offering BS and MS courses in Zoology, Botany, English and

Computer Sciences. It has attracted good faculty (currently 29) and its students (about 350) can

opt for a thesis or additional paper; hence BKP may encourage and support some of its students

in undertaking their research in biodiversity conservation. The Project may also help the

university in lab equipment and online access to academic libraries around the world.

There is also a campus of Abdul Wali Khan University in Chitral offering BS and MS courses in

management sciences to about 180 students. However, it does not offer natural sciences under

an understanding with the Shaheed Benazir Bhutto University to avoid overlapping. This is a

worth following example of mutual coordination.

3.8. Civil Society Organizations/Initiatives

There are tens of civil society organizations, international as well as national, working in

different areas of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. However, most of these are active in Peshawar,

southern part of the province and Swat (as most of USAID funding was focused in militancy

affected areas). Following are few CSOs and initiatives which are more relevant to BKP work and

operating in the focus districts of BKP. A list of NGOs working in Swat and Chitral is given at

Annex VI.

HUJRA, CARAVAN, Environment Protection Society (EPS) and Society for Human and Natural

Resource Development (LASOONA) are the leading local civil society organization working in

Swat District along with number of international and national NGOs. However, many of

international NGOs are working through small scale local NGOs as it is difficult for the

international organizations to get No Objection Certificate from the Provincial Government for

working in Swat. Most of the civil society work is supported by the European Union, USAID and

other donors like UNDP, FAO, World Food Programme, Swiss Agency for Development and

Cooperation (SDC), and Governments of Italy, Japan and United Arab Emirates. Pakistan Army

and the Provincial Reconstruction, Rehabilitation & Settlement Authority (PaRRSA) are key

development players in Swat District after counter militancy action in 2009 and floods in 2010.

88 Government Post Graduate Jahanzeb College (http://www.jc.edu.pk). Accessed on 8 Dec 2013.

60

In Chitral, Aga Khan Rural Support Programme (AKRSP) and Sarhad Rural Support Programme

(SRSP) are major national NGOs in addition to number of small level NGOs and a few

international NGOs.

Some of the key initiatives and organization having relatively more relevance with BKP work

have been mentioned below:

3.8.1. Helvetas Swiss Intercooperation Pakistan

One of the prominent NRM focused organization in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Intercooperation (as it

is commonly known) has a large portfolio of project in forestry, value chain development and

livelihoods improvement. It is operational in four valleys of Chitral (Arandu, Barir, Shishikoh and

Gabur) but is not working in Swat. IC can be extremely useful partner in value chain

development work of BKP as it has extensive experience of value addition to NTFPs and

agricultural produce in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, particularly in Chitral.

IC has also helped the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Forest Department in developing a Village Planning

Manual89 which is very useful handbook for community based forest management. BKP may

utilise this manual in its land use planning pilots.

3.8.2. Aga Khan Rural Support Programme

AKRSP, though primarily active in Gilgit-Baltistan, is working in upper and central Chitral. AKRSP

has helped the communities in community infrastructure schemes including microhydels,

irrigation channels and farm plantations, access to better seed and agricultural inputs, and value

chain development. AKRSP is being supported by SDC, KfW and EU. Golen is one its selected

valleys.

AKRSP has extensive experience in social mobilisation, value chain development and community

based enterprise development. BKP can benefit from AKRSP’s experience and build upon its

success stories.

3.8.3. Sarhad Rural Support Programme

SRSP has a reasonable presence in different valleys of (mostly southern) Chitral and Swat.

Currently it is implementing PEACE initiative funded by EU which includes microhydels, water

and sanitation, and community infrastructure components. As value chain development work,

SRSP is working on packing and marketing of walnut, peer and honey while it is also supporting

nursery development. SRSP has a regional office in Chiral and a Project Support Unit is Swat. Of

BKP valleys, SRSP is working in Rumbur where it has supported the community in social

mobilisation, community infrastructure, NRM and community enterprise development.

Currently, it has more than 90 professional staff in its Chitral Regional Office of which about 10%

are women. Almost same staff configuration is in Swat. SRSP can be a good partner in

development for BKP given its key role in rolling out EU funded Khyber Pakhtunkhwa District

Governance and Community Development Programme in Swat and Chitral.

89 Intercooperation, 2011. Village Planning Manual. Peshawar: Forestry Planning and Monitoring Directorate, Forest

Department, Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.

61

3.8.4. Thrive/Chitral Integrated Area Development Programme

Thrive was formed specially in order to implement the Chitral Integrated Area Development

Programme (CIADP), initially a five year programme supported by the Royal Norwegian Embassy

but extended up to 2014. The Programme is undertaking need based community infrastructure

and NRM projects in partnership with the Local Support Organizations, formed by AKRSP or

SRSP. CIADP is working in both of the selected valleys of BKP – Rumbur and Golen – helping

communities in establishing schools, construction of irrigation channels, health and sanitation

facilities, livestock health, and value chain development in terms of fruit processing, honey bee

farming and pine nut (chilghoza) harvesting. The Programme has also assisted the Agricultural

Research Station, undertaken tree plantation, provided livestock training, and has distributed

poultry bird to improve nutrition as well as income of communities. The future work of the

Programme includes developing GIS, seed development and strengthening of LSOs. CIADP

operated on community contribution (10%) approach and contributes the rest 90% of financial

resources.

3.8.5. Pakistan Poverty Alleviation Fund

PPAF, established in 2000 with support from the World Bank and Government of Pakistan, has

so far financed over 4.7 million microcredit loans, completed 25,000 health, education, water

and infrastructure projects, conducted over 11,500 training events and developed a grassroots

network of over 297,000 community organizations. It covers 121 districts through 126 partner

organizations across all provinces and regions.90 The Fund is supporting the community

organizations in Swat and Chitral through Aga Khan Rural Support Programme, Aga Khan

Planning and Building Services, Environmental Protection Society, Mountain Institute for

Educational Development and Sarhad Rural Support Programme. PPAF has declared Chitral

(with low HDI and food security) as a model district and is supporting constitution and operation

of a District Development Forum (DDF), to be chaired by the Deputy Commissioner and

facilitated by AKRSP. Its Livelihood, Employment and Enterprise Development component may

be of most relevance to BKP in its pursuit for value chain development and livelihood

improvement.

3.8.6. Mountains and Markets Project

The Mountains and Markets: Biodiversity and Business in Northern Pakistan is a full-sized GEF

biodiversity project to be implemented by UNDP and executed by the Climate Change Division.

With the objective of ‘sustainable production of biodiversity goods and services through

community ecosystem-based enterprises in demonstration conservancies in the northern

mountains of Pakistan’, the Project has select Kalam Valley as one of its focussed areas. IUCN,

Enterprise Development Centre and the Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa are the

implementation partners.

The Project will use market-based mechanisms to provide additional impetus to strengthening

community co-management of Pakistan’s biodiversity-rich mountain ecosystems through using

voluntary certification of non-timber forest products (NTFPs) to increase marketing and financial

opportunities for local communities through community biodiversity enterprises (CBEs).91

90 Pakistan Poverty Alleviation Fund (http://www.ppaf.org.pk/). Accessed on 6 Dec 2013.

91 Global Environment Facility, 2012. Pakistan and the GEF. Islamabad: GEF.

62

The Project can be good collaborative opportunity for BKP, creating synergies in Kalam Valley

and at the provincial and federal levels in respect to value chain development and market

linkages.

3.8.7. MEAD/Entrepreneurs Project

The Mennonite Economic Development Associates (MEAD) is implementing USAID funded

Entrepreneurs Project in Swat District (along with many other districts of Pakistan). It is an

economic development project seeking to substantially raise incomes of predominantly women

micro entrepreneurs by improving their production and management practices and linking them

to more profitable markets. The project is implementing a cluster based Value-Chain approach

through local organizations, private sector, government agencies, and other relevant actors, to

build their capacity in delivering effective economic programs using the value chain approach.

Training, market linkages and sustainability of improvement in production, marketing and

margins is achieved by developing and supporting cluster leads who also act as sales agents.

In Swat, the Project is working on the following value chains with high potential for market

expansion:

1. Medicinal and Aromatic Plants (MAPs)

2. Honey – through modernising the beehives and introducing improved honey collection

methods to increase the productivity

3. Hand embellished fabrics

The project supports primarily the women entrepreneurs through:

1. Strengthening capacity of local organizations to facilitate market-driven interventions

that will train and connect micro entrepreneurs to markets.

2. Developing and providing relevant marketing support to selected value chains including

identification of more profitable markets, development of market linkages and tools,

and delivery of marketing training by building capacity of local partners.

3. Providing livelihoods recovery support to approximately 40000 families who lost their

livelihoods due to flood, natural disaster and conflict.92

MEAD is supporting local NGOs; LASOONA for hand embellished fabrics, the Holistic

Understanding for Justified Research and Action (HUJRA) for honey and the Human

Development Organization Doaba (HDOD) for MAPs. So far the Project has supplied basic

equipment, provided trainings, helped in plantation/regeneration of MAPs, organised the

collectors in clusters to deal with middlemen, and linked them with markets in Madyan and

Lahore. In future, it intends to set up Collection and Buyers Centre. However, these efforts need

to be taken to next enterprise level of certification and export oriented marketing so that the

real value addition is made possible to maximise the benefits for communities. BKP can help in

filling in the gaps by advance level trainings, policy influence for adequate regulation of harvest

and trade, and arranging international certification for organic produce.

92 Entrepreneurs Project (http://www.meda.org.pk/usaids-entrepreneurs-project/). Accessed on 7 Dec 2013.

63

3.9. Communities in Swat and Chitral

The shortlisted valleys of BKP in Chitral – Rumbur and Golen – are located geographically in

lower Chitral but offer different ecosystems. The Chail, Lalku and Shamozai valleys in Swat

however offer different geographical as well as ecological variations.

The communities in both districts are predominantly rural, poor and resource deficient. Though

level of education as well as income is relatively much better in Swat District, the lack of

knowledge and realisation about the value of biodiversity is common in both districts.

Unemployment and poverty are interrelated root causes for communities’ neglect of their

ecological resources. At the same time, command and control approach of the government

departments has alienated the communities from their resource base. Since they are not

owners of the resources, hence they do not care if these resources are depleted or conserved.

Introduction of joint forest management approach, formation of farmer groups under the Farm

Services Centres and community based conservation efforts are good start but have not yet

gained confidence of communities. The communities consider these efforts as temporary

income or resource yielding activities rather than means of long term sustainable management

of ecosystem resources. There is need to instil sense of ownership of resources to the

communities and restore confidence in government efforts through genuine representation of

communities in the committees and forums to plan, implement and monitor resource

management and utilisation initiatives.

Many community members feel that even if they do not take royalty to protect their forests, the

forests would be cut on one or the other pretext; hence why not they should be taking

advantage on first come, first served basis. They see great potential of value addition into

agricultural and non-timber forest produce but do not see a long term marketing effort needed

to make this sustainable. There have been sporadic efforts by many organizations, like AKRSP,

SRSP, IC, HUJRA but the magnitude of benefit is not large enough to outweigh the advantages of

improved varieties and use of fertilisers and pesticides. The communities are not reluctant to

practice new technologies but are unable to contribute towards cost of adoption.

Damage to irrigations channels is a common problem in almost all selected valleys of Swat and

Chitral, hence would be one area of attention for BKP. These gradient channels are the only

source of water for the communities in the absence of energy for lifting water from rivulets and

streams but the recent floods have destroyed most of the channels beyond routine repairs. The

Water Management Department, mandated with community water schemes is unable to help

the communities due to lack of financial resources. Due to lack of community as well as public

resources for repair of these irrigation channels, the cultivable lands cannot be exploited to their

full potential. In some valleys, such as Chail, communities are being assisted in restoration of

their irrigation channels and soil conservation measures through Cash for Work approach. In

general, communities are happy to work through this approach but have reservations over its

limitations. As per FAO procedure, only one member of a household can participate in Cash for

Work programme. The worker would work only 6 hours a day and for a maximum of 12 days a

month. This approach may be replicated in all affected valleys with minor adjustments.

The inhabitants are poor in general with extreme reliance on their natural resources. The

common issues are lack of educational, health and sanitation facilities coupled with limited

employment and livelihood opportunities. Communities in general are aware of the value of

their natural resources but exploit the same without any concern for sustainability because of

their extreme poverty. In the absence of adequate and alternate livelihood options, the

communities have no option but to exploit the fragile ecosystems and declining biodiversity. As

64

phrased by a senior official, “poverty of resources leads to cannibalism”, the communities are

striping the nature of its beauty for catering to their sustenance needs. If given ownership

through tenure rights and conservation is incentivised through diversification of livelihoods, the

communities would prefer to conserve and protect their natural resources.

As a result of efforts by various NGOs, projects and previous local government system of 2001,

there is enormous amount of social capital in the form of Local Support Organizations (LSOs),

Citizen Community Boards (CCBs), Falahi Tanzeems (welfare organizations), Community Based

Organizations (CBOs), Village Organizations, Women Organizations, Village/Valley Conservation

Organizations (VCOs), and District Conservation Committees (DCCs) in both Swat and Chitral.

Since Swat has seen relatively more influx of development organizations, the communities are

relatively more organised and well aware of development planning process. Some of the

communities have even become little over-smart to mould their needs according to window of

opportunity being offered. Hence, the community development practitioner has to be able to

understand the real needs of the community. This social capital is of immense importance to

BKP as it will have a well organised community in its selected valleys to undertake the planned

interventions. The Project would also be able to find a few community development leaders in

order to get the interventions facilitated. At the same time, it would become easier to

undertake community based participatory monitoring (e.g., bio-monitoring) for the Project

interventions.

65

4. Capacity Gaps at Policy, Institutional and Personnel Level

Based on an overview of the policies and laws, and detailed discussions with the relevant

stakeholders, the following capacity gaps have been identified:

4.1. Lack of overarching policy and legal framework for biodiversity

conservation

Though national and provincial conservation strategies, and subsequent environmental and

climate change policies mention biodiversity as an area of work, there are no overarching policy

and relevant legal instruments to ensure conservation and sustainable management of

biodiversity. Most of the existing laws used to manage biodiversity are only partially relevant in

terms of their intent (forestry laws are for promoting commercial forestry and the wildlife laws

focus on game species) or need to be up-dated. The recently enacted CITES Law93 took about

seven years from drafting to enactment and relates only to the trade of species on CITES

Appendixes I and II. The draft ABS Law is still being developed as an agreement on a ‘permitting

authority’ has yet to be reached while Pakistan still has to ratify the Nagoya Protocol. On

Cartagena Protocol, ratified by Pakistan in 2009, only biosafety rules and guidelines have been

developed which are now being transformed into a law. Had there been an overarching

Biodiversity Policy and a Biodiversity Law, these laws could have been enacted as subsidiary

laws of the same. There have been some concerted efforts to enact a ‘biodiversity law’ in the

past, especially in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, with the assistance of GEF/UNDP supported and IUCN

managed Mountain Areas Conservancy Project and GEF/WB supported and WWF managed

Protected Areas Management Project. A draft bill was prepared in 2006 but it did not reach the

Provincial legislature due to interdepartmental conflicts over turf. Now again the draft bill is

with the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Provincial Assembly for enactment.

The wildlife laws, for their most part, are restricted to game species of economic value and do

not provide blanket protection to all biodiversity forms. They are game oriented and not

protectionist in nature. The case of Leopard Gecko (Eublepharis macularius) is a clear example of

such legal lacuna where this species is being captured, marketed and exported without any

punitive action in the absence of any relevant proscribing law. Even if the relevant rules could

have been framed to protect such species, the relevant provincial governments have failed to do

so under the existing laws.

Pakistan is signatory to number of multilateral environmental agreements and conventions but

for many the relevant legal instruments have yet to be developed and enforced. Convention on

Migratory Species, Nagoya Protocol (for ABS) and Cartagena Protocol (on biosafety) are very

obvious examples of this neglect.

4.2. Ineffective implementation of existing laws

After 18th Constitutional Amendment, the provinces were mandated to enact legislation on the

subjects which historically have been federal domain. For example, seed certification,

registration and monitoring are still being managed by the Federal Government while the

provinces are yet to draft their legislation in this respect. Same is true for fertilisers and

pesticides with the result that adulteration of these supplies is a common complaint in Khyber

93 Government of Pakistan, 2012. Pakistan Trade Control of Wild Fauna and Flora Act, 2012.

66

Pakhtunkhwa. In the absence of provincial legislation and a general but incorrect perception

about federal laws as inapplicable for the recently devolved provincial subjects, the provincial

departments feel handicapped in implementation of law.

The NWFP Forest Ordinance 2002 provides for formation of Joint Forest Management

Committees but given the complex tribal socio-cultural setup in the Province at times the

Committees formed are not truly representative. There are even complaints of unilateral

decision making by the Chairmen, without consulting other members JFMCs, to serve their own

vested interests. The relevant Forest Officer has the authority to dissolve anu JFMC on receiving

complaints, but on the other hand, such authority has its own disadvantages.

Role of vested interests in the implementation of laws and rules is another problem. In principle,

the timber harvesting should be according to the ‘marking’ following the ‘felling schedule’ and

‘yield tables as per forest type’ developed during the management planning process. However,

in practice actual harvesting is much more than the allowed quantity, primarily in connivance

with the relevant officials and communities. This defies the principle of ‘safe harvesting’ to

remove diseased, dying and dead treed out of the forest to allow healthy regeneration.

4.3. Conceptual contradictions about biodiversity conservation and

sustainable resource use

Pakistan, following the economic growth paradigm since long, has a sense of economic uplift,

and income and revenue generation deeply enshrined in its policy and legal system. This has

resulted in undermining the value of biodiversity conservation and sustainable resource use. For

example, forest development and management has always been with objective of timber

harvesting and revenue generation. Though, in principle, commercial logging is permitted under

the Forest Law on the basis of Forest Management Plans which take into consideration the

natural regeneration capacity of the forest, the fact is that there has been consistent decline in

canopy cover, resulting in loss of forest ecosystems which provide invaluable environmental

services.

Due to limited exposure of most of the stakeholders to new developments in the field of

biodiversity conservation, so far the subject has been limited to protected areas management

and wildlife conservation. Forest management for the most part has been for commercial

purposes rather than from ecosystem preservation perspective. Pakistan in general, and Khyber

Pakhtunkhwa in particular, lacks conceptual clarity in the areas of taxonomy, floral biodiversity,

community based protected areas management, forest-biodiversity nexus, REDD and most

importantly agro-biodiversity. The formulation process of next generation of biodiversity

strategies and actions plans may be used to generate debate on these issues, and consensual

opinion can be reflected in the resultant documents.

Realising the need to reverse the biodiversity loss, efforts have been made to provide ex-situ

protection and breeding facilities of threatened species. While this has been an important and

successful conservation measure, ignoring the need of in-situ conservation has given rise to

increase in recessive genes which is causing decrease in genetic diversity.

Unfortunately, biodiversity (though in terms of its most common manifestations, i.e., forests

and wildlife) is considered one of the many sectors. Comparing the return on investment (ROI)

in biodiversity conservation with that of an infrastructure (say roads) sector would never make

sense but is used as a yardstick for allocation of resources. NRM projects which are slow in

showing results are planned with the same time schedule as for other productive sectors. The

67

result is half cooked models, failures in completion of policy-practice loop and never achieved

up-scaling.

There is also an inherent contradiction between agricultural development and biodiversity

conservation objectives. Whereas biodiversity conservation demands avoidance of genetic

mutation and modification of germplasm, agricultural development is based on genetically

improved varieties through use of biotechnology and agricultural inputs like fertilisers,

pesticides and biochemical measures. Similarly, the introduction of improved livestock breeds

with the objective of enhanced meat and milk production has badly affected the propagation of

indigenous breeds.

4.4. Lack of trust and coordination amongst relevant stakeholders

There is a traditional distrust between public representatives, public servants and communities.

They all are interconnected but feel being cheated by others. One such example is of forest

harvesting. The Forest Department blames the community (the right holder) being greedy for

share in the royalty while the community feels that the contractors cut much more trees than

marked under the Forest Management Plan in connivance with the politicians and officials of

the Forest Department. Same stories are common about licensed hunting in the community

controlled conservancies where officials are blamed for illegal hunting in the garb of licenses.

Departmental compartmentalisation is a common phenomenon in the public sector. There are

at least six government departments in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa which are directly relevant to

biodiversity conservation but hardly meet regularly to coordinate their activities and plans. At

times, they even cross each other’s lines of authority to establish their own turf. There is no

institutional coordination mechanism in practice, hence planning, implementation and

monitoring of biodiversity conservation initiatives remain in silos. There is immense need to

institute a coordination mechanism for NRM related disciplines at the planning and

development as well as monitoring level so that all the relevant departments and institutions

are on the same wavelength and duplication, or at time contravention, of efforts is avoided. The

lack of coordination is even more visible at the lower tiers of implementation. Offices of

different Departments, and even different Units of the same Department, do not even know

about plans and activities of each other. At times, while working in the same geographical area,

the field staff does not coordinate with each other, resulting in overlapping and waste of public

resources.

Unfortunately, the civil society organizations which claim to be more prudent in planning,

implementation and monitoring also treed the same path. Just as an anecdote, one can witness

tens of signboards on the road to Bamboret and Rumbur Valleys mentioning development

organizations or projects for uplift of the people but unfortunately there has not been

significant change in the life of people. In reality, presence of so many diverse organizations in

small communities, like that of Kalash, has given rise to fragmentation of the society and culture

of dependence on outside assistance.

Government, civil society and the private sector are three pillars of service delivery but usually

work in isolation and sometimes at odds with each other. Though improved over the period of

time, the level of trust and coordination between government departments and civil society

organization is still low. Whereas government officials consider CSOs unsustainable and

expensive solution of the development needs, CSOs consider the public sector inept and fraught

with corrupt practices. Interestingly, both public sector and the civil society consider the private

68

sector as motivated by profiteering. This lack of trust is a major obstacle in synergetic action by

these key players of sustainable development.

The communities, who are ultimate beneficiaries or victims of good or bad service delivery,

hardly have any role in functioning of these three pillars of service delivery. The recently

announced Community Driven Local Development policy is trying to bridge this gap but lot of

prerequisites, especially well organised and capacitated local communities, are yet to be

fulfilled.

4.5. Non-competitive and non-incentivising public sector

Despite the fact that the public sector is the only sustainable vehicle for the state to reach out to

its citizens, the organizational model it follows is static and devoid of motivation. In the absence

of clear career development options and accountability, and with low salaries, lack of

performance incentives and control, inappropriate balance between professional and support

staff, and departmental compartmentalisation, the public sector has failed to deliver to the

desirable level of services with the result that those who can perform get out of the system and

opt for private sector while the rest consider public sector jobs a secure source of livelihood and

post-retirement income. This attitude results in lack of motivation for innovation and creativity

in service delivery, providing space for civil society organizations and the private sector to fill the

vacuum.

On the contrary, the private sector, primarily motivated by the bottom-line, invests into

research and extension with the objective of maximising their benefits; hence ignores

biodiversity conservation considerations quite conveniently. However, equipped with viable

business models and cable to attract the best of human resources, the private sector is coming

up fast as a challenger to the public sector in service delivery.

The civil society organizations, which can play a balancing act, are yet to become self-

sustainable and at present rely heavily upon donor support. This overreliance renders the civil

society sector with short term project-to-project programming.

In this context, there is need to introduce public sector reforms aimed at better career

structure, performance based compensation and investment in human resource development.

4.6. Dearth of and inaccessibility to conservation knowledge

Pakistan is one of few countries who does not have country specific IUCN Red List of Threated

Species94. There is not a single taxon monograph available while many countries smaller than

Pakistan are far better in this regard. In the absence of Pakistan’s Red List, the scientists,

biodiversity managers and other users such as from extractive industry, have to rely upon the

global Red List which at times provides data which is too generic from the country perspective.

The Red List can help in regulating species movement, especially under the newly enacted CITES

Law. The Zoological Survey Department, the Pakistan Natural History Museum, the Pakistan

Science Foundation and the Biodiversity Directorate can play vital role in developing Pakistan’s

Red List with the help of IUCN and WWF Pakistan. BKP can also assist in developing this key

knowledge product through financial and technical assistance.

94 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species (http://www.iucnredlist.org/). Accessed on 6 Dec 2013.

69

The public sector allocations for research in biodiversity are miserably low. Just as an anecdote;

the Zoological Survey Department, which is the most credible institution on biodiversity status

and taxonomical data, is allocated just one hundred thousand rupees as development expenses

for the entire year. In such a situation, how can the research base be expanded and reliable data

be made available for informed decision-making. Similarly, NTFPs and MAPs has been an

ignored area of knowledge which needs to be invested into.

Academia in Pakistan, which globally serves as originators of new knowledge, has not been

forthcoming in terms of research and development in the discipline of biodiversity or

conservation biology. There are very few educational facilities to train young conservation

biologists in planning and practising conservation and sustainable management of biodiversity.

There is dire need to collect and organise GIS based data on species status and distribution in

general and in the selected protected areas in particular, in addition to resource monitoring

through satellite imageries and assessment of biological variances in similar agro-ecological

zones.

The challenge of climate change, though being witnessed in the form of glacial melt, cloud

bursts, flash floods, mountain desertification and landslides, has yet to be fully realised at the

district and community level. Unfortunately, so far no reliable data or study is available on

impact of climate change on biodiversity and required readiness. GEF/UNDP supported GLOF

Project has recently announced a study on climate change impacts in Chitral and the climate

vulnerabilities study supported by BKP will probably the first one in the series.

Unfortunately, there is no central repository for data, information and knowledge regarding

conservation status, policies, laws, rules, strategies, actions plans, success stories, lessons learnt,

and reliable facts and figures. The recently established Clearing House Mechanism at the

Climate Change Division is supposed to serve the same objective but so far is hardly fulfilling the

need. It is also facing issue of sustainability in the wake of meagre financial allocations made for

CCD. It is extremely difficult to find copies of the abovementioned elements of conservation

knowledge and data from different sources is contradictory. In the age of satellite imaging and

remote sensing, maps of protected areas and true boundary demarcation are not available.

WWF has undertaken one project in collaboration with the oil and gas exploration industry but

the output is not available publically. The GIS laboratory of the Forest Management Centre,

Peshawar has done wonderful work on forest mapping but it is not available online. The

Agriculture Research Institute at Swat has prepared soil maps for the entire Malakand Division

but again these are not available to public. The inaccessibility of right kind of information not

only lead to ill-informed decision making but also makes the implementation erroneous and

results of interventions unknown – a major obstacle in up-scaling of best practices.

4.7. Lack of mass awareness about value of biodiversity

There is no doubt the level of awareness about biodiversity and its value for human life and

overall life cycle is much better as compared to a decade ago, credit goes mainly to NGOs and

CBOs working on biodiversity issues through donor funded projects. The English press is also

covering conservation issues but the mainstream Urdu press is not giving it due attention. The

communities where some international or local NGOs have implemented community based

conservation programmes or projects are relatively more sensitive towards value of biodiversity

but their practice depends a lot more on accomplishment of their livelihood needs. This was one

of the key factors behind success of trophy hunting programme in Balochistan, Gilgit-Baltistan

70

and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.95 There are many islands of excellence, for example through the

Mountain Areas Conservancy Project, which unfortunately could not be up-scaled due to lack of

appropriate financial and human resources as environment is a low-priority sector. The half-

hearted efforts of up-scaling like those under the Programme for Mountain Areas Conservation

have in fact disoriented the conservation communities.96 There is hardly any effort on part of

government agencies to create mass awareness for biodiversity conservation. There has been

very positive role of international and national NGOs in making the policy makers and

communities aware of biodiversity’s value but most of it is restricted to geographical areas

where donor funded projects have been implemented.

In some instances, the communities are relatively aware of the challenges they are facing and

will continue to face in future, due to climate change, unsustainable grazing, soil erosion, flash

floods, resource depletion and water scarcity, and are ready to take action if adequate guidance

and support is available. They, in some instances, have contributed up to 50% to such efforts

like farm forestry. However, there have been limited efforts by the public sector as well as civil

society organizations to channelize this awareness and willingness into concerted action.

4.8. Inadequate human resource capacity

The public sector departments and organizations in particular and natural resource sector in

general lack adequate human resource capacity. The communities who are ultimate actor and

beneficiaries of the development process are also not equipped with the required skillsets to

cope with changing demands of the natural resource management. There are extremely limited

opportunities for in-service training, those too in very traditional areas of work.

Table 1 shows a few areas of capacity requirements, identified during discussions with the

experts, community members, and departmental staff at the federal, provincial and district

level, which need to be addressed at the federal, provincial, district and community level for

sustainable natural resource management and biodiversity conservation.

Table 1: Areas of Required Capacity

Required Capacity Action Tier

Fed. Prov. Dist. Comm.

Access benefit sharing � � �

Access to climate finance including REDD+ � �

Bio-technology and its role in biodiversity conservation �

Climate change vulnerability and adaptation strategies � � �

Community mobilisation and social organization � � �

Control of spurious agricultural inputs, especially pesticides and

fertilisers � �

Disaster risk reduction, preparedness and management � � �

Economic valuation of environmental resources and services � � �

95 Mir, Ahsan, 2006. Impact Assessment of Community Based Trophy Hunting in MACP areas of NWFP and Northern

Areas (Typescript). Islamabad: IUCN.

96 Interview with Chairman of the Astor Conservancy Management Committee.

71

Required Capacity Action Tier

Fed. Prov. Dist. Comm.

Environmental prosecution and adjudication � �

Evidence based participatory monitoring and reporting � � � �

GIS and remote sensing as planning and decision making tool � �

Horticulture, especially cultivation, grading and packing of fruits, off-

season vegetables and cut flowers � �

Integrated natural resource management �

Integrated pest management �

International negotiations �

Livelihood diversification � �

Market intelligence and marketing � �

Modern agricultural techniques and organic farming � �

Post flood land reclamation � �

Project cycle management � � �

Project proposal and PC-1 development � � � �

Range and pasture management, including rotational grazing and

sustainable resource exploitation � �

Social mobilisation and organizational management � �

Species conservation and ecosystem management � � � �

Species survey techniques � � �

Strategic planning � �

Sustainable forest management � �

Sustainable harvesting, processing and marketing of NTFPs and

medicinal and aromatic plants (MAPs) � �

Taxonomical and ethno-botanical research � �

Value chain development � � �

Water conservation through high efficiency irrigation systems � �

Watershed management � �

72

5. Fiscal Support for COSMOB in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa

Historically NRM sectors in general and biodiversity conservation in particular have not been

priority sectors for financial planner of the Country or the Province. After Rio Conventions, there

has been significant increase in financial support for implementation of and reporting to these

conventions through bilateral and multilateral modalities for Pakistan like GEF, Adaptation Fund,

Green Climate Fund, Special Climate Fund and support for Enabling Activities. Despite global

fiscal crunch, there is enormous potential for accessing financial resources, if the

implementation and reporting obligations under various MEAs are unpacked and projectised.

The lack of capacity at CCD is holding it back from accessing number of funding windows. Just as

an anecdote, the Adaptation Fund can be tapped for EbA in close collaboration with the Climate

Change Division.

5.1. Public Sector Development Programme of Pakistan

Unfortunately, the environmental momentum created through formulation could not be

maintained and environment as a sector and cross-cutting theme continued sliding down from

the priority list. Having a look at Figure 7, it becomes obvious that how low priority environment

(including climate change, biodiversity, forestry and wildlife) sector has been accorded to.

Financial year 2005-06 was the only exception when the Ministry of Environment’s (renamed as

Climate Change Division in 2013) share in PSDP rose beyond decimals (1.08%). The situation is

no better for other NRM sectors including agriculture (food security), livestock and fisheries.

Figure 7: Overall National PSDP and Allocation for the Environment/Climate Change Division

Source: Pakistan Public Sector Development Programme Summaries 2002-03 to 2013-14

5.2. Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Annual Development Programme

Khyber Pakhtunkhwa is almost completely dependent on the Federal Government for revenue

resources in the form of divisible pool transfers, subvention from Federal Government and

transfer of net hydel profit from WAPDA which constitute about 90% of overall provincial

revenue. The provincial own revenue base is limited and inelastic. Most of the provincial budget,

almost 70%, is eaten up by debt servicing establishment costs and food subsidy and very little is

-0,2%

0,0%

0,2%

0,4%

0,6%

0,8%

1,0%

1,2%

1,4%

1,6%

-

200

400

600

800

1.000

1.200

1.400

En

v./

CC

D P

SD

P (

in %

ag

e)

Na

tio

na

l P

SD

P (

Rs.

in

bil

lio

ns)

National PSDP Local National PSDP FPA

Environment/CC Div PSDP (%) Local Environment/CC Div PSDP (%) FPA

73

left for its development activities.97 Under the recent 7th NFC Award (2010) Khyber Pakhtunkhwa

has been allocated 16.42% of the Federal Divisible Pool98 which is expected to be Rs. 198 billion

in the financial year 2013-14. The Province is expecting total receipts of Rs. 297 billion against an

overall financial outlay of Rs. 318 billion out of which Rs. 118 billion is planned as Development

Expenditure (including Rs. 35 billion of Foreign Project Assistance).99

With a few exceptions, the actual budget expenditure on the Annual Development Programmes

remains lower than the estimated budget allocations (see Figure 8) as at the time of preparing

ADP, many half cooked schemes are added to ADP just to get the budget allocated. Later on the

line departments either fail to prepare the PC-1s or spend the allocated budget. In many

instances, budget for the infrastructure schemes is enhanced cutting down the budget for other

sectors which are considered less important or for which fully prepared PC-1s are not

available.100

Figure 8: Estimated and Revised ADPs of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa

Source: Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, 2013. White Paper Budget 2013-14. Peshawar: Finance Department,

GoKP.

97 Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Finance Department: Medium Term Budgetary Framework

(http://www.financekpp.gov.pk/FD/financial-reforms/mtbf). Accessed on 13 Nov 2013.

98 Government of Pakistan, Ministry of Finance: 7

th National Finance Commission (NFC) Award 2010

(http://www.financekpp.gov.pk/FD/attachments/article/154/7th%20NFC%20AWARD%202010.pdf). Accessed on 13

Nov 2013.

99 Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, 2013. Budget Strategy Paper 2013-16. Peshawar: Finance Department, GoKP.

100 “New uplift project see upward cost revision”. Daily Dawn, 10 Dec 2013, p.15.

http://www.dawn.com/news/1061667/new-uplift-projects-see-upward-cost-revision.

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

19

70

-71

19

71

-72

19

72

-73

19

73

-74

19

74

-75

19

75

-76

19

76

-77

19

77

-78

19

78

-79

19

79

-80

19

80

-81

19

81

-82

19

82

-83

19

83

-84

19

84

-85

19

85

-86

19

86

-87

19

87

-88

19

88

-89

19

89

-90

19

90

-91

19

91

-92

19

92

-93

19

93

-94

19

94

-95

19

95

-96

19

96

-97

19

97

-98

19

98

-99

19

99

-00

20

00

-01

20

01

-02

20

02

-03

20

03

-04

20

04

-05

20

05

-06

20

06

-07

20

07

-08

20

08

-09

20

09

-10

20

10

-11

20

11

-12

20

12

-13

To

tal

AD

P (

Rs.

in

bil

lio

ns)

Estimated ADP Revised ADP

74

Historically, the Province has been extremely reliant upon foreign assistance for its annual

development financing, especially after Pakistan’s active engagement in war against terrorism

(in 2002-03) to which Khyber Pakhtunkhwa was, and still is, the frontline province. It started

dipping down gradually due to unpreparedness of the provincial government and visible

inclination of foreign donors (especially US) towards financing military and paramilitary

operations in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and tribal areas. The anticipated contribution of Germany

through KfW and GIZ in 2013-14 is around Rs. 1.54 billion in grant which is about 4.4% of total

foreign assistance. After 7th NFC Award (2010), the local contribution to ADP has improved

significantly, duly complemented by foreign contributions (Figure 9). In October 2013, the

Provincial Government reached an agreement on the Strategic Development Partnership

Framework (SDPF) with a group of 13 donors including Asian Development Bank, AusAid,

Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA), Department for International Development

(DfID), Embassy of Germany, GIZ, Embassy of Japan, Japan International Cooperation Agency

(JICA), European Union, Norway, SDC, USAID and the World Bank. This would pave the way for

structured and well-coordinated development assistance for the Provincial reform agenda in

health, education, urban development, industry, technical education, energy and power

sectors.101 The Provincial Government has identified eight objectives to achieve the Provinces

vision, ‘Attainment of a secure, just and prosperous society through socio-economic and human

resource development, creation of equal opportunities, good governance and optimal utilization

of resources in a sustainable manner’; however, none of the objectives mention NRM sectors

while agriculture has been cursorily discussed under job creation objective.102

Figure 9: Foreign Donors’ Contribution to Khyber Pakhtunkhwa ADPs

Source: Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, 2013. White Paper Budget 2013-14. Peshawar: Finance Department,

GoKP.

Since long Khyber Pakhtunkhwa has been facing resource crunch; hence, it development

programme has been limited to physical infrastructure development. Increase in allocations for

the social sectors is also a near-past phenomenon. The enhanced provincial autonomy through

18th Constitutional Amendment and the revised NFC Award (2010) resulted in significant

increase in the overall development portfolio of the Province but NRM sectors remained a low

priority area for the fiscal planners of the Province (see Figure 10).

101 “Donor countries in partnership with KP.” Daily Dawn, 3 Oct 2013. http://www.dawn.com/news/1047126/donor-

countries-in-partnership-with-kp.

102 Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, 2013. Strategic Development Partnership Framework. Peshawar: GoKP.

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

-

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

%a

ge

fo

reig

n c

on

trib

uti

on

to

AD

P

Rs.

in

bil

lio

ns

Local Foreign % Foreign Contribution

75

Figure 10: Overall Provincial ADPs and Allocation for NRM Sectors

Source: P&D Department, Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa

As usual, in financial year 2013-14 the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Government has focused more on

physical infrastructure development to gain visibility of efforts; however, there is slight increase

in the proportionate allocation for NRM sectors. In total, 108 projects (10.9%) in NRM sectors

(agriculture, animal husbandry, environment, fisheries, forestry and wildlife) with a total project

cost of 12.9 billion rupees will cumulatively receive only Rs. 2.78 billion (2.4%) through local and

foreign resources in 2013-14. The total provincial ADP 2013-14 is of Rs. 118 billion for

implementation of 989 projects with a total project cost of Rs. 456.4 billion. The cumulative

Current Expenditure for NRM sector is expected to be Rs. 6.1 billion (2.9%) out of the total

outlay of Rs. 211 billion.103 This is indicative of the low priority NRM sectors, especially

biodiversity, are accorded by the Government. Figure 11 depicts the development and current

budget allocation for NRM sectors showing dismal situation for animal husbandry, fisheries and

wildlife which do not have even a single project.

Figure 11: Allocations for NRM Sectors in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Budget 2013-14

Source: Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Annual Development Programme 2013-14

103 Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, 2013. Annual Development Programme 2013-14. Peshawar: Planning and

Development Department, GoKP.

0,0%

0,5%

1,0%

1,5%

2,0%

2,5%

3,0%

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14

NR

M A

DP

(in

%a

ge

)

To

tal

AD

P (

Rs.

in

bil

lio

ns)

Total ADP NRM ADP (%)

-10

-

10

20

30

40

50

60

-

0,5

1,0

1,5

2,0

2,5

3,0

3,5

Agriculture Animal Husbandry Fisheries Environment Forestry Wildlife

No

. o

f p

roje

cts

Rs.

in

bil

lio

ns

ADP 2013-14 Local ADP 2013-14 FPA 2013-14 Current Budget Projects

76

As mentioned above, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa anticipates Rs. 35 billion in financial year 2013-14

from the foreign donors in terms of grants or loan which constitutes about 30% of its

development outlay. Figure 12 shows the contribution of these donors to Khyber

Pakhtunkhwa’s ADP. Most of the Foreign Project Assistance (45.6%) is to support Elementary

and Secondary Education while NRM sectors (Agriculture and Forestry) get only 1.7%. Looking

closely at the list of foreign assisted projects given in Table 2, it transpires that BKP is the only

environmental project in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa being assisted by a foreign donor in the financial

year 2013-14.

Figure 12: Foreign Donors’ Contribution to Khyber Pakhtunkhwa ADP 2013-14

Source: Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Annual Development Programme 2013-14

Table 2: Foreign Assisted NRM Projects in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa 2013-14

Project Donor

Project Cost

(Rs. in million)

2013-14 Budget

(Rs. in million)

FPA Local FPA Local

Establishment of Model Fish Farms in

Private Sector in District Peshawar,

Nowshera and Mardan

JICA 24.000 0.001 6.748 0.001

Gomal Zam Dam Command Area

Development and On Farm Water

Management for High Value and High

Efficiency Agriculture Project

USAID 3595.000 705.000 465.000 25.000

Sustainable Management of Bio-diversity in

Malakand (Districts Swat & Chitral) GIZ 520.120 0.200 150.000 0.110

Total 4139.120 705.201 621.748 25.111

Source: Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Annual Development Programme 2013-14

5.3. Fiscal Opportunities for COSMOB in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa

Given low priority of COSMOB at the financial menu, and the fact the BKP is the only biodiversity

conservation financial assistance available to the Provincial Government, it is important that

conservation and sustainable management of biodiversity and agro-biodiversity is integrated in

other sectors’ development planning so that adequate fiscal resources are available for this key

sector. This may be possible at two levels:

-

2.000

4.000

6.000

8.000

10.000

12.000

14.000

16.000

Rs.

in

mil

lio

ns

Grant Loan

77

1. Sensitising the financial planners and managers at EAD, and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa P&D

and Finance Departments regarding value addition biodiversity conservation can offer

to the other productive sectors. It would enable them to highlight biodiversity

conservation as area of investment in their discussions with bilateral and multilateral

donors.

2. Working closely with the technical staff of the relevant line departments (i.e.,

Agriculture, Livestock, Fisheries, Forest, Wildlife and Environment) and development

partners at the district level (such as PPAF, AKRSP, SRSP and CIADP) to assist them in

incorporating biodiversity conservation activities into their regular sectoral

programmes. Given that these partners are planning some initiatives, it is important

that BKP keeps itself associated with planning process of such initiatives.

5.3.1. Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Comprehensive Development Strategy 2010-17

In 2010, the Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa developed a Comprehensive Development

Strategy104 for 2010-1017 providing the areas and magnitude of expected investment by the

public sector. It also identified the areas where the Government needs donor support.

Heartening fact is that the Strategy treats the biodiversity and ecosystems relatively fairly,

allocating about 7.07% of the total portfolio (Rs. 1.28 billion) for Agriculture, Forestry and

Wildlife, and Environment sectors. The portfolio is staggered in short term, medium term and

following initiatives.

Realising the need for investments in the agriculture, forestry, wildlife, fisheries and

environment sectors for sustainable development of the Province, and with a goal to serve the

people of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa by protecting, managing and promoting stewardship of the

province's forests, wildlife, fisheries and environmental resources on sustainable basis, the

Provincial Government has planned the following portfolio for these sectors (Table 3):

Table 3: Planned NRM Portfolio under KP-CDS 2010-2017 (PKR in millions)

S. # Measures Y1-Y2 Y3-Y5 Y6-Y7 Total Donor

Opportunities

AGRICULTURE, LIVESTOCK AND

FOOD SECURITY

1.

Agriculture policy reforms and

capacity building of Agriculture

Department

96 192 96 384 Technical

Assistance (TA)

2. Land development 2784 2400 998 6182 TA

3. Farmer participation in extension

and research 192 288 192 672 TA and O&M

4. Exemption or reduction from

taxes 708 1061 708 2476

5. Extension, seeds, fertiliser,

machinery 960 1440 960 3360 TA, grants

104 Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, 2010. Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Comprehensive Development Strategy 2010-

2017. Peshawar: Planning and Development Department, GoKP.

78

S. # Measures Y1-Y2 Y3-Y5 Y6-Y7 Total Donor

Opportunities

6. Procurement of bulldozers etc. for

land levelling 960 960 480 2400

7. Cultivable waste land

development 432 864 432 1728

8. Agricultural research 3216 5424 4800 13440 TA and O&M

9. Revising market standards and

trade legislation 10 0 0 10 TA

10. Livestock and dairy development 1008 3192 1920 6120

11. Horticulture development 768 1440 768 2976 TA

12. Water harvesting 480 864 576 1920 TA & construction

13. Enhancement in wheat storage

capacity 2880 4800 1018 8698

14. Strengthening of food department 67 38 10 115

Sub-Total Agriculture, Livestock

and Food Security 14561 22963 12957 50482

FORESTRY, WILDLIFE AND

FISHERIES

15. Rehabilitation of degraded natural

forests 576 768 384 1728

16. Rehabilitation and development

of range and pasture lands 288 480 192 960

17.

Development of forests for carbon

sequestration and climate change

mitigation

480 1440 960 2880

TA for accessing

global funds for

carbon trade

18. Promotion of non-timber forest

products 192 768 384 1344 TA

19. Sustainable management of the

critical ecosystem 192 576 192 960

20. Promotion of energy plantations 192 576 192 960 TA

21. Watershed rehabilitation and

Management 192 480 192 864

22. Biodiversity conservation

programme 576 1152 960 2688

23.

Community participation and

other programmes in wildlife

conservation

1008 1872 960 3840

24. Fisheries development and the

promotion of aquaculture 1152 2016 1536 4704

Sub-Total Forestry, Wildlife And

Fisheries 4848 10128 5952 20928

ENVIRONMENT

79

S. # Measures Y1-Y2 Y3-Y5 Y6-Y7 Total Donor

Opportunities

25. Environmental awareness raising

programme 96 288 96 480

26.

Strengthening of environmental

monitoring and the litigation

system in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa

96 96 96 288

27.

Strengthening of the review

process of IEE/EIA in Khyber

Pakhtunkhwa

48 96 48 192

Sub-Total Environment 240 480 240 960

GRAND TOTAL FOR NRM

SECTORS 19649 33571 19150 72370

Source: Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Comprehensive Development Strategy 2010-2017

The projects mentioned at serial number 7, 8, 10, 11 and 15-25 of Table 3 above have great

potential of collaboration with BKP and need to be followed up with the relevant line

departments. Particularly, the projects to be implemented by the Forest Department should be

collaborated with for adding value and building capacities of the Department officials and vice

versa.

5.3.2. Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Medium Term Fiscal Framework 2013-16

Presenting its Budget Strategy Paper for 2013-16, the Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa

anticipates slight decrease in its development expenditure despite increase in its revenue

receipts (Figure 13). Given its challenging budgetary position, the Framework does not offer any

silver lining for NRM sectors. However, its promising intention from BKP point of view is

establishment of a Value Chain Management Company complemented by a shift from

conventional cropping patterns to high value, high yield varieties of crops, fruit and vegetables;

efficient use of water resources; minimising environmental risks associated with unsustainable

means of agricultural production and reforming the agricultural marketing system to improve

profitability, productivity and value for money for producers and consumers.105 Further details

of NRM sectoral priorities and allocations for the same can be found in the Budget Estimates for

Service Delivery 2013-16.106

105 Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, 2013. Budget Strategy Paper 2013-16. Peshawar: Finance Department,

GoKP.

106 Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, 2013. Budget Estimates for Service Delivery 2013-16. Peshawar: Finance

Department, GoKP.

80

Figure 13: Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Medium Term Fiscal Framework 2013-16

Source: Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, 2013. Budget Strategy Paper 2013-16. Peshawar: Finance

Department, GoKP.

BKP may take advantage of Value Chain Management Company in terms of linking its select

communities with this initiative and providing them opportunity to receive good value for their

agricultural produce. The certification of organic produce by a well-recognised entity may

augment this arrangement.

5.3.3. Khyber Pakhtunkhwa District Governance and Community Development

Programme

Piloting its Community Driven Local Development policy and governance framework in

Malakand Division in the first phase, the Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa is partnering with

the European Union to generate economic activities at the grassroots level, i.e., villages, through

citizen participation. Direct transfers will be made to the village based organisations to engage

them in local development. The Government of KP will provide Rs. 500 million in addition to

EU’s commitment for € 80 million.107 The EU grant would include € 64 million euros for

budgetary support, 7.5 million for social mobilisation, 7.3 million for capacity building of the

government departments and 1.2 million for monitoring and evaluation. The 42 months project,

launched on 26th November 2013, will provide technical assistance, grants to civil society

organisations to promote community-driven development and budget support. In order to

provide baseline for this initiative, the District Development Strategies are already being

developed for 6 districts of Malakand Division (excluding Buner) with the support of EU. Though

DDS are focused more on social sectors, i.e., education, health and WASH, and District

Governance and Community Development Programme (DGCDP) is also designed to focus on the

same sectors, BKP may help the village based organizations in its select valleys of Swat and

Chitral Districts in identifying ecosystem based adaptation activities, aligning their needs with

DGCDP themes and developing proposals for the upcoming challenge fund modality under this

initiative.

5.3.4. Multi Donor Trust Fund

Following rise of violent militancy in parts of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and FATA, and the realisation

that this dire situation is an outcome of frustrations resulting from decades of weak governance,

107 Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, 2013. Budget Strategy Paper 2013-16. Peshawar: Finance Department,

GoKP.

-

100

200

300

400

2013-14 2014-15 2015-16

Rs.

in

bil

lio

ns

Current Expendture Development Expendture Revenue

81

corruption and wide-ranging socio-economic deficits, the Government of Pakistan requested

Asian Development Bank, European Union, World Bank and United Nations to undertake a Post-

Crisis Need Assessment (PCNA) in collaboration with Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and

FATA Secretariat. Completed in 2010, PCNA made number of recommendations in the areas of

governance, rule of law, agricultural and natural resources, non-farm economic development,

education, infrastructure (comprising energy, transport and water supply and sanitation),

health, social protection and strategic communications. Responding to PCNA, a Multi Donor

Trust Fund was established in 2010 with the objective of supporting reconstruction and

development aimed at recovering from the impact of the crisis and reducing the potential for

renewed crises, as well as long-term rehabilitation. MDTF projects are executed by the

Governments of Pakistan, KP, FATA, and Balochistan. Australia, Netherlands, Denmark, the

European Union, Finland, Germany, Italy, Sweden, Turkey, UK and USA have contributed US$

159 million through the Fund to support these rehabilitation activities. The Fund is administered

by the World Bank.108

The recommended outputs for Agricultural and Natural Resources with an anticipated cost of

US$ 635 million included:

1. Restocking of livestock, provision of feed and fodder [to reduce the grazing pressure and

workload of women who take care of and derive income from livestock] and distribution

of seeds and fertilizer, tools and implements.

2. Rehabilitation of destroyed infrastructure: repairs to damaged public irrigation and

flood control schemes, reforestation and rehabilitation of forest nurseries, repair of

animal shelters and poultry/dairy farms; replanting of fruit trees; repair of post-

harvest/storage facilities.

3. Technical outreach programmes and credit facilities reviewed and strengthened (the

latter especially in FATA) including for alternative rural income-generating activities and

marketing.

4. Community-based planning and implementation of rural livelihoods enhancement

interventions (crops, animal husbandry, fisheries, off-farm activities, post-harvest and

storage, water management and harvesting, NTFPs, small enterprise development, etc.).

5. Matching grants delivered for community development schemes, management of

common-use resource such as forestry plantations and range management.

6. New micro credit and revolving funds schemes extended and strengthened and legal

impediments to access to credit removed in FATA.

7. Expansion of commercial agricultural sector to maximise its potential for employment

and revenue: high value crops promoted through introduction of new technologies,

improvement of market information and infrastructure; incentive system to give

preference to local area for related value-chain activities.109

Unfortunately, very little of these outputs could be achieved as most of the available funds were

spent on reconstruction of infrastructure, health, education and governance reforms. Out of

US$ 155.8 million, about 53% have been allocated to Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (rest to FATA and

Balochistan). More pledges are expected to be made in early 2014. This provides an opportunity

108 Multi Donor Trust Fund (http://www.pakistanmdtf.org/). Accessed on 6 Dec 2013.

109 Asian Development Bank, European Union, United Nations and The World Bank, 2011. Post Crisis Needs

Assessment Khyber Pakhtunkhwa & Federally Administered Tribal Areas. Islamabad: Government of Pakistan.

82

for BKP to position itself strategically so that its work, especially that in line with the above-

mentioned outputs, is replicated and up-scaled through allocations from MDTF.

5.3.5. Global Environment Facility

GEF, since its inception has provided US$ 62.9 million through 23 projects of which Biodiversity

Focal Area has received highest share (US$ 25.8 million) for eight projects.110 It its next Cycle (6),

GEF is planning to allocated a range of US$ 1230-1450 million for the Biodiversity Focal Area.

Based on Pakistan’s STAR (System for Transparent Allocation of Resources) allocation in Cycle 5

(US$ 4.92 million), it can safely be concluded that Pakistan will get around US$ 5 million for

Biodiversity Focal Area in the next four years (2014-18). Given limited capacity of government

departments’ limited capacity in proposal development, the allocations are seldom utilised fully.

BKP may support the Climate Change Division and provincial Environment and Agriculture

Departments, in developing the Project Identification Form (PIF). Once the PIF is approved, the

proponents can be assisted in developing full scale proposals.

5.3.6. Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Forest Development Fund

Established under the Forest Ordinance 2002, the Fund is credited with one time endowment of

Rs. 50 million and 70% of its annual profit by the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Forest Development

Corporation. It also receives timber surcharge on commercial timber harvesting and sale from

reserved forests, protected forests, guzara forests, protected wastelands and other forest areas;

managerial charges levied by Government on the management of various types of forest;

seigniorage fee (a kind of tax) recovered from landowners and right holders; and all fines

imposed by the Forest Magistrate in forest offence cases. Managed by FDF Management

Committee, the Fund has become a significant pool of financial resources; however, the release

of funds is not timely causing delays in the forest management activities. Also, the spending is

normally on run of the mill routine activities like nursery raising, plantation, pruning and

watershed infrastructures. Working in close liaison with the Forest Department, BKP can help

design innovative forest and biodiversity conservation initiatives to be financed by FDF and

implemented by the Forest Department.

110 Global Environment Facility (http://www.thegef.org/gef/RBM). Accessed on 7 Dec 2013.

83

6. Perception about Capacities and Benchmarking

The previous Sections have elaborated in detail the existing capacities and gaps in terms of

policies, laws, institutions, personnel and fiscal priorities. In order to give this assessment

quantum and setting a rudimentary benchmark, a very simple perception scale was used asking

the relevant stakeholders the following questions:

1. What is level of political will for biodiversity conservation and ecosystem sustainability?

� Non-Existent � Very Low � Low � Adequate � High � Very High

2. How far the existing policies and legal instruments are conducive for biodiversity

conservation and ecosystem sustainability?

� Absolutely Not � Very Little � Little � Adequately � Highly � Very Highly

3. How adequate are departmental capacities for conserving biodiversity and sustainably

managing the ecosystems, including agro-biodiversity?

� Non-existent � Very low � Low � Adequate � High � Very High

4. What is the general level of awareness about value of biodiversity and ecosystems in human

life and livelihoods?

� Non-existent � Very low � Low � Adequate � High � Very High

5. To what level communities are ready to conserve biodiversity and sustainably use their

natural resources?

� Absolutely Not � Very Little � Little � Adequately � Highly � Very Highly

In total 53 stakeholders responded to the questions. The responses for each question have been

quantified on a scale of 0 to 5 and plotted on a bar chart (Figure 14). The literature review and

descriptive analysis made in the earlier sections also complements these results.

Figure 14: Perception about biodiversity conservation capacity

Analysing the perceptions and based on predefined indicators of BKP Project, a baseline has

been set to periodically measure the progress of the Project against the benchmark. The scale

used is from 0 to 5 describing complete absence (0) to full achievement (5) of the indicator,

which is explained below:

-

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Political Will Policy & Legal

Framework

Institutional

Capacity

General Awareness Community

Motivation

Very Low Low Non-existent Adequate High Very High Average

84

Project Indicator 1: A biodiversity action plan, including measures for sustainable land,

forest and water resource management, has been adopted for the

province.

0. No Provincial Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (PBSAP) exists

for Khyber Pakhtunkhwa

1. Need for PBSAP is realised and expressed.

2. A provincial steering committee is notified for developing PBSAP

3. A technical team has been constituted for developing PBSAP

4. A draft PBSAP is presented for the Province level consultations.

5. PBSAP is approved by the competent forum.

Project Indicator 2: The provincial government (Environment Department) has taken

account of the results of 5 best practices from the management of

watersheds and protected areas, agro-biodiversity, sustainable forest

management and the (economic) use of non-timber products in

relevant policy documents (e.g., biodiversity action plan, climate

adaptation strategy) under gender aspects.

0. No best practice has ever been transformed into policy action.

1. At least one best practice is transformed into policy actions.

2. More than two best practices are transformed into policy actions.

3. At least five best practices are reflected in PBSAP.

4. At least one policy action based on best practices is projectised and

included in the Annual Development Plan.

5. The project based on best practices is operationalised through

release of funds.

Project Indicator 3: In each of 2 districts, at least 1 value chain contributes to the

sustainable economic use of traditional plants or non-timber products

(e.g., medicinal plants, traditional agricultural varieties, honey)

particularly to improve income for women.

0. The concept of value chain development in non-existent in the

select districts.

1. At least some level of value chain development has been introduced

in the select districts by contemporary initiatives.

2. The value added products are certified for their organic value.

3. The value added products are domestically marketed at improved

price.

4. Income of women in the select communities has increased by 50%.

5. Income of women in the select communities has increased by 100%.

Project Indicator 4: Experience from pilot measures has been systematically compiled by

the responsible government agencies and included in the planning

activities of the provincial government as specific inputs to improve

disaster-preventive land use planning.

1. No lessons learnt are documented for planning and programming.

2. At least some pilot measures documented for planning and

programming.

85

3. The Provincial Government incorporates these lessons learnt into

disaster-preventive land use planning.

4. Land use plans are developed for the most disaster prone districts in

Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.

5. Land use plans are put in practice by the most disaster prone

districts.

Project Indicator 5: Experience gained as part of the measure in the sustainable

management of biodiversity in KP is channelled into national reporting

to CBD.

0. No provincial input is channelled into national reporting to CBD.

1. Informal and individualistic input is channelled into the national

reporting to CBD.

2. An institutional mechanism is notified for providing periodic input

to the national reporting to CBD.

3. Periodic input is provided to the federal level Biodiversity

Directorate for national reporting to CBD.

4. A provincial reporting is in place against the targets set through

PBSAP.

5. The PBSAP targets and periodic reporting is incorporated in to the

national reporting to CBD.

Based on the review of literature, and meetings and discussions with the key stakeholders in the

biodiversity sector, the current status on the abovementioned indicators has been

benchmarked:

Indicator Benchmark

Score

Explanation

1. PBSAP 1 No provincial biodiversity action plan exists.

2. Best Practices 2 The following best practices are already in practice as

policy actions:

1. Sustainable species use – trophy hunting

2. Joint forest management

3. Dedicated financial mechanism for conservation –

Forest Development Fund

3. Value chain

development

1 Through not fully successful, value chain development has

been introduced for hand embellished fabrics, honey and

MAPs by various initiatives

86

Indicator Benchmark

Score

Explanation

4. Land use planning 3 The Provincial Government realises the importance and

need for land use planning and has recently invited

Expression of Interest for Provincial Land Use Plan/Regional

Plan. Land use planning has been devolved to the District

Governments through KP Local Government Act, 2013 but

conserving transboundary nature of resources and

geographical elements, provincial and regional geospatial

planning has been envisaged.111

5. Provincial

reporting to CBD

1 So far the reporting has been irregular and on individual

level

The above table and graph may be updated every year, adding values for the respective time

period; so that a periodic progress of the project is available in the real time. However, this

needs to be kept in mind that this benchmarking is based on limited interactions; hence may

refine over the period of time as the project progresses and more information is available.

111 Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, 2013. Provincial Land Use Plan/Regional Plan. Urban Policy Unit, P&DD,

GoKP.

-

1

2

3

4

5

PBSAP Best Practices Value chain

development

Land use planning Provincial reporting

to CBD

Benchmark Score Year 1 Score Year 2 Score

Year 3 Score Year 4 Score Post Project Score

87

7. The Way Forward – Recommendations to Tackle the

Challenges

Based on the information gathered, literature reviewed, meetings and discussions held with key

stakeholders at the federal, provincial and local levels, it can safely be concluded that there is

lack of awareness, inadequate capacity and inappropriate policy and legal cover available for

conservation and sustainable management of biodiversity in Pakistan as well as Khyber

Pakhtunkhwa. Hence, the following recommendations are made to enhance policy, institutional

and personnel capacity for COSMOB at the national, provincial and local levels:

7.1. General Recommendations

� Since the public sector planning is subservient to the political will, special attention is

required to create ownership and political will at the highest possible levels.

� An overarching Biodiversity Policy and an all-encompassing Biodiversity Law are need of the

time. Once an umbrella biodiversity law is enacted, framing of subsequent laws and rules

will be greatly facilitated. While the planned PBSAP can serve as a biodiversity policy for the

province, biodiversity law can be a foremost recommendation of PBSAP.

� There is dire need to strengthen both regulatory and scientific authorities in terms of human

and financial resources. While provinces are responsible for regulation and implementation,

the federal institutions need to play their facilitative role in research and development and

international cooperation.

� The coordination issues between the federal and provincial governments in the backdrop of

18th Constitutional Amendment need to be ironed out. An early agreement on Central

Licensing Authority under the Access Benefit Sharing Law will be extremely helpful in

conservation of genetic resources.

� The Biodiversity Directorate at national level should be strengthened through provision of

dedicated staff and adequate budget. The Provincial Biodiversity Cells/Units, as and when

established, should be strengthened through provision of adequate human and financial

resources, and linked with the national Biodiversity Directorate.

� The Biodiversity Working Group should be revamped with inclusion of enthusiast and

dynamic professionals and operationalised through regular meetings. The Biodiversity

Directorate should have dedicated budget for its meetings.

� Based on consultative process, institutional reforms should be introduced in NRM line

departments to make the same more responsive to the emerging needs. The reform process

started in the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Forest Department also needs to be taken to its next

stage by provision of adequate human and financial resources, especially to the Specialised

Units.

� Capacity of the forest and wildlife staff in preparing cases, collecting evidence and

prosecution should be strengthened along with increase in budgetary allocation for

acquiring legal services. If possible, dedicated staff with adequate training in prosecution

should be recruited. NGOs should be motivated to come forward to assist the Forest

Department in litigation process.

88

� In-situ conservation needs to be given priority so that genetic diversity remains intact and

the ex-situ conservation should be used only to repopulate the in-situ biodiversity.

� The population status of species needs to be determined on scientific basis and the

sustainable use (such as trophy hunting) of species should be decided on the basis of

impartial scientific data. The provincial forest/wildlife departments and relevant

communities are jointly entrusted to undertake scientific surveys of wildlife population on

the basis of which trophy hunting quota has to be decided. With the departments and

communities themselves being beneficiaries of the license fee (US$ 70000 in case of

Markhor), there is need to introduce third party validation system for authenticity of the

survey data and determination of the off-take levels.

� There is need to introduce fiscal incentives for the conservation efforts. For example, duty

on chilghoza harvesting can be waived if the seed is separated from cones onsite, leaving

the cones behind to be used as fuel. It would reduce the burden on forests for heating

purposes.

� Since 84% of the wood consumption is attributed to firewood consumption112, it is

absolutely important to introduce energy alternates, such as electricity through micro

hydels, natural gas, biomass and biogas, and solar and wind energy in the forest areas.

� Farm forestry can also be helpful in reducing pressure on forests, fulfilling timber and fodder

needs of the farming communities. The experiences of AKRSP regarding community forestry

in the Gilgit-Baltistan region can be benefited from and customised according to local needs.

� Given limited land resources, especially in upper Swat and Chitral, there is need to

introduces value adding crops and horticulture as alternatives to traditional farming.

Horticulture is one of the strong pillars of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa’s economy, hence needs to

be accorded the same level of priority. Involving the nursery owners for providing certified

saplings, encouraging cooperatives for better market linkages and pricing, and improving

storage and transport facilities can give boost to this vital agricultural sub-sector.

� There is immediate need to conduct climate change studies in Chitral and Swat to determine

impact of climate change on agricultural practices and to devised adaptation strategies. The

Climate Change Centre at AUP can play a pivotal role in this regard.

� Ecosystem based Adaptation (EbA) should be part of overall policy and be accorded high

priority. It would also mean allocating additional resources in the annual development plans

to promote the approach. Donors and development partners need to increase their level of

effort to support EbA and implementation of best practices. The government of Khyber

Pakhtunkhwa should allocate special budget for encouraging this approach. Establishing Key

Account for such activities may be one of the viable options.

� In order to popularise EbA approach, the school curriculum needs to be amended to provide

basic understanding of climate change and Ecosystem based Adaptation. Also, the political

machinery needs to be sensitised on EbA and impact of climate change on agro-biodiversity

and people’s livelihoods.

112 Intercooperation, 2010. Study on Timber Harvesting Ban in NWFP, Pakistan. Islamabad: Intercooperation Pakistan.

89

� EbA can best be promoted through duly empowered local government structures, though

with coordination efforts at district and provincial level given transboundary nature of

climate change challenge and EbA. Also, EbA will need to be supplemented through

community infrastructure schemes, as entry points, responding to immediate problems

identified by communities.

� In general, communities are aware of climate related events, their consequences and ways

to cope with the same; they just need to be encouraged to take the required action through

capacity enhancement, skill development and at times some material inputs. There is need

to introduce village and valley level integrated planning, pooling of resources and joint

implementation and monitoring so that the genuine needs of the communities could be

addressed effectively and efficiently.

7.2. Specific Recommendations for BKP Project

� BKP may focus on its role as envisaged during the design phase, i.e., supporting the

integrated watershed planning and land use planning through liaising with the line

departments and facilitating them to develop and implement biodiversity conservation

initiatives through its leverage being strategically placed in P&D Department. BKP will have

at least three reasons to be placed in P&DD:

a. Being a facilitative project, it should look equally supporting the technical functions

within NRM sector, i.e., forestry, wildlife, agriculture, livestock and fisheries. Being

placed in P&DD, BKP will be equally accessible by all line departments.

b. It can help P&DD and line departments to bridge the gaps in planning new initiatives

through support in proposal (PC-1) development by engaging national and international

expertise, developing successful models to be replicated and up-scaled, and advocating

for NRM sector allocations at the policy and strategic level.

c. It can facilitate information flow on foreign project assistance available for biodiversity

sectors, and create linkages between donors, P&DD and line departments for enhanced

portfolio of NRM related projects.

� BKP should work closely with P&D Department and district management, and the District

Development Committees to mainstream biodiversity conservation into planning,

implementation and monitoring of the community-driven local development initiatives at

grassroots level under the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa District Governance and Community

Development Programme.

� Given sectoral compartmentalisation within NRM sectors at the provincial level, an

institutional coordination mechanism, housed in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa P&DD, is a dire need

to bring all natural resource sectors on a common wavelength. Such a mechanism, working

in close coordination with the Environment and Agriculture Sections of the P&DD, may be

instituted through amendments in the North-West Frontier Province Government Rules of

Business, 1985 and made effective through giving it a formal role in allocation of financial

resources for biodiversity related initiatives. Supported by BKP, such mechanism may

initially be started by designating a Biodiversity Focal Point in P&DD and gradually upgrading

the same to a formal Biodiversity Cell/Unit.

� Although the National Biodiversity Action Plan is being revised as the National Biodiversity

Strategy and Action Plan to be available by 2015, it is important that the Khyber

Pakhtunkhwa has its own provincial Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan, with provincial

targets aligned with Aichi Targets and the national ones. The provincial BSAP can in turn

90

become basis for the upcoming version of NBSAP. This, being one of the outputs for BKP,

should receive prime attention of the Project. The Provincial Government should also be

persuaded to allocate adequate resources and strengthen the relevant line departments as

well as civil society actors for achieving these targets.

� In addition to supporting PBSAP, BKP should support the local authorities and relevant

stakeholders in developing Integrated Valley Plans for its select valleys, like the ones

developed for select conservancies under MACP.

� NRM sectors in general, and biodiversity is specific, has always been facing resource

constraint. This issue can be addressed through allocation of public funds as well as access

to international assistance. Lack of capacity in proposal development has been a major

impediment in this regard. BKP may focus its resources on this particular aspect to expand

the resource base of biodiversity and NRM sectors.

� The Project may develop a comprehensive capacity building plan to be implemented in close

coordination with universities and departments for equipping the relevant stakeholders

with required skillsets. An indicative list of such required skills is given at Section 4.8. The

Plan should be multipronged including onsite and offsite trainings, direct and virtual

exposure to best practices, research and academic linkages between local and foreign

institutions, and a follow-up plan to keep the capacities refreshed. A special emphasis is

needed on building capacities in development planning and project cycle management.

� Universities being more sustainable forum of capacity development need special attention

of the Project. BKP may help the University of Agriculture to revitalise the currently dormant

Agro-Biodiversity Network. Providing the local universities on-line access to academic

libraries will be quite helpful in exposing the faculty and students to new research and

thinking across the globe. BKP may support some university students to undertake research

on critical agro-biodiversity issues and link the Agricultural Research Institutes/Stations with

the universities in Pakistan and abroad. Also, the bright and selected students can be

supported in opting for split programmes of study in the foreign universities.

� BKP may support establishment of knowledge hub to be housed in a suitable and

administratively sustainable institution, with at least three elements:

d. A repository for data, information and knowledge regarding conservation status,

policies, laws, rules, strategies, actions plans, success stories, lessons learnt, and reliable

facts and figures.

e. An interactive blog amongst line department officials, professionals, academia, service

providers, civil society actors, media and beneficiary communities to freely exchange

ideas and information for betterment of biodiversity and NRM sectors.

f. A virtual extension and outreach tool to disseminate new techniques, news and alerts,

and to serve as a helpline for the beneficiary communities.

The portal should offer a user-friendly interface using modern add-ons and widgets

facilitating information access and knowledge sharing for even the novice level computer

users. The Agriculture University Peshawar will have better administrative and thematic

support for hosting such repository on permanent basis while the University of Peshawar

(especially in Centre for Plant Biodiversity) and Pakistan Forest Institute can provide

technical and thematic lead to the initiative. BKP may collaborate with all of these for

creation of such online facility.

91

� Under its communication strategy, BKP may focus on political leadership and policy makers,

opinion leaders such as imam masjid (prayer leader) and tribal elders, and media to

communicate its message to masses. Use of biodiversity and environmental champions in

these key influence streams may be helpful.

� BKP may also develop awareness-raising campaigns in collaboration with mainstream print

and electronic media, especially in Urdu language, and alternate media such as cable

operators for reaching out to masses. Use of internet based communities of practice

through blogging for spreading the message can also be helpful for literate audience of the

Project.

� BKP may undertake an in-depth study on dynamics of commercial harvesting and royalty in

the backdrop of joint forest management approach and availability of new alternatives like

REDD+.

� Once the final selection of valleys in Swat and Chitral is made, BKP should undertake

detailed baseline, socio-economic and resource surveys of each valley to setup a benchmark

for its work.

� So far the efforts under various initiatives by organizations like FAO, AKRSP, SRSP and IC

have only been focused on sustainable harvesting, fruit processing (making juices, jam,

pickles) and packing with linking the farmers with local market. Very little attention has

been paid towards promoting organic food and products, and creating real market linkages

through well recognised certification and sustained supplies from communities to high value

markets. The Value Chain Development under BKP should include international certification

and export oriented market linkages so that real benefits of organic farming are accrued by

the communities.

� BKP must help the village based organizations in its select valleys of Swat and Chitral

districts in identifying ecosystem based adaptation activities, aligning their needs with

DGCDP themes and developing proposals for the upcoming challenge fund modality under

this initiative.

� The communities and relevant stakeholders should be equipped with necessary knowledge

and techniques for vulnerability assessment, disaster risk mapping and preparedness, and

mitigation measures to cope with climate induced disasters. BKP can set up pilots of

vulnerability mapping, early warning systems and community based disaster response

mechanisms.

� BKP may introduce energy alternatives in its select valleys to reduce firewood burden on

forests. If successful, the model can be up-scaled by the government to preserve its precious

forest resources.

� Since fodder becomes a rare commodity in winters, the livestock communities rely on

branches of oak and deodar trees. This can be prevented by encouraging communities to

grow high yielding varieties of fodder and store for winters. This can be a very useful pilot

intervention by BKP in terms of climate change adaptation.

� The Agriculture Department has established fruit collection and grading yards at Matta and

Kabal with the Italian assistance. The same can be upgraded for processing of fruit as well.

BKP can look into supporting this value addition as one of its value chain development

activities.

92

� BKP may introduce the concept of Community Livestock Extension Workers and assist the

interested youth by providing adequate training. This would not only improve veterinary

health but also ease out the resource-constrained Livestock Directorate. The Project may

also find out a modus operandi in consultation with the Directorate for supporting the

artificial insemination in Chitral and Swat which is badly suffering due to short supplies of

liquid nitrogen. The Project may also arrange trainings in artificial insemination techniques

and raise communities’ awareness about public health to avoid zoonotic diseases just by

taking prophylactic measures.

� BKP may expose the extension workers of stakeholder departments to best examples in and

outside the Province, especially in the fields of NTFPs harvesting and processing, sustainable

use regimes like trophy hunting, use of biotechnology for better crops, organic farming and

biological pest control.

7.3. Other Recommendations

A number of recommendations were made by the participants and experts who participated in

the BKP Inception-cum-Planning Workshop, held in February 2013. The same have been

reproduced in Annex VII to be available at one place. These, however, may not necessarily

correspond with the recommendations made above.

Additionally, being related to this study, following are some recommendations made by the

Pakistan Fourth National Report to CBD113:

� Strengthen the institutional arrangements, both at national and provincial level for

implementation of CBD program of work and crosscutting themes. The capacity of the

Biodiversity Secretariat [Directorate] within the Ministry of Environment [now Climate

Change Division] is weak and needs to be strengthened significantly. The Biodiversity

Secretariat [Directorate] needs to have sufficient clout to be able to coordinate

implementation of the convention across thematic areas and cross cutting issues. There is

need to assess the capacity of Biodiversity Secretariat [Directorate] to make it fully

functional and assume a leadership role for implementation of the convention. Among other

things, the capacity needs assessment should look into the following:

• The human and financial resource needs of the Biodiversity Secretariat together with an

operational framework for implementation of the convention.

• Integration, to create synergy, of the relevant federal institutions of the Ministry of

Environment like Biodiversity Secretariat, National Council for Conservation of Wildlife,

and Zoological Survey Department.

• Ways and means to coordinate implementation of the convention at national and

provincial levels.

• The need of thematic biodiversity working groups to undertake assessments of the

biodiversity status, trends and threats; to provide technical backstopping for the

implementation of the convention; and measures to support their work.

113 Government of Pakistan, 2009. Pakistan Fourth National Report [to CBD]. Islamabad: Ministry of Environment,

GoP.

93

� Prepare a National Biodiversity Programme covering CBD thematic areas and crosscutting

themes. The programme objectives should include but not limited to following priority

actions:

• Create an enabling environment for implementation of the Convention through policy

formulation and appropriate legal instruments.

• Build institutional and human resource capacity for implementation of the conventions

with special focus on thematic areas and cross cutting issues where more progress

needs to be made.

• Strengthen the protected area system ensuring that at least 10% area of all major

ecosystems, habitats, and ecologically sensitive areas are effectively conserved.

• Formulate National Plant Conservation Strategy and develop protocols for sustainable

use.

• Document genetic diversity and promote in situ conservation of important elements of

agrobiodiversity.

• Improve the conservation status of species of flora and fauna threatened with extinction

or endangered by trade, hunting or loss of habitat.

• Demonstrate conservation of landscapes to maintain capacity of ecosystems to deliver

goods and services and support livelihoods.

• Development of mitigation measure in selected ecosystems to adapt to climate change,

and enhance resilience of biodiversity.

� Prepare a National Plant Conservation Strategy.

� Prepare a National Plan of Work for the protected areas and selected NTFPs (flora and

fauna), and restoring populations of selected endangered and threatened species, and make

implementation arrangements.

� Develop and run pilot demonstrations for ecosystem management approach and climate

change mitigation in selected biomes outside the protected areas system.

� Develop a monitoring and reporting system to assess progress on implementation of CBD.

� Develop a GIS based biodiversity database and a website to disseminate it.

94

Annex I: Interview guide used for interviews

The following questions were asked to structure the discussions and seeking input from the

political leaders, experts, officials and community key informants:

� How relevant are the current national and provincial (KP) level policies and legal framework

for conservation and sustainable management of biodiversity and agro-biodiversity to

support ecosystem based adaptation to climate change?

� What would be implications of the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Local Government Act on the

planning and implementation of COSMOB policies?

� What is the level of interest and willingness of the provincial (KP) and district governments

(Swat and Chitral) to further develop and implement policies and plans with regard to NRM

(in general) and COSMOB in particular?

� What is the level of interest in development of sub-national Biodiversity Action Plans at

provincial and district levels?

� What are capacity constraints in effective implementation of policy and legal regime for

COSMOB?

� How effective are the existing structures and processes for the steering of COSMOB and

multi-sectoral land-use planning at national and provincial level?

� What are the existing mechanisms for reporting to CBD at national level and the

roles/responsibilities of the provinces in the reporting to CBD?

� To what extent Pakistan and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa can align their biodiversity related

programming with CBD Aichi Targets?

� Who are key players in terms of COSMOB and what is their capacity to tackle the

challenges regarding COSMOB?

� What roles can academia, in particular Agriculture University Peshawar, University of

Peshawar, University of Swat and Pakistan Forest Institute, play in building capacities for

COSMOB?

� What is role of women and marginalized groups in relation with COSMOB and how can it

be optimised?

� What is the level of awareness and interest for COSMOB among various levels of

stakeholders?

� What are current and future sources of funding for up-scaling COSMOB in Khyber

Pakhtunkhwa?

95

Annex II: List of key policy and legal instruments for Khyber

Pakhtunkhwa

Policies, Strategies and Plans

� Pakistan National Conservation Strategy, 1992

� Sarhad Provincial Conservation Strategy, 1996

� NWFP Forest Policy, 1999

� Biodiversity Action Plan for Pakistan, 2000

� National Environment Policy, 2005

� NWFP Agriculture Policy, 2005

� Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Horticultural Policy, 2009

� National Forest Policy, 2010 (Draft)

� National Rangeland Policy, 2010 (Draft)

� Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Economic Growth Strategy, 2011

� National Climate Change Policy, 2012

� National Sustainable Development Strategy, 2012

� National Disaster Risk Reduction Policy, 2013

� Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Community Driven Local Development Policy, 2013

� Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Agriculture Strategy and Policy, 2013 (Draft)

� Pakistan 2025

Laws

� The Constitution of Pakistan, 1973

� West Pakistan Fisheries Ordinance, 1961 (amended in 1982 and 1991)

� Dir, Chitral and Swat (Administration) Regulation, 1969

� North-West Frontier Province Wild-life (Protection, Preservation, Conservation and

Management) Act, 1975 (amended in 1976 and 1984)

� North-West Frontier Province Forest Development Corporation Ordinance, 1980

� Pakistan Environmental Protection Act, 1997

� Hazara Forest (Amendment) Ordnance, 1997

96

� North-West Frontier Province Forest Commission Act, 1999 (amended in 2005)

� North-West Frontier Province Forest Ordinance, 2002

� North-West Frontier Province River Protection Ordinance, 2002

� Sharia Nizam-e-Adl Regulation, 2009

� CITES Law, 2012

� Access Benefit Sharing Bill, 2012 (Draft)

� Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Farm Services Centres Act, 2013 (Draft)

� Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Local Government Act, 2013

97

Annex III: Multilateral Environmental Agreements signed/ratified by

Pakistan

Agreement Status (date)

� Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary

Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal (Basel

Convention)

Accession (26 Jul 1994)

� Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural

and Natural Heritage (World Heritage Convention)

Ratification (23 Jul 1976)

� Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) Ratification (26 Jul 1994)

� Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety (Cartagena Protocol) Signature (4 Jun 2001)

� Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild

Animals (CMS)

Party (1 Dec 1987)

� Convention on the International Maritime Organization (IMO) Party (1958)

� Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of

Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES)

Accession (20 Apr 1976)

� Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by

Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter (London Convention

72) (LDC)

Accession (9 Mar 1995)

� Convention on Wetlands (Ramsar) Party (23 Nov 1976)

� International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from

Ships (Annex I & II) (MARPOL)

Accession (22 Nov 1994)

� International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and

Agriculture (ITPGRFA)

Accession (2 Sep 2003)

� Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone

Layer (Montreal Protocol)

Accession (18 Dec 1992)

� Rotterdam Convention on the Prior Informed Consent

Procedure for Certain Hazardous Chemicals and Pesticides

International Trade (PIC)

Ratification (14 Jul 2005)

� South Asia Co-operative Environment Programme (SACEP) Member (1982)

� Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants

(POPs)

Signature (6 Dec 2001)

� United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (Law of the

Sea)

Declaration (26 Feb 1997)

� United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification

(UNCCD)

Ratification (24 Feb 1997)

� United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

(UNFCCC)

Ratification (1 Jun 1994)

� Kyoto Protocol to the UNFCCC (Kyoto Protocol) Accession (11 Jan 2005)

� Vienna Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer

(Vienna Convention)

Accession (18 Dec 1992)

98

Annex IV: Aichi Biodiversity Targets114

Strategic Goal A: Address the underlying causes of biodiversity loss by mainstreaming

biodiversity across government and society

By 2020, at the latest, people are aware of the values of biodiversity and the steps

they can take to conserve and use it sustainably.

By 2020, at the latest, biodiversity values have been integrated into national and

local development and poverty reduction strategies and planning processes and are

being incorporated into national accounting, as appropriate, and reporting systems.

By 2020, at the latest, incentives, including subsidies, harmful to biodiversity are

eliminated, phased out or reformed in order to minimize or avoid negative impacts,

and positive incentives for the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity are

developed and applied, consistent and in harmony with the Convention and other

relevant international obligations, taking into account national socio economic

conditions.

By 2020, at the latest, Governments, business and stakeholders at all levels have

taken steps to achieve or have implemented plans for sustainable production and

consumption and have kept the impacts of use of natural resources well within safe

ecological limits.

Strategic Goal B: Reduce the direct pressures on biodiversity and promote sustainable use

By 2020, the rate of loss of all natural habitats, including forests, is at least halved

and where feasible brought close to zero, and degradation and fragmentation is

significantly reduced.

By 2020 all fish and invertebrate stocks and aquatic plants are managed and

harvested sustainably, legally and applying ecosystem based approaches, so that

overfishing is avoided, recovery plans and measures are in place for all depleted

species, fisheries have no significant adverse impacts on threatened species and

vulnerable ecosystems and the impacts of fisheries on stocks, species and

ecosystems are within safe ecological limits.

By 2020 areas under agriculture, aquaculture and forestry are managed sustainably,

ensuring conservation of biodiversity.

By 2020, pollution, including from excess nutrients, has been brought to levels that

are not detrimental to ecosystem function and biodiversity.

By 2020, invasive alien species and pathways are identified and prioritized, priority

species are controlled or eradicated, and measures are in place to manage pathways

to prevent their introduction and establishment.

114 CBD Aichi Biodiversity Targets (http://www.cbd.int/sp/targets/). Accessed on 4 Nov 2013.

99

By 2015, the multiple anthropogenic pressures on coral reefs, and other vulnerable

ecosystems impacted by climate change or ocean acidification are minimized, so as

to maintain their integrity and functioning.

Strategic Goal C: To improve the status of biodiversity by safeguarding ecosystems, species

and genetic diversity

By 2020, at least 17 per cent of terrestrial and inland water, and 10 per cent of

coastal and marine areas, especially areas of particular importance for biodiversity

and ecosystem services, are conserved through effectively and equitably managed,

ecologically representative and well-connected systems of protected areas and other

effective area-based conservation measures, and integrated into the wider

landscapes and seascapes.

By 2020 the extinction of known threatened species has been prevented and their

conservation status, particularly of those most in decline, has been improved and

sustained.

Strategic Goal D: Enhance the benefits to all from biodiversity and ecosystem services

By 2020, the genetic diversity of cultivated plants and farmed and domesticated

animals and of wild relatives, including other socio-economically as well as culturally

valuable species, is maintained, and strategies have been developed and

implemented for minimizing genetic erosion and safeguarding their genetic diversity.

By 2020, ecosystems that provide essential services, including services related to

water, and contribute to health, livelihoods and well-being, are restored and

safeguarded, taking into account the needs of women, indigenous and local

communities, and the poor and vulnerable.

By 2020, ecosystem resilience and the contribution of biodiversity to carbon stocks

has been enhanced, through conservation and restoration, including restoration of at

least 15 per cent of degraded ecosystems, thereby contributing to climate change

mitigation and adaptation and to combating desertification.

By 2015, the Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and

Equitable Sharing of Benefits Arising from their Utilization is in force and operational,

consistent with national legislation.

Strategic Goal E: Enhance implementation through participatory planning, knowledge

management and capacity building

By 2015 each Party has developed, adopted as a policy instrument, and has

commenced implementing an effective, participatory and updated national

biodiversity strategy and action plan.

By 2020, the traditional knowledge, innovations and practices of indigenous and local

communities relevant for the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity, and

their customary use of biological resources, are respected, subject to national

legislation and relevant international obligations, and fully integrated and reflected in

the implementation of the Convention with the full and effective participation of

indigenous and local communities, at all relevant levels.

100

By 2020, knowledge, the science base and technologies relating to biodiversity, its

values, functioning, status and trends, and the consequences of its loss, are

improved, widely shared and transferred, and applied.

By 2020, at the latest, the mobilization of financial resources for effectively

implementing the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020 from all sources, and in

accordance with the consolidated and agreed process in the Strategy for Resource

Mobilization should increase substantially from the current levels. This target will be

subject to changes contingent to resource needs assessments to be developed and

reported by Parties.

101

Annex V: Membership of the Biodiversity Working Group

Membership as proposed in the Biodiversity Action Plan (2000)

Chair: to be elected by the Biodiversity Working Group (BWG)

Members

• Representative, Biodiversity Secretariat (Secretary)

• Technical Experts, Six from provincial/state governments

• Technical Expert, Pakistan Museum of Natural History

• Technical Expert, National Agricultural Research Centre

• Technical Expert, National Institute of Oceanography

• Technical Expert, National Institute for Biotechnology & Genetic Engineering

• Technical Expert, Pakistan Forest Institute

• Technical Expert, National Council for Conservation of Wildlife

• Technical Expert, Zoological Survey Department

• Technical Expert, WWF Pakistan

• Technical Expert, IUCN Pakistan

• Research Scientists, Two to four from academia115

Members as per Reconstitution in 2011

1. Inspector General Forests, Climate Change Division, Islamabad

2. Chief Conservator of Forests Balochistan, Quetta

3. Chief Conservator of Forests Sindh, Hyderabad

4. Chief Conservator of Wildlife Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Shami Road, Peshawar

5. Conservator of Forests, Gilgit Baltistan Forest Department, Gilgit

6. Conservator of Forests, Range Management Circle, Lahore

7. Conservator Wildlife, National Council for Conservation of Wildlife, Islamabad

8. Director General Environment, Climate Change Division, Islamabad

9. Director General, Federal Seed Certification and Registration Department, Islamabad

10. Director General, Pakistan Forest Institute, Peshawar

11. Director General, Pakistan Museum of Natural History, Islamabad

12. Director, Environmental Protection Agency, Govt. of Azad Jammu & Kashmir, Muzaffarabad.

13. Director, Zoological Survey Department, Islamabad

14. Dr. Abdul Salam Khan, Chairman, Department of Plant Reading and Genetics, University of

Agriculture, Faisalabad

15. Dr. Afsar Mian, Ex-Professor, University of Arid Agriculture, Rawalpindi

16. Dr. Atta Hussain Sumroo, Director, Wheat Research Institute, Sakrand, Sindh

17. Dr. Azra Yasmin, Chairperson, Fatima Jinnah University, Rawalpindi

18. Dr. Ejaz Ahmed, Deputy Director General, WWF Lahore

19. Dr. Uzaira Rafique, Chairperson, Department of Environmental Sciences, Fatima Jinnah

Women University, Rawalpindi

20. Head, Environmental Biology Section, Department of Biological Sciences, Quaid- i- Azam

University, Islamabad

21. Joint Secretary, Cabinet Division, Islamabad

115 Government of Pakistan, IUCN and WWF, 2000. Biodiversity Action Plan for Pakistan. Rawalpindi: IUCN, WWF

Pakistan and Ministry of Environment, Local Government and Rural Development, GoP.

102

22. Mr. Anwar Hussain Memon, Director Agriculture Farm and Major Crop Development,

Agriculture Extension, Sindh

23. Mr. Karam Khan Kaleri, Director Agriculture Research Institute, Tando Jam

24. Mr. Mohammad Aslam, Director PMC, Agriculture Livestock and Fisheries Department,

Govt. of Sindh, Karachi

25. Mr. Zafarullah Khan, Advocate Supreme Court, Islamabad

26. Professor S. Riazuddin, Director, Centre for Advanced Molecular Biology, University of the

Punjab, Lahore

27. Representative from Hamdard Labs

28. Representative from National Council of Tibb, Islamabad

29. Representative from Qarshi Labs

30. Director Biodiversity, Climate Change Division, Islamabad

Co-Opted Members / Invitees as Observers

31. Dr. Surayya Khatoon, Chair, Department of Botany, Karakoram International University Gilgit

32. Dr. Sher Wali Khan, Associate Prof. Karakorum International University, Gilgit

33. Dr. Manzoor Ahmed, Taxonomist, Government Degree College, Abbottabad

34. Dr. Fakhar-i-Abbas, Bioresource Research Centre, Islamabad

35. Head, Department of Sociology, University of Arid Agriculture, Rawalpindi

36. Dr. Waheed A. Chaudhry, Associate Prof., Department of Anthropology, Quaid-i-Azam

University, Islamabad

37. Dr. Iqbal Chaudhry, Head, HEJ Institute, Karachi University

38. Dr. Raza A. Bhatti, Prof. of Botany, Shah Abdul Latif University, Khairpur Mir’s

103

Annex VI: NGOs in Swat and Chitral (non-exhaustive list)

Organization Swat Chitral

Abaseen Foundation �

ACTED (Agency for Technical Cooperation and Development) �

Action Aid Pakistan �

Aga Khan Cultural Services Pakistan (AKCSP) �

Aga Khan Education Services (AKES) �

Aga Khan Health Services (AKHS) �

Aga Khan Planning and Building Services (AKBPS) �

Aga Khan Rural Support Programme (AKRSP) �

Aga Khan University’s Professional Development Centre �

Anatolian Development Foundation (ADF) �

ARC �

Aurat Foundation �

Basic Education for Awareness, Reforms and Empowerment (B.E.F.A.Re) � �

BEST �

Care International �

CERD �

CESSD �

CESVI �

Children First �

Chitral H E P S �

Church World Service Pakistan (CWS-Pak) �

Community Awareness Raising & Advocacy Ventures Around Needs (CARAVAN) �

Community Oriented Rural Empowerment (CORE) �

Concern World Wide �

Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH �

Devolution Trust for Community Empowerment (DTCE) � �

Diakonie Katastrophenhilfe (DKH) �

EDC-Pakistan �

Environment Protection Society (EPS) �

Focus Humanitarian �

Handicap International �

Hashoo Foundation �

HELP IN NEED �

Helping Hand for Relief and Development (HHRD) �

HOPE (Hundreds of Original Projects for Employment) � �

HUJRA �

Human Appeal International �

104

Organization Swat Chitral

Human Development Organization Doaba (HDOD) �

Human Resource Development Society (HRDS) � �

IBT �

Imran Khan Foundation �

Initiative for Development & Empowerment Axis (IDEA) �

Innovations for Developmental Empowerment & Accessible Services (IDEAS) �

Interfaith League against Poverty (I-LAP) �

International Relief �

International Rescue Committee (IRC) �

International Snow Leopard Trust (ISLT) �

IRD-CVSP �

JAAN Care International (JCI) �

JPI �

Kalash Environmental Protection Agency �

Kalash Indigenous Survival Programme �

Kalash PDN �

Karimabad Development Organization �

LASOONA (Society for Human & Natural Resource Development) �

Malteser International �

Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) International �

Medical Emergency Relief International (Merlin) �

Mercy Corps �

Muslim Aid �

National Rural Support Programme �

National Rural Support Programme (NRSP) �

National Sports Coalition �

North Areas Mountains Endogenous - Development Organization (NAME DO) �

Open Society Foundation �

Oxfam GB �

PAIMAN Alumni Trust �

Pak Women �

Pakistan Education Society (PES) �

Pakistan Village Development Program (PVDP) �

Peace and Development Organization (PDO) �

PRDS �

Qatar Charity �

Qatar Red Crescent �

RCDP �

105

Organization Swat Chitral

Reach Vulnerable �

Regional Institute of Policy Research and Training (RIPORT) �

Relief International � �

Response International �

Rural Development Organization (RDO) �

Sarhad Rural Support Programme � �

Save the Children �

SDO �

SHED �

SIS (Swat Integrated Society) �

Socio Economic Advancement Society (SEAS) �

SPADO �

SSD �

Support with Working Solution (SWWS) �

Sustainable Development Society (SDS) �

Swat Participatory Council (SPC) �

Swiss Development Confederation �

The Awakening �

Thrive [to implement] Chitral Integrated Area Development Programme �

Tribal Reform & Development Organization (TRDO) �

Trócaire �

WASFD �

Welthungerhilfe �

WWF Pakistan � �

Sources: Office of the Deputy Commissioner, Chitral

Provincial Reconstruction, Rehabilitation & Settlement Authority (PaRRSA), GoKP

BKP staff and personal observation

106

Annex VII: Recommendations from BKP Inception-cum-Planning

Workshop 2013

Fully excerpted from the BKP Inception-cum-Planning Workshop (2013) Report, the

recommendations below have been included for the benefit of the Project to have the same in

sight. These, however, may not necessarily correspond with the recommendations in Section 7.

Workshop Report

BKP had organised an inception cum planning workshop in February 2013. The report of the

workshop116 made the following key recommendations to BKP:

� Widen the focus of monitoring activities of the project steering committee as well as of the

project´s M&E unit from measuring results to also monitoring processes especially in the

field of cooperation between stakeholders. The challenge here will be the development of

SMART indicators.

� It seems that the field visit teams require support during meetings in the field. It is

recommended to organize structured follow-up activities after these meetings in which

individual and group learning can be initiated. Questions that activate reflection on

experiences could be a tool to initiate exchange.

� In order to promote co-operation of stakeholders so called inter-sectoral learning journeys

could be a means to strengthen learning and co-operation.

� Invest time and attention on interfaces between involved stakeholders. Participants

expressed their readiness to cooperate during the workshop; interfaces between them

became clearer and seem to bear potential for cooperation. But it can be assumed that

normal day-to-day work within the own organization will naturally reduce this energy for

cooperation. Accepting this assumption, activities to strengthen cooperation and

networking between stakeholders may be required by the project. Therefore a

recommended additional core process which BKP should be supporting is the integrated

planning and budgeting of activities related to sustainable management of biodiversity (joint

PC 1 and integrated annual development plans (ADP) at District level).

� Also the start of field visits in pilot regions will provide opportunities to strengthen the

possibly upcoming network on biodiversity. Most probably, a formalization of such a

network might put too much pressure on participants and their organisation. A less

formalized network, focusing on needs and interests of participating organisations, could be,

at least during the first year of implementation, an attractive organizational approach. This

requires active communication by the project, an on-going check of bi- and multi-lateral co-

operation attempts, an on-going regular distribution of information and an active dialogue

based on mutual respect. Generally, any type of “team-building” measures will support the

cooperation.

� Implement a sequence of consultancies clarifying how involved stakeholders can better

cooperate and how they should contribute to the national reporting to CBD resp. how they

can contribute to the further development of national policies in the field of biodiversity.

116 Zillich, Michael, 2013. Conservation and Sustainable Management of Biodiversity in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa – The

BKP-Project Planning Workshop, 11th

–15th

of February 2013 (Typescript). Islamabad: GIZ-BKP.

107

One idea for such a consultancy process could be to organize a step-wise process in which

consultants analyse in interviews the existing stakeholder´s landscape, identify existing and

potential new interfaces, identify options and limits of co-operation, propose a format for

an appropriate network, propose measures to increase co-operation and networking and

additionally propose / design a communication mechanism as well for reporting to CBD as

also for contributing to national policies. Such a consultancy would therefore serve two

purposes: the networking of biodiversity stakeholders in KP and the design of a

communication / reporting mechanism to CBD and to national policies.

� According to the results framework the project´s M&E unit could use following fields of

observation for:

• Indicator 1: the various development stages of the biodiversity action plan

(development process), its enacting by KP parliament (output) and its implementation

by involved stakeholders (result)

• Indicator 2: the various development stages of the policy papers (development process),

and their application by involved stakeholders (result)

• Indicator 3: measuring results will basically address the quality of governance of natural

resources (however, only at level of the envisaged pilot-projects) and comprise the

monitoring of factors with regard to

� Socio-economic and socio-cultural changes, e.g. income, resource use pattern, well-

being, etc.

� Changes in the level of empowerment of participating communities in terms of

access to information and participation in decision-making at appropriate levels

� Increased awareness, knowledge and trust among and between participating actors

along the value chains

� Change in the level of depletion of natural resources

• Indicator 4: see comments on indicator 2, however with a focus on disaster preventive

land-use planning

• Indicator 5: the development stages while managing the link between provincial and

national level (process), relation between project´s lessons learn / best practices and

contents of CB reports (output).

� Establishing of a biodiversity web-site, or establishing a biodiversity online-hub, providing

links to resources (websites, files, documentation, events, etc.) of other stakeholders in

biodiversity, and/or utilise potentials of social networking / marketing by creating a fan-

page / group on biodiversity within a social network

� The project needs to start as soon as possible with clarifying and then implementing pilot

measures in pilot regions. All stakeholders will better believe that progress is possible when

first activities are implemented and are visible.

� First activities can also be implemented within the awareness campaign.

� For further planning the author recommends a two-fold approach:

• A first event in October 2013 in which only the members of the steering committee

participate. Objective of this event would be to agree upon main. It is recommended

that BKP needs to orientate its planning and budgeting rhythms to the processes of the

Departments. Pakistani Governmental organizations plan already in May for the next

108

fiscal year (01.07. 30.06.), therefore BKP might also adapt planning time frames to this

cycle activities in 2014 allowing budgeting for the next year. Such an event will need

proper preparation like: early reporting in advance by participating departments on

status of implementation and linking these reports to the output structure of the

project. Its duration could be 2 days.

• A second event, which could take place in January / February 2014, will include

representatives of all involved stakeholders (as in the planning workshop 2013) and will

focus on plans of operations for 2014. Its duration would most probably 3 days plus

some time for team building events.

Additional Recommendation Note

After the same workshop, the GIZ Expert Mr. Luis Waldmüller elaborated his recommendations

in a separate report117, of which the most pertinent ones included:

� Capacity development includes awareness creation, knowledge management and

networking for sustainable management of biodiversity/agrobiodiversity. Apart from

creating awareness to the general public, politicians and journalists, the project should

highlight the role of different gender with regard to conservation of agrobiodiversity. Project

support will concentrate on agricultural and forestry extension staff, farmer groups,

secondary schools and university teachers and students, religious groups, and local leaders.

Before capacity development takes place, training needs assessment should be carried out.

Capacity development and trainings will be conducted in seminars and workshops,

regional/international seminars/conferences, school campaigns and symposia, field trials

and field days, study tours and exchange visits and any other modes that are suitable for

training. Major activities can include:

• Support the development and mainstreaming of selected biodiversity/agro-biodiversity

topics (specifying the different roles men and woman) and materials for university,

school curricula (including materials/reference book, etc.), agricultural vocational

schools and specific publications;

• Increase knowledge on sustainable management of biodiversity/agrobiodiversity

biodiversity for stakeholders at different levels (e.g. teachers, extension staff, local

leader and religious groups youth organisations);

• Document and disseminate successful approaches of sustainable

biodiversity/agrobiodiversity management (for example experiences in the sustainable

collection, cultivation and trading of local products);

• Document traditional management systems and the related traditional knowledge for

protection of natural resources and biodiversity and promote them on demonstration

sites;

• Facilitate awareness creation on sustainable management of

biodiversity/agrobiodiversity through different media (television, radio, newspapers,

internet, publications etc.) and other means (e.g. is exhibitions, fares, world biodiversity

day, etc.);

117 Waldmüller, Luis, 2013. Recommendations for the Implementation of Project Outputs concerning Biodiversity /

Agrobiodiversity (Typescript). Islamabad: GIZ-BKP.

109

• Support peace and conflict related relevance assessment and training for conflict

mitigation on natural resources in an gender balanced way;

• Train relevant intermediaries on conflict sensitive management.

� A “do-no-harm analysis” assists the project in designing project activities and

implementation in such a way to avoid unintended consequences of project activities lead

to aggravation of existing conflicts. Any effects which foster peace and bridge differences

between parties to the conflict should intentionally be strengthened.

� Using environmental issues to build peace includes building trust and cooperation.

Participatory approaches, such as participatory land use and village activity planning can

help reveal and address common concerns and helps to build trust and dialogue. This is

especially important where the project assists farmer groups in land-use planning in areas of

conflicting interests (for example grazing areas bordering crop production areas) and

agricultural land bordering protected areas and national parks. This process must integrate

conflict sensitivity, since farmers and local communities are dependent for their survival and

livelihoods on products taken from the areas.

� Farmer Training will be one of the core activities of the Project. Some or each project pilot

village will establish a Farmer Field School (FFS) where farmers receive training in agro-

biodiversity (ABD) and related issues. It is a participatory and discovery based learning

extension approach, which allows the members to undertake need-based experimentation

and interaction among the farmer group members, normally 15 – 25. The members form a

group and meet at regular intervals (once or twice per month) guided by a trainer (MoA

extension staff) to discuss relevant agricultural topics for implementation of project

measures. The field school is located in suitable locations (usually the home or courtyard of

a farmer or chairperson of the group) and close to the field school demonstration plot and

other members' houses that the farmers can conveniently attend the regular training

sessions. FFS group members prepare a plan describing the content of the learning sessions

(e.g. biodiversity friendly agricultural practices, local varieties improvement, etc.) and

related field activities for implementation of agreed project measures. A detailed concept

for implementation of the FFS approach will be elaborated during initial stages of the

Project.

� The training of government staff, experts and technicians on sustainable management of

ABD will be one of the tasks of the Project. A pool of core trainers with experience in ABD

will be built up to train assigned Agriculture extension staff of the Agriculture Department

KP in ABD and ABD related topics. The core group of trainers in sustainable management of

agro-biodiversity will remain a permanent group throughout the project cycle. This core

group of trainers will be recruited from suitable candidates of county and provincial level

agriculture staff and will train field staff on sustainable management of

biodiversity/agrobiodiversity. The core group may receive Agro-biodiversity training to

broaden their technical knowledge on ABD matters and to elaborate training materials on

biodiversity/agrobiodiversity. Since the majority of the group members are agricultural

technicians and had so far limited experience as trainers, very often they lack skills in

training techniques and curriculum development as well. Training contents could be:

• An overview of plant genetic resources

• Ex-situ and in-situ conservation

• Nature conservation and land use – different management approaches

• The Convention of Biodiversity and its implementation in Pakistan

110

• The International Treaty (ITPGRFA)

• Organic Agriculture as a tool for agrobiodiversity management

• Seed conservation and improvement at local level

• Value chain management as a tool for agrobiodiversity management

• Biotechnology and Biosafety for ABD management

• The role of traditional knowledge in ABD management

• Training techniques and curriculum development

� Prior to trainings, a training needs assessment should be carried out at different levels

(village, district and provincial levels) for stakeholders involved in the project and concerned

with biodiversity/agrobiodiversity issues.

� Organize international & national study tours on ABD related issues. Study tours can expose

MoA decision makers to relevant experience on the implementation of biodiversity/

agrobiodiversity laws and regulations, policies and methods at national, provincial and

farmers’ level. Participants are exposed to ideas from other countries and ideas from

relevant projects in their own county. This will encourage more active implementation of

the activities related to the Project. Participants will have to plan the timetable for study-

tours illustrating clearly how to utilize the experience gained during the study tour for

project activities. This ensures professional attitude to the tour, creation of new ideas, and

exposure to innovations for decision makers as part of a planned package. National study

tours will take provincial and county level staff to biodiversity/agrobiodiversity projects in

Pakistan. International study tours can take MoA decision makers to Germany to view

implementation of biodiversity and ABD policies at national, provincial and farmers’ level.

Planning and implementation of measures in pilot areas

Assessment and Documentation of ABD-resources in the Project areas

Since the detailed status of endangered and valuable ABD at village level is not known, project

activities will start off with an assessment of ABD at village level (including a threats analysis).

This assessment will include information on species, their variation, habitat, uses, as well as on

the respective traditional cultural practices, use and knowledge. In addition, the establishment

of a plant data-base bank (digital photos of the plant and specimen collection) can complement

the assessment. International expertise will be necessary to elaborate a suitable assessment

methodology. The assessment as such will be done by national experts in collaboration with

local agricultural extension staff and farmers. Suitable cooperation partners are local and

regional Universities.

Based on the assessment results, village communities will be encouraged and supported to

establish and maintain community registers on ABD. Such registers document all relevant ABD

plants in the village area and their specific location. This database is a tool for the village

community, which can help to defend Community Intellectual Property (IP) rights against IP

claims from outside.

Parallel to the ABD assessment, an institutional assessment (staff capability, clarity on mandates

and responsibilities among departments etc.) will be carried out. All the assessment results will

be documented, discussed with farmers and agricultural staff and used to develop site specific

in-situ conservation measures as well as training measures for farmers and agricultural staff. The

111

results of the ABD- and institutional assessment will be presented during the Project initiation

workshop.

Promotion of ABD sustainable management

Successful conservation requires both: “ex-situ” conservation in gene banks, research stations

and botanical gardens and in-situ use, conservation and enhancement of ABD by rural

communities within the context of the native ecosystem. The project will focus on “in-situ”

concepts. In-situ is a relatively new concept for Pakistan. Mainstreaming of the approach will be

supported with pilot villages in the Project intervention units.

Participatory Village Planning (PVP) with the pilot villages is a first step in identification of

measures related to ABD and biodiversity friendly farming practices. During planning, villagers

are encouraged to discuss problems related to their livelihood and farming practices. Joint

identification of the problems and solution finding is necessary before villagers can be

motivated to participate fully in sustainable management of ABD and conservation. PVP ensures

closer contact with villagers and ownership of the planning process. As a result, they are more

likely to come on board for implementation of activities. Suitable in-situ conservation measures

will be identified at this planning phase, taking into account results of the resource assessment,

carried out before.

ABD promotion measures in the pilot villages will be carried out by farmer field school groups.

Typical measures include training of farmers in seed management, seed selection for

improvement of local, traditional species and improved storage of seeds. They also include

improved crop husbandry management of specific ABD crops, organization of seed exchange

between farmers and villages, assistance in the establishment of small nurseries for valuable

fruit and indigenous forest trees. The measures will also include training of farmers in small

scale processing of their farm products within the framework of supporting the establishment of

value chains for local non-timber forest- and agricultural products.

The development of in-situ conservation and ABD promotion measures to the farmers can be

divided into 8 sub-activities:

1. Analyse existing domestic and international experience

2. Adapt experience to local in-situ situation

3. Formulate draft proposals

4. Discuss draft proposals with stakeholders (farmers, extension staff)

5. Submit the final proposal

6. Organize workshops to discuss measures for implementation

7. Elaborate plans to implement measures

8. Train field staff in implementation of measures

One important component is to find out and use traditional knowledge on ABD management.

There are a few international experiences, however many of them refer mainly to research

activities in the field of in situ conservation. Practical experiences can be obtained among others

from implementation of the Agrobiodiversity project in China. International consultancy can

assist to expose to international experience and lessons learnt from that. After screening

different experience and best practices, a draft proposal will be formulated and discussed with

the different stakeholders. The implementation measures will be elaborated together with the

farmers in a participatory way to conduct in-situ conservation in two steps:

112

• 1st step: Train district & village working level staff in participatory approaches,

planning and implementation,

• 2nd step: Carry out participatory Village planning (PVP) with farmers in pilot villages. The

planning has to be in participatory way to ensure farmers will adopt and carry out the

measures on their own and through their own initiatives. It’s needless to say that any

pressure, any too strong guidance from or by the extension staff would in the end lead

to unsuccessful implementation of in situ conservation measures.

As motivation for farmers to implement Agrobiodiversity measures and to reap benefits from

the Project in a rather short time, a small ABD grant fund can be established for each pilot

village. These funds will be used to co-finance (with contributions by the villagers and the

provincial government) village activities with direct and indirect impacts on biodiversity and

ABD. For example to assist in:

• Construction of biogas units or firewood saving cooking stoves on village level

(production of slurry as fertilizer, reduced consumption of fuel wood);

• To support erosion control measures like terracing,

• To support construction of a village access road to a main road in order to improve

marketing of agricultural products.

• To support establishment of tree nurseries in villages,

• To support water storage tanks for the supply of drinking water and water for washing

clothes.

• To establish ABD discovery and learning gardens for local schools.

The allocation and provision of the fund to the village will be linked to the condition, that the

village is actively involved in biodiversity and Agrobiodiversity conservation activities, such as to

discourage hunting of wild animals and destruction of nearby forest, plantation of trees,

conservation of small biotopes, etc. Farmers will contribute to the fund in kind (labour or

provision of materials). The coordination and implementation of the fund activities will jointly

be carried out by project staff and relevant district offices of Ministry of Agriculture. The ABD

fund will be a grant, managed and controlled by the Project Finance Officer. Wherever possible,

the activities financed through the ABD incentive fund should be linked to other projects of MoA

and other government institutions.

Assist in establishment of village conservation areas

Village conservation areas refer to areas with the village with high biodiversity or there is which

contain valuable wild relatives of crops. These areas can often be found in marginal places

where agricultural cultivation is difficult or not recommended. For example:

• on steep slopes

• rocky places

• degraded areas

• along the road side

• within the vicinity of small streams and other places

The project can assist farmers and farmer groups to identify those areas clearly as reserved

areas which have to be protected. Protection can take place in different ways. First, the area is

clearly marked as reservation area and an area of high biodiversity through signs and it is

protected by locally established demarcation lines. However, permanent fences should only be

erected if the valuable species are on the red list of highly endangered species. In addition the

113

project can promote conservation and protection through supporting the formulation of village

by-laws for protection and awareness creation. Farmers will become aware that those plants are

assets which belong to them.

Assist farmers in marketing of their products. In order to improve the economic use of ABD

resources, strategies have to be explored, that enable innovations in processing and marketing.

Parallel and complementary to looking at the supply side, market exploration from the demand

side has to be supported. Identification of products in demand or with a demand potential will

be necessary. This can be achieved in collaboration with private companies for instance in the

sector of medicinal plants, non-timber forest products (such as collection of wild berries, honey,

and mushrooms), organically grown agricultural produce or local traditional high-quality fruit

species. Public-Private Partnerships (PPP) could be of particular interest in utilizing medicinal

plants, herbs and spices either through collection or cultivation. Currently the demand is

growing, but increasing production in this sector needs careful observation since large-scale

monoculture production of selected medicinal plants would be a threat to biodiversity.

In most cases farmers sell their products in bulk and unprocessed. Farmers can add economic

value to their products through basic processing. The project can provide training and assistance

to farmer groups (farmer field schools) who wish set up for example a producer association for a

specific agricultural commodity where value can be added by the farmers within the value chain.

The Project can assist farmer groups or associations to form small scale enterprises, train them

in basic business and marketing skills and provide simple equipment to set up the enterprise

(e.g. seed cleaning- drying- or packing facilities). The value chain approach brings together the

producers, middleman, processors and farmers, who discuss during regular meetings, quality

and quantity issues, and agree on fair prices that are favourable for all participants. The direct

exchange between the producer and further processor, and margins are important to guarantee

good quality and proper marketing. Discussion can take place with farmer groups and potential

buyers during the round table meetings and all participants will come up to the strategy how to

promote selected crops. Part of the strategy will be to organize ABD products promotion

activities, like presenting crops on agricultural expo trade fairs and also assist in product

promotion.

Formation of farmer groups (Farmer Field Schools - FFS)

The idea is to have a group of farmers who are trained and actively involved in sustainable

management of ABD. The farmer group will be the lead group in the village for the ABD

conservation and will be established as sort of farmer field school. The farmer field school is an

ideal concept for establishment of village groups who meet at regular intervals (twice per

month) and discuss their issues on ABD. The group meets only for 2-3 hours per session that

requires little input and time for the group meetings. The group meeting is attended by the

agriculture field staff who gives inputs himself or who invites other experts to give inputs to the

group. The farmer field school will also establish demonstration plots on one of the farmers’

fields or which will serve as demonstration site to show to other farmers how the management

of ABD could take place and how crops with high value can be grown at farmers’ place. The

demonstration site normally is close to the village area so that other farmers can also visit the

site. The farmer field schools will get some initial training on group building and on management

of groups and then the farmers will discuss together with the field staff and set their yearly plan

on what to deal with in relation to ABD.

The first step of FFS formation is identifying target participants. The steps in the establishment

of FFS are as follows:

114

• Criteria setting by the project for farmers to join FFS: land holding, interest, space for

cultivation, one member from one family etc.

• General meeting at community level for each FFS area with the local elites to share the

objective of the project and gain support from community people

• Household visit: after having identified a certain number of interested people, extension

officers visit the listed participants at their house to explore the family acceptance and

observe the feasibility of project interventions.

The FFS group members then prepare a plan (by applying PME tools) on the content of the

learning sessions and on field activities for their improved farming based on the existing

situation and their needs.

Before the actual start of the FFS, a learning contract specifying rules and regulations of the

learning process should be signed by both parties (FFS group members and Agricultural Bureau

staff). In this contract, the responsibilities of the participants and the project staff are clearly

defined. This creates a sense of ownership by the participants from the very beginning of the

activities.

The field school is located in suitable locations (usually in a farmers place) and close to the study

plot and other members' houses so that the beneficiaries can conveniently attend the regular

sessions. In general, 20 members form a group and meet once or twice a month (up to three

hours) to share the learning of the field implementation and discuss new topics. The project can

provide materials worth up to EUR 100 as “starting capital” for the FFS for training material

(paper, drawing pen, scale etc.,) seeds, saplings for the study plot support etc. to be

administered by the FFS. FFS group members should add an almost equivalent sum in kind, for

example in form of land, compost, labour, fence, etc. to run the FFS. A register is maintained

where all members’ names, expenses for the study plot, observations, and recommendations

are kept. The recording is done by the Lead Farmer or a literate member of the FFS.

Each field school has an organizational structure with a group leader, secretary, etc. The FFS

sessions are pursued for eight to nine months and typically comprise of technical and social

issues. The sessions amongst the FFS are not uniform but depend on the cropping pattern of the

locality and the preferences of the participants as mentioned earlier.

For example technical topics can be: ABD and biodiversity conservation, seed improvement and

storage, hand pollination of vegetables, organic pesticide and fertilizer preparation, winter

vegetable production technology, study plot establishment, fruit tree management, insect

management of major fruits, fruit tree management, vegetable seed collection and

preservation, compost preparation, etc. Social topics can be: environmental protection and

promotion of a clean environment, gender awareness, sanitation etc.

As mentioned before, the FFS meetings are facilitated by the extension staff in such a way that

not only increases the knowledge and the awareness but also enhances the self-confidence of

FFS members. The extension staff can invite other specialists to the FFS meeting to cover

specific topics e.g. organic pest control, hand pollination, etc.

A typical FFS learning event includes the review of last meetings’ activities, group dynamics,

learning session with action plan preparation, farmers’ recent problem discussion (planning of

support session), impact point (emergency message delivery relevant to that month) and review

of the whole session.

Study Plot

115

The study plot is integral part of the FFS. It is a piece of land (about 0.3-0.5 acre) situated right

beside or near the FFS meeting place. Each FFS establishes one study plot. The Lead Farmer or

any other farmer provides the land for learning. Members select the crop to be grown

themselves according to their learning interest. The participants compare the crop cultivated

following the improved methods discussed (raised bed, use of compost, use of natural or non-

toxic pesticides etc.) with the status of the plants in the adjacent plot which are cultivated in the

traditional way (farmers’ practice).

The participants should keep notes about the baseline information of the farmers practice in the

FFS register to avoid any manipulation and to compare with the result of the improved practice.

This helps them to enhance their self-confidence and decision-making capacity. This shows the

community people the opportunity to observe the impact of the different cultivation methods

and possibly to adopt them in their own fields.

Farmers Field Days

Farmers Field Day (FFD) is an effective extension process facilitated by the project for sharing

and dissemination of group achievements with local elites, community members and others. At

the end of the FFS season, each FFS group organises a Farmer’s Field Day, together with their

facilitators, at a prominent place in the community (school ground, fallow high land, premises of

big farmers etc.), where the group presents its learning, its new experience and its successful

cultivation practices. Stalls are set up in which the topics discussed during the past FFS season

are presented in drawings, models (for example on how to set up a homestead including

biodiversity aspects: “ideal homestead plantation”), demonstration material, etc. Group

members explain their learning and experience to visitors. The Field Day also includes a social

event like village fair with music and little sketch plays to inform the audience about the groups'

work and achievements through this traditional way of communication.

The project can contribute a very small amount of EUR 50 for each FFD, but the total amount is

higher due to the contribution by the FFS members.

An additional effect besides the sharing of information with fellow villagers is that the group

members gain recognition and develop some pride for what they have done. For female

participants, it is a remarkable event in their life to expose and get recognition by the society.

Technical advice and training of farmer groups in agricultural techniques improvement and ABD

related measures.

The farmer field school together with extension staff will identify shortcomings in their current

or past practice and get assistance from the project to improve the current or past practice

techniques. In addition techniques for growing ABD related crops will be discussed and present

practice will be improved. Here the project together with the extension staff will invited

technicians from the agriculture department to advise farmer field school group on the proper

implementation of husbanding techniques.

Establishment of crop registers

The project can support the establishment of crop registers. Valuable ABD crops which will be

established and ABD crops in the village will be listed and will be also indicated the total area

where these crops are grown and which farmers grow which crop. The list will remain in the

village for further reference and also in order to indicate where the valuable ABD crops originate

116

from. Those registers will be updated regularly and a copy of the register will be submitted to

the agriculture office at county level.

Training of farmers and farmer field schools in seed production and storage techniques

An important aspect for proper seed modification and breeding is the availability of good quality

seeds. This refers to firstly the production techniques of good quality seeds and secondly to the

storage techniques of the seeds. Here the current practice of seed production and storage are

evaluated. From the evaluation and recommendations respective trainings on how to improve

seed production and storage techniques will be given by township level staff. The project will

support farmer field school groups through training and provision of some materials for storage.

Organization of seed exchange

In many villages old and traditional ABD crops that are valued by the farmers and used for

traditional ceremonies got lost over the years. In order to give farmers the opportunity to gain

access to the old varieties again, the project will support the exchange of seeds between

farmers, farmer field schools and also between different villages in the same county. The seed

exchange can be organized twice per year before the planting season. The exchange can take

place at regular fairs or markets for farmers, where special area will be reserved for farmers’

traditional seeds. And they will be supported to go to those markets and try to sell improved

seeds at good price. Initially the seed exchange may take place in form of meeting between

farmer groups, but later on the seed exchange should be more institutionalized through

provision of traditional ABD seeds at local markets.

Establish a participatory M&E system for FFS.

The basis for impact monitoring is a baseline study (as part of the resources assessment survey)

in which the status quo of farmers in the project village is identified. Representative farmers

from each FFS will be interviewed to generate data on socio-economic dimensions of the

households, as well as gender aspects. The same survey will be repeated after conclusion of the

project intervention. In that way monitoring provides information on the change of living

condition of the target group.

The information collected during the baseline study will be supplemented by the results of the

participatory monitoring and evaluation (PME), carried out at the very beginning of the farmer

group formation process, - the Farmer Field School (FFS) meetings. The purpose of PME is not

only to provide basic information of the respective field school to the project management but

also to train the participants of the FFS to practise goal oriented planning. Farmers, who will be

supported by agricultural field staff, play an active role in gathering information and in

developing recommendations and activity plans. Results of the PME sessions are documented

by the farmers and serve as basic information for assessment of impacts/adaptations during a

mid-term and end evaluation.

Agricultural field staff will regularly monitor the quality of FFS meetings. The quality

(performance) monitoring is done by especially assigned Monitoring Officers of the District

Agricultural Office staff. A special format will be designed for this purpose which stresses the

active participation of both facilitator and members of the FFS.

Awareness creation measures

Awareness creation concerning the necessity and the potential of ABD conservation is a

prerequisite for successful project implementation. With its awareness campaigns on the

117

sustainable management of ABD, the Project can address the general public, focusing on young

people (schools, universities). Through newspaper articles, TV clips, exhibitions and radio

messages, existing knowledge on ABD can be disseminated easily and will indirectly have a great

impact on the attitudes and understanding of the general public as well as decision makers

towards ABD.

In order to secure proper documentation and capitalisation of know-how, the Project should

support publication (local language and Urdu) of brochures/leaflets on ABD management for

different readers/target groups and be disseminated to the relevant institutions and public

media. A national or international consultant can assist in preparation and production of an ABD

manual that summarizes “lessons learnt” and describes approaches and strategies applied by

the Project during implementation as part of knowledge management. In addition to

publication, experiences gained and lessons learnt will be discussed and disseminated during

workshops and seminars at different levels (provincial and national level). A national or regional

(Asian countries) seminar can be organised to exchange regional experience on sustainable

management of biodiversity/agrobiodiversity.

In case the MoA Extension Department at provincial and district level conducts regular

extension campaigns for staff members and farmers as part of their extension activities, the

Project can use those campaigns to disseminate information on the importance of biodiversity

and the sustainable management of ABD.

Different media (TV, radio, internet, newspaper, magazine etc.) will be used to disseminate ABD

information in the project provinces. The media will be invited to report about specific project

activities and events. One medium for awareness creation that attracts a lot of attention could

be a biodiversity/agrobiodiversity exhibition including special events such as discussion fora,

singing contest and theatre performances. The exhibition can be staged on provincial level and

district level, depending on the availability of a suitable venue. Quite often universities can

provide suitable halls for the exhibition. The exhibition can be designed to present a short

introduction to biodiversity and ABD, highlight problems associated with the loss of biodiversity

and genetic resources and finally focus on three pillars of sustainable ABD management: a)

Genetic resources-capital for the future, b) Stabilisation of the ecosystem-farmers as ecosystem

managers, c) Cultural and traditional knowledge.

The exhibition event should be combined with lectures about biodiversity/agrobiodiversity

protection and sustainable management for students.

Agrobiodiversity monitoring system

Agrobiodiversity monitoring will be part of the overall project biodiversity monitoring. The

agrobiodiversity survey in the pilot villages will establish the baseline for further monitoring of

the change of agrobiodiversity due to project intervention. However, the intensive baseline

survey and the collection cannot be carried on by the farmers themselves. It is therefore

proposed that the project may introduce and test a farmer based agrobiodiversity monitoring

system which is briefly described thereafter.

Biodiversity monitoring often these science-based and depends on “indicator organisms” such a

specific plants, animal species, and the like. Such an approach requires academic background

knowledge as well as quite extensive financial means to carry out the detailed survey of all

plants and this is subsequent follow-up surveys. It is quite understandable that a sustainable

monitoring of agrobiodiversity at landscape level at such a scale is not realistic and impossible to

118

achieve. A rather different approach was developed and tested in an agrobiodiversity project in

China. An easy to handle “indicator set” was used comprising of the following components:

• Ecological relevant statistical data that are available at village level or can easily be

determined at the village level,

• Indicator organisms that can identified by farmers (for example frogs, small mammals,

specific flowers such as orchids, etc.),

• Significant agro-ecosystem structure indicators such as specific habitats, trees or

hedges.

The farmers are trained to observe and record specifics of the three components and then, over

their period of time monitor the changes - for the better or for the worse. This is not a scientific

approach but it can easily be handled by the farmers or the Farmer Field School groups. The

integration of this approach into activities of farmer field schools encourages them to discuss

about changes in the environment and biodiversity and therefore strengthens their

environmental consciousness.

Guidelines and regulations

The Project, with the help of a national consultant specialized in environmental law, can help to

analyse the constraints and weaknesses of present regulations and policies at district and

provincial levels (and, if possible at village level as well) that may hinder or contradict the

implementation of sustainable management of biodiversity/agrobiodiversity. ABD and

biodiversity related recommendations will be drafted for policy development/implementation

based on national, regional and international experiences and concepts, as well as on

experiences acquired through the Project. The provincial government as well as district

governments and, if possible, local communities could be encouraged and supported to

elaborate their own regulations and policy to help mainstream biodiversity conservation and

sustainable management. Village governments can be supported to formulate village

agreements (or by-laws) for biodiversity and agrobiodiversity protection. The agreements,

designed in standardised forms can be used by other villages in the project areas as templates

to develop their own regulations for ABD protection.

The Project can organize regular stakeholder fora to support the policy dialogue between

relevant sectors and actors. In addition, the project can support organisation and participation

in national, regional and international seminars to exchange ideas and experiences on

regulation and policy development. In addition, side events during seminars provide ideal

opportunities for detailed discussion and exchange.

131224_Sector Analysis_final.docx 119

Annex VIII: List of key stakeholders and persons met

S. # Name Designation/Location Telephone Email

1. Mr. Abdul Munaf

Qaimkhani

Deputy Inspector General of Forests, CCD

Islamabad

amqaimkhani@yahoo.com

2. Mr. Naeem Ashraf Raja Assistant Inspector General of Forests / Director

Biodiversity, CCD

Islamabad

Off. 051-9245601 naeemashrafraja@yahoo.com

3. Mr. Irfan Tariq Director General (Environment), CCD

Islamabad

Off. 051- 9245545 mirfantariq@gmail.com

4. Dr. Amjad Tahir Virk National Project Manager, Sustainable Land

Management Programme, CCD

Islamabad

Off.

5. Mr. Faiz Ali Khan National Project Coordinator, Mountains & Markets

Projects, CCD

Islamabad

6. Mr. Waqas ul Hasan Programme Officer, DFID

Islamabad

Off. 051-2087229 w-hasan@dfid.gov.uk

7. Prof. Dr. Abdur Rashid Director, Centre of Plant Biodiversity, University of

Peshawar

Cell. 0344-5844447 drabdurashid@yahoo.com

8. Mr. Asad Ullah Lecturer, Centre of Plant Biodiversity, University of

Peshawar

asadbotanist@yahoo.com

9. Mr. Umeed Khalid Conservator, National Council for Conservation of

Wildlife

Islamabad

Cell. 0333-5172704 umeed_khalid@yahoo.com

10. Mr. Saleem Ullah Khan Senior Programme Officer, UNDP

Islamabad

Cell. 0300-8506389 saleem.ullah@undp.org

131224_Sector Analysis_final.docx 120

S. # Name Designation/Location Telephone Email

11. Mr. Arshad Gill Programme Officer, WB

Islamabad

Off. 0300-5572455 arshad-gill@hotmail.com

12. Mr. Muhammad Yousaf

Khan

Deputy Director Planning, Environment Department

Peshawar

Off. 091-9211477

Cell. 0300-5919869

myousaf1964@yahoo.com

13. Mr. Hakim Shah Director Forest Education, Pakistan Forest Institute

Peshawar

Cell. 0332-2404645

14. Mr. Anwar Ali Pakistan Forest Institute, Peshawar

15. Mr. Shabbir Ahmad Deputy Chief Conservator of Forests

Peshawar

Off. 0315-9064366

16. Mr. Sanaullah Khan Director/Conservator Forest

Peshawar

Cell. 0300-8599180 eralpswat@gmail.com

17. Mr. Iftikhar Ahmad Deputy Director, NTFP, Forest Dept.

Peshawar

Cell. 0333-9133764 iftikhar_khalil2002@yahoo.com

18. Mr. Inam Ullah Khan DFO Working Plan 4, Forest Department

Peshawar

19. Mr. Maqsood Gul Assistant Chief, Foreign Aid, P&DD

Peshawar

Cell. 0333-9199433 mianmaqsoodgull@gmail.com

20. Sahibzada Irfanullah Provincial Project Coordinator, SLMP

Peshawar

Off. 091-9213012 irfan29_73@yahoo.com

21. Mr. Rizwan Ahmad Director P&D, University of Agriculture

Peshawar

Off. +92 (91) 9216328 rizwan_ahmad66@hotmail.com

22. Dr. Mohammad Zulfiqar Agri. Economist/Registrar, University of Agriculture

Peshawar

Off. 091-9216521

Ext: 3107

registrar@aup.edu.pk

131224_Sector Analysis_final.docx 121

S. # Name Designation/Location Telephone Email

23. Mr. Tahir Paracha Agri. Extension Expert, University of Agriculture

Peshawar

Cell. 0300-9597199 tahirparacha@yahoo.com

24. Dr. Jawad Ali Director, Climate Change Centre, University of

Agriculture

Peshawar

25. Dr. Muhammad Sajid Assistant Professor, Horticulture, University of

Agriculture

Peshawar

Off. +92 (91) 9216541 msajid@aup.edu.pk

26. Syed Nadeem Bukhari Project Coordinator, Helvetas Swiss Intercooperation

Peshawar

Off. 091-5830416 nadeem.bukhari@helvetas.org

27. Mr. Naveed Akhtar Assistant Professor Botany, Islamia College University

Peshawar

Cell. 0300-5997454

28. Dr. Hassan Sher Director, Institute of Plant Sciences & Biodiversity,

University of Swat

Swat

Off. 0946-724153

Cell. 0302-8040198

hassan.botany@gmail.com

29. Dr. Haider Ali Assistant Professor, Institute of Plant Sciences &

Biodiversity, University of Swat

Swat

Off. 0946-726170

Cell. 0333-9474014

alibotanist@yahoo.com

30. Mr. Salim Ahmad Executive Director, Hujra

Swat

Off. 946-726799

Cell. 0333-9472172

Saleemahmad7@hotmail.com

31. Mr. Imtiaz Hussain Shah Deputy Commissioner

Swat

Off. 946-9240337

32. Mr. Juma Khan Finance & Planning Officer

Swat

Off. 946-9240095

131224_Sector Analysis_final.docx 122

S. # Name Designation/Location Telephone Email

33. Mr. Sher Zada Khan District Director, On-Farm Water Management

Swat

Off. 0946-9240166

Cell. 0332-9088964

34. Mr. Karim Khan District Director, Agriculture Extension

Swat

Off. 946-9240273

35. Mr. Fazal-e-Maula Subject Matter Specialist (Horticulture), Agriculture

Extension

Swat

36. Mr. Nazir Khan District Director, Soil Conservation

Swat

Off. 0946-721746

Cell. 0321-9112463

37. Dr. Abdul Bari Director, Agriculture Research Institute

Swat

Off. 0946-813611

Cell. 0346-9409577

38. Dr. Abdul Rauf Principal Research Officer, Agriculture Research Institute

Swat

Cell. 0342-9122268

39. Dr. Fazal-e-Maula Senior Research Officer, Agriculture Research Institute

Swat

Cell. 0

40. Dr. Ehsan Ullah Senior Research Officer, Agriculture Research Institute

Swat

Cell. 0314-9736456

41. Mr. Muhammad Shahid Research Officer, Agriculture Research Institute

Swat

Cell. 0314-9191009

42. Syed Muhammad Ali Conservator Wildlife, Northern Circle

Swat

Off. 0946-723065

Cell. 0332-9354053

43. Mr. Muhammad Siddique

Khattak

Conservator Forest, Malakand Circle

Swat

Cell. 0334-9150290

131224_Sector Analysis_final.docx 123

S. # Name Designation/Location Telephone Email

44. Mr. Mir Wali Khan DFO Forest

Swat

Off. 0946-9240248

Cell. 0333-9853458

45. Mr. Muhammad Saleem

Marwat

DFO Forest

Kalam

Cell. 0311-1934134

46. Mr. Mohammad Yusuf Jan Biodiversity and NRM Consultant

Swat

Cell. 0300-9359637 myusuf40@yahoo.com

47. Mr. Sardar Ayub Regional Programme Manager, AKRSP

Chitral

Off. 0943-412734

Cell. 0302-5949314

sardarayub@hotmail.com

48. Mian Sohail Abbas Manager Admin, SAMBU-Golen Gol Hydro Power Project

Chitral

Off. 0943-320114

Cell. 0333-9288768

sohailabbas03@gmail.com

49. Dr. Sheikh Ahmad In-charge, Veterinary Hospital

Chitral

Off. 0943-412646

Cell. 0336-9376440

dlochitral@gmail.com

50. Mr. Muhammad Ibrahim

Jan

Assistant Registrar, Shaheed Benazir Bhutto University

Chitral

Off. 0943-414486

Cell. 0312-9511095

51. Mr. Tariq Ahmad District Programme Manager, SRSP

Chitral

Off. 0943-412918

Cell. 0300-5062833

tariq.ahmad@srsp.org.pk

52. Mr. Shujat Ali Manager M&E, CIADP

Chitral

Off. 0943-413078 shujat.ali@thrive.org.pk

53. Mr. Hussain Ahmad Advocate High Court

Chitral

54. Mr. Imtiaz Hussain DFO Wildlife

Chitral

Off. 0943-412101

55. Mr. Jan Mohammad Khan District Director Agriculture

Chitral

131224_Sector Analysis_final.docx 124

S. # Name Designation/Location Telephone Email

56. Mr. Shaukat Fiaz DFO Forest

Chitral

Off. 0943-413381

Cell. 0311-4413999

57. Mr. Zaffar Khan Social Mobilisation Expert

Chitral

Cell. 0302-5943629 zaffarmacp@yahoo.com

58. Mr. Muhammad Shoaib Senior Civil Judge

Chitral

Cell. 0300-5883872 seniorciviljudge@yahoo.com

59. Mr. Inayat Ullah Shopkeeper, Sheikhandeh, Rumbur

Chitral

Cell. 0342-5375952

60. Mr. Gul Feroz Khan Social Worker, Kalashgram, Rumbur

61. Mr. Obaidullah Contractor/Ex-Councillor, Sheikhandeh, Rumbur

Chitral

Cell. 0344-9700174

62. Mr. Ayaz Khan Research Officer, Agricultural Research Station

Chitral

Off. 943-412880

Cell. 0345-3987709

63. Mr. Shahzad Khan Coordinator, Abdul Wali Khan University

Chitral

64. Mr. Akram Khan Additional Assistant Commissioner

Chitral

Cell. 0333-9077723

65. Mr. Saad Nawaz Qaisrani Assistant Commissioner

Chitral

66. Mr. Saleem Khan Chairman, Conservancy Management Committee

Astor

131224_Sector Analysis_final.docx 125

Annex IX: Bibliography

“Donor countries in partnership with KP”. Daily Dawn, 3 Oct 2013.

http://www.dawn.com/news/1047126/donor-countries-in-partnership-with-kp.

“New uplift project see upward cost revision”. Daily Dawn, 10 Dec 2013, p.15.

http://www.dawn.com/news/1061667/new-uplift-projects-see-upward-cost-revision.

“NWFP unveils agricultural policy.” Daily Dawn, 15 Jun 2005.

http://www.dawn.com/news/143546/nwfp-unveils-agricultural-policy.

About [CBD] National Reporting (http://www.cbd.int/reports/intro.shtml). Accessed on 4 Nov

2013.

Ahmed J. and F. Mahmood, 1998. Changing perspectives on forest policy: Policy that works

for Forests and People Series no. 1. Islamabad and London: International Institute for

Environment and Development.

Ahmed J., G. Chaudhry, U. Iftikhar, F. Khan, M. ul Mulk, and S. Zia, 2002. Policy that Works for

Sustainable Agriculture and Regenerating Rural Economies. Islamabad and London:

International Institute for Environment and Development.

Anwar, Maqsood and Kashif Sheikh, 2005. Review of the Implementation of the Biodiversity

Action Plan for Pakistan: Current Status and Future Steps (Typescript). Islamabad: IUCN.

Ashfaq, Raja M. and Munir A. Awan, 2008. Policy and Legal Reform Study (Typescript).

Islamabad: Ministry of Environment, GoP.

Asian Development Bank, European Union, United Nations and The World Bank, 2011. Post

Crisis Needs Assessment Khyber Pakhtunkhwa & Federally Administered Tribal Areas.

Islamabad: Government of Pakistan.

CBD Aichi Biodiversity Targets (http://www.cbd.int/sp/targets/). Accessed on 4 Nov 2013.

Centre for Public Policy Research, 2010. District Swat: Socioeconomic Baseline and Displacement

Impact. Islamabad: CPPR.

Chitral Post (http://chitralpost.net/index.php). Accessed on 8 Dec 2013.

Chitral Times (http://www.chitraltimes.com/). Accessed on 8 Dec 2013.

Daily Awaz-e-Swat (http://www.awazeswat.com/). Accessed on 14 Dec 2013.

Daily Azadi (http://www.dailyazadiswat.com/epaper/2013/). Accessed on 8 Dec 2013.

Daily Chand (http://dailychand.com/epaper/2013/12/08/). Accessed on 8 Dec 2013.

Daily Chitral (http://www.dailychitral.com/). Accessed on 8 Dec 2013.

Daily Khabarkar (http://pknewspaper.com/epaper-daily-khabarkar-swat). Accessed on 8 Dec

2013.

Entrepreneurs Project (http://www.meda.org.pk/usaids-entrepreneurs-project/). Accessed on 7

Dec 2013.

131224_Sector Analysis_final.docx 126

GIZ, 2011. Conservation and Sustainable Management of Biodiversity in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa,

Pakistan [Project # 2011.2206.8]. Project Document.

GIZ, 2013. Successful conservation and sustainable management of biodiversity in KP - What

does it take? Presentation to the Stakeholders Workshop on 29 Oct 2013.

Global Environment Facility (http://www.thegef.org/gef/RBM). Accessed on 7 Dec 2013.

Global Environment Facility, 2012. Pakistan and the GEF. Islamabad: GEF.

Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Finance Department: Medium Term Budgetary Framework

(http://www.financekpp.gov.pk/FD/financial-reforms/mtbf). Accessed on 13 Nov 2013.

Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Rules of Business 1985

(http://www.khyberpakhtunkhwa.gov.pk/Gov/Rule-of-Business.php). Accessed on 2 Dec

2013.

Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, 2010. Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Comprehensive Development

Strategy 2010-2017. Peshawar: Planning and Development Department, GoKP.

Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, 2011. Economic Growth Strategy. Peshawar: P&D

Department, GoKP.

Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, 2013. Annual Development Programme 2013-14.

Peshawar: Planning and Development Department, GoKP.

Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, 2013. Budget Estimates for Service Delivery 2013-16.

Peshawar: Finance Department, GoKP.

Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, 2013. Budget Strategy Paper 2013-16. Peshawar: Finance

Department, GoKP.

Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, 2013. Community-Driven Local Development: A

Governance Framework. Peshawar: Finance Department, GoKP.

Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, 2013. Development Statistics of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.

Peshawar: Bureau of Statistics, GoKP.

Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, 2013. Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Agriculture Strategy and

Policy: A Ten Year Perspective (Typescript). Peshawar: Department of Agriculture, Livestock

and Cooperation, GoKP.

Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, 2013. Provincial Land Use Plan/Regional Plan. Urban

Policy Unit, P&DD, GoKP.

Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, 2013. Strategic Development Partnership Framework.

Peshawar: GoKP.

Government of NWFP and IUCN, 1996. Sarhad Provincial Conservation Strategy. Karachi: IUCN &

Planning, Environment & Development Department, GoNWFP.

Government of NWFP and IUCN, 2004. Abbottabad – An Integrated Development Vision.

Karachi: IUCN and Abbottabad District Government, GoNWFP.

131224_Sector Analysis_final.docx 127

Government of NWFP and IUCN, 2004. Chitral – An Integrated Development Vision. Karachi:

IUCN and Chitral District Government, GoNWFP.

Government of NWFP and IUCN, 2007. Dera Ismail Khan – Integrated Development Vision.

Karachi: IUCN and Dera Ismail Khan District Government, GoNWFP.

Government of NWFP, 1999. NWFP Forest Policy 1999. Peshawar: Forestry, Fisheries & Wildlife

Department, GoNWFP.

Government of NWFP, 2009. Sharia Nizam-e-Adl Regulation 2009 in Extraordinary Government

Gazette of North West Frontier Province (16 Apr 2009).

Government of Pakistan and FAO, 2009. Pakistan Forestry Outlook Study. Bangkok: Office of the

Inspector General of Forests, Ministry of Environment, GoP and FAO Regional Office for Asia

and the Pacific.

Government of Pakistan and IUCN, 1992. The Pakistan National Conservation Strategy. Karachi:

IUCN and Environment & Urban Affairs Division, GoP.

Government of Pakistan, 2001. Second National Report on Implementation of Convention on

Biological Diversity (CBD) in Pakistan (Typescript). Islamabad: Ministry of Environment, Local

Government & Rural Development, GoP.

Government of Pakistan, 2005. National Environmental Policy 2005. Islamabad: Ministry of

Environment, GoP.

Government of Pakistan, 2006. Third National Report on Implementation of Convention on

Biological Diversity (CBD) in Pakistan (Typescript). Islamabad: Ministry of Environment, GoP.

Government of Pakistan, 2008. First National Report of Pakistan to the Convention on Biological

Diversity (Typescript). Islamabad: Ministry of Environment, GoP.

Government of Pakistan, 2009. Pakistan Fourth National Report [to CBD]. Islamabad: Ministry of

Environment, GoP.

Government of Pakistan, 2010. National Forest Policy 2010 (Draft). Islamabad: Ministry of

Environment, GoP.

Government of Pakistan, 2010. National Rangeland Policy 2010 (Draft). Islamabad: Ministry of

Environment, GoP.

Government of Pakistan, 2012. National Climate Change Policy. Islamabad: Ministry of Climate

Change, GoP.

Government of Pakistan, 2012. National Sustainable Development Strategy. Islamabad: Ministry

of Climate Change, GoP.

Government of Pakistan, 2012. Pakistan Access to Genetic Resources and Benefit-sharing Act

(Draft). Islamabad: Climate Change Division, GoP.

Government of Pakistan, 2012. Pakistan Trade Control of Wild Fauna and Flora Act, 2012.

Government of Pakistan, 2012. The Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan (as modified

up to the 28th February 2012). Islamabad: National Assembly of Pakistan, GoP.

131224_Sector Analysis_final.docx 128

Government of Pakistan, 2013. National Disaster Risk Reduction Policy. Islamabad: Ministry of

Climate Change, GoP.

Government of Pakistan, 2013. Public Sector Development Programme 2013-14. Islamabad:

Ministry of Finance, GoP.

Government of Pakistan, IUCN and WWF, 2000. Biodiversity Action Plan for Pakistan.

Rawalpindi: IUCN, WWF Pakistan and Ministry of Environment, Local Government and Rural

Development, GoP.

Government of Pakistan, Ministry of Finance: 7th National Finance Commission (NFC) Award

2010

(http://www.financekpp.gov.pk/FD/attachments/article/154/7th%20NFC%20AWARD%2020

10.pdf). Accessed on 13 Nov 2013.

Government of Pakistan’s Vision 2025 (http://www.pc.gov.pk/?page_id=73). Accessed on 9 Nov

2013.

Government Post Graduate Jahanzeb College (http://www.jc.edu.pk). Accessed on 8 Dec 2013.

Intercooperation, 2010. Study on Timber Harvesting Ban in NWFP, Pakistan. Islamabad:

Intercooperation Pakistan.

Intercooperation, 2011. Village Planning Manual. Peshawar: Forestry Planning and Monitoring

Directorate, Forest Department, Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.

Pakistan Poverty Alleviation Fund (http://www.ppaf.org.pk/).

IUCN Red List of Threatened Species (http://www.iucnredlist.org/). Accessed on 6 Dec 2013.

IUCN, 1997. Biological Diversity in Pakistan. Karachi: IUCN.

IUCN, 2003. Environmental Law in Pakistan: Governing Natural Resources and the Processes and

Institutions that Affect Them - North-West Frontier Province (Volume 1: Description and

Analysis). Karachi: IUCN.

IUCN, 2004. Chitral: A Study in Statecraft (1320–1969). Karachi: IUCN Pakistan.

IUCN, 2012. Legal Implications of the 18th Amendment relating to Environment (Typescript).

Islamabad: IUCN.

Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Rules, Regulation, Acts, Laws

(http://www.khyberpakhtunkhwa.gov.pk/Gov/Rule-Regulations-Laws-Acts.php). Accessed

on 4 Nov 2013.

Mir, Ahsan, 2006. Impact Assessment of Community Based Trophy Hunting in MACP areas of

NWFP and Northern Areas (Typescript). Islamabad: IUCN.

Multi Donor Trust Fund (http://www.pakistanmdtf.org/). Accessed on 6 Dec 2013.

Pakistan Agricultural Research Council (http://www.parc.gov.pk/). Accessed on 8 Dec 2013.

Pakistan Bureau of Statistics: Land Utilisation Statistics

(http://www.pbs.gov.pk/sites/default/files/tables/Land_Utilization_Statistics.pdf). Accessed

on 8 Dec 2013.

131224_Sector Analysis_final.docx 129

Pakistan Forest Institute (http://pfi.gov.pk/). Accessed on 8 Dec 2013.

Pakistan Science Foundation (http://www.psf.gov.pk/index.php). Accessed on 8 Dec 2013.

Protected Areas of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa

(http://www.wildlifeofnwfp.gov.pk/protected%20areas.html). Access on 8 Dec 2013.

Provincial Assembly Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Acts Advanced Search

(http://www.pakp.gov.pk/index.php/acts/adv_search/en). Accessed on 4 Nov 2013.

Shahbaz, Babar, Tanvir Ali and Abid Q. Suleri, 2007. “Critical Analysis of Forest Policies of

Pakistan: Implications for Sustainable Livelihoods”. In Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies

for Global Change, 12: 4 (May 2007), pp. 441-453.

The World Bank, 1991. Managing Development: The Governance Dimension. Washington, DC:

WB.

University of Peshawar (http://www.upesh.edu.pk/?q=home). Accessed on 9 Dec 2013.

University of Peshawar, Centre of Plant Biodiversity

(http://www.upesh.edu.pk/academics/faculties/departments/?q=39&sid=45). Accessed on

9 Dec 2013.

University of Swat (http://uswat.edu.pk/). Accessed on 8 Dec 2013.

Waldmüller, Luis, 2013. Recommendations for the Implementation of Project Outputs

concerning Biodiversity / Agrobiodiversity (Typescript). Islamabad: GIZ-BKP.

Wildlife of Pakistan

(http://www.wildlifeofpakistan.com/WildlifeBiodiversityofPakistan/intiativestoconservewild

lifeinPakistan.htm). Accessed on 8 Dec 2013.

Yusuf, M., 2009. “Legal and Institutional Dynamics of Forest Management in Pakistan.” In McGill

International Journal of Sustainable Development Law and Policy, 5 (1): 45-71.

Zillich, Michael, 2013. Conservation and Sustainable Management of Biodiversity in Khyber

Pakhtunkhwa – The BKP-Project Planning Workshop, 11th–15th of February 2013

(Typescript). Islamabad: GIZ-BKP.

House 269-E, Street 13-B, E-11/4 Islamabad, Pakistan +92 (51) 2222469 +92 (345) 2004111 +92 (333) 5590803 info@devconsult.pk www.devconsult.pk

dev~consult is a unique partnership of individuals and consulting practices taking forward the philosophy of collective wisdom but individual niches. We are forging partnerships with few of excellent professionals and small to medium organizations with decades of experience in their area of expertise. We, together, aim to cover diverse aspects of sustainable development including policy analysis and development; strategy formulation and action planning; public finance management; social and environmental assessment; knowledge management; evidence based monitoring, evaluation and impact assessment; data collection and management; and support to field interventions for improved livelihoods. We offer full range of solutions for short-term to long-term initiatives through individual consulting and/or panel expertise.