Federal Ministry of Climate Change Government of Pakistan Interim

Federal Ministry of Climate Change Government of Pakistan

Interim Report Development of the National REDD+ Strategy and its Implementation Framework for Pakistan

7735 ID 109904 December 22, 2017

DISCLAIMER Indufor makes its best effort to provide accurate and complete information while executing the assignment. Indufor assumes no liability or responsibility for any outcome of the assignment.

Copyright © 2017Indufor All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including, but not limited to, photocopying, recording or otherwise.

TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. BACKGROUND 9 1.1 HISTORICAL OVERVIEW OF FORESTS IN PAKISTAN 9 1.2 OBJECTIVES OF THE ASSIGNMENT AND THIS REPORT 13 1.3 GUIDING PRINCIPLES FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE ASSIGNMENT 13 1.4 OUTLINE OF THE REPORT 14 2. APPROACH 15 2.1 DIAGNOSTIC FRAMEWORKS 15 2.2 LITERATURE REVIEW 18 2.3 CONSULTATIONS 19 3. FOREST POLICY, INSTITUTIONS AND LEGAL FRAMEWORKS IN PAKISTAN 21 3.1 FOREST POLICIES AND LAWS 21 3.2 REVIEW OF RELEVANT SECTORAL POLICIES OUTSIDE FOREST SECTOR 42 3.3 FOREST GOVERNANCE ASSESSMENT 45 4. LAND USE CHANGE TRENDS IN PAKISTAN 52 4.1 LAND USE CHANGE TRENDS IN PAKISTAN 52 4.2 OVERVIEW OF LAND TENURE, TITLING AND NATURAL RESOURCE RIGHTS 56 4.3 SYNTHESIS OF LAND TENURE ACROSS PROVINCES 58 5. REVIEW AND CONSULTATIONS OF DRIVERS OF DEFORESTATION AND FOREST DEGRADATION IN PAKISTAN 65 5.1 BALOCHISTAN 65 5.2 SINDH 67 5.3 KHYBER PAKHTUNKHWA (KP) 70 5.4 PUNJAB 73 5.5 GILGIT-BALTISTAN 75 5.6 AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR 78 5.7 FEDERALLY ADMINISTERED TRIBAL AREAS (FATA) 81 5.8 PRIORITIZED DRIVERS OF DEFORESTATION AND FOREST DEGRADATION 84 6. STRATEGY OPTIONS 89 6.1 A VISION FOR FORESTS AND PEOPLE 89 6.2 STRATEGY OPTIONS 90 6.3 PRELIMINARY RISK ASSESSMENT 99 7. CONCLUSIONS 101 8. REFERENCES 103 ANNEX 1 PAKISTAN’S REDD+ READINESS INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS 112 ANNEX 2 TOOLS USED DURING THE STUDY 114 FOREST POLICY, INSTITUTIONS AND LEGAL FRAMEWORKS IN PAKISTAN 115 QUESTIONNAIRE FOR SOCIAL SURVEY 131 DEVELOPING THE NATIONAL REDD+ STRATEGY AND ITS IMPLEMENTATION FRAMEWORK FOR PAKISTAN 134 ANNEX 3 SYNTHESIS OF RESPONSES TO FOREST GOVERNANCE ASSESSMENTS AT PROVINCIAL LEVEL 137 1. BALOCHISTAN 138 1.1 PROVINCIAL FOREST POLICIES AND LAWS 138 1.2 LAND TENURE, OWNERSHIP AND USER RIGHTS 139 1.3 CROSS-SECTORAL DIMENSION OF FOREST POLICY 140 1.4 INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORKS 140 1.5 PLANNING AND DECISION-MAKING 140 1.6 TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY 141 1.7 PERFORMANCE CULTURE 141 © INDUFOR: 7735 DEVELOPMENT OF THE NATIONAL REDD+ STRATEGY AND ITS IMPLEMENTATION FRAMEWORK –INTERIM 1 REPORT (ID 109904)

1.8 ADMINISTRATION OF LAND TENURE AND PROPERTY RIGHTS 142 2. SINDH 143 2.1 PROVINCIAL FOREST POLICIES AND LAWS 143 2.2 LAND TENURE, OWNERSHIP AND USER RIGHTS 143 2.3 CROSS-SECTORAL DIMENSION OF FOREST POLICY 144 2.4 INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORKS 144 2.5 PLANNING AND DECISION-MAKING 144 2.6 TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY 145 2.7 PERFORMANCE CULTURE 145 2.8 ADMINISTRATION OF LAND TENURE AND PROPERTY RIGHTS 146 3. KHYBER PAKHTUNKHWA 147 3.1 PROVINCIAL FOREST POLICIES AND LAWS 147 3.2 LAND TENURE, OWNERSHIP AND USER RIGHTS 152 3.3 CROSS-SECTORAL DIMENSION OF FOREST POLICY 153 3.4 INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORKS 153 3.5 PLANNING AND DECISION MAKING 153 3.6 TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY 154 3.7 PERFORMANCE CULTURE 155 3.8 ADMINISTRATION OF LAND TENURE AND PROPERTY RIGHTS 156 4. PUNJAB 157 4.1 PROVINCIAL FOREST POLICIES AND LAWS 157 4.2 LAND TENURE, OWNERSHIP AND USER RIGHTS 160 4.3 CROSS-SECTORAL DIMENSION OF FOREST POLICY 161 4.4 INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORKS 161 4.5 PLANNING AND DECISION MAKING 162 4.6 TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY 162 4.7 PERFORMANCE CULTURE 163 4.8 ADMINISTRATION OF LAND TENURE AND PROPERTY RIGHTS 164 5. GILGIT-BALTISTAN 165 5.1 CONSTITUTIONAL BACKGROUND OF FOREST LAWS AND POLICIES IN GILGIT-BALTISTAN AND THE CHALLENGES CREATED THEREBY 165 5.2 PROVINCIAL FOREST POLICIES AND LAWS 166 5.3 LAND TENURE, OWNERSHIP AND USER RIGHTS 169 5.4 CROSS-SECTORAL DIMENSION OF FOREST POLICY 170 5.5 INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORKS 170 5.6 PLANNING AND DECISION MAKING 170 5.7 TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY 171 5.8 PERFORMANCE CULTURE 171 5.9 ADMINISTRATION OF LAND TENURE AND PROPERTY RIGHTS 172 6. AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR (AJK) 173 6.1 CONSTITUTIONAL BACKGROUND OF FOREST LAWS AND POLICIES IN AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND THE CHALLENGES CREATED THEREBY 173 6.2 PROVINCIAL FOREST POLICIES AND LAWS 174 6.3 LAND TENURE, OWNERSHIP AND USER RIGHTS 176 6.4 CROSS-SECTORAL DIMENSION OF FOREST POLICY 176 6.5 INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORKS 177 6.6 PLANNING AND DECISION MAKING 177 6.7 TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY 177 6.8 PERFORMANCE CULTURE 178 6.9 ADMINISTRATION OF LAND TENURE AND PROPERTY RIGHTS 179 ANNEX 4 SYNTHESIS OF RESPONSES TO CONSULTATION OF DRIVERS OF DEFORESTATION AND FOREST DEGRADATION 180 BALOCHISTAN 181 © INDUFOR: 7735 DEVELOPMENT OF THE NATIONAL REDD+ STRATEGY AND ITS IMPLEMENTATION FRAMEWORK –INTERIM 2 REPORT (ID 109904)

SINDH 183 KHYBER PAKHTUNKHWA (KP) 185 PUNJAB 187 GILGIT-BALTISTAN 189 AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR 191 FEDERALLY ADMINISTERED TRIBAL AREAS (FATA) 193

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Pillars and Principles of Governance 17 Figure 2 Land cover/ land use of Pakistan. Source: GoP, 2009 52 Figure 3 Severity of Direct Drivers of Deforestation and Forest Degradation in All Forest Types 55 Figure 4 Overall Severity of Indirect Drivers of Forest Degradation and Deforestation 56 Figure 5 Khyber Pakhtunkhwa’s Forest Area Development 2011-2014 70 Figure 6 Types of Forests in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, 2013 71 Figure 7 FATA's Forest Area Development, 2007-2015 82

LIST OF TABLES Table 1 Legal Classification of Forests in Pakistan 27 Table 2 Pakistan Land Cover/Land Use (000 hectares) 53 Table 3 Lands of Forest Departments Transferred for Non-forest Uses since 1992 53 Table 4 Land Tenure and Users’ Rights 59 Table 5 Forest Resources in Sindh Province 2013 68 Table 6 Results from the Spatial Temporal Analysis of Riverine Forest areas in Sindh Province 1979-2009 68 Table 7 Khyber Pakhtunkhwa's Forest Area by Districts in 2013-2014 in Acres 71 Table 8 Spatial Temporal Analysis of Land Cover in Gilgit-Baltistan 1990-2010 75 Table 9 Forest Cover Change 1990-2010 in GB 76 Table 10 Forest Cover Change (Conifer) 1992-2010 in the Northern Areas (GB) 76 Table 11 Forest Cover Change (Conifer) AJK 1992-2010 78 Table 12 Spatial Temporal Analysis of Land Cover in AJK 1990-2010 79 Table 13 Forest Cover Change 1990-2010 in AJK 79 Table 14 Forest Area in FATA in 2014-2015 in Acres 81 Table 15 Drivers of Deforestation and Forest Degradation by Province 84 Table 16 Strategy Options Identified from the Discussions with Stakeholders and Analysis 91

ABBREVIATIONS AJK Azad Jammu Kashmir AKLASC Azad Kashmir Logging and Sawmill Corporation CBD The Convention on Biological Diversity CBO Community Based Organisation CCB Citizen Community Board CCF Chief Conservator of Forest CDO Community Development Officer CITES Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species CM Chief Minister COP Conference of Parties CPEC China Pakistan Economic Corridor CSO Civil Society Organisation DD Drivers of Deforestation & Forest Degradation DFO Divisional Forest Officer EIA Environmental Impact Assessment EPA Environment Protection Agency EU European Union FATA Federally Administered Tribal Area FCC Forest Conservation Committee FCPF Forest Carbon Partnership Facility FDC Forest Development Corporation FLEG Forest Law Enforcement and Governance (under WB PROFOR) FLEGT Forest Law Enforcement, Governance and Trade (under EU) FREL Forest Reference Emission Level FRL Forest Reference Level GB Gilgit-Baltistan GHG Greenhouse Gas Govt. Government IEE Initial Environmental Examination INGO International NGO IUCN International Union for Conservation of Nature JFMC Joint Forest Management Committee KP Khyber Pakhtunkhwa LGRD Local Government and Rural Development LPG Liquefied Petroleum Gas LSO Local Support Organisation MW Mega Watt MRV Measurement, Reporting and Verification N/A Not Applicable NFMS National Forest Monitoring System NGO Non-Government Organisation NHA National Highway Authority NOC No Objection Certificate NTFP Non-timber Forest Product Pak Pakistan PC Participants Committee PFDs Provincial Forest Departments PKR Pakistani Rupees PM Prime Minister PROFOR Program on Forests, World Bank based multi-donor programme. PWD Public Works Department RD Rural Development REDD Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation RFO Range Forest Officer RNR Renewable Natural Resources

R-PP Readiness Preparation Proposal SAFWCO Sindh Agricultural and Forestry Workers Coordinating Organization SDFO Sub Divisional Forest Officer SDO Sub Divisional Officer Sq Square SUPARCO Pakistan Space and Upper Atmosphere Research Commission UNCCD United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification UNCIP United Nation Commission on India and Pakistan UNDP United Nations Development Programme UNDRIP United Nations Declaration on Rights of Indigenous People UNFCC United Nation Framework Convention on Climate Change VDC Village Development Committee VPA Voluntary Partnership Agreement (under EU FLEGT) WAPDA Water & Power Development Authority WB The World Bank WWF World Wide Fund for Nature

PREFACE Addressing drivers of deforestation and forest degradation has been at the heart of REDD+ discussions and UNFCCC negotiations since many years. Decision 2 of COP 13 in Bali already encouraged Parties “to explore a range of actions, identify options and undertake efforts, including demonstration activities, to address the drivers of deforestation”. Decision 1 of COP 16 reiterated the need for all parties to take actions to address drivers of deforestation (para 68) and requested developing countries, to address drivers of deforestation and forest degradation when developing and implementing their national strategies and action plans (para 72). The dynamics and causes of deforestation and forest degradation are multi-faceted, complex and vary from place to place. Direct drivers are associated with a complex set of underlying drivers that need to be tackled if efforts to address the direct drivers are to be successful in the long-term. Along with human- induced drivers, natural drivers, abiotic and biotic of land degradation and land use change must be taken into account. Natural drivers, such as droughts, predispose forests to degradation (e.g. by pests, disease or wildfires), which sometimes leads to land-use change. The distinction between direct and underlying causes and between human- and naturally-induced changes is often not as clear as it might appear. In reality there are long, complex chains of causation that can bring about deforestation or the degradation of forests. Carefully and systematically analysing and comprehensively addressing all direct and underlying drivers of deforestation and degradation of forests is a priority and key prerequisite to effectively reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation, and thus, enhancing forest carbon stocks in every REDD+ country. While drivers of deforestation vary in different places, particular attention has been given to addressing the conversion of forests to agricultural land, which is by far the greatest driver globally. Overexploitation and unsustainable forest management practices are the main human-induced causes of forest degradation. Measures and strategies to address drivers should seek to harmonize different development objectives, taking into account the need for increased food production and improved livelihoods, as well as climate change mitigation and adaptation, and enhanced environmental conservation. A cross-sectoral “landscape approach”, encompassing all land uses, would contribute to halting both deforestation and forest degradation while meeting future demands for food and nutrition. Government of Pakistan (GoP) is promoting REDD+ (Reduction of Emissions from deforestation and forest degradation) program for conservation and preservation of its forests resources. REDD+ process was initiated by GoP in 2009. Pakistan became member of UN-REDD in 2011 to tap funds from its Targeted Support Program (TSP). Pakistan was selected as a REDD+ Country Participant under Forest Carbon Partnership Facility (FCPF) of the World Bank in 2013 after submission of its REDD+ Readiness Preparation (R-PP) Proposal. The Participants Committee (PC) through its resolution PC/16/2013/8 decided to allocate grant funding to enable Pakistan to move forward with preparations for readiness. Assistance from the FCPF is provided through a Readiness Fund. One of the main objectives of the R- PP is to develop a National REDD+ strategy and its implementation framework. The report in hand is part of the process to develop the REDD+ strategy and provide basis for developing REDD+ strategy of the country. This interim report is the outcome of consultations with provincial forest services, communities, academia, civil society organizations and other relevant stakeholders. This report identifies preliminary direct drivers, underlying causes, challenges/barriers to increase of forest cover and potential future drivers of deforestation and forest degradation. The report also elaborates on the identification of the strategy options and associated risks that might be used to effectively reduce the greenhouse gas emissions from deforestation and forest degradation, and enhance and conserve carbon stocks.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY National REDD+ Office under Ministry of Climate Change (MoCC) has awarded Indufor Oy, a Finnish company, the contract to develop “National REDD+ Strategy and its Implementation Framework”. With that, one of the deliverables is Interim Report focusing in drivers of deforestation, forest governance, and the strategy options available for the implementation of REDD+ in the country. This report broadly discusses the land use change trends, forest policy, institutions, legal framework, drivers of deforestation and, forest governance for each of province. At the end there is a proposal for the alternatives to implement REDD+, discussed as strategy options. Chapter 1 discusses background and objectives of this assignment, which was to study the drivers of deforestation and forest degradation in Pakistan, and recommend strategy options to inform the formulation of the national REDD+ Strategy and its implementation framework. The focus of this study was to; assess land use, land use change drivers, forest law, policy and governance activities, analyse factors of weak governance and laws implementation in REDD+; identify linkages with drivers of deforestation and governance issues. The report also presents historical overview of forests in Indo- Pakistan and its evolving governance with the changing powers structures and their requirements. Derived from consultations and literature analysis this report suggests strategy options (general activities to implement REDD+). The guiding principles of implementation of the assignment were national ownership of the process, adopting a consultative, participatory and collaborative approach and building the analysis on systematic review of already conducted work. Basing the delivery of services on international best practices and guidance, such as Guidance on Stakeholder Engagement in REDD+ Readiness (UN REDD/FCPF, 2012), PROFOR Framework for Assessing and Monitoring Forest Governance (2012) and FCPF’s Readiness Assessment Framework (FCPF 2013), remained also one of the key guiding principles. Chapter 2 is about the approach of the study, which delineates diagnostic frameworks, such as FCPF’s Readiness Assessment Framework (FCPF 2013), takes guidance from the questions posed by diagnostic assessment and analysis, prioritizes direct and indirect drivers/barriers to forest carbon stock enhancement, and links between drivers/barriers and REDD+ activities. PROFOR framework is at the heart of this assessment, and provides a means to view and analyse the institutions and interactions within and outside the forest sector, which together create the conditions and possibilities for the governance of a country’s forests and forest resources. Literature at regional, national, provincial and local levels was reviewed to understand the direct and indirect drivers of deforestation, forest degradation and barriers to sustainable forest management, including natural regeneration, as well as conservation of forests. As a general assessment, there is a wide variety of literature on environmental issues in Pakistan that meet minimum quality standards for research. This review does present results from selected studies and their strengths and limitations should be duly noted. Consultations with diverse stakeholders were undertaken including forest officers, forest owners, communities, civil society organizations, NGOs, market players including wood industry actors (traders and contractors) and some relevant government departments to assess the trends in the land use change and the governance of forests, including policies, practices, decision-making processes and cross sector coordination, etc. Chapter 3 is related to forest policy, institutions and legal frameworks in Pakistan. This chapter underlines international commitments of Pakistan such as United Nations Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES), United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCC), United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD), The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), The Ramsar Convention, The Indus Waters Treaty, and London Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter. It also highlights the existence and quality of national policies, clarity and coherence of policies governing forest use and management, implementation realities of forest laws and policies, land tenure, ownership and user rights, cross-sectoral dimension of forest policy, institutional frameworks, and clarity of mandates and functions of institutions. Chapter 3 also includes forest governance assessment. Since forestry in Pakistan is entirely a provincial subject, the forest governance assessment is presented in detail province-wise. The forest governance has multiple components, which include forest laws and policies. Under this component the existence and quality of provincial laws and policies, clarity and coherence of policies, laws and regulations

governing forest use and management, as well as implementation realities of forest laws and policies are covered. The other components of governance such as, land tenure, ownership and user rights, cross-sectoral dimension of forest policy and the institutional framework have been discussed. The assessment also incorporates national planning and decision-making system including stakeholder participation, capacity of stakeholders, as well as transparency and accountability in the sector. Performance culture, quality of decision-making, implementation, forest law enforcement, administration of land tenure and property rights have also been covered under the forest governance assessment. Chapter 4 is about the land use change trends in Pakistan and overview of land tenure, titling and natural resource rights. Chapter 5 discusses the literature review and consultation of drivers of deforestation and forest degradation in Pakistan. It elaborates the national studies conducted on the subject and the province- wise review of literature. The results of survey on drivers of deforestation and forest degradation conducted separately in each province are also presented along with literature review, which are quite close to each other. Chapter 6 presents the alternatives to implement REDD+ referred as strategy options. These options are described, and a preliminary risk assessment is presented. Chapter 7 includes the conclusion of the work done and derives from the analytical findings of the study from the previous chapters. It summarizes the findings from land use change trends, forest policies, institutions and legal frameworks in Pakistan. Chapter 8 provides a list of the literature, documents and studies consulted for this work and forms the references for this document.

1. BACKGROUND The REDD+ process was initiated by the Government of Pakistan in 2009 with consultative workshops and awareness raising. In 2010, a multi-stakeholder Steering Committee was constituted, and national and provincial focal points were declared. In addition, National Working Groups (WGs) were formed to compile and deliver information on the following: (i) Governance and Management of REDD+; (ii) Stakeholders’ Engagement and Safeguards; (iii) National Forest Monitoring System (NFMS) and Measurement Reporting and Verification (MRV); and (iv) Drivers of Deforestation and Forest Degradation. In 2015 the FCPF and the Government of Pakistan signed a grant agreement to support the Readiness Preparation Activities of the country. According to the R-PP, the grant is aimed to strengthen the capacity of the recipient to monitor deforestation and reduce forest and land use change related greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions through a socially, environmentally, and technically sound national REDD+ strategy. The project has four components 1) REDD+ policy analysis; 2) REDD+ technical preparation; 3) Readiness management; and 4) Designing ant testing of REDD+ Payment for Environmental Services scheme. During R-PP implementation process, as part of the readiness management component, provincial REDD+ Management Committees and Provincial REDD+ Grievance and Implementation Units (PGIUs) have been notified in 2016. As part of R-PP process, Indufor Oy was mandated by the Ministry of Climate Change, Government of Pakistan to develop REDD+ strategy and its implementation framework. This interim report contains literature review and stakeholder consultations that were carried out in two rounds. Furthermore, this report covers assessment of the drivers of deforestation and forest degradation including prioritization of drivers, as well as respective strategy options, and brief risk assessment. The drivers of deforestation analysis especially with spatial and temporal analysis needs reliable data. The best available data so far can be found in the Action Plan for the implementation of the National Forest Monitoring System of Pakistan (Government of Pakistan, 2015). The Ministry of Climate Change Pakistan, has mandated Arbonaut Finland and WWF Pakistan as part of R-PP process to develop National Forest Monitoring System (NFMS), MRV and Forest Reference Emission Level (FREL)/Forest Reference Level (FRL). Once the data becomes available it will be a good source for the spatial and temporal analysis of drivers of deforestation.

1.1 Historical Overview of Forests in Pakistan The dense forests, which once covered Indo-Pak region, now are covering three independent countries (Pakistan, Bangladesh and India). The changing forest composition and cover can be closely linked to the growth and change of civilizations. Over the years, as man progressed, the forest began gradually depleting. The growing human population’s dependence on the forest has been mainly responsible for this. All ancient texts have some mention of the forest and the activities that were performed in these areas. People revered forests and many religious ceremonies centred on trees and plants. When Chandra Gupta Maurya came to power around 300 BC, he realized the importance of the forests and appointed a high officer to look after the forests. Ashoka stated that wild animals and forests should be preserved and protected. He launched programmes to plant trees on a large scale. These rules continued even during the Gupta period (from year 320 to 550) (Gupta, 2001). The Muslim conquerors were mostly keen hunters and therefore had to have patches of forests, where they could go hunting. This ensured that the trees in these areas were not felled, and the forest ecology was not tampered with. The Mughals showed more interest in gardens and their development. Akbar ordered the planting of trees in various parts of his kingdom (Tucker, 2012). During the early part of the British rule, trees were felled without any thought. Large numbers of trees such as the sal, teak and sandalwood were cut for export. The history of modern Indian forestry was a process, by which the British gradually appropriated forest resources for revenue

generation. Trees could not be felled without prior Government permission. This step was taken to ensure that they were the sole users of the forest trees. But after some time, the British began to regulate and conserve. In 1800, a commissioner was appointed to consider the availability of teak in the Malabar forests. In 1806, the Madras government appointed Capt. Watson as the Commissioner of forests for organizing the production of teak and other timber suitable for the building of ships. In 1840, the British colonial administration promulgated an ordinance called Crown Land (Encroachment) Ordinance. This ordinance targeted forests in Britain's Asian colonies, and vested all forests, wastes, unoccupied and uncultivated lands to the crown. The Imperial Forest Department was established in India in 1864. British state's monopoly over Indo-Pak forests was first asserted through the Indian Forest Act of 1865. This law simply established the government’s claims over forests. The British colonial administration then enacted a further far- reaching Forest Act of 1878, thereby acquiring the sovereignty of all wastelands, which in its definition included all forests. This Act also enabled the administration to demarcate reserved and protected forests. In the former, all local rights were abolished while in the latter some existing rights were accepted as a privilege offered by the British government to the local people, which can be taken away if necessary. The first manmade forests, the irrigated plantations in India were established at ‘Changa Manga’ to produce fuel wood for the railway steam engines in 1866 and later on extended to other parts of Punjab and Sindh. The plantations were maintained for production of timber, fuelwood and other purposes. These colonial laws brought the forests under the centralized sovereignty of the state. It was believed in colonial times that the forest is a national resource, which should be utilized for the interests of the government. Like coal and gold mines, it was believed that forests belonged to the state for exploitation. Forest areas became a source of revenue. For example, teak was extensively exploited by the British colonial government for ship construction, sal and pine in India for railway sleepers and so on. Forest contracts, such as that of biripata, earned so much revenue that it was often used by the people involved in this business as leverage for political power. These contracts also created forest “Zamindar” (government recognized forest landowners). Additionally, some forests in India were earmarked by the government with the sole purpose of using them for hunting and sport for the royalty and the colonial officials (Tucker, 2012). In Bombay (now Mumbai), the conservator of forest, Gibson, tried to introduce rules prohibiting shifting cultivation and plantation of teak forests. From 1865 to 1894, forest reserves were established to secure material for imperial needs. From the late 19th century, scientific forest management systems were introduced to regenerate and harvest the forest to make it sustainable. Between 1926 and 1947 afforestation was carried out on a large scale in the Punjab and Uttar Pradesh. (Tucker, 2012). During World War I, forest resources were severely depleted as large quantities of timber were removed to build ships and railway sleepers and to pay for Britain’s war efforts. Between the two wars, great advancements in scientific management of the forests were made, with many areas undergoing regeneration and sustained harvest plans being drawn up. Sadly, emphasis was still not on protection and regeneration but on gaining maximum revenue from the forests. World War II made even greater demand on the forest than World War I had done. In 1864, the British Raj established the Imperial Forest Department; Dr. Dietrich Brandis, a German forest officer, was appointed as Inspector General of Forests. The Imperial Forestry Service was organized, subordinate to the Imperial Forest Department in 1867. Forestry was transferred to the Provincial List by the Government of India Act, 1935, and subsequent recruitment to the Imperial Forest Service was discontinued. In 1878, the first British Imperial Forest School was established in Dehradun. In 1906, it was re- established as the Imperial Forest Research Institute, under the British Imperial Forestry Service. The Indian Forest College was established in 1938; officers recruited to the Superior Forest Service by the states and provinces were trained there.

After partition of British India and independence of Pakistan, the British legacy in the shape of laws, regulations and practices, was adopted by Pakistan. Forestry remained provincial subject and forest management remained in the purview of provincial forest departments. The main thrust of managing forests for production of timber products as in the British period continued. Under previous constitutions and in the constitution of 1973, the subject of forestry (environmental pollution and ecology) was shifted to the concurrent list, so the central government played an important role, particularly at the policy level in the management of the forest. Under the 18th amendment to the 1973 constitution of Pakistan in 2010, the concurrent list was abolished, and forestry became once again a provincial subject with its entirety. The first Forest Policy (1956) of Pakistan after independence accorded high priority to forestry in national development plans and recommended that forests should be classified based on their utility and management objectives. It emphasized the need for developing management plans to ensure sustainable supplies from forests to earn revenue for the state. This policy also provided an increase in forest area by reserving 10 per cent of land and water in agricultural areas for irrigated plantations. The watershed rehabilitation drive in 1959 had positive and enduring effects on afforestation activities in the watersheds of Mangla and Tarbela dams lying in KP and AJK. Plantations initially of pine trees and later fast growing mainly Robinia and Ailanthus as well as of the fruit trees were established under the pilot project in 1966. At a later stage the project activities were extended to other parts of KP including Dir, Swat and Buner. The local people, though hesitant at the start of the project, actively participated in the activities when observed the benefits of tree planting particularly the fruit plants. The merger of provinces into “West Pakistan” and some other developments necessitated the issuance of the 1962 forest policy statement, which however, remained as draft (cabinet approved it, but the Council of Common Interests did not approve it). The draft Forest Policy of 1962 recommended that state grass and pasturelands, (Rakhs) and lands adjoining canals should be transferred to provincial forest departments for management. This policy also provided for the development of forest resources alongside agricultural practices. The 1962 draft policy also recommended that logging by private contractors should be stopped. In 1975, the provincial forest department in the KP (former NWFP) and Azad Kashmir took over timber extraction and subsequently established semi-autonomous corporations – the Forest Development Corporation (FDC) in the KP and Azad Kashmir Logging and Saw Milling Corporation (AKLASC) in AJK. Thus, commercial logging was entrusted to state-run corporations. In 1972, a National Enquiry Committee was constituted to submit its recommendations to the Council of Common Interests (CCI) that was answerable to parliament. The 1975 Forest Policy (approved by the Council of Common Interests) originated from the recommendations of the National Enquiry Committee. This policy recommended to encourage participation of local communities in forest development operations. Subsequently, Multi-purpose Cooperative Societies were formed for management of Guzara forests in Hazara in 1980 but were closed down in 1992 on the plea that the forests were over exploited. Again in 1980, a forest policy statement was made part of the 1980 National Agricultural Policy. The National Commission on Agriculture, constituted by the government in 1988, also contained specific recommendations on forestry. In the year 1989, for the first time, some stakeholders were consulted for the formulation of forest policy. This shift was supported by international donors. The draft policy was circulated to all provinces and approved by the Prime Minister at a farmers’ conference in May 1991. This policy was discussed and approved by the National Assembly in June 1991, and according to Beg (2000) was approved by the Council of Common Interests. The 1991 Forest Policy recommended integrated use of forest resources in conformity with wildlife conservation, and environmental and social needs. At least some of the decisions taken in the 1991 policy were implemented, such as the formation of owners’ cooperative societies, and that forest harvesting should be carried out entirely by public sector corporations.

In the year 1992, a catastrophic flood hit the northern part of the country and caused huge damage to livelihoods, habitations and infrastructure. The flood damage was attributed to heavy deforestation in mountainous areas by forestry cooperatives from 1980 to 1991. The government established a committee to examine the causes of deforestation, which recommended a ban on commercial logging of forests in 1993. The ban continued until December 2000 when the federal cabinet, while lifting the ban for one year, also provided guidelines to the Provincial Forest Departments (PFDs) for regulating the commercial harvesting of forests. The one-year lifting of the ban was conditional to the adoption of measures that lead to the sustainable management of forest resources and stop illegal harvesting of forests. Studies have been conducted on the impacts of the ban on the status of forests, and most of them found the ban as counterproductive (see e.g. Pak-Swiss Integrated Natural Resource Management Project, 2010 and Pellegrini, 2007). The ban continued for long years and only once or twice was lifted for the extraction of dead and windfall trees. In the 1990s, many donor-funded projects were initiated advocating participatory approaches and involved communities/farmers in tree planting on communal land and private farmlands. The concept of joint forest management got acceptance especially in parts of KP. Community participation rules were framed and Joint Forest Management Committees (JFMCs) were notified in KP. Other provinces also initiated projects and programmes in forestry sector involving local communities in plantations and protection of forests. During these years, a visible increase has been noted in forest plantations on communal and private lands, increasing the number of trees per hectare in the farmland. In the year 2001, the National Forest Policy was drafted. It sought to launch a process for eliminating the fundamental causes of the depletion of Renewable Natural Resources (RNR) through the active participation of all the concerned agencies and stakeholders, to realize the sustainable development of the resources. It was an umbrella policy providing guidelines to the Federal Government, Provincial Governments and territories for the management of their renewable natural resources. The policy was aiming at sustainable development of resources, for the maintenance and rehabilitation of its environment, and the enhancement of the sustainable livelihoods of its rural masses, especially women, children and other deprived groups. It also touched upon population planning in critical ecosystems, poverty reduction, reducing political interference in forestry, renovating and invigorating the institutions, establishing protected areas, preservation of unique forests, wildlife, range lands etc. The policy also advocated devising a participatory monitoring and evaluation systems for detecting changes in the forest cover. In the year 2010, another National Forest Policy was drafted. The aim of this policy was “to provide guidelines to the federal and provincial agencies for restoration, development, conservation and sustainable management of forests and allied natural resources to ensure sustainability of ecosystem functions, services and benefits for present and future generations of Pakistan”. The objectives of the policy were restoration and maintenance of natural forests to preserve ecological cycles, functions and services of forests, increasing productivity of forests, encouraging efficient utilization of wood, maximizing wood substitution and development of alternative renewable energy resources, enhancing carbon sequestration capacity and mitigation of climate change effects, through massive afforestation programmes, mainstreaming sustainable forest management into sectoral policies, plans and programmes, conservation of biological diversity, strengthening forestry education and research institutions, creating mass awareness and involving local communities in sustainable natural resource management, and finally meeting national obligations under multilateral environmental agreements. Both the policies of 2001 and 2010 remained draft policies only as they never got the approval of the competent forum. In the year 2015, a robust National Forest Policy was developed which has been approved by the competent forum. The goal of the policy is “expansion of national coverage of forests, protected areas, natural habitats and green areas for restoration of ecological functions and maximizing economic benefits while meeting Pakistan’s obligations to international agreements related to forests”. The key policy objectives are “enhancing public awareness on economic, social, ecological and cultural values of forests; implementing a national level mass afforestation

programme to expand and maintain forest coverage to meet international standards; controlling deforestation through regulating movement of timber and inter-provincial trade of timber; establishing and managing protected areas and networking through ecological corridors, reducing carbon footprints of energy and economic sector programmes; facilitating implementation of international conventions and agreements related to forestry, biodiversity and climate change; and promoting standardized and harmonized scientific planning of forests, research and education”.

1.2 Objectives of the Assignment and this Report The objectives of the assignment, as stated in the Terms of Reference, are to:  Develop an integrated national REDD+ strategy and its implementation framework to reduce deforestation and forest degradation in Pakistan  To develop and provide a roadmap for Pakistan to implement its REDD+ program at both the national and sub-national level  To conduct the development of the national REDD+ strategy through a participatory process that elicits and prioritizes the strategic options according to multiple criteria. The Terms of Reference note that the National REDD+ strategy will articulate the necessary policies and other measures needed to reduce forestry related emissions in Pakistan. The objective of this report is to identify the drivers of deforestation and forest degradation in Pakistan to inform the formulation of the national REDD+ Strategy and its implementation framework. This report will draw upon the assessment of land use, land-use change drivers, forest laws, policy and governance undertaken as part of the R-PP as well as other relevant work, assessments and studies. The PROFOR Framework for Assessing and Monitoring Forest Governance toolkit was used to collect data to assess forest governance and provide important diagnostics for the REDD+ strategy. The task also strives to provide information identifying knowledge gaps and capacity constraints that play a role in deforestation, forest degradation and the other REDD+ activities, to inform the proposal for training courses and curricula in the later part of the project. The deliverable will be based on the review of currently available literature on drivers of deforestation in Pakistan. The work for this deliverable did not conduct remote sensing, GIS or other spatial temporal analysis to determine the drivers of deforestation and forest degradation. It was based mostly on secondary data, and information provided through the surveys. The deliverable attempted to capture the drivers of deforestation at the provincial level, to inform the provincial REDD+ action plans that will feed into the national REDD+ strategy. Based on the drivers of deforestation identified, this report presents also the strategy options as alternatives to implement REDD+. These options were identified during the consultations with relevant stakeholders and refined in further analysis.

1.3 Guiding Principles for Implementation of the Assignment The technical approach to the development of the national REDD+ strategy for Pakistan was guided by principles and based on best practices, which integrated lessons from other countries that have developed their national REDD+ Strategies. The overall assignment was steered by the following guiding principles: National Ownership of the Process. This aims to achieve national REDD+ strategy’s objectives and targets. National ownership of the process is crucial, and requires broad stakeholder and Government buy-in to the process and output. Adopting a consultative, participatory and collaborative approach, to reach broad consensus for the national REDD+ Strategy development. This builds the analysis on systematic review of already conducted work and findings under the Pakistan’s R-PP, such as available studies on drivers of deforestation and forest degradation, various sub-national

REDD+ studies, and demonstrated activities and pilots (if any) covering different forest categories. Basing the delivery of services on international best practices and guidance. More specifically, the following guidance and best practices were used in the development of the proposed methodology, and are imbedded into this proposal while guiding implementation:

 Guidance on Stakeholder Engagement in REDD+ Readiness with a Focus on the Participation of Indigenous Peoples and Other Forest Dependent Communities (FCPF 2012)  PROFOR Framework for Assessing and Monitoring Forest Governance (2012)  FCPF’s Readiness Assessment Framework (FCPF 2013).

1.4 Outline of the Report This report is organised into seven chapters. Chapter 1 presents the introduction of the study, providing a general overview on the national context and history of forests and institutions in Pakistan. This chapter also contains objectives and purpose of this report. Chapter 2 presents the methodologies and guidance used in the preparation of the drivers of deforestation report with the respective diagnostic frameworks, which employ the Forest Carbon Partnership Facility’s (FCPF) guidance. Chapter 3 presents the forest policy, institutions and legal frameworks in Pakistan within a national context; this chapter also presents the results from the PROFOR Governance Assessment, providing new insights and sourcing new primary data on the underlying causes of deforestation within each of the provinces and territories. Chapter 4 briefly reviews land use change trends in Pakistan providing an assessment and analysis of recent historical land use trends, relevant land tenure and titling and natural resource rights. Chapter 5 presents the results of the literature review on drivers of deforestation at the national and provincial/territorial levels. Following each territorial and provincial literature review, the synthesis of the comments received during the consultation process are replicated to show the reader that there are perceived drivers of deforestation that are not studied in some cases, and these drivers should be considered in the diagnosis and formulation of the REDD+ strategy and its action plans. Chapter 6 presents the strategy options derived from the analysis of the drivers of deforestation and forest degradation and related policy, legal and institutional frameworks. The report closes with conclusions in Chapter 7. Chapter 8 provides details of references. Additionally, there are several annexes that provide further details on the results presented in the report.

2. APPROACH This section provides a reference on the approach used to develop the content of this report. It comprises three main components: a diagnostic to identify key drivers of deforestation and forest degradation through the assessment of several aspects related to land use, governance, law and policy; a literature review; and a consultation process with different stakeholders in all provinces and territories.

2.1 Diagnostic Frameworks This report relies on two main diagnostic frameworks, which are intended to understand the processes that determine land use change and the key drivers of deforestation and forest degradation. In addition, this assessment includes special attention in forest governance.

2.1.1 Readiness Assessment Framework FCPF (2013) provides guidance on how to address the drivers’ analysis. The purpose of this assessment of land use, land-use change drivers, forest law, policy and governance were to identify key drivers of deforestation and/or forest degradation, as well as activities concerning conservation, sustainable management of forests, and enhancement of forest carbon stocks. The assessment addressed how shortcomings in current land use and forest law, policy and governance contribute to the drivers of deforestation and forest degradation, and also developed potential solutions. Considering the country’s experience in addressing these shortcomings (including the issues that led to underperformance of previous programs), the assessment has contributed towards informing the country’s REDD+ strategy and identified ways to address the key deforestation and degradation drivers in a prioritized fashion. This deliverable focuses on the causal relationship between the economic, legal, policy setting of the country and associated patterns of land-use change, deforestation and forest degradation. Building a comprehensive understanding at the preparation phase sets a solid foundation for developing an effective REDD+ strategy. Assessment criteria and diagnostic questions used are: Assessment and analysis  Does the summary of the work conducted during R-PP formulation and preparation present an analysis of recent historical land-use trends (including traditional) and assessment of relevant land tenure and titling, natural resource rights, livelihoods (including traditional/customary), forest law, policy and governance issues?

Links between drivers/barriers and REDD+ activities  What evidence demonstrates that systematic links between key drivers, and/or barriers to forest carbon stock enhancement activities (as appropriate), and REDD+ activities were identified?

Action plans to address natural resource rights, land tenure, governance  Do action plans to make progress in the short, medium and long-term towards addressing relevant, land-use, land tenure and titling, natural resource rights, livelihoods, and governance issues in priority regions related to specific REDD+ programs, outline further steps and identify required resources?

Implications for forest law and policy  Does the assessment identify implications for forest or other relevant law and policy in the long-term?

The assignment draws upon the assessment of land use, land-use change drivers, forest law, policy and governance undertaken as part of the R-PP as well as other relevant work, assessments and studies. The conclusion presented in Chapter 4 of this report frames its

responses based on the Readiness Assessment Framework’s assessment criteria and diagnostic questions.

2.1.2 PROFOR Framework for Assessing and Monitoring Forest Governance Governance is not a term with a broadly accepted meaning, however the general perception includes the norms, processes, instruments, people, and organizations that control how people interact around certain topic (Kishor and Rosenbaum, 2012). Forest governance is a key element for ensuring sustainability in the forest sector, thus, there is importance in assessing it correctly. The Program on Forests (PROFOR) is multi-donor partnership, hosted by the World Bank that provides knowledge, tools and in-depth analysis to facilitate forests contribution to poverty reduction, sustainable economic development and the protection of global and local environmental services (PROFOR, 2017). The Forest Law Enforcement and Governance (FLEG) partnership was earlier another multi-donor trust fund established in 2004 to support regional FLEG initiatives and analytical work. The FLEG partnership merged with PROFOR in 2009. Since then, PROFOR has developed a tool to assess forest governance in order to identify its current status in relation to the target of good forest governance to achieving positive and sustained development outcomes in the sector, including efficiency of resource management, increased contribution to economic growth and to environmental services, and equitable distribution of benefits (Kishor and Rosenbaum, 2012). The PROFOR Framework provides a means to view and analyse the institutions and interactions within and outside the forest sector that together create the conditions and possibilities for the governance of a country’s forests and forest resources. The Framework uses the term institutions to refer to customs behaviour patterns and rules that define:  Who has access to forests and forest resources and shares in their benefits and flows  Who has rights and duties related to forests  Who participates in the key decisions on forests. The framework builds on the understanding that governance is both the context and the product of the interaction of a range of actors and stakeholders with diverse interests. The Framework is based upon generally accepted pillars and principles of good governance, replicated below.

Figure 1 Pillars and Principles of Governance

The diagnosis is undertaken to analyse and obtain broad understanding of the governance system applicable to forests in Pakistan. The diagnosis identifies the system’s characteristics, general patterns and issues likely to be of significance and in need of attention, monitoring and intervention, for the implementation of the national REDD+ Strategy.

2.1.3 Forest Law Enforcement, Governance and Trade, FLEGT This section is based on EU FLEGT (2017). FLEGT stands for Forest Law Enforcement, Governance and Trade. The European Union's (EU) FLEGT Action Plan was established in 2003. It aims to reduce illegal logging by strengthening sustainable and legal forest management, improving governance and promoting trade in legally produced timber. The Action Plan sets out seven measures that together prevent the importation of illegal timber into the EU, improve the supply of legal timber, and increase demand for timber from responsibly managed forests: 1. Supporting timber-producing countries 2. Promoting trade in legal timber 3. Promoting environmentally and socially beneficial public procurement policies 4. Supporting private-sector initiatives 5. Financing and investment safeguards 6. Using existing or new legislation 7. Addressing the problem of conflict timber. The EU provides financial and technical support to countries that want to address illegal logging. This support helps countries to build timber legality assurance systems, promote transparency, build the capacity of governments, civil society and businesses, and reform policies. EU support promotes fair, equitable solutions to illegal logging that do not harm people living in poverty. Pakistan has not benefitted from FLEGT project support. Of the neighbouring countries, India has three projects and Nepal two projects. An important element of the trade-related measures set out in the Action Plan is to engage major timber consumers and explore ways of working together towards a comprehensive multilateral framework to restrict illegally harvested timber from entering their markets. Co-operation

between the EU, the United States and Japan is key as they account for a large part of the world market for timber and timber products. The EU is also making efforts to engage other major markets for timber and timber products, particularly China, in the expansion of the global FLEGT initiative. The Action Plan includes legislation to control imports of illegally harvested timber into the EU: The EU Timber Regulation has been in place since 2013. Voluntary Partnership Agreements (VPAs) between the EU and timber-producing countries also promote trade in legal timber products and help to close the EU market to illegal products. A VPA improves forest governance and, ultimately, guarantees that timber and timber products exported to the EU are legal. Each VPA defines 'legal timber' according to the laws and regulations of the timber-producing country. Negotiating the Agreement provides an opportunity for private sector and civil society to get involved in developing national legality standards. Each VPA sets out a strong timber legality assurance system that can verify that a consignment of timber is legal and merits the award of a 'FLEGT licence'. FLEGT-licensed timber will be free to enter the EU market as it will automatically meet the requirements of the EU Timber Regulation. A VPA can help a timber-producing country achieve its development objectives by securing employment, increasing government revenues, strengthening the rule of law and safeguarding the rights of forest peoples.

2.2 Literature Review

Literature at regional, national, provincial and local levels was reviewed to understand the direct and indirect drivers of deforestation, forest degradation and barriers to natural regeneration. As a general assessment, there is a wide variety of literature on environmental issues in Pakistan, much of which is presented in peer reviewed journals and international publications. An extensive reference list demonstrates the extent of research at the end of this report. Therefore, there is a good level of research and studies that meet minimum quality standards for research on forests and the environment in Pakistan and the surrounding region. The volume of literature is also quite substantial with quality publications and research attained dating back to the 1970s through to the present day.

The presence of well-planned and structured research is prevalent at the provincial level. However, there is a divergence of volume and variety of research available. There are limitations of using such a wide breadth of research in the case of understanding the direct and indirect drivers of deforestation in Pakistan. The first issue is that neither Pakistan nor any of its provinces/territories have agreed definitions and parameters for deforestation, forest degradation for forest cover, and the role of tree farming/agro-forest systems and plantations in this context is still to be clarified as Pakistan’s National Forest Monitoring System is being developed for the first time under FCPF’s R-PP grant. This has implications for much of the research reviewed, which uses the term “deforestation” to often describe forest degradation and vice versa. Forest definition was established in September 2016. Furthermore, there were no national standards (including parameters) for land use sub-types. For example, there was no national standard that distinguishes dense coniferous forest from sparse coniferous forest. Such a definition would apply, for example, in a set of canopy threshold parameters. As a result, various GIS and remote sensing studies aiming to assess the changes in forest cover and land use apply their own parameters and classification assumptions. When the studies apply their own classification assumptions, the results will be different, even when studies use robust methodologies. This has overall unintentional consequences for the results in reporting different numbers for forest and land use areas in Pakistan. The absence of a national forest inventory applying systematic forest data collection methods across all provinces means that the only research available is GIS, remote sensing or localized inventory data. However, the thresholds have recently been defined while adopting (Government of Pakistan, 2017) a national forest definition (A minimum area of land of 0.5 ha with tree crown cover of more than 10% comprising trees with the potential to reach a minimum height of 2 meters) through an iterative and consultative process.

Several drivers of deforestation and forest degradation have been extensively studied over the decades, usually relating to grazing of livestock and fuelwood consumption (see, for example, Maanics International, 2004). These studies also apply their own assumptions, usually using well planned and founded research methods, but are localized in reporting results. This creates the same challenge as the different assumptions are used for forest and land use classes. That is, there is data and quality research, but the results are usually not comparable because a different range of assumptions is applied. The Readiness Assessment Framework under FCPF recommends the application of assessment criteria and diagnostic questions to ensure that the national REDD+ Strategy is designed to coherently address the drivers of deforestation and forest degradation. Part of this process is to prioritize the key direct and indirect drivers to be addressed by the programs and policies in the national REDD+ Strategy. The lack of consistent and comparable data creates a challenge for the development of the national REDD+ Strategy. While the study will use the best available data to inform the development of programs and policies for the national REDD+ Strategy, the role of consultations and the necessity of the PROFOR Governance Monitoring and Assessment Framework will also play a key role, in addition to the literature review, to inform the development of the national REDD+ Strategy.

2.3 Consultations As part of the process to develop the drivers of deforestation and forest degradation study, a comprehensive consultation process was developed in a three-stage process, based on which a report has been produced (Mid-term Report). The consultations report complements this report by presenting the results from national and provincial surveys, consultations on the drivers of deforestation with 26 communities, as well as consultations held with diverse stakeholders, Government departments, CSOs and academia. Stakeholder maps are also developed which can be used in developing REDD+ awareness and outreach plans, engage stakeholders strategically, and formulate programmes of action to gain further support for REDD+ at the provincial and local levels. The consultation process used focus group discussions, key informant interviews and questionnaires to understand the drivers of deforestations and forest degradation. Within communities, both men and women groups were consulted, while within stakeholders, efforts were made to consult with the important stakeholders at national, provincial and few districts as well. These included forest department officers, relevant government departments, private sector actors, CSOs and community representatives. During the second round, apart from other stakeholder, consultation meetings were also held with the Provincial REDD+ Management Committees in provinces1. REDD+ Management Committees are provincial level highest management committees responsible for REDD+ affairs in their respective provinces. It was found during consultations that generally all provincial/territorial forest departments concluded that issues regarding forests include internal and external elements. Externally, these include low awareness regarding forests and particularly REDD within communities, and stakeholders, less effective inter-departmental coordination, and low priority of forests in public and private sector initiatives. Internally, policy frameworks need to be updated in view of the changed context, building capacity of forest officers on REDD+, improving forest management practices in each type of forests as well as improving role of users, owners and right holders in the management systems. Common REDD+ actions identified, linked to the drivers, included community oriented forestry with a focus on alternative livelihoods, private sector engagement training, and then a program to support engagement and participation of the private sector actors in REDD+. Ecotourism, improving management practices, expanding protected areas, and restoring mangroves were identified as important REDD+ options. The China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (C-PEC) was

1 Except Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, where Management Committee meeting could not be held on the identified date. The meeting is planned for a date, which will fall after submission date of this report.

identified as an option that could also present some good opportunities to greening infrastructures and supporting REDD+. The Consultations report is in no way exhaustive compilation of the consultations that will take place during the formulation of the national REDD+ Strategy. Consultations and information sharing sessions are expected to take place during the national REDD+ Strategy formulation, and up until the end of the project.

3. FOREST POLICY, INSTITUTIONS AND LEGAL FRAMEWORKS IN PAKISTAN The foundations for the REDD+ Strategy are the current policies and legal and institutional frameworks. This chapter presents an overview of the current policies and laws. The chapter also presents the results of the forest governance assessment.

3.1 Forest Policies and Laws Pakistan has an extensive set of regulations regarding natural resources, land tenure and institutional arrangements that are relevant to REDD+, and this section presents the most relevant ones. Every Province has a separate set of laws, which are mainly inherited from the British era. These are discussed in detail in the concerned provincial governance assessment reports annexed to this report.

3.1.1 International Commitments Widely adopted treaties present the closest option available to international norms for resource management and environmental protection. Pakistan has made political commitment to address sustainability issues through the ratification of international Treaties on the environment and climate change that have intended positive implications for its forests, ecosystems and land management. Pakistan has either signed or ratified the United Nations Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species, United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (including its decisions and agreements), United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification, the Convention for Biological Diversity and the Ramsar Convention. United Nations Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species Pakistan joined United Nations Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) on 4 April 1976, and is a Party to the Treaty. Pakistan’s status is accession. To support the implementation of the CITES agreement, Government of Pakistan enacted the Pakistan Trade Control of Wild Flora and Fauna Act 2012. The Act is national in scope and is an exclusive law for the effective enforcement of CITES provisions. In addition, several provinces have recently amended their wildlife legislation to support CITES provisions including Balochistan’s Wildlife Protection, Preservation, Conservation and Management Act (Balochistan 2014) and the Wildlife Legislation of Sindh Province was amended to declare all freshwater turtle species of Pakistan as protected, See Government of Pakistan/CITES (2014). United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) entered into force 21 March 1994, in accordance with Article 23 of the Convention. It functions as a framework for international cooperation to combat climate change by limiting average global temperature increases and the resulting climate change, and coping with impacts that were to the time perceived as inevitable. In addition to the Convention, there are two additional Treaty Agreements under the UNFCCC: the Kyoto Protocol and the Paris Agreement. Pakistan became a signatory to the UNFCCC on 13 June 1992. On 1 June 1994, Pakistan ratified the Convention and it came into force on 30 August 1994. Pakistan acceded to the Kyoto Protocol in January 2005, which then came into force on 11 April 2005. The Paris Agreement entered into force on November 2016. Pakistan signed the Paris Agreement in April 2016, and ratified the Paris Agreement on the 10 November 2016 by which it came into force on10 December 2016. Pakistan submitted its Intended Nationally Determined Contribution (INDC) to the UNFCCC in November 2016. United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification The United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD) is the sole legally binding international agreement linking environment and development to sustainable land management. The Convention addresses specifically the arid, semi-arid and dry sub-humid areas, known as the drylands, where some of the most vulnerable ecosystems and peoples can be found. Pakistan signed onto the UNCCD on 15 October 1994. Pakistan ratified the UNCCD on 24 February 1997, and became effective on 25 May 1997.

Convention on Biological Diversity The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) entered into force on 29 December 1993. It has 3 main objectives; firstly, the conservation of biological diversity; secondly, the sustainable use of the components of biological diversity; and finally, the fair and equitable sharing of the benefits arising out of the utilization of genetic resources. Pakistan ratified CBD on 24 October 1994. The Cartagena Protocol on Bio-safety to the Convention on Biological Diversity is an international agreement which aims to ensure the safe handling, transport and use of Living Modified Organisms (LMOs) resulting from modern biotechnology that may have adverse effects on biological diversity, taking also into account risks to human health. It was adopted on 29 January 2000 and entered into force on 11 September 2003. Pakistan ratified the Cartagena Protocol on 31 May 2009. The Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits Arising from their Utilization is an international agreement, which aims at sharing the benefits arising from the utilization of genetic resources in a fair and equitable way. It entered into force on 12 October 2014. Pakistan acceded the Nagoya Protocol on Access and Benefit- sharing on 21 February 2016. Ramsar Convention The Convention on Wetlands, called the Ramsar Convention, is an intergovernmental treaty that provides the framework for national action and international cooperation for the conservation and wise use of wetlands and their resources. The convention entered into force in Pakistan on 23 November 1976. Pakistan currently has 19 sites designated as Wetlands of International Importance (Ramsar Sites), with a surface area of 1,343,807 hectares. Indus Waters Treaty The Indus Waters Treaty is a regional bilateral water-distribution treaty between India and Pakistan brokered by the World Bank and signed in 1960. The Treaty contains provisions on who has control of the rivers the Beas, the Ravi and the Sutlej (India), and the Indus, Chenab and Jhelum (Pakistan). The Treaty contains provisions on how the waters are shared. This Treaty has implications for the national REDD+ Strategy, should water ecosystem services be considered. The Treaty resulted from concerns originating from Pakistan on the upstream status of Pakistan for the rivers in the Indus Basin, which can pose risks and potentially cause drought and famine in Pakistan, in the case of war, for example. So far, no water wars have resulted, and disagreements and disputes have been settled via legal procedures provided for within the framework of the Treaty. While it is considered as successful, there are growing number of experts that note the need to update certain technical specifications and expand the scope of the Treaty to include climate change, see Strategic Foresight Group (2011). London Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter London Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter is an agreement to control pollution of the sea by dumping and to encourage regional agreements supplementary to the Convention. Pakistan is a signatory and ratified the Convention on 9th March 1995.

3.1.2 Constitutional Background of Forest Laws and Policies in Pakistan and the Challenges Created Thereby Provinces of Pakistan Prior to the Eighteenth Amendment to the Constitution of Pakistan, 1973 (“Constitution”) (affected through the Constitution (Eighteenth Amendment) Act 2010) the Fourth Schedule to the Constitution consisted of the Federal Legislative List and the Concurrent Legislative List. The Parliament (also known as the “Majlis-e-Shoora”) had the exclusive power to make the laws in relation to all matters enumerated in the Federal Legislative List whereas both the Parliament

and the Provincial Assemblies had the power to legislate on the matters enumerated in the Concurrent Legislative List. Any matter not listed in the Fourth Schedule in either of the lists above named, therefore a “residuary matter”, was within the exclusive legislative domain of the Provincial Assemblies to the extent of their provincial territories. Through the Eighteenth Amendment, designed to wrest power from the Federation and devolve greater autonomy and power to the provinces of Pakistan, inter alia, the Concurrent Legislative List was deleted altogether. Thereafter the Parliament retains the exclusive power to make laws in relation to all matters enumerated in the Federal Legislative List whereas all other matters not enumerated in the Fourth Schedule, which includes the entries under the erstwhile Concurrent Legislative List, are now amenable to legislation by the Provincial Assemblies exclusively. Entry 24 on the erstwhile Concurrent Legislative List comprised “Environmental pollution and ecology.” but there was no explicit entry in relation to forests in either the Federal Legislative List or the Concurrent Legislative List. As a result, where prior to the Eighteenth Amendment both the Parliament and the Provincial Assemblies may arguably have been competent under the Constitution to legislate on the subject of forests and matters ancillary to that subject (presuming such a matter could be said to fall under the ambit of Entry 24 of the Constitution) these are now firmly within the exclusive legislative domain of the Provincial Assemblies post the Eighteenth Amendment. The Parliament is not competent to legislate in respect of this subject. Furthermore, the deletion of the Concurrent Legislative List from the Constitution has also restricted the extent of the executive authority of the Federation whilst expanding that of the Provinces. Article 97 of the Constitution delineates the executive authority of the Federation as extending only to the matters with respect to which Parliament has power to make laws (essentially, the Federal Legislative List) and concomitantly Article 137 of the Constitution provides that the executive authority of the Province shall extend to the matters with respect to which the Provincial Assembly has power to make laws (since the Eighteenth Amendment, all subjects not listed in the Federal Legislative List). As a result, whereas prior to the Eighteenth Amendment, the executive authority of the Federation also extended to subjects on the Concurrent Legislative List, including the subject of forests and related matters as far as these could be encompassed in Entry 24 on that list, this is not the case anymore and the executive authority in this respect now rests squarely with the Provinces. The upshot of the above constitutional background is that the subject of forests and all matters related thereto, including the implementation in Pakistan of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (“UNFCCC”) and the Cancun Agreement on Reduction of Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (“REDD+”) thereunder, are within the exclusive purview of the Provinces, both within the legislative and executive policy space. The role of the Parliament and the Federal Government in relation to this subject, at least in a direct sense, has been reduced to legislation and policy making only to the extent of such areas in the Federation as are not included in any province i.e. the Islamabad Capital Territory and the Federally Administered Tribal Areas) as enshrined in Clause (d) of Article 142 of the Constitution (at least until the FATA are merged with the province of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa as proposed by the cabinet of the current Federal Government earlier this year). Specifically, in the context of the UNFCCC and REDD+, the Eighteenth Amendment creates an unfortunate dichotomy by including “…the implementing of treaties and agreements with other countries….” within the Federal Legislative List. The ironic outcome is that the Federal Government is responsible for the ratification and implementation of treaties in general but when it comes to a treaty in relation to a subject that is not listed in the Federal Legislative List itself, such as “Environmental pollution and ecology’’ and forestry and related matters, the Federal Government is unable to enforce implementation within the Provinces. The Provinces and the Provincial Assemblies alone can implement the requirements of the REDD+ program within their own territorial limits after the Eighteenth Amendment through effective legislation and policy making. As such, while the Federal Government may promulgate a national policy such as the National Forest Policy 2015 or the National Climate Change Policy 2012, both of which lay down an effective policy framework necessary for the implementation of REDD+ across Pakistan, these policies, particularly in relation to the subject of forests and related matters, do not bind

the Provinces in light of the Constitution. The Provinces are free to promulgate their own policies on the subject, which raises the risk of an overall incoherent implementation framework because of a lack of national and inter-provincial coordination on this subject. From an institutional capacity point of view this is a glaring concern for the implementation of REDD+ in Pakistan that needs to be addressed. Azad Jammu and Kashmir The territory within Azad Jammu and Kashmir (“AJK”) is still not considered a part of Pakistan Territory as defined in Article 1 of the Constitution, however Pakistan has nevertheless acted as a sovereign here, exercising an effective and continuous display of state authority generally recognized under international law. Nonetheless, Pakistan recognizes that the future status of the State of Azad Jammu and Kashmir is yet to be determined in accordance with the freely expressed will of the people of the State through a plebiscite under the auspices of the United Nations as envisaged in the United Nation Commission on India and Pakistan (UNCIP) Resolutions. As such, the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution Act, 1974 (“Interim Constitution”) was presented by the Government of Pakistan to the President of AJK for introduction and passage before the Legislative Assembly of AJK and it was passed in due course. The salient features of the Interim Constitution for the current discussion are that it creates two bodies with legislative powers: the AJK Council (comprising the Prime Minister of Pakistan, the President of AJK, five members nominated by the Prime Minister from amongst the Federal Ministers and members of Parliament, the Prime Minister of AJK and six members to be appointed by the AJK Legislative Assembly) and the Legislative Assembly of a total of forty one members directly elected and eight members elected by the directly elected members against reserved seats. The Council has the exclusive power to make laws in respect of the subjects provided in the Third Schedule to the Interim Constitution (“Council Legislative List”) whereas the Legislative Assembly has the exclusive power to make laws in respect of all subjects not included Council Legislative List. However, neither the Council nor the Legislative Assembly has the right to make any laws in respect of certain subjects including the responsibilities of the Government of Pakistan under the UNCIP Resolutions, the defence and security of AJK, the current coin or issue of any bills or the external affairs of AJK. In respect of these reserved subjects, the Government of Pakistan reserves the right under Article 56 of the Interim Constitution to take any such action, as it may consider necessary or expedient for the effective discharge of these responsibilities and nothing in the Interim Constitution may derogate from these responsibilities. The subject of “Forests”, or indeed related subjects such as environment and ecology which may be interpreted to include forests within their legislative field, are not to be found on the Council Legislative List therefore the Legislative Assembly now retains the exclusive domain to make laws with regard to forests in AJK. Under Article 12 of the Interim Constitution, the executive authority of AJK shall be exercised in the name of the President by the Government, consisting of the Prime Minister and the Ministers, which shall act through the Prime Minister who shall be the Chief Executive of AJK. However, under Article 19, the executive authority of the Government shall extend only to such matters with respect to which the Legislative Assembly has the power to make laws, which as above elaborated, includes the subject of Forests. Under Article 21(7) of the Interim Constitution, on the other hand, the Council has the executive authority in respect of all matters in respect of which it has the power to make laws. As apparent from the above discussion, the forests of AJK are within the exclusive legislative and executive domain of the Legislative Assembly. As such, any REDD+ related policy and legislative framework creation and/or amendments would require efforts directed at lobbying the Government of AJK as opposed to the Government of Pakistan or the AJK Council (in distinction to Gilgit-Baltistan where forests are within the legislative and executive competence of the Gilgit- Baltistan Council headed by the Prime Minister of Pakistan). Since AJK is free to promulgate its own policies on the subject, this raises the same concerns as with the provinces in relation to

the coherence of the overall framework because of a lack of coordination between the Federation of Pakistan and AJK. Gilgit-Baltistan The territory that now comprises Gilgit-Baltistan was once part of the princely state of Jammu and Kashmir. In 1947, after a successful revolution against the decision of the then Hindu Maharaja of Kashmir to accede to India after Independence, this despite the presence of a Muslim majority local population, the Revolutionary Council requested the Government of Pakistan to take over the administration of the Northern Areas (as Gilgit-Baltistan was then called). Like Azad Jammu and Kashmir, the status of Gilgit-Baltistan was subject to resolutions adopted by the UN Security Council and the UN Commission for India and Pakistan. In 1949, the Government of Pakistan, the Azad Kashmir Government and the All Jammu and Kashmir Muslim Conference signed an agreement granting administrative control of the Northern Areas to Pakistan. The territory that is today included in the Northern Areas acceded unconditionally to Pakistan after Independence with one exception: in 1951, the tribal areas that now form part of the Diamer District signed an agreement with the Government of Pakistan, retaining certain rights of self-governance. In 1999, the Supreme Court of Pakistan held in the case titled Al-Jehad Trust and 9 others v. Federation of Pakistan and 3 others (1999 SCMR 1379) (“Al-Jehad Trust”) that the Government of Pakistan exercises de jure as well as de facto administrative control over the Northern Areas and residents of the Northern Areas enjoy full citizenship of Pakistan, and are entitled to the safeguards provided by the fundamental rights enshrined in the Constitution of Pakistan 1973 (“Constitution”). The upshot is that while Gilgit-Baltistan is still not considered a part of Pakistan Territory as defined in Article 1 of the Constitution, Pakistan has nevertheless acted as a sovereign in the Northern Areas, exercising an effective and continuous display of state authority generally recognized under international law. Nevertheless, the Constitution is not applicable to Gilgit- Baltistan in its entirety (except as its effect is extended to Gilgit-Baltistan by the Al-Jehad Trust decision). Previously under the Federal Rules of Business 1973 (Rule 3(3) read with Schedule II, Item 19(3)), the then Ministry of Kashmir Affairs and Northern Areas (“KANA”) (which has now been re-named the Ministry of Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan) was vested with the power to make laws for the for the Northern Areas as well as the power to extend any federal or provincial law to the Northern Areas. Furthermore, under the Northern Areas Council Legal Framework Order, 1994, the Northern Areas Legislative Council had limited powers to legislate in 49 prescribed areas. During this time, through various orders and notifications, the Government of Pakistan has extended the Forest Act 1927 to all of the Northern Areas. In 2009, the Government of Pakistan notified the Gilgit-Baltistan (Empowerment and Self Governance) Order, 2009 (“Order”) with the express purpose of providing greater political empowerment and better governance to the people of Gilgit-Baltistan, and for all intents and purposes to act as the interim constitution of the Gilgit-Baltistan. The salient features of the Order for the current discussion are that it creates two bodies with legislative powers: the Gilgit-Baltistan Council (comprising the Prime Minister of Pakistan, the Governor of Gilgit-Baltistan, six members nominated by the Prime Minister from amongst the Federal Ministers and members of Parliament, the Chief Minister of Gilgit-Baltistan and six members to be appointed by the Gilgit-Baltistan Legislative Assembly) and the Legislative Assembly of a total of thirty three elected and reserved seat members. The Council has the exclusive power to make laws in respect of the subjects provided in the Third Schedule to the Order (“Council Legislative List”) whereas the Legislative Assembly has the exclusive power to make laws in respect of subjects included in the Fourth Schedule to the Order (“Assembly Legislative List”). The Government of Pakistan retains the residuary but exclusive power to make laws in respect any matters not enumerated in either of the legislative lists of the Order. The subject of “Forest” is specifically included in the Council Legislative List at entry no. 40 and therefore the Council now retains the exclusive domain to make laws with regard to forests in

Gilgit-Baltistan. Furthermore, the Council has the power to adopt any amendment in the existing laws of Pakistan or any new law in force in Pakistan. Furthermore, under Article 84 of the Order, all laws which, immediately before the commencement of the Order, were in force in Gilgit- Baltistan shall continue to be in force until altered, repealed or amended by an Act of the appropriate authority. In the case of forests, this means that the Forest Act 1927 continues to apply to Gilgit-Baltistan and shall so continue until repealed or amended by the Council. Under Article 22 of the Order, the executive authority of Gilgit-Baltistan shall be exercised in the name of the Governor by the Government through the Cabinet consisting of the Chief Minister and the Ministers, which shall act through the Chief Minister who shall be the Chief Executive. However, the executive authority of the Government shall extend only to such matters with respect to which the Assembly has the power to make laws. Under Article 33(12) of the Order, on the other hand, the Council has the executive authority in respect of all matters in respect of which it has the power to make laws (which of course includes forests). The forests of Gilgit-Baltistan are within the exclusive legislative and executive domain of the Council with the Prime Minister of Pakistan as its Chairman who may exercise the executive authority vested in the Council directly or through the Secretariat of the Council of which the Federal Minister for Kashmir Affairs and Gilgit-Baltistan Division is in-charge. As such, the National Forest Policy 2015 or the National Climate Change Policy 2012, both of which lay down an effective policy framework necessary for the implementation of REDD+ across Pakistan can effectively be used as a platform for the implementation of REDD+ in Gilgit-Baltistan which is not possible in the case of the provinces of Pakistan, as above explained. However, for Gilgit- Baltistan these policies may be made applicable by the issuance of a notification to that effect from the Gilgit-Baltistan Council (the Chairman of which is also the Chief Executive of the Federation). From an institutional capacity point of view this is good for the effective implementation of the REDD+ framework insofar as Gilgit-Baltistan is concerned. FATA Under Sub-Article 2 of Article 1 of the Constitution the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (“FATA”), which comprise seven Agencies and five Frontier regions2, are a part of the territories of Pakistan. The FATA are regulated under the Frontier Crimes Regulation, 1901 (“FCR”) devised as a special law for these tribal areas by the British Colonial Government and amended from time to time since then. The manner of administration of the FATA is provided in Article 247 of the Constitution, according to which the executive authority of the Federation shall extend to FATA. Under the same Article3 the President may give such directions to the Governor of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa relating to the FATA as he may deem necessary and the Governor shall comply with such directions. Most importantly, under Sub-Article 3 of Article 247, no act of Majlis-e- Shoora (Parliament) shall apply to any part of FATA unless the President so directs and in giving such a direction the President may further direct that such a law shall have effect subject to such exceptions and modifications as may be specified in the direction. As such, although the FATA is under the administrative control of the Federation, only laws promulgated by the Parliament are effective, as those are extended to the FATA at the direction of the President. The primary legislation in respect of forests, as far as the rest of Pakistan is concerned, i.e. the Forest Act 1927 has not yet been extended to the FATA nor has any other act in respect of this matter been passed by Parliament for FATA specifically and directed to be extended by the President. Therefore, there is no specific legal framework to regulate forest related matters in FATA at the moment. However, forest related offences which may otherwise be offences under the Pakistan Penal Code, such as theft for example, may be tried under the FCR which of course is not adequate to meet the objectives of REDD+ in Pakistan. Therefore, the effective management and regulation of forest issues in the FATA (where all forest land is privately owned) especially in the context of REDD+ requires a suitable act to be passed by the Parliament and extended to the FATA by the President under Article 247 of the Constitution.

2 FCR- A bad law nobody can defend – Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (Peshawar Chapter) – July 2005 3 Sub-Article 2 of Article 247 of the Constitution

3.1.3 Land Tenure and Governance within the Legal Framework The primary legal regime determining the legal categories of forest land in Pakistan and their governance is the Forest Act 1927 (“Forest Act”). The Forest Act is applicable in three of the four provinces, as well as having been extended to Gilgit-Baltistan. The provinces have made periodical amendments to the Forest Act, with Punjab having made the most significant overhaul of the provisions of the almost century old law, however the basic legal regime remains intact. Balochistan is unique in respect of the fact that the Forest Act is applicable there, however, part of the forests is still regulated by the provisions of the Balochistan Forest Regulation, 1890 (“Balochistan Forest Regulation”) which is valid despite the later promulgation of the Forest Act. The Forest Act was also applicable to Khyber Pakhtunkhwa until the promulgation of the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Forest Ordinance 2002 (“Forest Ordinance”). The Forest Ordinance, inter alia, consolidated all forest related laws applicable in the province of KP and repealed the Forest Act in its application to KP. However, the Ordinance also co-opts the major legal categories of forests laid out in the Forest Act, as detailed below. The primary legislation with respect to AJK is the Jammu and Kashmir Forest [Regulation No.2 of 1936] (“AJK Forest Regulation”). Classification of Forests The forests in Pakistan may be divided into two broad categories of Government-owned forests and privately-owned forests. The legal framework of each province and the other territories provides for the further classification of Government owned forests, as notified by the relevant Government, with varying degrees of private rights and activity allowed within each such class of forest. The major classes of government owned forests are as follow: (i) Reserved Forest: All provinces and Gilgit-Baltistan (ii) State Forest: Balochistan (iii) Demarcated Forest: Azad Jammu and Kashmir (iv) Protected Forest: All provinces and Gilgit-Baltistan (v) Undemarcated Forest: Azad Jammu and Kashmir (vi) Village Forest: All provinces, Azad Jammu and Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan (vii) Community Forest: Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (viii) Unclassed Forest: Punjab.

In addition, the relevant laws for each province and the territories, and the rules and regulations made thereunder, also provide for the regulation and management of certain classes of private forests. The major classes of privately owned forests that are either managed directly by the Forest Department or otherwise regulated by the relevant Government are as follow: (i) Guzara Forests: Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (ii) Protected Wasteland: Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (iii) Community Forests: Azad Jammu and Kashmir (iv) Section 36 Forests: Punjab, Sindh, Balochistan and Gilgit-Baltistan (v) Section 38 Forests: All provinces and Gilgit-Baltistan (vi) Chos Act Areas: Punjab.

Table 1 Legal Classification of Forests in Pakistan Legal Province (or territory) Classification Legal Provision Category where operative All provinces and Gilgit‐ Section 3 of the Forest Act; Section 4 of Reserved Forest Baltistan the Forest Ordinance Section 3 of the Balochistan Forest State Forest Balochistan Government Regulation Forest Demarcated AJK Section 3 of the AJK Forest Regulation Forest All provinces and Gilgit‐ Section 29 of the Forest Act; Section 29 of Protected Forest Baltistan the Forest Ordinance

Legal Province (or territory) Classification Legal Provision Category where operative Undemarcated AJK Section 10 of the AJK Forest Regulation Forest Section 28 of the Forest Act; Section 28 of All provinces, AJK and Village Forest the Forest Ordinance; Section 14‐A of the Gilgit‐Baltistan AJK Forest Regulation Community KP Section 101 of the Forest Ordinance Forest Unclassed Forest Punjab Section 28‐A of the Forest Act Punjab Guzara Rules; Section 35 of the Guzara Forest Punjab and KP Forest Ordinance Protected KP Section 36 and 37 of the Forest Ordinance Wasteland Community Private AJK Section 13‐A of the AJK Forest Regulation Forest Forest Punjab, Sindh, Balochistan Section 36 Forest Section 36 of the Forest Act and Gilgit‐Baltistan All provinces and Gilgit‐ Section 38 of the Forest Act; Section 38 of Section 38 Forest Baltistan the Forest Ordinance Chos Act Areas Punjab Punjab Land Preservation (Chos) Act 1900

GOVERNMENT OWNED FORESTS Reserved Forest, State Forest and Demarcated Forest This is the strictest category of forests from the perspective of governance and the exclusion of rights of private persons. As can be seen below these forests generally exclude all private rights unless these have been specifically allowed by the Forest Officer in writing or are otherwise sanctioned by the Government through a contract, concession or under rules promulgated by the Government. Punjab, Sindh, Balochistan and Gilgit-Baltistan Under Section 3 of the Forest Act, the Government of a province may constitute as a reserved forest any forest land or waste-land, which is the property of the Government, or over which the Government has proprietary rights, or to the whole or a part of the produce of which the Government is entitled. In accordance with Sub-section 1 of Section 26 of the Forest Act, unless done in exercise of any right under the Forest Act, rules, grant or contract made by the Government or with the written permission of the forest officer4, broadly the following acts are prohibited offences in a reserved forest: a) making fresh clearing b) setting fire to the reserved forest or kindling or burning fire, which endangers the forest or setting on fire any plant or tree c) kindling, keeping or carrying any fire except during such season as the forest officer may notify in this behalf d) trespassing, or pasturing cattle, or permitting cattle to trespass e) causing damage by negligently felling a tree, cutting or dragging any timber f) felling, girdling, lopping, tapping or burning a tree or stripping off a bark or leaves of a tree or otherwise damaging the same g) quarrying stone, mines, minerals, burning lime or charcoal, or collecting and removing any forest produce h) clearing or breaking up any land for cultivation or any other purpose i) contravening any rules relating to hunting, shooting, fishing, or setting up traps or snares.

4 Sub-Section 2 of Section 26of the Forest Act 1927 and Sub-Section 5 of Section 26 of the Forest Act 1927 (with Amendments for Punjab)

In the province of Punjab, the following acts were also added to the list of punishable offences under Sub-section 1 of Section 26 of the Act through an amendment under the Forest (Amendment) Act 2010: a) cutting or damaging any plant b) constructing any building, structure, hutment or cattle pen c) encroaching upon the forest land d) causing damage or tampering with barbed wire, or fence erected in or around the forest e) removing or causing damage to the soil, water, natural vegetation (shrubs, herbs and plants), fish, wild animals and wild birds f) damaging any structure such as water channel, check dam, embankment, reservoir or pond g) changing the land use for the purpose other than development, preservation or conservation of the forest or park h) installing a saw mill, charcoal kiln or establishing a timber or firewood depot or operating any mechanical aid designed to cut, fashion or convert a tree or timber or fabricating wood into articles of furniture, building materials, joinery or articles of domestic or commercial use in or within a five-mile radius of the forest.

While Balochistan retains the category of reserved forest under the Forest Act 1927 it also retains the earlier passed Balochistan Forest Regulation. Under Section 3 of the Balochistan Forest Regulation, the Government of Balochistan may declare any wood-land, permanent grazing ground or other land, which is the property of the Government, to be a State forest. Generally, all the acts which are offences in relation to a reserved forest under the Forest Act are also punishable offences under Section 7 and 8 of the Balochistan Forest Regulation, unless these acts are done with the permission of a forest officer or the Chief Commissioner or otherwise in accordance with any rules made by the Government5. The forests that were declared state forests under the Balochistan Forest Regulation retain that status and are legally a separate category from the reserved forests under the Forest Act. Khyber Pakhtunkhwa The Forest Ordinance retains many of the same provisions as the Forest Act that it replaced. Therefore, the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Government may constitute a reserved forest under Section 4 of the Forest Ordinance in the same manner as provided under Section 3 of the Forest Act and many of the acts that are offences under the Forest Act in relation to reserved forests are also offences under the Forest Ordinance unless done in exercise of any right under the Forest Ordinance, or with the written permission of the forest officer, or in accordance with the rules made by the Government.6 In addition to these, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa has also prohibited the following acts in a reserved forest: a) constructing any building or other infrastructure or altering and enlarging any existing building or infrastructure7 b) polluting soil or water through any pollutants or other means8.

Azad Jammu and Kashmir In the AJK, under Section 3 of the AJK Forest Regulation, the Government may make rules declaring a forest land or wasteland which is the property of the Government, or over which the Government has proprietary right, or to the whole or any part of the forest produce of which the Government is entitled, to be a demarcated forest. Under Section 6 of the AJK Forest

5 Section 9 of the Balochistan Forest Regulation 6 Sub-Section 5 of Section 26 of the Forest Ordinance 7 Sub-Section 1(b) of Section 26 of the Forest Ordinance 8 Sub-Section 1(h) of Section 26 of the Forest Ordinance

Regulation, all of the acts which are offences with respect to a reserved forest under the Forest Act are also offences with respect to a demarcated forest under Section 6 of the Forest Regulation, unless done in exercise of any right, under a grant, concession or contract made by the Government or with the written permission of the forest officer, or in accordance with rules made by the Government. Under a recent amendment to the AJK Forest Regulation, under Section 9-A, the Government may issue a notification to declare any demarcated forest or any part thereof as a reserved forest or a protected forest. A reserved forest is defined in the AJK forest regulation for this purpose as “the demarcated forests where all acts are prohibited unless permitted”. A protected forest is defined as “the forests where all acts are permitted unless prohibited.” Power to declare forest no longer reserved, a state forest or a demarcated forest Each of the Forest Act, the Forest Ordinance, the Balochistan Forest Regulation and the AJK Forest Regulation respectively allow the Government to declare that a forest or a portion thereof is no longer reserved9, or a state forest10 or a demarcated forest11 as the case may be. This is an unrestricted power and the Government need not have prior justification for changing the status of a forest in this manner. The province of Punjab, however, has amended Section 27 of the Forest Act to provide that the Government shall not declare or notify a reserved forest or any part thereof as no longer being reserved, and further, that the Government shall not allow change in the land use of a reserved forest except for the purpose of right of way, building of roads and development of a forest park, but the Government shall not allow construction of concrete building or permanent structure therein12. However, through a further amendment to Section 2713 the Government of Punjab may declare a reserved forest, or a part thereof, as no longer reserved if the organization requiring the reserved forest land is able to: c) satisfy the Government that there is no other option but to use the reserved forest land for the purposes of a national project of strategic importance d) provide a substitute plantable land equal to or bigger than the required reserved forest land, in a compact form and situated close to the reserved forest land e) provide funds for immediate forestation and maintenance of the substitute forest land.

PROTECTED FOREST AND UNDEMARCATED FOREST As a class of forests, under all the respective legal regimes of the provinces all activities by private persons are permitted within a protected forest unless these have been specifically proscribed either through a notification by the relevant Government in this respect or through the promulgation of rules in respect of such matters. Once the notification or rules have been issued, however, any contravention of such notification or rules is a punishable offence. Similar provisions as those for protected forests under the Forest Act and the Forest Ordinance are also provided under the AJK Forest Regulations in respect of undemarcated forests. In case of both protected forests of Punjab14 in particular and undemarcated forests, an act that would otherwise have been an offence under the provisions of the respective laws will not be deemed an offence if done in exercise of any right, under a grant, concession or contract made by the Government or under the law or with the written permission of the forest officer, or in accordance with rules made by the Government. Under Section 34 of the Forest Act and the Forest Ordinance, in respect of protected forests in all the provinces15 and Gilgit-Baltistan, an act, that would otherwise be an offence shall not be deemed to be an offence if done with the

9 Section 27 of the Forest Act and Section 27 of the Forest Ordinance 10 Section 10 of the Balochistan Forest Regulation 11 Section 9 of the AJK Forest Regulation 12 Amendments through Punjab Forest (Amendment) Act 2010 13 Addition of Sub-Section 3 to Section 27 of the Forest Act through Punjab Forest (Amendment) Act 2016 14 Through an amendment to Section 33 of the Forest Act in its application to Punjab 15 Punjab retains the original Section 34 from the Forest Act despite the above referred amendment to Section 33

permission of the forest officer, in accordance with rules made in respect of protected forests, or except as regards any portion of the protected forest closed by notification or in the exercise of any right which is recognized by the Government at the time of notification of a protected forest. As far as the provinces (other than Punjab) and Gilgit-Baltistan are concerned there is a gap in this particular provision (as specifically sought to be filled by the amendment to Section 33 by Punjab, above referred) in that it does not permit the exercise of rights in a protected forest granted by a grant, concession or contract made with or on behalf of the Government. Suitable amendments in this respect may be required along the lines of those undertaken in Punjab. Punjab, Sindh, Balochistan and Gilgit-Baltistan Under Section 29 of the Forest Act the Government of a province may constitute as a protected forest, any forest land or waste-land which is not included in a reserved forest, but which is the property of the Government, or over which the Government has proprietary rights or to the whole or a part of the produce of which the Government is entitled. Section 30 of the Act provides that in respect of a protected forest the Government, through a notification in this respect, may: a) declare any trees or class of trees to be reserved from a fixed date b) declare that any proportion of such forest specified in the notification shall be closed for such term not exceeding 30 years as the Government thinks fit, and that the rights of private persons, if any, over such portion shall be suspended during such term, provided that the remainder of such forest be sufficient, and in a locality reasonably convenient, for the due exercise of the rights suspended in the closed portion c) prohibit from the date fixed in the notification, the quarrying of stone, or the burning of lime or charcoal, or the collection or subjection to any manufacturing process, or removal of, any forest-produce in any such forest, and the breaking up or clearing for cultivation, for building, for herding cattle or for any other purpose, of any land in any such forest.

In addition, Section 32 of the Act empowers the Government to make rules for a protected forest, in respect of, among other things, clearing and breaking up of land for cultivation or for any other purpose, cutting of grass and pasturing of cattle, protection of timber and reserved trees from fire and the protection and management of any portion of a forest closed under Section 30. Through the Forest (Amendment) Act 2010, the province of Punjab has added several other areas in respect of which the Government has the power to make rules in respect of protected forests including change of land use in the forest, protection of the forest land from encroachment, construction of a building or other structure, quarrying or mining of stones or minerals, installation of a sawmill or operation of any mechanical aid designed to cut, fashion or convert timber into semi-finished and finished goods etc. Essentially, Section 30 and Section 32 of the Forest Act allow the Government to regulate certain acts in respect of protected forests, which are automatically offences in relation to a reserved forest merely by fact of the notification as a reserved forest. The result is that unless a notification in respect of the matters enumerated in Section 30 is issued or rules under Section 32 of the Act are promulgated by the Government, all acts are permitted in a protected forest. However, once a notification under Section 30 of the Act has been issued or rules under Section 32 of the Act are promulgated, under Section 33 of the Forest Act, the following acts shall be punishable offences where they contravene the notification under Section 30 or rules made under Section 32 of the Forest Act: a) felling, girdling, lopping, tapping or burning a reserved tree or stripping off a bark or leaves of a tree or otherwise damaging the same b) quarrying any stone, burning lime or charcoal, or collecting, subjecting to any manufacturing process and removing any forest produce c) breaking up or clearing any land for cultivation or any other purpose d) setting or kindling fire without taking reasonable precautions to prevent its spreading to any reserved tree, whether standing, fallen or felled, or to any closed portion of the forest

e) leaving any fire burning in the vicinity of any reserved tree or closed portion of the forest f) felling any tree or dragging any timber and damaging any reserved tree g) permitting any cattle to damage any reserved tree h) infringing any rule made under Section 32 of the Act.

Khyber Pakhtunkhwa The Forest Ordinance essentially follows the same scheme as that provided by the Forest Act, empowering the Government to declare a forest as a protected forest under Section 29 and further empowering it to issue a notification (in the same terms in respect of a protected forest as Section 30 of the Forest Act)16 under Section 30. Further, as with the Forest Act, the Forest Ordinance empowers the Government to make rules in respect of certain matters in relation to the protected forest under Section 34 of the Forest Ordinance. Subject to the notification under Section 30 and/or promulgation of rules under Section 34 of the Ordinance, essentially all the acts that are prohibited in relation to a protected forest under the Forest Act are also prohibited under the Forest Ordinance. Azad Jammu and Kashmir Under Section 10 of the AJK Forest Regulations, the management and control of undemarcated forests, which is defined as all forestland and wasteland that is the property of the Government and not appropriated for any specific purpose, is vested in the Forest Department. This category of forests is similar to the protected forest classification under the Forest Act. Under Section 11 of the AJK Forest Regulations the Government may issue a notification with regard to undemarcated forests: a) declaring any trees or class of trees to be reserved from a fixed date b) prohibit from the date fixed in the notification, the quarrying of stone, or the burning of lime or charcoal, or the collection or subjection to any manufacturing process, or removal of, any forest-produce in any such forest, and the breaking up or clearing for cultivation, for building, for herding cattle or for any other purpose, of any land in any such forest.

Importantly the AJK Forest Regulation does not provide for the closing of any portion of the undemarcated forest nor the suspension of rights of private persons therein as does the Forest Act 1927. In addition, under Section 12 of the AJK Forest Regulations, the Government may from time to time make rules to regulate the following matters: a) the sale and removal of trees and forest produce from the undemarcated forests b) the protection and management of undemarcated forests c) the exercise of concessions in undemarcated forests.

Under Section 13 of the AJK Forest Regulations, the following acts are punishable offences in respect of an undemarcated forest where they infringe a notification under Section 11 and/or rules promulgated under Section 12: a) felling, girdling, lopping, tapping or burning a reserved tree or stripping off a bark or leaves of a tree or otherwise damaging the same b) quarrying any stone, burning lime or charcoal, or collecting, subjecting to any manufacturing process and removing any forest produce c) breaking up or clearing any land for cultivation or any other purpose d) infringing any rule under Section 12.

In addition, in a departure from the scheme for protected forests, regardless of a notification under Section 11 or rules made under Section 12, the following acts are deemed offences in respect of undemarcated forests:

16 Section 30 of the Forest Ordinance

a) setting fire to such forest, or kindling or leaving any fire such as to endanger the forest b) removing or damaging the articles fixed to trees for the collection of resin c) installing or establishing a saw mill or forest based industry within a prohibited limit outside an undemarcated forest.

Balochistan In addition to the provisions of the Forest Act as applicable to Balochistan, under Section 11 of the Balochistan Forest Regulation, the Government may declare that any trees or any specified class or classes of trees standing on any land at the disposal of the Government shall be reserved trees from a specified date. Once so reserved, under Section 12 of the Act, the felling, girdling, marking, lopping, tapping or injuring by fire or otherwise of any such tree is a punishable offence. Regarding the power to declare forest no longer protected, with the exception of Punjab, the respective laws of the provinces and Gilgit-Baltistan do not empower the Government to declare a forest as no longer protected. In Punjab, however, Section 34-A mirrors the provisions of the amended Section 27 of the Forest Act in empowering the Government to declare a forest as no longer protected for certain specific purposes and subject to certain conditions and safeguards in this regard to be fulfilled by an organization seeking the protected forest land for a project. Village Forests and Community Forests The Forest Act, the Forest Ordinance17 and the AJK Forest Regulation18 all provide for the formation of village forests whereby the Government may assign to any village community the rights of the Government to or over any land which has been constituted a reserved forest (or in the case of AJK over land which has been entered into settlement records as khalsa (“crown”) land). In addition, the Forest Ordinance also provides for the formation of community forests whereby the Divisional Forest Officer may assign to any village forest community, village organization or Joint Forest Management Committee, all or any of its rights of management over any protected forest, Guzara forest and protected wasteland19. The Forest Act and the Forest Ordinance, further provide the Government with the power to make rules for the management of a village forest or a community forest including the conditions under which the village community may use the forest produce including timber (except in Punjab where the village community may only avail non-timber forest produce)20 and pasture as well as their duties to protect and improve the forest. Specifically, in respect of village forests, all the provisions related to reserved forests would apply to village forests as well in so far as these are not inconsistent with any rules in relation to village forests made by the Government. The concept of a village forest and community forest seems to have potential in easing the management burden of the forest departments and increasing community participation in forest management, however, these provisions seem to have found little traction with the respective Governments of the provinces and other territories. With the exception of Punjab21, none of the provinces or other territories has formulated the required rules for the formation of village forests. None of the provinces or other territories have actually formed a village forest. Unclassed Forest In Punjab, Section 28-A was inserted in the Forest Act through the Forest (Amendment) Act 2010 whereby the Government may declare a wasteland, not being a reserved forest or

17 Section 28 of the Forest Act and Section 28 of the Forest Ordinance 18 Section 14-A of the AJK Forest Regulation 19 Section 101 of the Forest Ordinance 20 Sub-Section 2 of Section 28 of the Forest Act as amended by the Forest (Amendment) Act 2010 21 Punjab has promulgated the Punjab Village Forest Rules 2013

protected forest, as unclassed forest and further direct that all or any of the provisions of the Forest Act relating to a reserved forest or protected forest, shall apply to such unclassed forest.

PRIVATE FORESTS Guzara Forests, Protected Wasteland and Community Forest Guzara Forests, Protected Wastelands and Community Forests are similar with respect to the fact that these are lands within the common ownership of a village in whose vicinity these are located, however, the law provides that these will be managed by the Forest Department including the regulation of private rights and prohibition of certain acts within these types of private forests even by the right-holders to such forests. Punjab Guzara Forests Within the Murree and Kahuta Tehsil of the Rawalpindi District all forests (other than reserved and protected forests) and wasteland, including privately owned forests, wasteland and Guzara forests are subject to regulation under the “Rules of Guzara land, or forest and wastelands of the Murree and Kahuta Tahsils, other than Reserved and Protected Forests under Section 76 (c) of Act XVI of 1927” (“Punjab Guzara Rules”). Wasteland is defined in the Forest Act as uncultivated or uncultivable land notified as wasteland by the Government of Punjab22. The Forest Act as applicable to the province of Punjab does not expressly address Guzara forests, however, certain wastelands close to villages in the Murree and Kahuta Tehsils of the District of Rawalpindi were set aside at the time of the first regular settlement for the purpose of meeting the genuine domestic needs of the village landowners.23 These Guzara (literally subsistence) forests are owned by the village landowners but managed by the Forest Department as per the Punjab Guzara Rules. The Punjab Guzara Rules divide trees growing in these areas into two classes, A and B, and generally, no person may do any of the following acts in the privately-owned wastelands and Guzara forests24: a) fell, girdle, lop, tap or burn any tree b) strip off the bark or leaves from or otherwise damage or destroy any tree c) fell any tree or drag any timber as to damage or destroy any tree d) permit any cattle to damage any tree e) burn lime or charcoal or bricks or break up land for extending cultivation, which is likely to cause injury to trees or timber, or to affect adversely the natural reproduction of trees f) cause or permit any other person or otherwise abet any person in the commission of any of the above acts g) set fire to the Guzara forest or wasteland, or any timber, forest produce and grass nor negligently permit any fire to spread.

However, the following acts are exempted within the wastelands and Guzara forests under the Punjab Guzara Rules25: a) the felling and removal of any dry timber or any dry timber for ordinary domestic and agricultural purposes b) the cutting and removal of grass and fruit of all kinds and species c) the removal of fallen pine needles and empty pine cones d) the lopping of any tree whose shade is detrimental to the growth of field crops up to one half of the height of the tree above the ground

22 Sub-Section (u) of Section 2 of the Forest Act 1927 as amended by Punjab 23 Changing perspectives on forest policy (1998) - Jawad Ahmed and Fawad Mahmood 24 Rules 4 and 12 of the Rules of Guzara land, or forest lands of the Murree and Kahuta Tahsils, other than Reserved and Protected Forests under Section 76 (c) of Act XVI of 1927 25 Sub-Rule 2 of Rule 6 of Guzara land, or forest lands of the Murree and Kahuta Tahsils, other than Reserved and Protected Forests under Section 76 (c) of Act XVI of 1927

e) the lopping of leaves for fodder for cattle from such trees and at such seasons as may be prescribed by the Deputy Commissioner from time to time.

Furthermore, residents of the estate within which a tree is situated, i.e. the residents of the villages within whose boundaries a Guzara forest or wasteland are situated, may fell and remove any tree within Class B without permission or license as long as this is done for ordinary domestic and agricultural purposes and the trees are utilized within the village itself.26 However, if the resident desires to fell and remove a tree of Class B or break up land to extend cultivation and this is likely to cause injury to trees or to timber, the resident may do this only after obtaining a permit from the Deputy Commissioner in this behalf.27 The permit to break up land for extension of cultivation may be granted readily where the trees standing on such land are not numerous and the ground is sufficiently level for crop raising. Furthermore, under the Punjab Guzara Rules the Deputy Commissioner may grant a village resident no more than three biar trees (which are included within Class A) within a period of three years provided that where these are required for the erection of a new house the Deputy Commissioner may grant a further three chir or biar trees (both within Class A) as an advance against the trees that a person would be eligible for in the next two periods of three years.28 In addition, the Deputy Commissioner may also grant permits for sale of trees and timber from the Guzara forests and wastelands subject to payment of fees and other conditions.29 Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Guzara Forests and Protected Wasteland Under the Forest Ordinance, subject to certain specific exceptions, any uncultivated or uncultivable land in areas comprising the districts of Haripur, Abbottabad, Mansehra, Kohistan and Batagram is defined as wasteland30. Where these wastelands are included in the boundaries of a village, under Section 35 of the Forest Ordinance these are deemed to be the property of the landowners of the village to be held jointly or severally, as the case may be. Under Section 36 of the Forest Ordinance, the Conservator of Forests may declare any wasteland to be a protected wasteland for several defined purposes31 through an order in this respect. Where a protected wasteland of a village is set aside at the time of the regular settlement for the meeting of the requirements of the landowners and right holders (as was done at the time of the first regular settlement for land in the Districts of Haripur, Abbottabad, Mansehra, Kohistan and Batagram) such protected wasteland is defined as a Guzara Forest32. Any protected wasteland may otherwise also be declared a Guzara Forest under the Forest Ordinance and the rules made thereunder. Under Section 35 of the Forest Ordinance, the land owners of the village are entitled to use any trees and forest produce found in Guzara forests and wastelands for their own domestic and agricultural requirements in their capacity as owners of these Guzara forests and wasteland.

26 Rule 5 of Guzara land, or forest lands of the Murree and Kahuta Tahsils, other than Reserved and Protected Forests under Section 76 (c) of Act XVI of 1927 27 Sub-Rule 1 of Rule 6 of Guzara land, or forest lands of the Murree and Kahuta Tahsils, other than Reserved and Protected Forests under Section 76 (c) of Act XVI of 1927 28 Rule 11 of Guzara land, or forest lands of the Murree and Kahuta Tahsils, other than Reserved and Protected Forests under Section 76 (c) of Act XVI of 1927 29 Sub-Rules 3 and 4 of Rule 8 of Guzara land, or forest lands of the Murree and Kahuta Tahsils, other than Reserved and Protected Forests under Section 76 (c) of Act XVI of 1927 30 Sub-Section 51 of Section 2 of the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Forest Ordinance 2002 31 The purposes for which a wasteland may be declared a protected wasteland are as follow: (i) The protection against storms, winds, rolling stones, floods and avalanches, or any other natural calamities (ii) The conservation or preservation of soil on the ridges and slopes, and in the valleys of hilly tracts, the prevention of land-slips or landslides, or the formation of ravines and torrents, or the protection against erosion and floods, or the deposit thereon of sand, stones or gravel (iii) The protection of catchments basins, banks and beds of rivers, streams, torrents and ravines (iv) The protection, conservation and regeneration of particular types of trees, brushwood or grasses (v) The maintenance of water supply in springs, rivers, tanks and reservoir (vi) The protection of lines of communication including roads, bridges and railways and other infrastructure. 32 Sub-Section 23 of Section 2 of the Forest Ordinance

However, under Section 44 of the Forest Ordinance the following acts are prohibited in both Guzara forests and wastelands: a) breaking up or cultivating or occupying or constructing any building or enclosure or making any other kind of encroachment or permitting the same b) contravening any general or special management order passed under the Forest Ordinance or the rules made thereunder c) selling or conveying for sale certain specified trees, timber or brushwood without the permission of the Conservator of forests d) cutting, felling, uprooting, girdling, lopping, tapping, burning or injuring any tree or brushwood contrary to any general or special management order passed under the Forest Ordinance or the rules made thereunder e) setting fire to a wasteland otherwise than as permitted by a Forest Officer not below the rank of a Divisional Forest Officer f) causing any damage by negligence in felling any tree or cutting or dragging any timber; g) quarrying stones, mining of minerals, burning lime or charcoal or colleting, subjecting to any manufacturing process or removing any forest produce h) hunting, shooting, poisoning of water or setting of traps and snares i) polluting soil or water j) abetting the commission or furtherance of any of the above acts.

Furthermore, under Sub-Section 3 of Section 36 the following acts are prohibited in a protected wasteland: a) the encroachment by breaking up or clearing of land for cultivation or construction of buildings and infrastructure or its occupation for this purpose b) pasturing of cattle c) burning or clearing of vegetation d) cutting of particular types of trees or removal of forest produce e) quarrying of stones, mining of minerals burning lime or charcoal f) hunting, shooting, poisoning of water or setting of traps and snares g) polluting of soil or water.

Under Sub-Section 5 of Section 36 of the Forest Ordinance the Conservator of Forests may carry out such cultural and engineering works upon a protected wasteland as he deems fit for the purpose for which the wasteland has been declared protected. The management of wastelands and protected wastelands shall normally remain with the landowners of the village. However, under Sub-Section 2 of Section 37, the Conservator of Forests may assume management of protected wastelands where the landowners negligently or wilfully disobey an order made under Section 36 of the Forest Ordinance, in relation to acts prohibited in a protected wasteland or where this is required for the purposes of any work or construction to be carried out in a protected wasteland as provided in Sub-Section 5 of Section 36 of the Forest Ordinance. On the other hand, the management of Guzara forests automatically vests in the Forest Department under Sub-Section 1 of Section 37 of the Forest Ordinance. Under the North-West Frontier Province Guzara Forest Rules 2004, (“KP Guzara Rules”) all right -holders in a village may utilize dry wood and brush wood without restriction33 however sale of dry wood and brush wood from a Guzara Forest shall be prohibited except in accordance with the provisions of the approved forest management plan34. Furthermore, under the KP Guzara Rules, the Divisional Forest Officer may grant trees or brushwood from the Guzara forests for the purposes of domestic building to resident right- holders subject to several conditions including, among other things, the confinement of the

33 Rule 4 of the North-West Frontier Province Guzara Forest Rules, 2004 34 Rule 5 of the North-West Frontier Province Guzara Forest Rules, 2004

sanctioned timber to the volume of timber actually required for the construction of the house, silvicultural availability of the trees and preference being given to dead, dying, diseased and fallen trees over green standing trees35. In addition, a non-resident landowner in the village land may also apply for the sanction of timber from a Guzara forest subject to the same conditions as those for resident right-holders subject to the availability of trees more than sufficient to meet the requirements of resident right-holders36. The barking of trees and extraction of torchwood from a standing tree as well as the lopping of trees is prohibited within Guzara forests.37 Commercial harvesting of timber and extraction of other forest produce from the Guzara forests may only be done in accordance with the approved forest management plans38. Eighty percent of the net sale proceeds from such commercial harvesting is payable to the owners of the Guzara forest with the rest being credited to the Forest Department’s Forest Development Fund. The upshot of the above with regard to the governance of these three types of private forests is that wastelands afford the village community landowners the most rights in respect of use of the trees therein, and are subject to the least management from the Forest Department. On the other hand, Guzara forests allow for the many of the same rights to the village landowners as wastelands, but only subject to the management of the Forest Department. Protected Wastelands are not automatically managed by the Forest Department, however, the rights of the village landowners in these are restricted, particularly regarding pasturing of cattle, the cutting of particular types of trees, and removal of forest produce, which are rights available in both wastelands and Guzara forests. Azad Jammu and Kashmir Community Forests Under Section 13-A of the AJK Forest Regulations, the management and control of the community forests shall vest with the Forest Department where community forests are defined as the shamilat deh (common village land) areas which are managed and developed by the Forest Department on behalf of the Deh Council. The net income from the community forests shall be treated as the revenue of the Deh Council. Except where these are done with the permission in writing of the forest officer, or in accordance with any rule made by the Government, or in the exercise of any right created by grant or contract or concession made by or on behalf of the Government, the following acts are prohibited in the community forests39: a) setting fire to the community forest or kindling or leaving any fire burning which endangers the community forest or b) kindling, keeping or carrying any fire except during such season as the forest officer may notify in this behalf c) causing damage by negligently felling a tree, cutting or dragging any timber d) felling, girdling, lopping, tapping or burning a tree or stripping off a bark or leaves of a tree or otherwise damaging the same e) quarrying stone, mines, minerals, burning lime or charcoal, or collecting and removing any forest produce f) clearing or breaking up any land or erecting a fence, or enclosure or constructing any structure or building or cultivating or attempting to cultivate any land in another manner in the community forest or for any other purpose g) contravening any rules relating to hunting, shooting, fishing, or setting up traps or snares; h) trespassing, or pasturing cattle, or permitting cattle to trespass in such part of the forest duly declared to be closed i) removing or damaging the utensils, lips, nails or other articles fixed to trees for the collection of resin j) infringing any rules made to regulate community forest

35 Rule 7 of the North-West Frontier Province Guzara Forest Rules, 2004 36 Rule 8 of the North-West Frontier Province Guzara Forest Rules, 2004 37 Rule 15 and 16 of the North-West Frontier Province Guzara Forest Rules, 2004 38 Rule 17 of the North-West Frontier Province Guzara Forest Rules, 2004 39 Section 13-B of the AJK Forest Regulations

k) installing a saw mill, or forest based industry within a prohibited limit outside the community forest.

Section 36 Forests Punjab, Sindh, Balochistan, Gilgit Baltistan Under Section 35 of the Forest Act, for several specified purposes40, the Government may regulate or prohibit in any forest or wasteland: a) the breaking up or clearing of land for cultivation b) the pasturing of cattle c) the firing or clearing of vegetation. In addition, under Sub-Section 2 of Section 35, the Government may, for any such purpose, construct such works on such forest or wasteland as it thinks fit. However, in case of neglect or wilful disobedience of the regulation or prohibition in respect of such wasteland or forest or if required for the purpose of any work under Section 35, the Government may, under Section 36 of the Forest Act, place it under the control of a forest officer and declare that all or any of the provisions of the Forest Act in respect of reserved forests shall apply to such forest or wasteland. However, before acting under Section 36 in the above manner the Government shall consider the objections of the owner of such forest or wasteland and under Sub-Section 2 of Section 36 the net profits, if any, arising from the management of such forest or wasteland shall be paid to the owner. Section 38 Forests Punjab, Sindh, Balochistan and Gilgit Baltistan Under Section 38 of the Forest Act, the owner of any land (or if there are more than one owner then the owners with an aggregate of two-thirds of the land) may request the relevant Revenue Department officer either that the land may be managed on their behalf by the Forest Officer as a reserved, or protected forest on such terms as may be mutually agreed or that all or any of the provisions of the Forest Act may be applied to such land. In either case the Government may apply such of the provisions of the Forest Act to such land as it thinks appropriate in the circumstances. Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Under Section 38 of the Forest Ordinance, the owners of any wasteland other than Guzara forest, may hand over management of such wasteland subject to similar provisions as those of Section 38 of the Forest Act, by making an application in this respect to the Conservator of Forests. The application made under Section 38 of the Forest Ordinance is not restricted to handing over management of the wasteland to the Forest Officer as a reserved or protected forest but may also request that it may be managed by a community based organization, village-based organization as a village forest or by the Joint Forest Management Committee.

40 The purposes for which a forest or wasteland may regulated under Section 35 of the Forest Act are as follow: (vii) for protection against storms, winds, rolling stones, floods and avalanches; (viii) for the preservation of soil on the ridges and slopes, and in the valleys of hilly tracts, the prevention of land-slips, or the formation of ravines and torrents, or the protection against erosion, or the deposit thereon of sand, stones or gravel; (ix) for the maintenance of water supply in springs, rivers and tanks; (x) for the protection of roads, bridges and railways and other lines of communication; (xi) for the preservation of the public health.”

As opposed to the Forest Act, under Sub-Section 4 of Section of Section 38 of the Forest Ordinance, the Conservator of Forests is specifically empowered to transfer the management of such wasteland back to the landowner for any reason he deems fit. Land subject to the Punjab Land Preservation (Chos) Act 1900 Punjab Under the Punjab Land Preservation (Chos) Act 1900 (“Chos Act”) for the conservation of sub- soil water or the prevention of erosion in any area subject or likely to erosion the Government may notify such area under Section 3 of the Chos Act. Under Section 4 of the Chos Act the Government may regulate an area notified under Section 3 by regulating, restricting or prohibiting several activities41 in such an area including the cutting of trees or timber or the collection or removal of forest produce (other than by right-holders in such area for a bona fide domestic or agricultural purpose). Furthermore, under Section 5 of the Chos Act in respect of any village or villages, or part of parts thereof, comprised within the limits of any area notified under Section 3, the Government may further regulate, restrict and prohibit certain acts42 in such village including the cultivation of land ordinarily under cultivation prior to the notification under Section 3 or the cutting of trees or timber or the collection or removal of forest produce for any purpose. In respect of areas notified under Section 3, the Government may direct the execution of such works as required to prevent erosion in the area or conserve sub-soil water including the levelling, terracing, drainage and embanking of fields or the provision of drains for storm water etc. Furthermore, under Section 8 of the Chos Act if it seems desirable to the Government that measures should be taken in the bed of any chos (defined as a stream or torrent flowing through or from the Siwalik mountain range within the Punjab) for the regulation of the flow of water within and preventing the widening or extension of such bed or reclaiming or protecting any land situated within the limits of such bed the Government may: a) either notify the specific nature of measures needed to be taken in this regard in a particular locality and require all persons with proprietary and occupancy rights in such locality to carry out the measures so notified43 b) where the whole or any part of the bed of the chos is unclaimed or the measures required render the interference of the Government absolutely necessary, or the owners or occupiers of the whole or any part of the bed fail to comply with the notification of measures under Sub-Section, the Government may notify that the whole or any part of the

41 Under Section 4 of the Chos Act, the following acts may be regulated, restricted or prohibited in an area notified under Section 3: (a) the clearing or breaking up of land not ordinarily under cultivation prior to the notification under Section 3 (b) the quarrying of stone or burning lime at places where this was not ordinarily done prior to the notification under Section 3 (c) the cutting of trees or timber, or the collection or removal or subjection to any manufacturing process of any forest produce other than grass, save for bona fide domestic or agricultural purposes (of right holders in such area) (d) the setting on fire of trees timber and forest produce (e) the admission, herding, pasturing or retention of sheep (goats or camel) (f) the examination of forest produce passing out of such area (g) the granting of permits to the inhabitants of the area and towns and villages in the vicinity of such an area to take any tree, timber or forest produce for their own use therefrom, or to pasture sheep (goats or camel) or to cultivate or erect buildings therein and return of such permits by such persons. 42 Under Section 5 of the Chos Act, the following acts may be regulated, restricted or prohibited in an area notified under Section 3: (a) the clearing or breaking up of land ordinarily under cultivation prior to the notification under Section 3 (b) the quarrying of stone or burning lime at places where this was ordinarily done prior to the notification under Section 3 (c) the cutting of trees or timber, or the collection or removal or subjection to any manufacturing process of any forest produce (for any purpose) (d) the admission, herding, pasturing or retention of sheep (goats or camel). 43 Sub-Section 1 of Section 8 of the Chos Act.

bed of the chos shall vest in the Government for such period and under such conditions as the Government notifies under Sub-Section 2 of Section 8 of the Chos Act.

During the period notified under Sub-Section 2 of Section 8 of the Chos Act, where Government shall take over ownership of the required land within the bed of the chos or within the limits of the bed of any such chos, all private rights of any kind whatever existing in or relating to such land shall be suspended44.

LEASE OF FOREST LAND The provinces of KP, Sindh and Punjab allow for the leasing or concession of Government owned forest land to private persons either through provision for this in the legal or policy framework. Punjab and KP have specific provisions in this respect in the Forest Act and the Forest Ordinance, respectively. Earlier, Sindh has implemented the Sindh Agro-Forestry Policy 2004 (“Sindh Policy”) in this regard. Sindh Agro-Forestry Policy 2004 The Sindh Policy allows the Government of Sindh to lease tracts of Government owned forest land out of a total of 133,000 acres to private parties. The initial lease period is 5 years, extendable by another 5 years depending on the performance of the lessee during the previous term. Each lessee is entitled to no more than forty acres of land under the Sindh Policy and each such lease shall be granted through auction. The lease holder shall be obliged to bring twenty five percent (25%) of the leased land under hurry block plantation within the first twelve months of the lease period failing which the lease may be liable to cancellation. The remaining leased land may be used to raise agricultural crop by the lessee, however, this may be done only upon successful completion of the hurry block plantation. The income from the hurry block plantation shall accrue exclusively to the Forest Department with the lessee having no share therein. The Sindh Policy was implemented with the apparent intention of regularizing widespread forcible encroachments on Government owned forest land45, however, it does not seem to have had the desired effect. Some of the area intended for leasing under the Sindh Policy remains in possession of encroachers whereas most lessees receive extensions in the lease period regardless of performance in the previous term. The Sindh Policy therefore may in fact be contributing to the degradation of the Sindh’s forest lands by perpetuating the possession of forest land by private parties, which are not committed to sustainable management of forests and forest resources, instead of the Forest Department. Forest Company under Section 78-A of the Punjab Forest (Amendment) Act 2016 Under Sub-Section 4(3) & 4(4) of Section 80-A of the Punjab Forest (Amendment) Act, the Government of Punjab may itself or through a forest company permit any person to use a blank forest land or wasteland for increase in the productivity of the forest. However, the Government shall not permit the use of forest land or wasteland assigned to a forest company for: a) construction of any permanent structure; b) change of land use for a purpose other than development of forest or forest related activities.46

Under Section 78-A of the Punjab Forest (Amendment) Act, the Government of Punjab may establish a forest company under the Companies Ordinance, 1984 (XLVII of 1984) to oversee the implementation of public private partnership on assigned forest land or wasteland. Under Sub-section 2 of Section 78-A the Government may, by notification in the official Gazette, assign a blank forest land or wasteland owned by the Government to a forest company for this purpose.

44 Section 9 of the Chos Act 45 Study of Riverine forest upstream Sukkur and downstream Kotri – 2008 (Indus for All Programme, WWF Pakistan) 46 Sub-Section 4 of Section 80-A of the Punjab Forest (Amendment) Act

Section 78-B of the Punjab Forest (Amendment) Act lays down the procedure for the public private partnership for the development of forest land or wasteland assigned to the forest company. The forest company shall invite applications from eligible persons through a public notice with the eligibility of the applicants being determined on the basis of availability of required technical and other human resource to undertake the project, financial capacity and relevant experience. The Punjab Forest (Amendment) Act 2016, however, has been superseded by the Punjab Public Private Partnership Act 2014, according to which the land could only be leased out for 15 years term to the successful bidders. After serving the term, these lands will have to be returned by the bidders back to the government for the next round of bidding. Under the mandate of these provisions, the South Punjab Forest Company (“SPFC”) was incorporated as a not for profit company under Section 42 of the Companies Ordinance 1984 with the purpose of raising tree plantations on blank forest land belonging to the Government of Punjab through private investment on profit sharing basis as delineated under Section 78-A of the Punjab Forest (Amendment) Act. The Punjab Forest Department has assigned blank area of 99,077 acres to the SPFC after approval of the Government of Punjab for this purpose47. The draft concession agreement (“Draft Agreement”) between the SPFC and the potential concessionaire48 lays down several conditions in relation to the afforestation and management of the forest land assigned to a concessionaire. Most importantly, the concessionaire is obliged to fully complete the development of land and plantation of the plantable area with the recommended species of trees (or other species approved by the SPFC) by the third year of the concession period. As consideration for the concession granted by the SPFC it shall receive a certain share of any forest timber crop standing on the plantable area that is ready for harvesting. The crop share of the SPFC shall be harvested only at its own discretion while the Concessionaire may harvest the remaining forest timber crop subject to the written permission of the SPFC. In addition, the SPFC is entitled to share in the revenue generated by the concessionaire from the non-timber forest produce on the project site. Finally, the SPFC is also entitled to a certain fee per acre of rangeland included in the project site. The concessionaire may plant the rangeland with forest timber crop and shall be exclusively entitled to the proceeds from the harvesting of timber from the rangelands. The SPFC has auctioned several lots of blank forest land and wasteland of varying sizes under this scheme, however, the risk of adverse occupation of Government owned forest lands by private parties once given possession as concessionaires is as much a possibility in Punjab as in Sindh and therefore this scheme carries the risk of itself becoming a source of forest degradation as is the case in Sindh. However, the true efficacy of afforestation through the SPFC may only be assessed in time. Section 105 of the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Forest Ordinance 2002 Under Section 105 of the Forest Ordinance the KP Forest Department may, where it considers appropriate lease out the whole or any portion of a reserved forest, protected forest, wasteland, or other forest placed under the management of a Forest Officer, for the following purposes: a) to plant trees and increase production of forest produce b) to implement agro-forestry and social forestry schemes for the benefit of local communities c) to operate farms for breeding of wildlife and conservation of bio-diversity and nature reserves.

47 http://spfc.org.pk/about_us/ 48 http://spfc.org.pk/tenders/docs/Concession_Agreement.pdf

However, the Section also provides that any lease granted thereunder may not allow any activities inconsistent with the principles of forest conservancy and sustainable management or prejudicial to the rights and concessions of local communities. As yet leases of forest land owned or managed by the KP Forest Department have not been awarded. However, the experience of Sindh in this regard would recommend the rolling out of a leasing scheme only based on a deliberate and sufficiently regulated process of granting leases so that the desired aims and objectives of this scheme may be realized.

3.1.4 Forestry Research and Education in Pakistan Pakistan Forest Institute has been the only research and education institution in the field of forestry in the country for a long time. Besides awarding degrees in forestry, it has been imparting training on various aspects of forestry and allying disciplines to field foresters and other professionals. Its research agenda is focused on developing and improving forestry sciences and technologies, and on establishing and maintaining a database for development of forest resources. Under the 18th constitutional amendment, the national status of the Pakistan Forest Institute was abolished, and its management was shifted to the KP government. In view of this, other provincial forest departments have established the forest academies and schools to train forestry professionals, maintaining small setups for undertaking routine research activities. For example, Punjab has created a reasonably equipped research establishment at the Punjab Forestry Research Institute at Gatwala, Faisalabad and the Forest Academy established by Punjab in Ghoragali both of which cater for the research needs of the province. The Pakistan Agricultural Research Council also conducts research on forestry and range management through its research establishments primarily by the Rangeland Research Institute at the National Agricultural Research Centre, Islamabad and the Arid Zone Research Centers operational in various parts of the country. The council also organizes training courses for the researchers, field officers, technicians and farmers on forestry related subjects. The University of Agriculture, Faisalabad was the second institution that established the department of forestry and range management and started the B.Sc. and M.Sc. degree programs. Other universities running the programs on forestry in the country include the Pir Mehar Ali Shah Arid Agriculture University, Rawalpindi, University of Haripur, University of Swat, Shaheed Benazir Bhutto University, Sheringal, and Bahauddin Zakariya University, Multan. The departments of environment established in other universities also offer courses in forestry and related disciplines. While these institutions provide research and education services to the forestry sector in Pakistan, the need is far from fulfilled in terms of the issue at hand. Technologically and in other aspects, research facilities and level of research in forestry needs improvements as well additional resources to undertake research that require high-tech engagement.

3.2 Review of Relevant Sectoral Policies outside Forest Sector Most of the policies outside forestry sector are directly or indirectly linked to or have influence over forests. Important sectors in this respect are climate change, agriculture, minerals, tourism, water and energy. Among the national policies approved by competent forum include the Climate Change policy 2012, Environment Policy 2005, Minerals Policy 2013 and Power Policy 2014. After the 18th constitutional amendment on provincial subjects, Pakistan’s provinces have developed their own policies for some of these sectors. The following provides an overview of policies influencing forests. National Policies The Climate Change Policy 2012 includes necessary provisions to address climate change related issues for various sectors, such as water, agriculture, forestry, coastal areas, biodiversity and other vulnerable ecosystems. It also discusses industrial emissions and carbon footprint in different industries and its implications for climate. The policy proposes various alternatives to mitigate possible effects of climate change on vulnerable and other ecosystems. It also reflects on coping with the challenges emerging from climate change. The policy has extensively

covered forestry and a range management sectors. Specific recommendations have been given to take benefit of the REDD+ mechanism. The REDD+ Strategy can bank on the Climate Change Policy as an important supporting instrument within the complex policy framework of Pakistan. This support includes forest management, mitigating drivers of deforestation, and working on technological improvements to reduce carbon and other emissions. The National Environment Policy 2005 provides comprehensive guidelines for natural resource sectors including forestry, biodiversity and protected areas, agriculture and livestock and water, and also other important sectors like energy efficiency, renewable energy, climate change and ozone depletion. The policy encourages the protection and preservation of biodiversity including forests, use of energy efficient technologies, handling the climate change issues, improving the agriculture and livestock productivity under a changing environmental scenario. Pakistan’s National Mineral Policy was developed in 2013 after a long consultation process with sector stakeholders. One of the themes of the National Mineral Policy 2013 is environmentally sustainable exploration, development and production of minerals. It also envisages mitigation of adverse environmental effects of mineral development, facilitation of access to private or public lands and of forest reserves, and resolution of issues with other public department functionaries. Section 7.3 deals with the environment, and binds the explorative companies to observe safeguards on protection of environment, highlighting CSR. However, it was observed that while some sections work toward mitigating adverse environmental impacts including those on forests, their implementation is not very effective due to low inter- departmental coordination and inefficient monitoring and control. Pakistan National Power Policy was promulgated in 2013. The National Power Policy recommends generation of inexpensive and affordable energy sources, and focus on shifting Pakistan’s energy mix toward low-cost sources, such as hydro, gas, solar, nuclear and biomass. The policy also mentions coal as a source of energy and recommends coal with appropriate mitigating measures for reducing carbon and sulphur emissions. Cheap electricity supply may reduce pressure on forests, however, generation of energy from biomass may be carefully carried out. The National Renewable Energy Policy (2006) underlines the importance of renewable energy resources and emphasizes on benefiting from the enormous potential of solar, hydro, wind and biomass (bagasse, crop residues, livestock manure, etc.). Appropriate strategies in this respect can reduce pressure on forests due to fuelwood extraction. As far as tourism policy is concerned, work was initiated on formulation of new National Tourism Policy. However, the policy issued in 1990 and updated in 2007, has not been able to propose any tangible preventive or mitigation measures, despite recognition of the environmental spoilage by tourism. In addition, the reviewed policy from 2007 overcame a phase of terrorism between 2007-2012, when tourism dropped significantly. Later after 2014, it has failed to envisage the expanded scale and challenges of local tourism. The latest National Agriculture and Food Security Policy (draft) wherein recommending the adoption of climate smart agriculture practices, has emphasized on improvement of rangelands for healthy livestock and increased production of dairy products. However, it does not discuss forestry, farm forestry or agroforestry. In addition, it does not discuss the issue of livestock grazing having an adverse impact on the forest regeneration. Pakistan National Rangeland Policy was drafted in 2010. It discusses rehabilitation, management and mitigation of the impacts of global warming and climate change on the rangelands. It has remained as draft and has not been approved yet. The policy supports protection and rehabilitation of scrub forests for better forage production but does not provide for improvement of tree growth on rangelands. However, it urges the need for practicing agroforestry and farm forestry on farm lands near rangelands and pastures. A comprehensive National Water Policy (December 2016) was drafted. It discusses concerns for increase in water scarcity, and emphasizes judicious use of the limited water resource in all sectors. It provides measures for climate change adaptation, improving watershed management through extensive soil conservation, catchment area treatment, preservation of forest, increasing forest cover, and also restoring and maintaining the health of the environment and

ecology. It provides for protection of wetlands and Ramsar Sites for the prevention of wildlife, flora and fauna, and stopping further sea water intrusion into Sindh (upstream from coastline) for the sustenance of coastal environment, flora and fauna and mangrove growth. The policy has thus far remained a draft, however, its recommendations can be critical for some of the important forest ecosystems of Pakistan, including mangroves, juniper and northern alpines. Provincial Policies All the provinces, as well as AJK and GB, accord high priority to the subject of climate change due to its impacts on almost all sectors of life. Some of the provinces have drafted their own policies regarding climate change, while others have either developed or are developing strategies and plans for implementation of the National Climate Change policy to cope with the possible impacts of climate change. The draft climate change policies of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (2016) and Punjab (2017) emphasize protection and conservation of existing forest resources and enhancing the forest carbon sinks through pursuing afforestation and reforestation programs. KP policy has proposed both adaptations as well as mitigation measures. Azad Jammu and Kashmir Climate Change Policy was approved in 2017. GB is proposing similar actions and activities in the plans and strategies prepared/being prepared as follow up of the National Climate Change Policy. The Agriculture Policy of KP offers a ten years perspective (2015-2025) and has attributed the recent natural disasters in the province to climate change and proposed measures to handle them. However, no specific recommendations for enhancing tree cover on farm lands or elsewhere have been given. Although references have been made to one particular project i.e. Billion Tree Tsunami. However, no institutional mechanisms are recommended. Measures for soil, water and biodiversity conservation and rangelands development have been proposed. The Punjab Agriculture Policy 2013 (draft) suggested addressing the issues of climate change and the environmental pollution due to burning of crop residues, particularly the rice straw, which in recent years have contributed to smog. Measures for encouraging farm forestry have also been proposed. The Punjab Environment Policy 2015 (draft) gives guidelines and proposes actions for the protection of environment and the natural resources. It also recommends measures for coping with the challenges posed due environmental degradation. Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Gilgit Baltistan have drafted Rangeland policies for sustainable management of rangelands and pastures in various ecological zones. Measures for mitigation of climate change impacts and protection of environment have been recommended in these policies. KP Mineral Development Policy 2014 urges for elimination and mitigation of adverse environmental degradation of mining. No mining operations will be permitted without an IEE (Initial Environmental Examination Report) or EIA (Environmental Impact Assessment Report), as the case may be, having been compiled, evaluated and approved by Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Environmental Protection Agency (KP-EPA). The KP Mines and Mineral Development and Regulation Ordinance 2016 directs that a holder of a mineral title shall not cut or injure any tree on Government land or on reserved forests without the prior permission in writing of the Licensing Authority or of such officer as the Government may authorize in this regard, and such cutting is also permissible under the relevant law. Operations in reserved and protected forests shall be conducted subject to such precautions regarding prevention of fire and conservation of forest as the licensee or the lessee may from time to time, be required by the Licensing Authority. The Draft Punjab Mineral Policy, 2017 envisions to have a modern, innovative, dynamic and private sector driven mineral sector that is environmentally responsible, socially sustainable and safe. Under the policy, it requires that the Punjab Forest, Wildlife and Fisheries Department shall provide No Objection Certificate (NOC) for carrying out the mineral activity in the areas marked under Forestry, Wildlife and Fisheries land. Similar policies requiring NOC from forest department also exist in other provinces and AJK, GB, etc. The Punjab Tourism Policy 2009 is based on the principles of building environmental and cultural awareness and respect, and provides positive experience for both visitors and hosts. It

proposes the promotion of ecotourism that would involve a selective approach, scientific planning, effective control and continuous monitoring. However, due to various departmental reasons, the policy and its different aspects have not yet fully materialized for the tourism sector as a whole. The KP Tourism Policy 2015 values the principle of sustainable development, which dictates that the level of development does not exceed the carrying capacity of an area. Tourism development needs to be properly guided and regulated to avoid any adverse impact on the natural environment. A conscious balance needs to be maintained between development and conservation. For this reason, it envisions adding additional tourist spots to reduce tourism burden on existing hot spots. The AJK and GB tourism departments also believe in sustainable tourism development that assures conservation of the environment and natural resources in their respective area. Keeping in view the available potential, ecotourism is considered to be the most appropriate option for adoption in these areas.

3.3 Forest Governance Assessment As mentioned in a previous section, PROFOR developed the Forest Governance Assessment Toolkit to assess forest governance in order know its current state with the goal of having a good forest governance to achieving positive and sustained development outcomes in the sector, including efficiency of resource management, increased contribution to economic growth and to environmental services, and equitable distribution of benefits (Kishor and Rosenbaum, 2012).

3.3.1 Methodology For the assessment of governance, the PROFOR Forest Governance Assessment Toolkit was used. The questionnaires used were multiple-choice responses (possible answers) and was closed ended (Annex II). The questions taken from PROFOR governance assessment tool were grouped into three categories. Questions asked from forest officers, communities and journalists were separated as technical, social and legal sections respectively. The surveys were conducted at Province/Territory level with selected communities, group of forest officers, communities and relevant journalists. Communities living in or around each forest type (Mangroves, Riverine, Subtropical Scrub, Subtropical Pine, Moist Temperate, Dry Temperate) were selected with the support of provincial REDD Focal persons. The survey with group of forest officers was facilitated and organized by the respective focal persons and the group varied in size from province to province. The relevant questionnaires were used for interviewing the target participants. Community groups, individual community members, civil society organizations, journalists and diverse group of forest officers were reached out for the assessment. The responses were mainly made on the perceptions and experience of the respondents. The results of survey with group of forest officers represent either the consensus or the opinion of majority of participants. The relevant provincial laws, policies, rules and manuals were also reviewed and are presented in the previous section of this chapter.

3.3.2 Results of Consultations at the Provinces The main conclusions from the consultation with stakeholders are presented in the following section. Additionally, a synthesis of the responses is presented in Annex 3. 3.3.2.1 Existence and Quality of National Policies

Pakistan has a national forest policy (2015) at federal level, which is principally agreed in the Council of Common Interest (CCI) but is not yet officially approved by the cabinet. The national forest policy of Pakistan (2015) states that under the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan (1973), the subject of forestry falls in the provincial domain and is mainly dealt by respective provincial/federal territories governments. The functions of Federal

Government pertaining to forestry as per Federal Legislative List (Part-II) are limited to national planning and economic coordination, Inter-provincial matters and coordination and matters incidental or ancillary thereof. The Part-I of Federal Legislative List also entitles Federal Government to regulate import and export of wood and forest products across custom frontiers, inter-provincial trade and commerce, trade and commerce with foreign countries. Additionally, Federal Government is also empowered to perform functions of implementing international conventions and agreements related to forests. Section 41-A of the Provincial Forest Acts of Sindh and Punjab empowers Federal Government to define rules for movement of timber across custom frontiers. Pakistan also has an approved Climate Change Policy 2012, which aims 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. It envisages the need to restore and enhance Pakistan’s forests under sustainable forest management with particular focus on how these are affected by climate change. The national forest policy does not specifically mention the word sustainability in its policy objectives or goal, however the goal of the policy says: “expansion of national coverage of forests, protected areas, natural habitats and green areas for restoration of ecological functions and maximizing economic benefits” which is reflecting sustainability per se. The KP Forest Ordinance states protection, conservation, management and sustainable development of forests and other renewable natural resources, and matters ancillary or incidental thereto in the in KP (former NWFP). The Punjab Forest policy 1999 and Act 1927 (amended 2016) and the laws, of the rest of the provinces/territories do not specifically mention the word sustainable forestry. GB has also finalized its forest policy, which is going to be approved soon by the competent forum. This policy also states sustainable management of forest resources. AJK has recently approved its climate change policy, and sustainable forest management is at the centre of this policy. All the provinces were of the view that addressing drivers of deforestation is low priority in national, sectoral and forest development plans. However, Sindh and GB responded that addressing DD is somewhat priority in forest management plans where they exist (very few management plans exists in both the provinces). KP responded that addressing DD is high priority in forest management plans (A good number of management plans exist in KP). KP and AJK were of the view that “planners always consider activities on private forest lands and the resulting plans reflect that consideration”. The rest of the provinces responded that the “planners usually consider activities on private forest lands”. KP and AJK responded the forest strategy recognizes the contribution and role of the private sector and explicitly includes mechanisms directed at fostering an appropriate role for the private sector. Punjab, Sindh and GB responded that the forest strategy recognizes the existence of the private sector, but it does not give the private sector appropriate weight, and the strategy fails to foster an appropriate role for the private sector. Balochistan responded that there is no strategy or policy in this regard. AJK, Punjab, Sindh and GB responded that Government policies mostly consider non-market values of the forest, while KP and Balochistan responded that Government policies sometimes consider non-market values of the forest. Only the forest ordinance 2002 of KP requires an inventory and management plans for all public- sector forests. The laws of other provinces do not specifically mention this notion. The draft forest act/law of GB also requires an inventory and management plans for public sector forests. In KP the law requires that all forest products for the government’s own use be legally produced. In AJK, the law has these requirements for many products, such as timber, but not for all products. In rest of the provinces the law does not have these requirements.

Regarding exercising of discretion of government officers, Punjab, AJK, KP, Sindh and GB responded that the law has specific standards in some areas and broad standards in others, while Balochistan responded that the law includes only broad, general standards, such as a requirement to act in the public interest. To sum up the above discussion, Pakistan has updated forest and climate change policies at national level. However, the provinces are yet to come up with approved forest policies. Only two provinces have approved forest policies and one territory has an approved climate change policy. The laws in almost all the provinces are out-dated and don’t take into account climate change issues. Conservation of forests and ecosystem services have been lesser priority over economic gains from forests over the time. National, sector and forest development plans do not address drivers of deforestation. Forest management plans which somewhat address the drivers of deforestation, are available for very few forest divisions mostly in KP only. Private sector involvement has been minimum and mainly confined to planting trees on private lands. Only in Punjab province private sector has been involved in forestry under public private partnership. For this purpose, a company with the name of South Punjab Forest Company (SPFC) has been established in order to attract investment of private sector in forestry. Inventorying the forests is not obligatory except in KP and in the draft policy of GB. Discretion of government officers is common. All the above factors are contributing to deforestation and forest degradation. 3.3.2.2 Clarity and Coherence of Policies Governing Forest Use and Management

As per the survey conducted in all the provinces, the responses are summarized below. The response from KP and AJK said that in general, the laws are consistent and clear while the response from Punjab, GB & Sindh were that some of the laws are confusing or in conflict with each other. The response from Balochistan was that most of the laws are confusing or in conflict. In all the provinces, there are no land use laws and the questions regarding land use was not answered due to lack of land use policies at provincial/national level. There is only approved climate change policy at federal level and in Azad Jammu and Kashmir. The other provinces/territories are in the process of developing climate change policies, but none is approved till date. The national forest policy and national climate change polices are supportive and complimenting each other. From the results of the survey and review of laws it can be concluded that the forest laws are not always consistent and clear. The land use policies have not been developed so far by the provinces and at national level. Approved climate change policy only exists at national level and in AJK. The provinces have not approved climate change policies so far. Only two provinces (Punjab & KP) have approved forest policies. Lack of policies and coherent actions are also contributing to deforestation and forest degradation as well as act as a barrier to enhancement of forest carbon stock. 3.3.2.3 Implementation Realities of Forest Laws and Policies

In almost all the provinces except KP the Forest Act of 1927 or other laws framed during British era are still valid. Some minor amendments have been made in the laws, but the overall thrust of the law is the same. The old law does not address the core issues of deforestation, forest degradation, communities, their rights, their livelihoods, etc. The orientation of the legislative framework is towards the economic exploitation of forest resources rather than conservation and ecological values. According to the survey Balochistan, Punjab, Sindh, GB and AJK said that some of the laws governing forestry are complex, but overall, compliance is not hard. However, the response from KP was that the laws governing forestry are simple and compliance is easy. Regarding adaptive forest management the overall response from the provinces was that the law is silent on adaptive forest management. A typical adaptive forest management uses iterative forest management processes to learn and adapt. This has never been practiced. The forest law and policies are not explicitly advocating adaptive forest management but if the trend

is analysed in the forest policy making from 1955 till date, the learning from the field have somehow been incorporated from time to time which is manifested in the changing focus of the policies from time to time. When asked whether the policies and laws serve the interest of both genders, the response of forest officers to this question varied from the response of CSOs. The forest officers responded: In KP the women fully participate in forest decisions making while in AJK the women sometime participate in forest decision-making. The rest of the provinces responded that women seldom participate in decision-making. The response of CSO to the same question in AJK was that women sometime participate in forest decision-making while in the rest of the provinces the women seldom participated in forest decision-making. In summary, the existing laws are not difficult to comply with, but they do not address climate change issues. The policies and laws do not support adaptive forest management. The forest laws and policies are apparently gender neutral but in practice women seldom participate in forest related decisions. 3.3.2.4 Land Tenure, Ownership and User Rights

As for as the ownership and tenure of land and tied resources is concerned, all the provinces responded that the land tenure and ownership regarding carbon and genetic resources are still unclear, although the law clearly recognizes the ownership of land, vegetation, minerals and wildlife. AJK response was that the law clearly determines who has the rights to resources like carbon, genetic materials, wildlife, water, and minerals. However, this statement was not substantiated from the review of the existing laws. The response from provinces to recognition of traditional and indigenous rights was that the law recognizes the indigenous and traditional rights such as grazing rights, firewood collection and right of way to the communities. The legal analysis based on the existing laws point out that the Forest Act 1927 does recognize several traditional rights insofar as the Forest Officers are empowered to inquire regarding a claim as to such rights while undertaking the process of notifying forest land as reserved or protected forest. However, the powers of forest officers in this respect are highly discretionary, and even where such rights are recognized these may be overturned by the Provincial Government under Section 22 of the Forest Act 1927 or commuted by the Forest Officer. Furthermore, the Forest Officer may also stop any public or private way under Section 25 of the Forest Act 1927, subject to the availability of a substitute being available that is deemed to be reasonably convenient. As such there is little in the way of absolute protection for indigenous and traditional rights under the currently existing legislative framework. In case of KP, the Ordinance does recognize several indigenous and traditional rights such as rights to pasture or to forest produce as evident by the fact that the Forest Settlement Board is empowered to inquire regarding a claim as to such rights while undertaking the process of notifying forest land as reserved forest. However, the powers of the Forest Settlement Board in this respect are highly discretionary, and even where such rights are recognized these may be overturned by the Provincial Government under Section 22 of the Ordinance or commuted by the Forest Settlement Board. Furthermore, the Forest Settlement Board may also stop any public or private way in a reserved forest under Section 25 of the Ordinance, subject to the availability of a substitute being available that is deemed to be reasonably convenient. As such there is little in the way of absolute protection for indigenous and traditional rights under the currently existing legislative framework. Furthermore, in the case of Guzara Forests where the Government has notified a wasteland as protected wasteland, the village landowners nonetheless retain the right to use for their own domestic and agricultural needs any trees and forest produce found in those Guzara forests free of charge. In response to the question whether formal and informal rights are in conflict, the provinces came with variable statements. AJK, KP, Sindh and Punjab were of the view that the law fully

harmonizes formal and informal rights to forest resources. While response of GB and Balochistan is that the law partially harmonizes formal and informal rights to forest resources. The laws governing rights such as tenancy acts of provinces, land revenue acts of provinces and others are not very effective in resolving disputes related to land tenure, ownership and use rights. The judicial processes are sluggish and expensive. For example, in case of KP under the KP Forest Ordinance 2002, no rights in relation to a reserved forest may accrue to a private individual except as provided in a very limited sense under Section 23 whereby rights in reserved forests may only accrue to a person after notification as a reserved forest through succession or through a grant or contract in writing with the Government or such a person in whom such right was vested when the notification for reserving a forest is promulgated. As against the Provincial Government, laws such as tenancy act and others are not effective for a private individual even prior to the notification as a reserved forest as the Government retains the right under Section 11 of the Ordinance to acquire any land in which the claim of a private individual has been recognized in the manner provided under the Land Acquisition Act 1984. Where the claimed rights of an individual to a forest land under the process of being reserved are rejected altogether, such an individual only has the right to appeal under Section 17 to a notified officer of the Revenue Department or the Forest Tribunal, if established. The decision of such an appeal is deemed to be final under the subject to the powers of the Provincial Government to revise the decision in appeal under Section 18 of the Ordinance. In response to question whether the law include ways for local communities to share or obtain authority over public forests, KP said that the law requires the government to share or transfer management authority to local communities, while the rest of the provinces said the law expressly allows the government to share or transfer management authority to local communities. The legal analysis sums up that the law expressly allows the government to share or transfer management authority to local communities, under Section 28 of the Forest Act 1927 and especially after the passing of the Punjab Village Forest Rules 2013 in this respect. Section 28 of the Forest Act 1927 deals with the possibility of assigning to any village community the powers of the Government to any land which has been constituted a reserve forest with the Government being empowered to make rules for management of the village forest and the Village Forest Rules 2013 allow for the implementation of Section 28 in practice as explained above. In going much beyond the provisions of the Forest Act 1927 apart from the formation of a village forest under Section 28 by assigning the Government’s rights in a reserved forest to any village community, the KP Ordinance, 2002 also provides under Section 101 for the assignment of all or any of the Government’s rights in a protected forest, Guzara forest and protected wasteland to any village forest community, village organization or a Joint Forest Management Committee (which may comprise members of an interested community or village based organization or a group of persons representing such organizations and members of the Forest Department). The commitment to this scheme of delegated or joint forest management is evident in the fact that unlike a village forest under Section 28, the assignment of Government rights under this provision shall not be cancelled before the village forest committee or the Joint Forest Management Committee has been given the opportunity of being heard by the Forest Officer and the Forest Officer has recorded his reasons in writing should he wish to proceed to cancellation of the assignment. To sum up the above discussion, the tenure regarding carbon and genetic resources is unclear in the existing laws. The traditional and indigenous rights of grazing, firewood collection, NTFPs collection are recognized by the law and are practiced differently in different legal types of forests and at different locations. The law does not fully harmonize formal and informal rights to forest resources everywhere. The laws tend to unilaterally empower government officers and there is little in the way of absolute protection for indigenous and traditional rights under the currently existing legislative framework. The mechanisms of tenure related dispute resolution are ineffective, sluggish and expensive. The law expressly allows the government to share or transfer management authority of public forest to local communities.

3.3.2.5 Cross-Sectoral Dimension of Forest Policy

All the provinces responded to the question whether national development policies promote sustainability in forest sector, stating that National development policies are inconsistent with sustainability in the forest sector. However, only Punjab province responded that National development policies fully support sustainability in the forest sector. Most of the provinces were of the view that the sectors that directly depend on forests and the sectors that directly affect forests normally don’t provide for forest- and tree-related activities in their plans and budgets. Only Sindh & AJK responded that National Highway Authority (NHA) has some provision for tree related activities but that is also less than sufficient. KP and AJK responded that Water & Power Development Authority (WAPDA) has some provision for tree related activities. The WAPDA has a separate directorate for environment and it implements environment management plans after conducting EIA in all its projects. For this purpose, WAPDA earmark separate budget in its projects. Regarding the question to cross sector coordination all the provinces responded that there are no official mechanisms, but there is some informal cross-sectoral coordination. While Balochistan responded that there are some official mechanisms for cross-sectoral coordination, but they are not comprehensive. To conclude the above discussion, the national development policies are not always entirely supportive to the sustainability in the forest sector. The sectors which directly depend on forest or which affect forests are not providing for tree related activities. Only NHA and WAPDA have been provided for forest related activities but much less than desired level. There are almost non-existent official mechanisms for cross sectoral coordination mechanisms. In case of donor supported development projects the coordination mechanism exists in the form of project steering committee or other similar body. The government development policies overlooking forests and lack of cross sectoral coordination are adding to drivers of deforestation and forest degradation. 3.3.2.6 Institutional Frameworks

Clarity of Mandates and Functions of Institutions Forestry in Pakistan is entirely a provincial subject. The national government has the coordination role among provinces and keeping liaison with international bodies for forest related functions. Some national agencies such as NHA, WAPDA perform forestry related functions in their development projects but that’s mostly done in isolation. The responses to the question that to what extent the forest related mandates of national and sub national government are clear and mutually supportive, KP responded that forest-related mandates of national and sub national agencies are clearly mutually supportive. Whereas the mandates of cross-sectoral agencies are significantly conflict with each other. The rest of the provinces responded that forest-related mandates of national agencies significantly conflict with each other. Sindh Province responded that forest-related mandates of national agencies sometimes conflict with each other. To the question whether the forest agency budgets are based on national goals for sustainable forest management and independent of forest revenues, donor funding, and other distorting factors, KP responded that the budgets are entirely based on national/provincial goals for sustainable management of forests. AJK responded that the budgets have a strong bias toward high-revenue-producing resources, donor- funded projects, or other narrow issues. Punjab and GB responded that the budgets are somewhat biased — toward high-revenue-producing resources, toward donor-funded projects, or other narrow issues — perhaps to the detriment of sustainable management of all resources. Balochistan and Sindh responded that forestry is the lower priority on the government development agenda and the budget is not taking into account sustainable management of forests.

The response to the question that whether forest agencies have information technology appropriate to carry out their responsibilities was that all provinces were of the view that the agencies have a serious lack of appropriate information technology or staff trained to use it while KP responded the forest agencies have some information technology, but not enough to do their jobs well. From the above responses, it can be concluded that, mandates of national agencies are not always in conformity with each other. Mandates of national and subnational government are also contested. The budgets are not always based on national/provincial goals for sustainable management of forests and are somewhat biased toward high-revenue-producing resources toward donor-funded projects, or other narrow issues, perhaps to the detriment of sustainable management of all resources. Most of the provincial forest agencies have a serious lack of appropriate information technology and trained staff to use it.

4. LAND USE CHANGE TRENDS IN PAKISTAN The basis to address deforestation and forest degradation is, not only knowing the drivers but also the way land is used and how those uses change over time and space. In the case of Pakistan, land tenure and natural resources rights have an important influence on how the land is used. This section presents an overview of the land use change trends in the country; the land tenure, titling and natural resources rights.

4.1 Land Use Change Trends in Pakistan As of the time of this study, a comprehensive land cover assessment of Pakistan with a good degree of accuracy was not in existence. In 2004 the Ministry of Environment (now Ministry of Climate Change) launched a National Land Use Plan Project under which the Land Use Atlas of Pakistan was developed. The data for the Atlas was obtained from Space and Upper Atmosphere Research Commission (SUPARCO), National Agricultural Research Centre, International Water and Salinity Research Institute, Soil Survey of Pakistan, and Survey of Pakistan.

Figure 2 Land cover/ land use of Pakistan. Source: GoP, 2009

Land cover/land use classification using ten categories in Pakistan developed from Landsat ETM image data is shown in table below. Forest cover including scrub, riverine, mangroves and plantation is about 5 percent in the country. Agricultural land including irrigated, rainfed and rodkohi agriculture extracted from spectral reflectance of crop cover is about 20 percent. It does not include the fallow land, which has been covered under open space/ground class (covering about 10% area of country). Rangelands covered over 27 percent areas, while rock outcrops occupied another quarter of the country. The snow/glacier coverage was recorded at about 2

percent. Deserts have about 10 percent area and other uses (built up area, waterlogged and saline land and water bodies together accounted for a little more than one percent).

Table 2 Pakistan Land Cover/Land Use (000 hectares)

Land use/ No Balochistan Sindh NWFP Punjab Pakistan % land cover 1 Forest 508.1 848.3 2,311.9 855.1 4,523.4 5.4 2 Rangeland 9,255.8 3,961.1 3,848.7 5,385.7 22,451.3 26.9 3 Agricultural land 822.2 4,465.0 1,174.1 10,143.4 16,604.7 19.9 4 Open 4,494.7 911.5 1,290.5 1,618.8 8,315.5 10.0 ground/fallow 5 Exposed rocks 16,425.1 201.4 3,451.1 328.4 20,396.0 24.5 6 Desert 3,189.4 3,140.8 - 1,796.9 8,127.1 9.7 7 Built-up area 6.7 90.2 26.4 196.6 319.9 0.4 8 Waterlogged and 15.2 294.3 0.2 130.4 440.1 0.5 saline land 9 Water bodies 1.8 178.9 57.1 179.8 417.6 0.5 10 Snow/Glaciers - - 1,829.6 - 1,829.6 2.2 Total 14,091. 34,719.0 13,989.7 20,625.1 83,425.2 100 4 Source: PFI (2012) In 2012, the Pakistan Forest Institute (PFI, 2012) published the Land Cover Atlas of Pakistan prepared under the Forestry Sector Research and Development Program employing GIS and remote sensing techniques with the objective of assessing the existing forest types and other land cover of the country. In this study the total area of Pakistan was reported as 88.430 million hectares (ha), when the official land area reported by UN and national statistics shows total land area of 79.6 million ha. Thus, it was not possible to compare the PFI study results with the data of 2004 study. Pakistan’s Readiness Preparation Proposal (R-PP) does present current land use and change trends in Pakistan in Annexes IX and X of the document. The Annex IX used the PFI dataset. Annex X of the R-PP contains valuable and reliable information on the trend over the last few decades in which large scale transfers of Government forest lands for non-forestry and commercial purposes have taken place. These forest lands have been transferred permanently or on lease to various departments including defence, education, housing, agriculture, roads, building, ports and tourism departments. The total area under the jurisdiction of all forest departments transferred to other departments is summarized in the table below.

Table 3 Lands of Forest Departments Transferred for Non-forest Uses since 1992 Total Area in Control Total Lands Province/Territory of Forest Departments transferred for Non- (1992) (ha) forest uses (ha) Khyber Pakhtunkhwa 1,312,000 2,678 Punjab 3,268,000 36,164 Sindh 1,087,000 110,071 Balochistan 1,325,000 5,544 Gilgit-Baltistan 3,050,000 Data not available AJK 567,000 1,458 Total 10,609,000 155,915 Source: FCPF (2014)

In addition to these official transfers there have been several illegal encroachments upon Government forest lands. While the Government of Pakistan has committed to increasing its forest area, there is also an increasing trend of expanding housing colonies, and industrialization that can also cause deforestation. Consultations and localized studies show that there have been significant land use change trends that show the conversion from forest to non-forest over the past 3 decades. The studies and consultations support the application of the Forest Transition Theory, which asserts that forest transitions are associated with socio-economic transformations towards increased industrialization and urbanization. In addition, the associated phenomena of abandoned agricultural land can also play a key role in transition. The literature review does present results from selected studies and their strengths and limitations should be noted. Qamer et al (2016) is an example of a robust application of GIS and remote sensing methodologies to understand forest cover change, but the study is only applied to Gilgit-Baltistan, Azad Jammu and Kashmir (AJK) and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP) provinces, which is about 23% of the land area in Pakistan. Interestingly, the research article presents the discrepancies and lack of consistency in studies on forest cover in Pakistan, noting that the lack of data is a sizeable obstacle for efficient forest management policies resulting from lack of systematic assessment (i.e. national forest inventory). Qamer et al (2016) describes the accuracy and validity of their results. In general, the research was found to have good accuracy for the forest classes. Regarding the non-forest classes, accuracy was viewed as low due to high seasonal variability of land cover classes. A report developed by WWF, under the targeted support fund of FAO for REDD+ on the basis of consultations workshops held in ten districts of Pakistan, analysed the drivers of deforestation and degradation and prioritized them in each forest type on subjective scale of 1-10 (Government of Pakistan 2015). In this report three categories of direct drivers have been indicated i.e. demand and consumption of products, land use change and natural or manmade hazards. The first category (i.e. demand and consumption of forest products) seems to be the most severe and critical followed by the second category (i.e. land use change) and then the third one (i.e. natural and manmade hazards). Regarding demand and consumption of forest products, fuel wood demand is the most critical one followed by timber smuggling and demand and then fodder demand and free grazing. Comparing the direct drivers of deforestation and forest degradation, timber demand and timber cutting is a serious issue in all forest types except mangroves. Fuel wood demand, fodder demand and grazing pressure are the most severe direct drivers in all the forest types. Mining is the most severe driver in scrub forests followed by moist temperate, riverine and dry temperate forests while in mangrove forest no such driver is present. Infrastructure development and forest land encroachment are the most sever drivers in scrub and moist temperate forests while in riverine and dry temperate forests these drivers are of moderate severity. Agricultural expansion is the most severe problem in all forest types except mangroves where such practices cannot be done. Drought has been indicated as the most severe driver in scrub forests followed by dry and moist temperate forests and then riverine forests. Flood is the most severe driver in riverine forests followed by scrub and then moist temperate forests while in dry temperate flood is of less severity. Mangrove forests have no problem of floods. Diseases and fires though found in all forest types are of low severity. The overall and forest type wise severity of direct drivers is summarized in the below graphs.

Figure 3 Severity of Direct Drivers of Deforestation and Forest Degradation in All Forest Types

Source: Government of Pakistan (2015) The indirect drivers of deforestation and forest degradation identified in the report can be broadly categorized into five categories i.e. social, political, legal, economic and resource management. Lack of alternatives, poverty, lack of awareness, shortage of energy and political influence are the most critical indirect drivers of deforestation and forest degradation. Lack of resources, unemployment, weak governance and policies, urbanization and unwise use of timber and fuel wood have been identified as the second most critical drivers. Remaining indirect drivers are of moderate severity. In Moist Temperate forests, population pressure, urbanization, political influence, unclear rights and concessions, lack of alternatives, shortage of energy and revenue based management are the most severe drivers causing forest degradation and deforestation. Regarding dry temperate forest poverty, lack of alternatives, weak governance and policies, unemployment, lack of resources and shortage of energy are the most severe drivers. In Scrub Forests urbanization, lack of awareness, poverty, unemployment, political influence, outdated legal instruments, unclear right and concessions, land tenure issues, lack of alternatives, lack of resources, shortage of energy have been identified as the most severe drivers. In Riverine Forests population pressure, lack of alternatives, unemployment, political influence, shortage of energy and low water flow in Indus have been identified as the most severe drivers. In mangrove forests population pressure, urbanization, lack of awareness, political influence, lack of alternatives and seawater intrusion are the most severe drivers. The severity of indirect drivers as a whole and forest type wise are illustrated in the given graph below.

Figure 4 Overall Severity of Indirect Drivers of Forest Degradation and Deforestation

Source: Government of Pakistan (2015) The Action Plan for the Implementation of a National Forest Monitoring System in Pakistan, see Government of Pakistan (2015), is also an important document for assessing national level drivers of deforestation and forest degradation. The document presents the latest acceptable estimates and statistics on forest cover in Pakistan using the FAO Forest Resource Assessment to understand temporal changes. However, the document also points out that the forest inventories carried out have been at the compartment level for economic management of forests. The sampling design most commonly used in these inventories is systematic random sampling with different sampling intensities varying among provinces. Therefore, all numbers on forest area and land use presented in this report must be viewed carefully noting their limitations.

4.2 Overview of Land Tenure, Titling and Natural Resource Rights Property Rights are protected by the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan 1973.Under Article 23 of the Constitution, “Every citizen of Pakistan shall have the right to acquire, hold and dispose of property in any part of Pakistan, subject to the Constitution and any reasonable restriction imposed by law in the public interest.” Furthermore, Article 172 of the Constitution states “Any property which has no rightful owner shall, if located in a province, vest in the Government of that province, and in every other case, in the Federal Government.” Subject to the law, every citizen of Pakistan has the right to hold private property49 and unless a land or property belongs to the Government it may be presumed to be in the ownership of a citizen of Pakistan (however if a property demonstrably has no rightful owner its ownership will

49 Article 23 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan: “Every citizen shall have the right to acquire, hold and dispose of property in any part of Pakistan, subject to the Constitution and any reasonable restrictions imposed by law in the public interest.”

vest in the relevant Provincial Government or otherwise the Federal Government)50. This also applies to forests within Pakistan with a particular forest either belonging to the relevant Government (or the Government having specified rights, such as the right to the produce of the forest, within that forest)51 or to individuals (or a community such as the category of Guzara forests in the provinces of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Punjab). Any forests, which have no rightful owner, shall vest in the relevant Provincial Government. The ownership and title to a forest or other rights such as a tenancy rights therein, as with other rural land, are by and large established by relevant entries in the revenue records, including the Record of Rights maintained by the Revenue Department under the Land Revenue Act 1967. Where a particular forest is owned by the Government outright or the broader sense that the Government has certain vested proprietary or usufruct rights within it, it may be legally ring- fenced by the Government in several ways such as being declared a reserved forest, a state forest or a protected forest (under the Forest Act 1927, Balochistan Forest Regulations 1890 (Chapter II section 3) and the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Forest Ordinance 2002 (Chapter II Section 4)). As far as public forests are concerned, the Government may restrict the use and benefit of the forests and the forest produce to private individuals, specifically prohibiting acts that may harm or damage a forest such as clearing forest land, felling, lopping and ring-barking trees, etc. Any benefits to be derived by private individuals in such public forests are regulated by and enjoyed at the discretion of the Government. While the Government may recognize and perpetuate rights traditionally enjoyed by individuals and communities within such public forests, such as certain rights to forest produce, these are not absolute and may be withdrawn by the Government at its discretion. Private individuals therefore cannot lay an automatic claim to public forests on the basis of historic or traditional use of such public forests. In addition to the vast powers in relation to public forests, in certain cases, the Government has also powers to interfere in private forests owned by an individual or community. For example, community owners of wastelands in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and individual owners of private forests in the AJK cannot unilaterally sell wood and timber from their forest land and have to obtain the permission of the Government in order to do so (KP Forest Ordinance 2002 Section 36, Azad Kashmir Rules for Sale and Development of Private Forests1984). While the details of land tenure and natural resource rights vary by province and are detailed in the section on forest governance below, it is clear that private individuals only enjoy rights in public forests at the discretion of the relevant Government and such rights are not absolute in nature. Gender Aspect in Forests In forests where community has users’ rights, both men and women are involved in fuel wood collection, animal grazing and household timber collection. However, women and children are mostly responsible for fuel wood collection and livestock grazing at the household level, when the forest is comparatively in a closer proximity. This is time consuming and heavy labour work

50 Sub Article 1 of Article 172 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan: “Any property which has no rightful owner shall, if located in a Province, vest in the Government of that Province, and in every other case, in the Federal Government.” 51 Section 3 of the Forest Act 1927: “Power to reserve forests. —The Provincial Government may constitute any forest-land or waste-land which is the property of Government, or over which the Government has proprietary rights, or to the whole or any part of the forest produce of which the Government is entitled, a reserved forest in the manner hereinafter provided.” [emphasis provided] Section 29 of the Forest Act 1927: “Protected forests: -The Government may, by notification in the official Gazette, declare the provisions of this Chapter applicable to any forest-land or waste-land which is not included in a reserved forest, but which is the property of, or over which the Government has proprietary rights, or to the whole or any part of the forest produce of which the Government is entitled.” [emphasis provided] Section 69 of the Forest Act 1927: “Presumption that forest-produce belongs to Government —When in any proceedings taken under this Act, or in consequence of anything done under this Act, a question arises as to whether any forest-produce is the property of the Government, such produce shall be presumed to be the property of the Government until the contrary is proved.” [emphasis provided] which the Government is entitled. Section 69 of the Forest Act 1927.

directly affecting health, energies, education and health status of both women and children. In addition, women are responsible for other household chores including fetching water from long distances. Reduction in forest cover has therefore, impacted women more severely than men in terms of covering long distances to reach to forest resources. The consultation process highlighted that women are generally not directly engaged or consulted in forest related projects/programs or routine forest management and conservation activities. Men, among the communities are the decision makers and point of contact for the department. Lack of women staff availability in the forest departments has complicated the situation further. Culturally, men from outside the local community are not allowed/appreciated to interact with women. Thus, women being key stakeholder in terms of 'forest users' remains uncovered in forest interventions to a large extent. There have been few donors funded projects which engaged directly with women through women staff, which have shown positive results especially in AJK and GB. Further, based on the its positive experiences, KP Forest Department has constituted a community development department which engages with forest users and owners including both men and women. Women engagement in projects and programs as forest users and managers have shown promising results. It was specially highlighted during consultations that awareness raising programs on forest management and conservation with women can add value to the sustainable forest management.

4.3 Synthesis of Land Tenure Across Provinces To better understand the complex dynamics of land use and land use change, that is closely related to land tenure and rights to access natural resources, the next table presents an overview of the different land tenure modalities and their relation to the use of natural resources, formal and informal. This table aims to illustrate the complexities and differences present in the country, and helps also to understand the diverse dynamics that occur.

Table 4 Land Tenure and Users’ Rights Balochistan

Forest Stakeholders User Rights Forest Type Legal document Classification Formal Informal Formal Informal Forest Department, resident Juniper forest /state Other communities Balochistan Forest Regulation State Forest community and board of Nomads and other community forest* including nomads/NGOs 1890 and Forest act 1927 revenue Pakistan Navy (they Forest department and Forest Fishermen come for fishing Protected operate under their own Mangrove Community as per rights given Department from Sindh and other areas but Forest act 1927 Forest mandate, but they have by the department. and local not for forest presence in mangrove) communities. Forest Department, resident Other communities Nomads and other Balochistan Forest Regulation Chalgoza forest State Forest community and board of including nomads/NGOs communities 1890 and Forest act 1927 revenue Board of Revenue/ Irrigation department and forest Riverine forest department^ and resident Forest Community community Influential people such as Department Balochistan Forest Regulation and state‐ land lords in the Sub‐tropical desert and local 1890 owned forest Forest department and adjoining areas or areas Olive‐Pistachio communities. Community as per rights given within the vicinities of Forest by the department. riverine forests Olive Acacia Forest Nomads Community (forest department Eastern and Natural Re generation and not only if plants have reached Southern Ranges covered under any act state forest land) Central Ranges Communal Local Forest Nomads communities Not covered under legal act as Western Ranges Local communities yet Alien/invasive Sulieman Mountain

Sindh Stakeholders User Rights Forest Type Forest Classification Legal document Formal Informal Formal Informal Local Communities sometime benefit from forest resources such as Forest Act 1927 Forest Department collecting falling and working plans branches and Forest Department controlled grazing during season etc. Local communities are allowed Illicit cutting is Riverine Reserved for seed collection during the controlled to a

season through passes given by greater extend by the Forest Department for prices. not 100 % Unsuitable Forest land for plantation can be leased out to farmers/private sector for 5 Agro Forestry Lessees Local years under formal agreement to NA Policy, 2005. Sindh communities return to forest department with under forest at least 50 % right on the forest Act grown areas by the lessee Local Communities sometime benefit from forest resources such as Forest Department Forest Department collecting falling Forest Rights branches and controlled grazing Irrigated Reserved during season etc. plantations Unsuitable Forest land for plantation can be leased out to Illicit cutting is farmers/private sector for 5 controlled to a years under formal agreement to Agro Forestry Lessees greater extend but return to forest department with Policy. Sindh not by 100 % at least 50 % right on the forest grown areas by the lessee

Stakeholders User Rights Forest Type Forest Classification Legal document Formal Informal Formal Informal Forest Department HH timber and fuel wood, Mangrove Forest Protected (Karachi Port Trust and NA Forest Act collection and Grazing rights Port Qasim) Range lands/ Local Communities, Forest Graziers from Forest act and Protected Protected Department, Board of other Grazing and fuel wood collection Livestock grazing working plans Forests Revenue communities Local Communities sometime benefit from forest Forest Department/ NHA, Linear Local resources such as There is no legal Unclassified Irrigation department and Plantation communities. collecting falling act for it concerned Municipalities branches and controlled grazing during season etc. Private Block forest department There is no legal and linear Unclassified Private farmers none Private farmers only monitor the growth act for it plantations of plantations

Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Forest Type Forest Classification Stakeholders User Rights Legal document Formal Informal Formal Informal Dry Temperate Reserved, Protected, and Forests Guzara Forests Forest department in case Forest Department, Guzara Moist Reserved, Protected, and of Reserved, Forest owners and local concession Temperate Guzara Forests Department and local holders. However, the local Sub‐tropical chir Reserved, Protected, and concession holders in case Landless people in case of protected and Forest Act 1927 pine forests Guzara Forests of protected forest, and Guzara forests have the rights for Sub‐tropical forest department and Reserved, Protected, and construction timber, fuel wood deciduous Guzara forest owners in Guzara Forests and NTFPS forests case of Guzara forests Mazri Forests Reserved and Community

Providence: Punjab Forest Type Forest Stakeholders User Rights Legal document Classification Formal Informal Formal Informal Moist Temperate forest/Deodar/Kail/fur/ Communities have rights to cut spruce/quercus trees for burials, HH timber Protected/ Sub‐tropical chir pine forest /Chir (current ban on green cutting). reserved pine/quercus, etc. Rights over dry and fallen Sub‐tropical forest/Ever green broad wood, grazing and fodders Forest Act 1927, leave scrub forest/Phulai/Kahu etc Forest Amended in 2010 Private sector Forest Department, grazing Irrigated plantations/canal side Reserved/ Department/ Illegal contributing to rights are given to employees plantations/Shesham/ eucalyptus unclassed Local encroachments Punjab Forest deforestation on limited scale Communities (Amendment) Act Linear Plantation/ Shelter Protected/ Forest Department, Irrigation 2016 belts/Shesham, Eucalyptus, Kekar reserved and Highway departments. Riverine Reserved/ Forest/Shesham/eucalyptus unclassed Forest Protected/ Department/Communities have Range Lands /Tropical Thorn reserved/ grazing rights forest/Caprus/kairir unclassed

Gilgit Baltistan Forest Type Forest Stakeholders User Rights Legal document Classification Formal Informal Formal Informal Resident Owners have all rights Montane sub‐tropical Scrub Private NIL Communities over their forest resources In case of Private forests, non‐ owners, are also accessing De facto Resident forest resources. These could be Owners have rights over rights over Montane Dry Temperate Communities, Forest Act, 1927 tenants or only local their forest resources. In grazing, fuel Coniferous/Deodar, Kail, Fur Spruce, Lessees, and with amendments of communities. In addition, case of protected forests, wood Chalghoza Forest 1993. Private Forest number of NGOs are working on communities have rights collection Protected Department Regulation 1970. forest/green sector over fallen/dead wood, and NTFPs, /Private Private Forest rules interventions n grazing, collecting fire as agreed 1975 Montane Dry Temperate‐ Broad wood, construction timber with Forest Resident leaves (with the permission of Department. Communities Seasonal Migrants Forest Department Sub Alpine/Birch, Juniper, Willow and Forest Department Northern Dry Scrub

Azad Jammu and Kashmir Forest Type Forest Stakeholders User Rights Legal document Classification Formal Informal Formal Informal Sub‐tropical broad leaves/Scrub NTFP collection other than forest State Owned Right of timber for commercial use, water usage, Forest Forest Regulation of Sub‐tropical chir pine forest Forest/ Private construction, fuel watermills by local residents. Department/ Nomads/ Seasonal II of 1930 as Moist temperate Forest Forests/ wood cutting, Nomads use grazing Resident Migrants amended from time Dry temperate Forest Communal grazing and grass lands/pastures under de facto Communities to time Sub‐alpine Forest Forest cutting arrangements with local Alpine pastures people

Federally Administered Tribal Areas Forest Stakeholders User Rights Forest Type Legal document Classification Formal Informal Formal Informal Alpine Pasture *Timer fuel wood, Localised agreements Dry Temperate/ grass cutting/fodder, between local communities Chalgoza and Deodar open grazing, NTFPs, and nomads/seasonal Moist Temperate Community forest Wild fruit collection migrants. This may include Forest laws and Acts are not forest/deodar, kail, fir, owners and (chalgoza, walnuts, cash transfers for forest extended to FATA and it does spruce community resident ficus) resource use or in kind Seasonal not have Forest Policy. The Community forest users /Forest mostly firewood and some of nonowners also get Oak Forests migrants and Revenue department Owned Forest department for hazel nut collection firewood and hazel nuts. nomads maintains record on forest Sub‐tropical Pine management through *Timer fuel wood, Localised agreements users and owners and their Forest/Chir the political grass cutting/fodder, between local communities respective rights Sub‐tropical broad administration. open grazing, NTFPs, and nomads/seasonal leaved ever green Wild fruit collection migrants. This may include forest/Olive, Acacia, (chalgoza, walnuts, cash transfers for forest Dodonaea sp. ficus) resource use or in kind Community forest owners and *Timer fuel wood, Localised agreements community resident grass cutting/fodder, between local communities Seasonal Community forest users /Forest open grazing, NTFPs, and nomads/seasonal Tropical Thorn Forest migrants and Owned Forest department for Wild fruit collection migrants. This may include nomads management through (chalgoza, walnuts, cash transfers for forest the political ficus) resource use or in kind administration.

5. REVIEW AND CONSULTATIONS OF DRIVERS OF DEFORESTATION AND FOREST DEGRADATION IN PAKISTAN This section presents the main drivers of deforestation and forest degradation identified from two sources: literature produced to date on the topic and a specific consultation made for this purpose as part of the assignment for this project. Acknowledging the differences among provinces and territories in the country, the results are presented separately to highlight the specificities of each one.

5.1 Balochistan

5.1.1 Literature Review According to Pakistan’s Readiness Preparation Proposal (R-PP), Balochistan reported 591,000 hectares of forest area, or about 13.5% of Pakistan’s 4.392 million hectares current forest area (FCPF, 2014). Balochistan is the largest province of Pakistan in terms of area and hosts multiple forest ecosystems. The most studied are the Juniper forests and Mangrove forests. According to various literature sources, Balochistan has approximately 140,000 hectares (ha) of Juniperus excelsa forests. Of this, some 86,000 ha are found in the Ziarat and Loralai districts (Achakzai et al, 2013). The dry temperate Juniper forest is the second largest Juniper forest in the world and contains trees as old as 2500-3500 years (Marcoux, 2000). The Juniper forests provide important ecosystem services, especially for watershed management. In Balochistan province, mangroves are located at three sites, MianiHor, KalmatKhor and Jiwani. According to a fairly recent image analysis, Balochistan has about 4,660 ha of mangroves along the Makran coast in 3 isolated pockets at MianiHor (4,018 ha), KalmatKhor (407 ha) and Jiwani (235 ha), see Abbas et al (2011) and Abbas et al (2013). The forests of Balochistan suffer from both natural and anthropogenic disturbances resulting in deforestation and forest degradation, as well as barriers to regeneration. The focus of this literature review is to review the direct and indirect drivers of deforestation and forest degradation in Balochistan’s forests. However, a brief review of the natural disturbances will also be presented, as these create challenges for regenerating the forests in the province in addition to human induced factors. Natural Disturbances

Natural disturbances in Balochistan’s forests include the heart rot fungus, drought, poor soil conditions, climate change and mistletoe. Batool et al (2012) conducted an evaluation of the extent of heart rot fungi infection and its impact on live Juniper trees in Ziarat Juniper forest and that the mode of infection was through tree wounds. They concluded that the infection severity was very high. Their research noted that pruning and debranching of trees by the community must be stopped to control heart rot and degradation of wood quality. While little is known about the infestation of dwarf mistletoe on Pakistan’s forests, there are studies which conclude that the incidence is a widespread threat to the Juniper forests of Balochistan. Signs of infestation in host trees include growth loss, deformities and tree mortality, see Sarangzai et al (2010). Climate change is expected to have significant social implications in Balochistan and its impacts are expected to be multi-sector, multi-dimensional and disrupt livelihoods and economic development, see IUCN (2012). Droughts in Balochistan can cause forest loss and further degradation through forest and range fires, reduced forest productivity, and increased dependence by communities on forests for grazing, see Shafiq et al (2007). Poor soil conditions have been attributed to slow radial growth and poor regeneration (Sarangzai et al, 2010) and are also exacerbated by droughts (Shafiq et al 2007). In mangrove forests, siltation is both a natural and human-induced phenomenon, which affects the ability of mangroves to regenerate. Siltation is caused by low discharge of the Porali River discharge into the lagoon due to human consumption of water, and low rainfall patterns and is exacerbated by human-induced deforestation and soil erosion (Saifullah et al 2002).

Direct and Indirect Drivers of Deforestation

Sarangzai et al (2010) noted that Juniper forests in Ziarat have exhibited widespread decline, attributing the decline over the last 60-70 years to a range of ecological, pathological, and socio- economic reasons. Sarangzai et al (2010) noted that over-grazing, illegal logging, collection of fuelwood, periodic drought and the effect of climate change have all contributed to drastic changes in species composition, regeneration patterns and productivity of forests in Ziarat, Balochistan. Achakzai et al (2013) concurred and found that the study of Ziarat Juniper forests indicates a high rate of deforestation when compared with regeneration and that this phenomenon is human-induced. Grazing is a key threat to regeneration as local communities are dependent on the forests to feed their livestock. Goats are the most preferred livestock and feed on small shrubs and vegetation. Sarangzai et al (2010) conducted a review of Juniper forests in Balochistan examining the direct and indirect drivers of deforestation and forest degradation. Their research found that the Juniperus excelsa forest in Balochistan had a long history of over-exploitation and degradation. Direct human-induced changes causing forest degradation in Juniper forests were noted as illegal logging for timber, selective felling of poles for graveyards and embankments, debarking Juniper tree trunks for thatching of huts, branch cutting for agricultural fencing and for hedges for sheep. Indirect drivers of degradation in Juniper forests were low forest investment, unorganized tourism, lack of awareness, lack of coordination and experimental research, especially on the seed germination, nursery raising and reforestation of degraded sites. There are different types of pastoral systems in Balochistan, but availability of livestock feed round the year is a major issue in all of the systems and mobility is a crucial factor. Pastoralists are compelled to use opportunistic grazing early in the season when grass is not at the optimal growth stage, which has a detrimental impact on both productivity and ecology (Ahmad et al. 2012). Islam and Adams (2000) found that increased human and livestock populations in the province have put tremendous pressure upon the rangeland resources for providing fuelwood, water, forage, and recreation. They estimated that rangelands provided forage for 33 million heads of livestock with an estimated monetary value of PKR 477 billion. However, numerous studies also indicate that the plant species in Balochistan tend to be deficient in digestible nutrients and in digestible protein and dry matter with respect to animal requirements (FAO 1983; Islam and Adams 2000; Ahmad et al 2009). Bazai (2012) found that a large proportion of population in a study i.e., 56% used forest wood for fuel, and it was obtained in different forms, e.g. by cutting the stems or branches. 28% of the community used wood for timber and 11% used the tree bark of the Juniper trees that make the trees vulnerable to diseases. Ahmed (1989) found that further indirect drivers of deforestation and degradation included increased human pressure for fuel wood needed for domestic energy, especially in the winter season, over grazing and extensive forest clearing for cultivation without replanting, housing construction, uncontrolled recreation and camping. Many of the causes of degradation identified in the studies are also barriers to successful regeneration of Juniper forests (Sarangzai et al 2010). Generally, studies noting the drivers of deforestation and forest degradation in Balochistan are numerous. However, no study was found to conduct a spatial temporal analysis with field verification techniques. This means that while the general drivers of deforestation and degradation are known but not distinguishable, their extent and underlying causes are not always apparent and warrant further study. The key anthropogenic drivers of deforestation and forest degradation that were confirmed in this review are:  Unsustainable/illegal timber and fuelwood collection  Forest clearing for cultivation  Livestock grazing  Horticultural practices

 Uncontrolled recreation and camping  Construction  Urban expansion.

Key indirect drivers of deforestation and forest degradation were:  Population growth  Migration  Economic development  Lack of awareness and coordination  Poor governance  Lack of forest investment  Poverty.

Natural disturbances and climate change were shown to make forest regeneration efforts challenging in Balochistan, and therefore priority should weigh on the protection and preservation of remaining forests, in addition to targeted regeneration.

5.1.2 DD Survey Results The drivers of deforestation identified in the literature review and in the survey, are in conformity with each other. The key direct drivers of deforestation and forest degradation are agriculture expansion, unsustainable wood extraction, grazing, infrastructure development, mining, urban/commercial expansion and harsh climatic conditions. The underlying drivers are wood energy needs, lack of alternative livelihoods, food security, no demarcation of forest boundaries, poor implementation of laws, lack of land use planning, droughts, low water table, low air moisture, obsolete laws, lack of resources, political interference, the lack of access to alternative sources of energy, and tribal and traditional barriers. The main challenges in increasing forest cover are lack of investment and financing, maintenance of recently planted area, lack of inter- departmental and inter-sectoral coordination. The drivers are not ranked in order or priority.

5.2 Sindh

5.2.1 Literature Review According to Pakistan’s Readiness Preparation Proposal (R-PP), Sindh reported 399,000 hectares of forest area, or about 9% of Pakistan’s current forest area (FCPF, 2014). Sindh’s forest resources are comprised mainly of mangrove forests and riverine forests. Sindh also has small areas of irrigated plantations and tree farms. Historically, Sindh has suffered from deforestation and forest degradation. However, recent planting efforts have reversed the trend. Sindh’s forests have been affected both by natural and anthropogenic factors over the last century. During the last few decades, large-scale transfers of Government forest lands for non-forestry and commercial purpose have taken place. These forest lands have been transferred permanently or on lease to various departments including Defence, Education, Housing, Agriculture, Roads, Building, Ports and Tourism departments. Sindh has seen the largest provincial transfer of Government forest lands transferred for non-forest land uses – a total of 110,000 ha. Forests in Sindh have both productive and protective functions. Riverine forests and irrigated plantations are forests with productive functions, while mangroves and rangelands primarily function as protective forests.

Table 5 Forest Resources in Sindh Province 2013 Type of Forest Area (ha) Riverine Forests 241,198 Irrigation Plantations 82,277 Mangroves 344,845 Rangelands 457,546 Total 1,125,866

Source: Tagar and Shah (2015)

Abbasi et al (2011) used remote sensing techniques to study the changes in forest cover in the Sukkur and Shikarpur divisions from 1979 to 2009. Their results showed that in the study area the forest cover changed from 22.67% of the area in 1979, to 5.97% in 2009. The table below summarizes their results.

Table 6 Results from the Spatial Temporal Analysis of Riverine Forest areas in Sindh Province 1979-2009 Year Landsat Landsat Landsat Landsat Landsat Landsat MSS MSS MSS MSS MSS MSS 1979 1992 1998 2000 2006 2009 % % % % % % Forest Cover 22.67 17.38 12.28 6.15 7.51 5.97 Water body 14.60 11.15 12.67 7.97 9.58 8.34 Grassland/Agriculture land 18.19 43.97 43.33 24.57 23.56 21.22 Dry/barren land 44.69 27.48 31.70 61.29 56.33 64.45

Source: Abbasi et al (2011) Siddiqui et al (2004) concur with the results. They used remote sensing and GIS techniques to monitor and map changes in riverine forests in Sindh between 1977 and 1998. They found that the construction of dams/barrages on the upper reaches of the river Indus for hydroelectric power and irrigation, significantly reduced the discharge water into the lower Indus Basin and as a result, 100,000 acres of forest disappeared during the study period. Between 1960 and 1980, Sindh’s riverine forests were reduced due to the Indus River embankment construction to divert river flow to irrigated agriculture. However, the riverine forests of Sindh are dependent on the Indus River water flow during the monsoon season to remain healthy. However, diversion of the river water for agricultural irrigation occurring during the drought has negatively affected the riverine forests reducing both ecological and productive function of forests, see Amanullah and Ahmed (2015). Amanullah and Ahmed (2015) noted that population pressure has driven deforestation and forest degradation in Sindh citing domestic fuel wood needs, livelihoods, indiscriminate cutting, and conversion to agriculture. They noted that climate change has also had an impact on riverine forests in the province. Tagar and Shah (2015) studied the causes of deforestation and environmental degradation in Sindh. Their study concluded that the mismanagement of wetlands, scarcity of water resources, rapid population growth, poor planning of urbanization and industrialization were the main causes of deforestation in Sindh. Abbasi et al (2012) used an analytic hierarchy process model to study and determine the dominant cause of deforestation of riverine forests in Thatta, Shikarpur, Sukkur, Dadu, Larkana, Nawabshah and Hyderabad. They studied both natural and anthropogenic causes including droughts, unauthorized cutting, poverty, unemployment, low literacy ratio, government, utilization, land encroachment, bad law and order situation, and land use for cultivation. They

found that droughts, unauthorized cutting and poverty were the three main factors causing deforestation. Menon et al. (2002) reviewed the literature on the impact and history of the water issue in Pakistan. The study noted that deforestation and desertification along the River Indus due to reduced flow of the Indus, as the water was the only source of regeneration and growth for these riverine forests. Tree-drying and mortality was noted, and the reason given was agriculture. Amjad et al (2007) studied the degradation of the Indus River and its impact on Mangroves. The study showed that between 1950 and 2000, there was a major loss of mangrove forest cover in Pakistan. They found that the factors responsible for the degradation of Indus delta mangroves were reduced flow of sweet water and silt from river Indus, inflow of pollutants from Industries, navigational activities and intermix of industrial effluents, browsing/ grazing by livestock, wood & fodder harvesting meandering and erosion of creek banks, over fishing and gradual rise in sea level. Other minor threats include lack of knowledge, mismanagement, over exploitation, browsing and less frequent and low tides over deltaic region. Sindh Forests and Wildlife Department, Government of Sindh, realizing an alarming situation of depletion of mangrove vegetation, initiated mangrove rehabilitation/development project with the assistance and partnership of the Asian Development Bank (ADB 2006), Government of Pakistan and Government of Sindh to mitigate the degradation process and loss of mangrove habitat. As per data compiled by the Office of Chief Conservator of Forests, Sindh, Pakistan, some 70,300 hectares have been rehabilitated/planted with local mangrove species during the last 20 years period from the year 1993 to 2012. The most fascinating aspect of these projects besides rehabilitating huge degraded areas is setting of two new “Guinness World Records” during the year 2009 and 2013. Recent site visits by the National REDD+ Strategy team found that restoration efforts over the past decade were beginning to reverse the trend of mangrove loss. The drivers of deforestation and forest degradation in Sindh province are controversial. In riverine forests, the construction of damns/embankments, and the diversion of river flow to irrigated agriculture have led to the reduction and loss of ecosystem and productivity function in riverine forests. To some extent, this has also affected coastal forests too. Other direct drivers of deforestation and forest degradation includes expansion of land for agriculture and fuelwood collection. Indirect drivers of deforestation and forest degradation in riverine forests were noted to be population pressure, and poor planning for urbanization and industrialization. In mangrove forests, the trend of forest loss has recently been reversed and mangrove forest cover is increasing due to the efforts of Sindh Forest department, with the support of NGOs and donors. The key barrier to improving forest cover through conservation and regeneration efforts in Sindh province is the availability and access to fresh water. Multiple studies have noted this will probably remain the challenge of the next century for Sindh.

5.2.2 DD Survey Results The survey and literature review were almost having similar results. The key direct driver of deforestation and forest degradation identified is the shortage of fresh water flow in the Indus basin due to embankments, construction of barrages, which affected both riverain and mangroves forests. Similarly, other drivers identified are unsustainable timber extraction; unsustainable fuelwood extraction, urban expansion, infrastructure development and cultivation. The major underlying causes of deforestation and forest degradation are lack of alternative livelihoods, unsustainable management of forests, poor implementation of laws, illegal logging, wood energy needs, food security, lack of demarcation of boundaries, and poor extension services. Policies such as agriculture lease policy, land grant policy, overall development policies (Hydro, Industrial etc.) and lack of coordination with departments such as revenue board etc. are also driving deforestation. The major barriers in increasing forest cover identified are investment and financing, maintenance of recently planted areas, securing land for afforestation, lack of management plans, water scarcity and other governance issues.

5.3 Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP)

5.3.1 Literature Review As of 2014, 21% of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa’s area or 1.3 million hectares were forests (Bureau of Statistics 2015). “Khyber Pakhtunkhwa in figures” statistic datasets indicate that during the reference period (2011-2014) the forest area in KP province has been slightly decreasing. However, over a long span of time the decrease is quite considerable. The study conducted by Sajjad et al. (2015) using GIS and remote sensing techniques has demonstrated a 12% decrease of the forest area over a 12-year span (2000-2012) in Barawal Valley in KP is similar to the results of other studies identifying a 13% decrease in the forest area of Swat and 11% in Shangla. Deforestation trends in KP over 40-year period are much more drastic; in Kalam the forest cover contracted by 30%, in Barikot 32%, in MalamJabba over 50% as the result of expanded agriculture and built-up areas (Banba 2017).

Figure 5 Khyber Pakhtunkhwa’s Forest Area Development 2011-2014

million ha 1.4

1.2

1.0

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0.0 2011/2012 2012/2013 2013/2014 Source: Khyber Pakhtunkhwa in figures 2013, 2014, 2015

Forests in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa are almost evenly distributed between 3 major categories: Guzara, protected and other forests, including village forests. Reserved forests comprise around 6% of forest lands.

Figure 6 Types of Forests in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, 2013

Reserved, 6%

Other, incl.village forest, 34% Protected, 29%

Guzara, 31%

Source: Implementation of Forest Laws in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (Afridi, 2013)

Dir Upper & Lower is the most forested district comprising 15% of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa’s forest lands, while Bannu, Malakand, LakkiMarwat, Peshawar, and Torghar are the least forested ones – altogether constituting 5% of KP’s forests. Distribution of forests in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa’s districts is presented in the table below:

Table 7 Khyber Pakhtunkhwa's Forest Area by Districts in 2013-2014 in Acres Forest area with District Area, ha % of total area Khyber Pakhtunkhwa 4,649,734 100 Abbottabad 199,710 4 Bannu 35,587 1 Battagram 246,839 5 Buner 273,765 6 Charsadda 176,877 4 Chitral 125,677 3 Dera Ismail Khan 74,525 2 Dir Upper & Lower 686,780 15 Hangu 181,645 4 Haripur 184,271 4 Karak 87,604 2 Kohat 70,654 2 Kohistan 481,064 10 LakkiMarwat 44,430 1 Malakand 30,479 1 Mansehra 536,426 11 Mardan 91,729 2 Nowshera 178,142 4

Forest area with District Area, ha % of total area Peshawar 55,043 1 Shangla 180,430 4 Swabi 109,888 2 Swat 409,247 9 Tank 188,919 4 Torghar 35,983 1

Source: Natural Resources in Khyber PakhtunKhwa (Pakistan) (Marwat, 2016)

In 2014 the KP Government launched the “Green Growth Initiative (GGI)” with the general aim of promoting sustainable development in the province. The Initiative has set an ambitious goal of increasing the forest area in the province by 2% annually and the density of 7% of degraded forests. Implementation of the Green Growth Initiative has been done through several projects, including the “Billion Tree Tsunami”, the KP National Parks project, and the “365 community micro-hydel” (Khan 2017). The “Billion Tree Tsunami” project aiming at reversing deforestation in the province has been included into the global Bonn Challenge and as of now, according to the officials, 80% of the 380 000 ha forest restoration goal in KP has been already reached and some 750 million new trees planted last year. The billion threshold is expected to be reached by the end of the year (Khan 2017).

The GGI was a direct response to the worsening deforestation in KP which by 2013 had led to depletion of 74% of forests in the province. One of the main reasons behind it is believed to be widespread illegal logging practices in addition to unjustified overharvesting of old and aged trees under the “windfall policy” (Khan 2017). According to the Research and Development (R&D) directorate, deforestation in KP has been the result of unavailability of other energy sources than fuel wood in the mountainous regions. The survey prepared by the directorate demonstrates that additional pressure on forest resources in the province has been caused by overgrazing (Ali et al. 2016).

Spatiotemporal Monitoring for Deforestation and Forest Degradation Activities in Selected Areas of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP) conducted by Khalid et al. (2016) has pointed out a different set of reasons behind deforestation in the study area naming heavy snowfall, landslides, flash flooding and earthquake as the most important ones. In addition, they also acknowledge contribution of illegal mining, lack of other energy sources apart from wood, poverty, as well as the lack of employment opportunities in contributing to the loss of forest cover in the study area. The study focusing on forest depletion and socio-economic factors carried on by Nazir et al (2011) has demonstrated that national urban planning, agricultural, construction and demographic policies take the biggest toll on KP’s forest resources, therefore their careful planning is the key in decreasing the amount of pressure on KP forests in future and gradual restoration of healthy forest cover. To sum up, the main factors which have led to deforestation in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa include:

 Overharvesting of old and aged trees by taking an advantage of the “windfall policy”  Unavailability of non-wood energy sources  Overgrazing and expansion of agriculture  Natural phenomena: heavy snowfalls, landslides, flooding, earthquakes  High dependency on natural resources due poverty and lack of jobs  Non-availability of bank loans  Illegal logging and wood smuggling  Illegal mining  Corruption  Lack of literacy and awareness of forest conservation needs

 Lack of practical proactive government policies and NGO work  Traditional use of wood for construction especially in mountainous regions  Simplicity of harvesting techniques and tools  Lack of planning  Forest fires.

5.3.2 DD Survey Results The drivers of deforestation identified in literature review and in the survey, are having similarities. The key drivers are agricultural expansion for subsistence, unsustainable wood extraction, urban expansion, mining, and infrastructure development, forest clearing for habitation and forest fires, both natural and intentional. The major causes of deforestation and forest degradation are high dependency on natural forest due to poverty and lack of alternative livelihoods in rural areas, illegal logging, poor extension services, lack of land use planning, problems in demarcation of forest boundaries, not enforcement of management plans, high population growth, lack of awareness and education, uncontrolled tourism, encroachments of forest land, tradition of excessive wood use by forest dwelling communities, simplicity of forest harvesting tools, developmental works and some laws such as mining act, etc. The major challenges in increasing forest cover are investment and financing, securing land for growing trees/forests, urban expansion, management of new forest areas, maintenance of forested area, uncontrolled grazing and fires.

5.4 Punjab

5.4.1 Literature Review According to Pakistan’s Readiness Preparation Proposal (R-PP), Punjab reported 529,000 hectares of forest area, or about 12% of Pakistan’s current forest area (FCPF, 2014) and consists of many different forest types including conifer, scrub, riverine, irrigated plantation, farmland trees, and other plantations. Punjab has large forest and farmland tree plantation resources and its irrigated forest plantations are rich in wildlife diversity. Punjab produces both soft and hard woods and its natural forests are facing severe deforestation resulting from unsustainable cutting to meet domestic wood fibre needs. Punjab is the most populous province in Pakistan. Shazard et al (2015) studied the sustainability of state owned and private owned forest ecosystems (sub-watershed area of Murree, Galliat region) using remote sensing and participatory approaches to demarcate boundaries. They found that both state-owned and private forests were converted from forest to non-forest between 2005 and 2011, and concluded that conservation is more effective in state-owned forests than private forests. The study revealed that between 2005 and 2011, a total of 5,500 ha had been deforested, of which 2,400 ha was state owned forest and 3,100 ha was private or community forests. Shazard et al (2015) identified the direct drivers of forest conversion of tourism, illegal cutting, forest fires and urban/commercial expansion in Murree. The indirect drivers of deforestation were attributed to weak law and policy enforcement applied to local encroachment and further clarification needed on rights of ownership and land tenure, see also Wani (2002). In addition, Shazard et al (2015) found that lack of proper record-keeping and an effective monitoring system were also indirect drivers of forest loss in the area. Ashraf et al (2014) also studied forest encroachments in Murree Forest Division (MFD). They found that Murree Forest Division comprised of 19,135 ha of state forest land, out of which 1,159 ha was identified as land encroached upon by the land grabbers, builders, and the timber mafia. Tanvir et al (2002) noted that over population stress has led to a growing imbalance between demand and supply of timber wood and wood products and that Pakistan is suffering from an acute shortage. Muhammad et al. (2011) found that increased agriculture and rapid urbanization has created pressure to clear forests and utilize the land for more economically viable options in Punjab.

Plantations and tree farming are a potential opportunity to improve the forest cover in Punjab and meet the wood fibre deficit. However, this literature review finds that there is multiple and contradictory research on the role of plantations and tree farming and their business case in Punjab. Azhar et al (2011) studied the Daphar Irrigated Plantation of Punjab province during 2006 to investigate the profitability of this plantation. Overall results showed that Daphar Irrigated Plantation was profitable but resulted in low net financial benefits. Reasons for low net financial benefits were attributed to high tree mortality, social/illicit tree felling and high initial costs. Azhar et al (2011) recommended that by adopting proper and improved techniques and managerial approaches, profitability can be increased significantly. Tanvir et al (2002) studied the rotation of farm-grown Eucalyptus canadensis based on maximum volume production and ultimate economic return in Central Punjab. Tanvir et al (2002) concluded that while the plantation was profitable, the rotation should be shortened (from 8 years to 4-5 years) to maximize income. Anjum et al (2013) studied the Kamalia Irrigated Plantation located in Tehsil Kamalia, District Toba Tek Singh over a ten-year period (1999-2009). The study indicated that the plantation suffered from huge economic losses during the period under study. It was recommended that government should start agroforestry practices on 30-40 per cent area of plantation, to make it profitable. Omer et al (2004) studied the ChichawatniI irrigated Forest Plantation between 1989 and 2000 and compared the use of indigenous and exotic tree species with similar irrigation conditions. They found that the water requirement for exotic species (E. camaldulensis) limits their potential for planting on farmlands since they compete aggressively with agricultural crops for water and nutrients. They recommended the planting of slower growing indigenous species Dalbergia sissoo and Melia azedarach for providing good quality timber and fuelwood on farmlands. Maan and Chaudhry (2001) studied irrigated forest plantations in Changa Manga, Daphar, Pakhowal and Kundian. They found that irrigated forest plantations are rich in wildlife diversity, and forestry operations, grass-cutting, kana stubbing and livestock grazing were major threats to wildlife. If forest operations were implemented with an objective to support wildlife management, it could help conserve the diversity of fauna. Abidi and Noor (2012) studied the economic efficiency and financial performance of the forest management plans for Changa Manga and Murree forests. Their results revealed that the forest department was working at breakeven point and that the management is risk prone to exogenous shocks. Their study concluded that the existing management plans are not efficient and that there is a need to improve the system and adopt a sustainable approach. Ahmad (2016) studied the importance of ecological restoration of a 128-year-old plantation of Changa Manga. The research noted that the forest had undergone increased degradation through mismanagement, fires, and illegal removal of trees since 1947. The main drivers of degradation of the forest were noted to be un-prescribed fires, water scarcity, corruption, lack of funds and improper management. The research recommended that future management should focus on implementing the law, increased community awareness and robust ecological monitoring and restoration. There is consensus in the literature that Punjab’s forests have suffered from deforestation and degradation in both privately owned and state forest areas. The direct drivers of deforestation and degradation are rapid urban expansion, unsustainable timber extraction and conversion of forests to agriculture land. The indirect drivers of deforestation were noted to be population pressure, wood fibre demand (also driven by population pressure), weak governance and law enforcement, ambiguous land tenure and lack of public awareness. Furthermore, the absence of a robust forest monitoring systems arguably has led to sub-optimal forest management and planning decisions. The literature on the profitability and feasibility of tree farms and forest plantations in Punjab revealed a spectrum of results, which could depend on site conditions, management and species. However, all literature reviewing the financial feasibility of tree farms and forest plantations found that improvements in management could improve the financial performance.

5.4.2 DD Survey Results The drivers of deforestation and forest degradation identified in literature review and in the survey, are in conformity with each other. The major drivers are agriculture expansion both commercial and subsistence, unsustainable wood extraction, infrastructure development, urban expansion, surface mining, habitation and forest fires. The major underlying drivers are livelihood dependence on forest and agriculture, population growth, poverty, wood energy needs, food security, lack of alternate livelihoods in rural areas, illegal logging, poor extension services, lack of land use planning, no demarcation of forest boundaries, poor implementation of forest laws, political interference, unclear land tenure, no right person for right job, policy making in isolation, unsustainable forest management, weak legislation, lack of awareness among masses regarding forests, water scarcity, lack of coordination with stakeholders, some laws such as tenancy act etc. as well as development projects. The main challenges in increasing forest cover are investment and financing, securing land for afforestation, urban expansion, management of afforested areas, uncontrolled grazing and fires.

5.5 Gilgit-Baltistan

5.5.1 Literature Review According to Pakistan’s Readiness Preparation Proposal (R-PP) the forest area and land classes are presented for Gilgit-Baltistan under the term Northern Areas and reported 666,000 hectares of forest area, or about 15% of Pakistan’s reported forest area (FCPF, 2014) and are mostly coniferous forests. Recent studies, using different methodologies and assumptions, have been conducted using remote sensing techniques and robust land cover classification techniques to measure the forest cover and land use change in Gilgit-Baltistan. Qamer et al (2016) produced land cover maps over three temporal points and included 14 land classes excluding settlements. The results are presented in the table below for Gilgit-Baltistan.

Table 8 Spatial Temporal Analysis of Land Cover in Gilgit-Baltistan 1990-2010 Category Land cover 1990 2000 2010 1990-2000 2000- 2010 Forest land Dense Coniferous Forest 45,226 44,248 41,800 -978 -2,448 Sparse Coniferous Forest 82,367 82,258 79,454 -109 -2,804 Dense Mix Forest 27,489 27,860 26,189 371 -1,671 Sparse Mix Forest 10,828 10,295 10,788 -532 493 Dense Broadleaved forest 2 2 2 0 0 Sparse Broadleaved forest - - - - - Sub-total forestland 165,912 164,663 158,233 -1,249 -6,430 Grassland Grasses/Shrubs 837,438 986,354 1,022,002 148,916 35,649 Alpine Grasses 6,126 26,263 24,785 20,137 -1,477 Cropland Agriculture Cropped 80,045 50,979 81,193 -29,066 30,215 Agriculture Fallow 38,852 69,787 14,069 30,936 -55,718 Other land Bare soil/Rock 2,427,343 3,115,46 3,024,594 688,203 -90,953 Snow Glacier/ice 2,962,873 1,877,379 1,934,108 -1,085,493 56,729 Wetlands Water bodies 19,631 23,864 29,485 4233 5,621 Peatland 353,995 577,378 603,743 223,383 26,365 Total 7060,125 7,058,788 7,052,443 2,980,767 488,882

Source: Qamer et al (2016) The results show that Gilgit-Baltistan’s land cover changes have been very dynamic. Of relevance, dense forest classes have continued to decline for coniferous and mixed forest over the twenty-year period, indicating degradation and deforestation. When the results are

aggregated for the forestland category, the results show that Gilgit-Baltistan lost more than 7,600 ha of forest area during the analysis period 1990-2010. There was a significant reduction in other land classified as snow/glacier/ice of more than 1,000,000 ha, while water bodies increased between 1990 and 2000 indicating significant impacts of climate change. The study assessed the changes in forest cover assessing deforestation, degradation and regeneration and the net changes. The results are presented in the table below.

Table 9 Forest Cover Change 1990-2010 in GB Forest Cover Change in Gilgit-Baltistan Province Net Total Area Deforestation Degradation Regeneration Annual Rate change 6,892,214 7680 2701 2 10,379 -0.31

Qamer et al (2016)

Gilgit-Baltistan suffered from deforestation and forest degradation during the twenty-year analysis period. Regeneration was very modest with only 2 ha regeneration detected. Qamer et al (2016) identified hotspots at the sub-district level for deforestation and degradation in Gilgit- Baltistan. The sub-district of Chilas had the highest rate of deforestation between 2000 and 2010 exceeding 3,500 ha. Darel/Tangir reported the second highest rate of deforestation between 2000 and 2010 exceeding 2,000 ha. Astore was the sub-district with the third highest rate of deforestation, which was much less than Chilas and Darel/Tangir. The results correlate with a study by Ahmad et al (2012), who used GIS and different classification parameters to examine the changes in coniferous forests and disaggregated the results for the Northern Areas. The study found that coniferous forest areas had been lost and had degraded, noting that only 9% of the coniferous forests have tree canopy cover of more than 75%. This observation was further supported by an anonymous FAO study quoted in Ahmad et al (2012) showing that the Northern Areas have an even worse condition than other provinces where 72% of area under coniferous forest has a tree cover density below 25%.

Table 10 Forest Cover Change (Conifer) 1992-2010 in the Northern Areas (GB) Status of Vegetation Cover (Hectares) Annual Change % 1992 1997 2001 2005 2010 Northern Areas 660,000 312,000 318,000 301,000 285,000 -0.08

Source: Ahmad et al (2012) Many studies have examined the drivers of deforestation and forest degradation in Gilgit- Baltistan and the prevailing theory of Himalayan environmental degradation. Ali and Benjaminsen (2004) collected local data on fuelwood consumption and timber extraction from Basho Valley. The results demonstrated that forest degradation and deforestation over three decades was primarily driven by unsustainable commercial harvesting and mismanagement and referred to the timber mafia and the Government as driving the largest extent of the forest depletion in the 1970s and 1980s. The degradation of the commercial harvesting depleted the forest to such an extent that “local use is also starting to have an impact on the forest”. The local use is driven by fuelwood and local housing construction needs. Ali and Benjaminsen (2004) noted that the forests in Basho valley are at risk of being lost within the next decade at the current speed of extraction, unless alternative sources of energy or wood for fuel are made available. Ali and Benjaminsen (2004) noted that grazing and the conversion of forest land to agriculture have influenced forest cover to a lesser extent. Other indirect drivers of deforestation have been identified as sectarian disputes and increased access to forest resources in Darel/Tangir and Chilas valleys, see Gohar (2002).

Ali et al (2014) conducted a baseline study for Dayan Valley in Astore District. They found that vegetation had been disturbed and noted that vegetation had been overexploited as lopping and uprooting of trees is frequently practiced by forest dependent communities to get timber and fuelwood, as well as medicinal herbs. They noted that this practice also creates a barrier to regeneration. Their study noted that the use of wood for housing, furniture, and fuelwood for cooking and heating is inefficient and leads to higher extraction than necessary. Finally, the study noted the role of excessive use of pastures for livestock grazing and its impact on palatable grass species and the increase in soil erosion. Akbar et al (2011) made a quantitative study on forest vegetation in three districts of Gilgit- Baltistan and observed illegal cutting in Rama and Skardu districts noting that the canopy was mostly open (degradation) but in some areas, it was closed. More recently, Akbar et al (2013) investigated the forest size class structure in Astore, Gilgit and Skardu districts. Their study found that anthropogenic disturbances have affected the quality of the forest stand structure owing it to many human driven activities such as grazing, cutting, sliding and burning. They concluded that prompt action is required to stop current practices from eradicating the remaining stocks. Khan et al (2013) studied the high-altitude rangelands and their interfaces in Gilgit-Balitstan and found that the lower timber line ecotone is undergoing excessive degradation and severe erosion due to intensive farming, deforestation, infrastructure development, and frequent hazards like flash floods, mudslides, and landslips. It is further threatened by the expansion of farming activities, road networks, resorts and other infrastructure. Their study noted that the number of livestock in Gilgit-Baltistan, especially cattle, sheep, and goats, increased from 0.88 million in 1976 to 2.45 million in 2006, an increase of 1.67% per annum. This causes increased pressure on the ecosystems and exacerbated by the lack of a proper rangeland management system. Khan et al (2013) also noted various exploitative uses of range lands such as agriculture, extraction of plant biomass for fuelwood and rapid infrastructure. Hussain et al (2015) studied the pasture condition trends, biomass productivity, carrying capacity, possible influences of grazing on alpine grasslands and key issues of Deosai National Park in Gilgit-Batistan and concur with Khan et al (2013). Hussain et al (2015) found that the average biomass production was low following a decreasing trend, and noted that heavy influx of nomads, free grazing by peripheral communities, extraction of fuelwood and medicinal plants, as well as unmanaged tourism were major issues affecting the environmental health of the national park. The park did not have a buffer zone. The construction of the Karakorum Highway (KKH), which links Pakistan with China, also played an important role in accelerating deforestation. The KKH facilitated easy and cheap transport of timber to other areas, and opened previously isolated forested valley areas, see Ali et al (2005). Other studies have noted the incidence of deforestation and forest degradation as the result of constructed roads in Gilgit-Baltistan. Schickhoff (1998) found that healthy forest stands were found in valleys with no roads, while degraded forest areas were found in valleys they have been linked with roads to the KKH. Regeneration of forests have multiple challenges and barriers given the climatic and mountainous growing conditions, slow growing species, occurrences of natural disasters, and human activities that reduce the potential for successful regeneration. Khan et al (2015) studied the present status and future trend of the tree species of forest in the study area of Ganji Valley in Skardu district. The study concluded that most of the stands have few seedlings, less young trees or they do not show signs of seedling establishment or are prone to anthropogenic disturbances. In a separate study, Khan et al (2015b) studied the distribution of Chalghoza forest in Goharabad District Diamer. The study found that most of the forests have few seedlings and young trees or they do not show signs of seedling establishment. The poor regeneration was attributed to both anthropogenic (nuts collection, cutting, grazing, burning, etc.) and natural (land sliding, floods) causes. Historically, the primary cause of deforestation and forest degradation in Gilgit-Baltistan has been unsustainable commercial harvesting and illegal cutting. This has reduced the capacity of

current forests to supply a sustainable source of fuelwood and timber for local housing, cooking and heating needs. The forests that remain are highly degraded, and local dependence on these forests is high driving further degradation and loss of forests. Secondary drivers of deforestation and forest degradation in Gilgit-Baltistan are the construction of roads, overgrazing of animals and farming practices. Population increases in both humans and livestock are an indirect driver of deforestation and forest degradation, following the theory of Himalayan environmental deterioration. Regeneration of forests encounters multiple challenges from anthropogenic and natural occurrences and will require a high degree of management by both the communities and state to be successful.

5.5.2 DD Survey Results The results of survey and literature review regarding deforestation and forest degradation are complimenting each other. The main drivers are unsustainable commercial harvesting and illegal cutting of trees which was further exacerbated by the ban on commercial logging in the year 1992. Agricultural expansion, infrastructure development such as roads, transmission lines, urbanization, excessive cutting for firewood due to severe cold and free grazing are other drivers of deforestation. The major underlying causes of these drivers are population growth (both human & livestock), livelihood dependence on forests, lack of alternative livelihoods, poor enforcement of laws, poverty, and no clear demarcation of boundaries, not respecting the prescriptions of forest management plans, extreme cold temperature and food security. There are other reasons such as the ambiguous status of the territory (which suffers due to delays in approval), the archaic forest laws which are not compatible with present day realities, some policies such as hot and cold allowance for government employees are also driving deforestation. The major challenges in increasing forest cover are investment and finance, securing land for afforestation, free grazing, lack of land use planning and extreme cold conditions.

5.6 Azad Jammu and Kashmir

5.6.1 Literature Review According to Pakistan’s Readiness Preparation Proposal (R-PP), Azad Jammu and Kashmir (AJK) reported 417,000 hectares of forest area, or about 10% of Pakistan’s current forest area (FCPF, 2014) and are mostly coniferous forests. The state’s forests have high ecological significance because of their ecosystem functions such as maintaining soil stability in watershed catchment areas in the Himalayan Mountains. The ecosystem values of AJK’s forests not only serve AJK, but can potentially contribute to providing downstream ecosystem services for both Sindh and Punjab provinces as well. In AJK, forestry and forest products form an important component of local livelihoods and income and coniferous forests are of higher quality when compared to other provinces, where 50% of the forests have a cover density above 75%, (Ahmad et al, 2012). Ahmad et al (2012) found based on a GIS analysis that AJK’s coniferous forest cover has changed (see table below) over the past 20 years, however, the results show that AJK’s forest cover remains relatively stable in the long run.

Table 11 Forest Cover Change (Conifer) AJK 1992-2010 Status of vegetation cover Annual Change rate (1992 base yr)

Year 1992 1997 2001 2005 2010 AJK 241,000 289,000 267,000 288,000 272,000 0.71

Source: Ahmad et al (2012)

More recent studies, using different methodologies and assumptions, have been conducted using remote sensing techniques and robust land cover classification techniques. Qamer et al

(2016) produced land cover maps over three temporal points and included 14 land classes and exclude settlements. The results are presented in the table below for AJK.

Table 12 Spatial Temporal Analysis of Land Cover in AJK 1990-2010 Category Land cover 1990 2000 2010 1990- 2000- 2000 2010 Forest Dense Coniferous Forest 171,149 169,521 167,689 -1,628 -1,832 land Sparse Coniferous Forest 112,300 112,585 112,971 285 386 Dense Mix Forest 90,731 89,811 87,182 -920 -2,629 Sparse Mix Forest 28,165 28,093 29,850 -72 1,757 Dense Broadleave forest 31,902 30,926 30,478 -976 -448 Sparse Broadleave forest 25,320 26,061 25,720 741 -341 Sub-total forestland 459,567 456,997 453,890 -2,570 -3,107 Grassland Grasses/Shrubs 264,641 283,624 265,091 18,983 -18,533 Alpine Grasses 3,738 12,577 12,124 8,839 -453 Cropland Agriculture Cropped 244,013 199,687 243,158 -44,326 43,471 Agriculture Fallow 8902 75,066 41,127 66,165 -33,940 Other land Bare soil/Rock 94,742 117,154 116,083 22,412 -1,071 Snow Glacier/ice 86,161 34,621 33,338 -51,540 -1,283 Wetlands Water bodies 25,727 7,765 22,681 -17,962 14,916 Total 1,187,492 1,187,492 1,187,492

Source: Qamer et al (2016)

The results show that in AJK, land cover changes have been dynamic. Importantly, dense forest classes have continued to decline in all forest classes – coniferous, mixed forest and broadleaved forests over the twenty-year period, indicating degradation. When the results are aggregated for the forestland category, the results show that AJK lost more than 5,600 ha of forest area during the analysis period 1990-2010. Other land categories such as cropland and grassland increased. There was a significant reduction in other land classified as snow/glacier/ice of more than 50,000 ha, indicating significant impacts of climate change. The study estimated the changes in forest cover assessing deforestation, degradation and regeneration and the net changes. The results are presented in the table below.

Table 13 Forest Cover Change 1990-2010 in AJK Forest Cover Change in AJK Province Total Area Deforestation Degradation Regeneration Net change Annual Rate 1,187,492 6,965 6,113 1,288 11,789 -0.13

Qamer et al (2016)

AJK suffered from deforestation and forest degradation during the twenty-year analysis period. Regeneration was modest with about 1,288 ha regenerated. Qamer et al (2016) identified hotspots at the sub-district level for deforestation in AJK. These areas include Athmuqam, Kotil, and Muzaffarabad. Qamer et al (2016) discussed the results and noted that according to their study AJK had the lowest rate of deforestation when compared with Gilgit-Baltistan, Balochistan and KP/FATA provinces. The primary cause of deforestation was driven by demand for fuelwood, indirectly driven by population growth.

Many studies have examined the incidence of fuelwood consumption on AJK’s forests. Shaheen et al (2016) noted that fuelwood is a major energy source for rural populations in Kashmir

Himalayas and has resulted in forest degradation. The study concluded that increased fuelwood harvest, combined with low tree density, high population growth and severe climatic conditions, is causing deforestation and associated biodiversity loss. Ahmad et al (2012) noted that conifer forests in Pakistan are under intense pressure due to commercial harvesting for fuelwood and timber. The study also notes that the demand was driven by population growth. Shaheen et al (2011) found that rural households in the Himalayas are highly dependent on fuel wood for their energy needs. Higher fuelwood consumption is mainly due to lack of alternative energy sources and drives deforestation and forest degradation. The study concluded that the present consumption level of the forest resources far exceeded the carrying capacity and natural regeneration rates of the local forest resources. According to the environmental and social profile of Athmuqam District (Environmental & Social Profile of Athmuqam District, 2007), the primary source of energy for heating and cooking in the macro-environment of DHQ Athmuqam is fuel wood mainly extracted from the nearby forest area. Secondary sources include electricity, LPG and kerosene oil. Electricity has been provided to about 70% households. Fuelwood and unsustainable timber extraction is not the only threat to forests in AJK. Shaheen et al (2011) found that anthropogenic disturbances showed a significant negative impact on distribution of medicinal and palatable species. Unpalatable species dominated the local flora, indicating the heavy grazing pressure in the area. Miller (1999) noted that Himalayan pastures have been grazed intensely for centuries. However, the available grazing area per animal has been observed to decrease, see Malik (1988) and Misri (2003). Rangelands for grazing are stressed and overgrazing has become a norm, (FAO, 1987). More recently, Cochard and Dar (2014) found that population growth had driven growth in livestock, particularly sheep and goats, and there are high livestock densities (>2 animals per hectare) in and around Machiara National Park in Pakistan administered Kashmir, resulting in degradation of pasture in sensitive areas. Siddiqui et al (2010) found that disturbance in the native forests may provide the opportunity for invasion of aggressive exotic species that may prevent or slow down native species from re- establishment. To enhance growth of native species, grazing and fire should be allowed in a controlled manner. This will not only reduce the rate of soil erosion, increase the fertility, but will also provide better chances for seedling survival and growth of conifers in natural forests. Seedling regeneration status of various coniferous forests should be assessed. Amjad et al (2014) studied species diversity and regenerating capacity in the forest of Nikyal valley in relation to environmental variables and underlying anthropogenic influence. They identified human induced factors of animal grazing as a barrier to regeneration. In addition, they noted that because of deforestation, soil had been washed out and rocks were exposed, creating further barriers to successful regeneration. Sudmeier-Rieux et al (2007) reported that forested areas in AJK are less susceptible to be affected by landslides than sparsely vegetated areas. The study clearly revealed that area covered by forests suffered much fewer landslides than deforested areas. Different methodologies and assumptions produce different results on the magnitude of trends affecting the forests in AJK. The most thorough assessment to date has been conducted by Qamer et al (2016) who found that deforestation and forest degradation, as well as natural regeneration, is a problem in AJK. The direct drivers of deforestation are fuelwood extraction for household and commercial purposes. In addition, animal grazing is a significant driver of deforestation and degradation in the state, which also creates a barrier to regeneration. The indirect drivers of deforestation in the AJK are population growth and the increasing number of livestock needing pastureland for grazing. All studies noted that the current forest and land use in AJK is unsustainable, but noted the importance of forests contribution to economic, social and environmental values.

5.6.2 DD Survey Results The results of DD survey and the literature review on drivers of deforestation and degradation are supporting each other. The key direct drivers of deforestation are expansion of agriculture mainly for subsistence, unsustainable wood extraction especially the firewood, infrastructure development including roads, power projects, habitations, mining and free grazing. The

underlying causes are livelihood dependency on forest and agriculture, wood energy needs, illegal logging/cutting, lack of alternative livelihoods, lack of land use planning, food security, no clear demarcation of forest boundaries, growth in human and livestock population, no enforcement of forest management plans, poor governance, political pressure while enforcing forest laws, tension on the line of control, influx of refugees, nomadic activities, lack of cross sectoral coordination and overriding effects of other laws. The major challenges in increasing forest cover are investment and financing in forest sector, uncontrolled grazing of restoration sites, securing land for afforestation, less awareness among masses, uncontrolled tourism and fires.

5.7 Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA)

5.7.1 Literature Review The latest available FATA Development Statistics (Bureau of Statistics 2015) contains the following forest cover data for FATA’s tribal agencies and frontier regions:

Table 14 Forest Area in FATA in 2014-2015 in Acres Man-made Linear Natural Total forest Forest area forest/ plantation Agencies/FRs Total area forest area with % of artificial (avenue (estimated) covered total area plantation kilometre) FATA 6,636,999 334,538 3,304 966,014 1,303,856 19,65 Bajaur 339,530 42,998 193 21,359 64,550 19,01 Khyber 644,618 35,118 170 20,000 55,288 8,58 Kurram 834,815 61,113 931 119,271 181,315 21,72 Mohmand 568,100 41,335 280 8,000 49,615 8,73 North Waziristan 1,162,487 29,629 576 127,400 157,605 13,56 Orakzai 384,869 33,015 215 161,645 194,875 50,63 South Waziristan 1,585,449 48,974 713 410,946 460,633 29,05 FR Bannu/Lakki 183,992 10,022 0 13,902 23,924 13,00 FR D.I. Khan 475,213 6,591 87 40,948 47,626 10,02 FR Kohat 112,338 10,073 48 1,997 12,118 10,79 FR Peshawar 65,312 7,295 91 500 7,886 12,07 FR Tank 280,276 8,375 0 40,046 48,421 17,28

As of 2015 almost 20% of FATA’s area or almost 528 000 hectares were forests, one fourth of which were plantations. Nearly two thirds of forest lands in FATA were concentrated in the most forested districts, such as South Waziristan, Orakzai and Kurram, while Khyber, Mohmand and North Waziristan were the least forested ones. FATA Development Statistic sets available for 2009, 2013, and 2015 demonstrate that during the reference period (2007-2015) the forest area in FATA has been growing. A rapid increase in the forest area during 2013-2014 in comparison to the preceding year, which can be noted from the graph below, may be explained by the fact that the area of the natural forest estimated by the officials has more than doubled

Figure 7 FATA's Forest Area Development, 2007-2015 million acres 2.0 1.8 1.6 1.4 1.2 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.0 2007/2008 2008/2009 2009/2010* 2010/2011 2011/2012 2012/2013 2013/2014 2014/2015

Source: FATA Development Statistics 2009, 2013, 2015 Note: *no data for 2009-2010 available, added as an arithmetical trend line

FATA Sustainable Development Plan for 2007-2015 (FATA Civil Secretariat 2006) describes that FATA’s forests are mostly composed by such coniferous tree species as Chilghoza (Pinus gerardiana), Kail (Himalayan pine, Pinus wallichiana), Deodar (Himalayan cedar, Cedrus deodara), Chir (Pinus roxburghii) and other shrubs and such broadleaved species as oak (Quercus ilex, Q. dilatata), but also Ber (Zizyphus mauritiana), Gurgura (Monotheca buxifolia), Neem (Azadirachta indica), Amaltas (Indian laburnum, Cassia fistula) and Walnut (Juglans regia). The Plan points out that official forest cover data in FATA, is not reliable.

Although several sources criticize the reliability of the forest cover data provided by the official sources, the study conducted by Baig and Straquadine (2011) demonstrated based on the “ground survey of randomly sampled areas based on Area Frame Sampling (AFS) and satellite image classification” that the land use data provided by the FATA secretariat and Federal Bureau of Statistics had actually the accuracy rate of 91.82% (or a 1.72% difference for forests).

The Pakistan Space and Upper Atmosphere Research Commission (SUPARCO) together with FAO has recently announced completion of a land cover for FATA and the results are said to be published in an atlas after they go through the quality control. Whether the estimates of SUPARCO are close to those regularly published in FATA’s development statistics remain to be seen.

According to the Agricultural Policy for FATA (Government of Pakistan, 2014) covering the ten- year period from 2014 till 2024, the total forest area of the FATA is some 529,282 ha, but it could be potentially increased to as much as 1,446,413 ha. Presently, most of that area which could be reforested is rangelands degraded due to overgrazing. It is also recognized that reforestation of rangelands in FATA would, among others, improve the water table in FATA as many rangelands are situated in catchment areas. The policy document underlines that one of the main reasons behind FATA’s degrading forest cover is its arid conditions with the majority of the territory stretching over dry arid and semi-arid zones with quite common long-lasting droughts. Secondly, overexploitation of land resources due to overgrazing and high dependency of increasing population on agriculture also poses an addition pressure on forest resources. In addition, the situation is worsened by illegal logging, constant conflicts over land tenure, lack of control and undiligent forest management practices. The Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper for Pakistan (International Monetary Fund, 2010) names similar reasons for the decrease in FATA’s forest area, including continuous droughts and grazing, but also points out the negative effect of wood harvesting for own needs of the

population (e.g. fuel wood extraction) and export which has jointly led to harvesting in volumes beyond sustainable. Furthermore, FATA Sustainable Development Plan for 2007-2015 (Civil Secretariat FATA 2006) mentions over-exploitation of land by Afghan refugees as one of the factors which have contributed to deforestation in FATA, although this trend has been diminishing. In addition, it points out that present monitoring and regulatory activities in the forest sector are insufficient and, moreover, there is no forest legislation in the province resulting in the lack of demarcation of different forest categories and control over harvesting activities. Protection of land and forest tenure rights is challenging as land settlement has been done only in one agency in FATA – in Kurram– and tenure rights in the province are mostly customary. The authors admit the fact that the recovery of the forest cover and their productivity might take much time as the ability of forests resources to regenerate has significantly decreased. The reasons of deforestation in FATA listed in official policy documents are also mirrored in scientific sources. Thus, the problem of illegal timber harvesting and pressure on forest resources due to extraction of fire wood is mentioned by Ajaib et al. (2014). Ajaib et al. consider fuel wood harvesting the most significant cause of deforestation in Parachinar, Upper Kurram Agency and explain it with no availability of the natural gas which could be used by local people for cooking. Deforestation being the result of refugee resettlement from Afghanistan and customary ownership of forest and land resources have been admitted by Khokhar et al (2014). However, from another side, Thomas (1995) is of another opinion stating that deforestation and overgrazing had been in FATA and NWFP even before the long-scale refuge fleeing started. To sum it up, the official policy documents and scientific sources list the following main factors which have led to deforestation in Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA):  Arid and semi-arid climate with long periods of droughts  Overgrazing and/or uncontrolled grazing of livestock  Increasing population and dependency on agriculture  Illegal logging, including export and fuel wood harvesting for cooking  Over-exploitation of land and forests by Afghan refugees  Customary forest and land tenure  Insufficient governmental control, monitoring and enforcement of regulations related to forest resources  Lack of sustainable forest management practices and forest legislation.

5.7.2 DD Survey Results The results of literature review and DD survey are in conformity with each other. The major direct drivers of deforestation and forest degradation are agricultural expansion, unsustainable wood extraction, infrastructure development including roads, habitation, mining, free grazing and forest fires. The key underlying drivers are poverty, food security, lack of alternative livelihoods, influx of Afghan refugees, indiscriminate cutting for timber and firewood purposes, poor law and order situation, ruthless tree cutting by militants, forest clearing for security purposes and no extension of forest law into FATA. The key barriers to increasing forest cover are investment and finance, free grazing and management/maintenance of areas recently afforested.

5.8 Prioritized Drivers of Deforestation and Forest Degradation Consultations with stakeholders provided important elements for the analysis of drivers of deforestation and forest degradation. The following table was developed with the results from discussions during consultations. The table shows the drivers of deforestation and forest degradation that stakeholders perceived as the most important. These results will need to be strengthened with the outcomes from the development of the National Forest Monitoring System (NFMS), MRV and Forest Reference Emission Level (FREL)/Forest Reference Level (FRL).

Table 15 Drivers of Deforestation and Forest Degradation by Province Drivers of Forest Drivers of Deforestation Degradation Main Causes Challenges • Commercial Agricultural Expansion • Unsustainable timber • Poor implementation of laws, and obsolete • Investment and financing in forest • Agricultural expansion for extraction laws restoration efforts was seen as the key subsistence: fruit orchards • Unsustainable fuelwood • Weak judicial system, legal cases lengthy to challenge and barrier to future restoration • Encroachments extraction resolve efforts by all forest officers • Unsustainable timber extraction • Heavy grazing • Lack of awareness • Maintaining areas where recent planting • Unsustainable fuelwood extraction • Urban expansion • Lack of coordination in government offices. had occurred and financing nurseries to • Mining, especially surface mining • Mining • Wood energy needs (everyone agreed) cultivate seedlings were also viewed as • Urban expansion • Commercial agricultural • Livelihoods dependent on agricultural barriers. Uncontrolled grazing was viewed • Infrastructure development (roads) expansion subsistence (everyone agreed) as a major threat to forest restoration • Forest clearing for livestock grazing • Infrastructure • No demarcation of boundaries (most efforts

Balochistan • Forest clearing for habitation development agreed) • Other challenges that make forest • Forest clearing for small scale • Small scale agricultural • Food security (less than half agreed) restoration efforts difficult include agriculture practices • Poor extension services (most agreed) planning and management of new forest • Drought • Poor land use planning (most agreed) areas, urban expansion, water scarcity, • Climatic conditions • Lack of alternative livelihoods in rural areas no political will and lack of interest from (most agreed) tribal elders as well as lack of inter- • Unsustainable forest management (half departmental and inter-sectoral agreed) coordination and ownership on the issue

Drivers of Forest Drivers of Deforestation Degradation Main Causes Challenges • Infrastructure development e.g. roads • Forest fires • Population growth • Investment and financing • Urban expansion • Agricultural expansion • Poverty • Securing land for growing trees/forests; • Forest clearing for habitation • Forest clearing for • Weak monitoring • Urban expansion • Mining especially surface mining livestock grazing • Wood energy needs • Planning and management of new forest • Commercial Agricultural expansion • Unsustainable timber • Food security areas (Cotton, Sugarcane, wheat, sunflower extraction • Livelihoods dependent on agricultural • Maintaining areas where recent etc.) • Unsustainable fuel subsistence plantings have occurred • Agricultural expansion for wood extraction • Lack of alternate livelihoods in rural areas • Uncontrolled fires subsistence, encroachments. • Urban expansion • Illegal logging • Uncontrolled grazing of restoration sites • Floods • Mining • Poor extension services • Political hurdles • Water scarcity. • Infrastructure • No land use planning • No right person for right job • Unsustainable timber extraction Development e.g. roads • No demarcation of boundaries (especially in • Policy making (not taking on board the Punjab • Unsustainable fuelwood extraction • Unscientific operations coniferous forest of Punjab) key stakeholders i.e. communities). • Forest fires (natural, due to in forests. • Unsustainable forest management negligence or intentional). • Poor implementation of laws (poor governance) • Political interference • Unclear land tenure in some cases • Weak legislation • Lack of awareness • Water scarcity (especially in riverine forest) • Lack of coordination of FD with other stakeholders • Diseases. • Encroachment / Forest clearing for • Water scarcity (in • Lease Policy • Investment and financing in forest small scale agriculture and to some riverine and mangroves) • Poor implementation of laws (everyone restoration efforts was the key challenge extent habitation • Unsustainable timber agreed) and barrier to future restoration efforts by • Commercial agricultural expansion extraction • Unsustainable forest management (most all forest officers.

Sindh (wheat, cotton, sugar cane, other cash • Unsustainable fuelwood agreed) • Maintaining areas where recent planting crops) extraction • Lack of alternative livelihoods in rural areas had occurred and financing nurseries to • Unsustainable timber extraction • Urban expansion (most agreed) cultivate seedlings were also viewed as • Unsustainable fuelwood extraction • Infrastructure • Livelihoods dependent on agricultural barriers. Uncontrolled grazing (camels • Urban expansion and livestock) was viewed as a major • Infrastructure development (roads) threat to forest restoration efforts.

Drivers of Forest Drivers of Deforestation Degradation Main Causes Challenges • Forest fires (intentional) to a very development subsistence (most agreed) • Other challenges that make forest small extent • Rice cultivation • Poor land use planning (half agreed) restoration efforts difficult include securing land for growing trees and forest areas, urban expansion, water scarcity, governance issues, lack of management plans and agroforestry • Agricultural expansion for • Agricultural expansion • Illegal logging • Investment and financing subsistence (potatoes, maize etc.) for subsistence (list main • Wood energy needs • Financing nurseries for cultivating • Unsustainable timber extraction crops); • Food security seedlings • Unsustainable fuelwood extraction • Unsustainable timber • Livelihoods dependent on agricultural • Securing land for growing trees/forests • Urban expansion extraction subsistence • Urban expansion • Mining • Unsustainable fuelwood • Lack of alternate livelihoods in rural areas • Planning and management of new forest • Infrastructure development e.g. roads extraction • Poor extension services areas • Forest clearing for small scale • Mining • Poor land use planning/no land use • Maintaining areas where recent

KP agriculture • Infrastructure planning plantings have occurred • Forest clearing for habitation Development e.g. roads • No demarcation of boundaries • Uncontrolled fires • Forest fires (natural or due to • Livestock grazing. • Unsustainable forest management (i.e. • Uncontrolled grazing of restoration sites negligence) forest management plans not enforced) • Forest fires (Intentional) • Poor implementation of laws (poor governance) • Poverty • Population growth • Tourism • Developmental works • Encroachment • Unsustainable fuelwood extraction • Agricultural expansion • Illegal logging • Investment and financing (funds • Hotel industry for subsistence • Wood energy needs generally exist) • Agricultural expansion for (potatoes) (limited) • Food security • Securing land for growing trees/forests GB subsistence (vegetable, horticulture • Unsustainable timber • Livelihoods dependent on agricultural (wherever there is water, communities etc.) extraction subsistence prefer agriculture; wherever we do • Unsustainable timber extraction • Unsustainable fuelwood • Lack of alternate livelihoods in rural areas forestation activities, we need water) /timber mafia extraction • No demarcation of boundaries (because • Other: (climate is a major issue as • Commercial agricultural expansion: • Urban expansion (to demarcation has not been done which leads deodar species from lower parts of

Drivers of Forest Drivers of Deforestation Degradation Main Causes Challenges potato, pea, some extent as new to conflicts) Pakistan don’t grow in GB the way, in • Urban expansion (low level) colonies need more fuel • Unsustainable forest management (i.e. lower areas) + limited land as 2-3% land • Mining (low level) wood and timber) forest management plans not enforced) is cultivable) • Infrastructure development e.g. roads • Free grazing • Poor implementation of laws (poor (low level) governance) (overall all government is weak; • Forest clearing for small scale using 1927 laws although laws have been agriculture (very limited) revised) • Forest clearing for habitation (very • Other: (ambiguities in terms of GB’s status limited) of province / territory. Federal government • Forest fires (natural or due to does not have time for the GB and cases, negligence) (very limited, mostly issues does not get resolved. This in negligence, cigarettes and tea making particular affects progression on laws and etc.) cases) • Forest clearing for security purposes • Unsustainable timber • There is no forest law, yet to define cutting • Investment and financing • Forest clearing for livestock grazing extraction of trees whether legal or illegal. • Financing nurseries for cultivating • Unsustainable timber extraction • Unsustainable fuelwood • Wood energy needs seedlings • Unsustainable fuelwood extraction extraction • Food security • Planning and management of new forest • Mining (Not major) • Mining • Livelihoods dependent forest related income areas • Infrastructure Development e.g. • Infrastructure • Lack of alternate livelihoods in rural areas• • Maintaining areas where recent FATA FATA roads Development e.g. roads Poor extension services plantings have occurred • Forest Clearing for small scale • Livestock grazing • Poor land use planning/no land use • Uncontrolled grazing of restoration sites agriculture planning • Forest clearing for habitation • Influx of Afghan refugees in the past and • Forest Fires (Intentional) their heavy dependence on forest • Law & order situation in the region • Forest clearing for security purposes

Drivers of Forest Drivers of Deforestation Degradation Main Causes Challenges • Unsustainable fuelwood extraction • Agricultural expansion • Illegal logging/cutting • Investment and financing • Unsustainable timber extraction for subsistence • Wood energy needs • Financing nurseries for cultivating • Forest fires (natural, due to • Unsustainable timber • Food security seedlings negligence or intentional) extraction • Livelihoods dependent on agricultural • Securing land for growing trees/forests • Agricultural expansion for • Unsustainable fuelwood subsistence • Urban expansion as well as rural subsistence extraction • Lack of alternate livelihoods in rural areas expansion • Forest clearing for livestock grazing • Urban & rural expansion • Poor extension services • Maintaining areas where recent • Urban & rural expansion • Mining • Poor land use planning/no land use plantings have occurred • Mining • Infrastructure planning • Uncontrolled fires • Infrastructure development e.g. development e.g. roads • No demarcation of boundaries • Uncontrolled grazing of restoration sites roads, dams, transmission lines etc. • Livestock grazing • Unsustainable forest management (i.e. • Other: infrastructure development

AJK AJK • Forest clearing for small scale forest management plans not enforced) (roads, hydropower, schools and other agriculture • Poor implementation of laws (poor government buildings) • Floods, landslides, heavy snowfall, governance) • Forest is lower priority than earthquake, drought and diseases, • Political pressure on forest officers for infrastructure development pests relaxing the laws which discourages full • Poor awareness • Forest clearing for habitation enforcement of law • Tourism • Uncontrolled nomadic activities and • Influx of refugees and IDPs due to overgrazing tension on line of control (LOC) • Weak governance

6. STRATEGY OPTIONS A National REDD+ Strategy, as a guiding and live document is aimed to guide the efforts made by the government (at different levels) and relevant stakeholders to ensure there are social, economic, legal, political conditions to ensure a sustainable use of natural resources that ultimately reduce the loss and improve the quality of forest ecosystems. The National Strategy is intended to provide some alternatives that, when implemented, will contribute to the REDD+ objectives - these are known as strategy options. However, the strategy options might not be readily implemented but need a full set of supporting actions that enable the conditions necessary to crystalize them, known in the REDD+ jargon as implementation framework.

6.1 A Vision for Forests and People The ultimate goal of a National REDD+ Strategy is the effective reduction of greenhouse gases emissions coming from deforestation and forest degradation through conservation and enhancement of carbon stocks and sustainable forest management. To achieve such goal the efforts should be circumscribed in a broad policy framework, which at the same time is integral and has a long-term scope. In this sense, a national vision for REDD+ should be oriented to incorporate these characteristics. Vision 2025 (Ministry of Planning Development & Reform 2014) is a document that provides the vision for Pakistan for the coming decades. Pakistan’s Intended Nationally Determined Contribution (Paki-INDC) is also based on the Vision 2025. Vision 2025 sets out important elements that prioritize people, inclusive growth, governance, water, energy and food, as well as recognises the high priorities of developing knowledge economy, regional connectivity and having the private sector participate in the economy. In this sense, there is a strong alignment between Pakistan’s Vision 2025 with the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) (Ministry of Planning Development & Reform 2014). Pakistan’s forests can play an important part in the country’s ability to mitigate and adapt to climate change. However, it is the social values that forests have historically provided its people that create the need to craft a vision that acknowledges the potential of both forests and people. Pakistan has been working on REDD+ readiness for several years, different stakeholders have been discussing views and expectations for the implementation, process and results arising from REDD+. Pakistan’s vision for forests and people is a culmination of extensive consultations that seek to align the national REDD+ vision with the vision of Pakistan. As a result, the national REDD+ vision is based on Vision 2025 and the SDGs, in which relevant stakeholders should play a key role in the target and goal setting of the national REDD+ Strategy.

National Vision for REDD+: Forests in Pakistan provide ecosystem services and livelihood support on sustainable basis.

In achieving this vision, several aspects and sectors need to be addressed. For this reason, the strategic objectives designed to achieve the vision cover various topics.

Strategic objectives • Contribute significantly to reduce country emissions in order to mitigate climate change through avoided deforestation and forest degradation and enhanced forest carbon stocks. • Ensure the provision of environmental services provided by forest ecosystems. • Provide alternatives for sustainable livelihoods to people dependent on forest to adapt to the impacts of climate change. • Provide the institutional, legal, economic and governance conditions to ensure the sustainable management of forest resources and ecosystems. • Provide the basis of good governance for the implementation of policies. • Ensure awareness of communities and political leaders about the role of forest in sustainable development and climate change.

Guiding Principles The national REDD+ Strategy, and its development, is based on a set of guiding principles that align with the vision. The guiding principles developed were based on stakeholder consultations with numerous government forest officials, several NGOs working specifically on REDD+ and several donors that have been supporting Pakistan’s REDD+ efforts. The guiding principles are:  Strengthening forest dependent livelihoods  Enhancing ecosystem services  Improving forest and land governance  Transparency and accountability  Contribution to global and national GHG reductions. These guiding principles are common to all provinces, and ensure coherence between the objectives and vision of the national REDD+ Strategy and its provincial actions.

6.2 Strategy Options The development of a National REDD+ Strategy entails the analysis of the different drivers of deforestation and forest degradation, including indirect or underlying causes, in order to remove them to ultimately reduce or even stop the loss and degradation of forests, and to conserve and enhance forest carbon stocks. Paragraph 70 of the Cancun Agreements (Decision 1/CP.16) encourages developing country Parties to contribute to mitigation actions in the forest sector by undertaking the following activities: reducing emissions from deforestation, reducing emissions from forest degradation, conservation of forest carbon stocks, sustainable management of forests, and enhancement of forest carbon stocks. Each country has to decide on the strategic alternatives to guide implemented actions according to national circumstances. There are at least three categories of policy options that a country can select to fulfil its REDD+ compromises: direct regulation market based instruments, and payment for results (Linacre, et al 2015), from which a country could decide to develop concrete actions. Due to the diversity and complexity of drivers of deforestation and forest degradation in the country, there is no one size fits all solution, so a combination of alternatives should be designed in order to effectively and sustainably achieve REDD+ objectives. Additionally, Pakistan already

has successful experiences and projects in the topics proposed as strategy options. The national REDD+ Strategy needs to be built on that basis in order to support, expand, scale-up or adjust current initiatives and projects. Some of these initiatives include (but are not limited to): Sustainable Forest Management to Secure Multiple Benefits in High Conservation Value Forests (GEF), Green Pakistan Project, and the Billion Tree Tsunami Afforestation Project in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. Most of the anthropogenic drivers of deforestation and forest degradation occur because the economic, legal and social conditions provide the incentives to perform activities that produce deforestation. In other words, it is easier to behave unsustainably than in a sustainable manner. Strategy options need to be designed with the logic of creating appropriate incentives, encouraging the owner or user to behave sustainably. This requires not only a good design of the activities per se, but also a complex set of supporting conditions to make them occur and sustain over time. The discussion undertaken throughout the readiness preparation process of the country, including the consultations for the formulation of the REDD+ Strategy, is conducted to define strategy options suitable to address the drivers of deforestation and forest degradation and promote the sustainable use of forest resources. Acknowledging the different conditions across provinces and territories, not all strategy options are suitable for all of them, or at least not at the same level or having same supporting actions to perform them. These actions might include, but are not limited to, changes in legal framework, enhanced governance, land use planning at national, provincial, district and local level, awareness raising and capacity building, which also have to be province-specific and related to forest categories and land tenure. In this direction, the same strategy option might need to be implemented through different mechanisms in different provinces according to their circumstances. The following table shows the strategy options that have been identified from the discussions with stakeholders and analysis. However, these options have to be refined when implemented to effectively incorporate conditions and needs from each of the provinces, including specific drivers of deforestation and forest degradation, and institutional, legal, economic (among others) circumstances in each province and territory.

Table 16 Strategy Options Identified from the Discussions with Stakeholders and Analysis Strategic Mitigation activity Strategy option alternative Enhancement of Enhancement of forest carbon stocks 1. Restoration (including forests capacity natural regeneration, to capture and assisted natural maintain carbon regeneration and enrichment planting), reforestation and afforestation Reduction of Reducing emissions from deforestation 2. Sustainable Forest pressure to Reducing emissions from forest Management forest degradation 3. Payment for Ecosystem ecosystems Conservation of forest carbon stocks Services Sustainable management of forests 4. Efficient cook stoves and kilns Promotion of Reducing emissions from deforestation 5. Silvopastoral practices and alternative Reducing emissions from forest sustainable grazing livelihoods degradation 6. Agroforestry Conservation of forest carbon stocks Sustainable management of forests Enhancement of forest carbon stocks

Governance issues (deficiencies in legislation and rules and sometimes their inadequate enforcement, capacity of the courts to process legal cases, forest administration capacity, land tenure issues, institutional mandates and capacity, etc.) have a considerable contribution to the conditions that enable drivers of deforestation and forest degradation. Thus, correctly addressing governance issues, as underlying causes of deforestation and forest degradation, is fundamental for the REDD+ Strategy. However, considering addressing governance issues as a strategy option is problematic as it will be hard to measure their emission reduction (carbon sequestration) impact. Addressing the governance issues will nevertheless be important, but they would need to be considered as supporting activities, rather than REDD+ Strategy Options; i.e. good governance is an enabling condition for REDD+. The six strategy options are described in more detail in the following tables.

Strategy Option Restoration, reforestation and afforestation

Description: Forest’s capacity to capture and store carbon depends on its health and extension. More forested areas and healthier forests will contribute to REDD+ objectives. Restoration of degraded forest areas, recovery of recently lost forest cover, and creating new forested areas are the activities that could be used to improve the country’s forest’s capacity to capture and store carbon. This can be applied on any type of forest, from high altitude forests to mangroves. Restoration is defined as the action that manages forest’s conditions in order to come back to a healthy or undisturbed condition, could include efforts to incentivize natural regeneration, assisted natural regeneration, or enrichment planting among others. The establishment of trees on land that has been cleared of forest during relatively recent past with the aim of recovering lost forests’ functions and dynamics is known as reforestation, and could be used to increase forested areas. Similarly, afforestation has a similar purpose but applied in areas where forests were not covering the land in longer periods of time. A well-designed project or program for restoration, reforestation and/or afforestation should take into account, not only the ecological conditions of the areas to be restored or recovered, but also the social and economic conditions of the people who live, use or own the land. Even though restoration and reforestation could be perceived as a single activity process, the success in terms of reproducing healthy forest’s conditions largely depends on removing the causes that produced the degradation or forest loss, and ensuring the protection of the areas where the activities were performed in order to allow the full recovery of forests (a condition that is also needed in the case of afforestation). For this reason, even though activities to restore, or establish a new forest, are activities that generally need low investment, the costs might increase considerably if the land is being used for other purposes that provide income, because of the opportunity costs.

Stakeholders: Ministry of Climate Change, Provincial Forest Departments, local communities (owners or users), private sector, international financing institutions.

Supporting activities Awareness raising to support the activities. Capacity building to ensure the activities are performed correctly.

Provinces Balochistan, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Sindh, Punjab, Gilgit Baltistan, Azad Jammu and Kashmir, Federally Administered Tribal Areas

Key challenges Ensuring protection and recovery of forest’s dynamics in the long term. Ensuring financing for the long term. Ensuring forest users are not limited to have income source by the activities.

Strategy Option Sustainable Forest Management (SFM)

Description: Sustainable management of forests is a proven mechanism trough which it is possible to obtain specific products and services (including non-timber products) from the forest, while ensuring the ecological integrity and sustainability of the forests. Even though there are mechanisms in place to promote SFM, there is a need to expand to ensure most forests in the country are sustainably managed for production or conservation purposes. In some areas the management would be oriented for timber extraction, whereas in others to non-timber forest products or even to provide ecosystem services of local, national or international interest. High levels of technical expertise are needed to ensure correct SMF, so capacity building is a key component for this strategy option, not only for designing management plans, but also to perform activities to implement the plans, which might include road building, harvesting, planting, and stand treatments among others. The country already has extensive expertise in place in Forest Departments at provincial level with successful experiences, for example with the GEF funded project Sustainable Forest Management to Secure Multiple Benefits in High Conservation Value Forests.

Stakeholders: Ministry of Climate Change, Provincial Forest Departments, local communities (owners or users).

Supporting activities Create the legal improvements at the national and provincial levels to support SFM. Create mechanisms and conditions to articulate value chains and added value to production. Create conditions to ensure traceability of legal timber and other forest products.

Provinces Balochistan, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Punjab, Gilgit Baltistan, Azad Jammu and Kashmir, Federally Administered Tribal Areas

Key challenges Capacity building to perform SMF. Awareness raising to promote the use of forest products coming from sustainable sources. Provide alternatives to ensure timber production is linked to a market. Ensuring there are the correct incentives in place to promote SFM.

Strategy Option Payment for ecosystems services (PES)

Description: Schemes to compensate forest owners or users to ensure certain level of health in specific ecosystems in order to maintain or improve environmental the services provided. The basic idea of a PES scheme is that the providers can ensure the provision of an environmental service for the enjoyment and use for users and who can compensate for it. A PES scheme would create a positive incentive to keep or improve forested areas and to avoid other activities that destroy or degrade the forest. To implement a PES scheme there is a need to clearly define the providers and the users, and establish a relationship between them in order to set a level (price) and type of compensation (cash, non-cash). This requires considering in the design forest types, land tenure, economic conditions of forest providers and users, among other conditions. Establishing PES requires considerable levels of coordination and governance among the involved stakeholders, so it is required to fully plan and pilot the scheme before making a national or province-wide program. It is also crucial to have a sustained and reliable financial mechanism to ensure the scheme functioning in the long term. In the case of REDD+, as the beneficiaries of the ecosystems services are the population as a whole, the provincial or federal government might consider funding the scheme in the long term. Even though REDD+ results are going to be measured in terms of carbon for the whole country, the PES scheme might not be based on carbon but on other benefits more easily observable by users and providers, assuming conservation of forest ecosystems will effectively contribute to REDD+ objectives. The benefits from PES schemes are observable not only for the environmental service that is involved in the transaction but also for the benefits beyond conservation, for example, as additional income for the household, improved governance, among others.

Stakeholders: Ministry of Climate Change, provincial forest departments, local communities (owners or users), private sector, international financing institutions.

Supporting activities Awareness raising, and capacity building. Promotion of activities that could potentially provide additional income to forest owners or users in the scheme. Inter-institutional coordination to avoid policy and implementation contradictions and guaranteeing synergies. Governance strengthening at local, provincial and federal level.

Provinces Sindh, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Gilgit Baltistan, Punjab, AJK and FATA

Key challenges Development equitable and inclusive benefit sharing mechanisms. Ensuring equitable participation of users. Ensuring financing for the long term.

Strategy Option Efficient cookstoves and kilns

Description. Unsustainable firewood extraction was identified as a major driver of deforestation and/or forest degradation. For this reason, using efficient cookstoves and kilns, can reduce the pressure on forest ecosystems by reducing the amount of wood needed to produce the same amount of energy for cooking or heating. These technologies might bring also other benefits, such as reduced collection time or reduced indoors pollution, and thus causing less respiratory illness. The introduction of alternative cookstoves and kilns has to be designed together with final users, because not all models can provide solutions to the cooking and heating needs in the regions. The implementation needs to have an important component of awareness raising. Pakistan already has good experiences to learn from, for example the project on Promotion of Energy Efficient Cooking, Heating and Housing Technologies (PEECH) financed by GEF and finished in 2013.

Stakeholders: Ministry of Climate Change, provincial forest departments local communities.

Supporting activities Awareness raising for the construction and use of cookstoves and kilns. Development of suppliers of cookstoves and kilns to ensure timely provision and accessibility.

Provinces Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Punjab, Gilgit Baltistan, Azad Jammu and Kashmir.

Key challenges Awareness raising to use new technology.

Strategy Option Silvopastoral sustainable practices

Description. Practices in which livestock grazing is not controlled has several impacts on the environment, including deforestation and degradation of forests and lands, not only by the removal of forest cover but also, by not letting regeneration to occur. There could be also negative effects on soil fertility, erosion, and pollution. Very frequently uncontrolled livestock has low productivity, partially because of the lack of management practices. Livestock grazing managed sustainably could provide economic and environmental benefits. This strategy option is intended to promote: • Agro-pastoral systems combining crop and animal production, allowing for enhanced agro-ecosystem productivity and stability through integrated management of soil and water resources and crop and animal diversification • Intensive animal husbandry (ranching), combined with sustainable pasture and rangeland management • Promoting use of environmentally friendly technologies to intensify production on high-potential land already converted to pasture The success of silvopastoral practices depends on a design that incorporates social, economic, and environmental conditions in order to be effective and provide an advantage to the farmers/ranchers over their current practices. Technology packages have to be developed to fit regional conditions.

Stakeholders: Ministry of Climate Change, Ministry of National Food Security & Research, local communities (owners or users), private sector.

Supporting activities Coordination with universities and research centres to develop technology packages. Coordination between Ministry of Climate Change, Ministry of National Food Security & Research, and similar provincial departments to develop mechanisms to create positive incentives for the activities.

Provinces Balochistan, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Sindh, Punjab, Gilgit Baltistan, Azad Jammu and Kashmir, Federally Administered Tribal Areas

Key challenges Development of technology packages to fit regional conditions, and development of demonstrative areas to show results. Capacity building in livestock owners and forest owners to switch to sustainable practices.

Strategy Option Agroforestry

Description: Productive practices that combine deliberately trees (or other woody perennials) with agricultural crops in the same land, known as agroforestry, is a proven system to increase benefits from the land, as they can provide equal or higher yields than traditional practices with the added environmental and economic benefits from the forests, including carbon capture and storage in the areas where it is implemented, and reduce pressure on other forested areas. Agroforestry systems can be an important alternative for smallholder farmers as they can improve agricultural yields and provide additional income from other forest products. There are several proven alternatives for agroforestry systems that can be customized for the regional conditions in the country, including alley cropping, multilayer tree gardens, multipurpose trees on crop lands, shelterbelts and windbreaks, live hedges, fuelwood production, among others. Because agroforestry systems incorporate multiple dimensions (environmental, agricultural, silvicultural, economic, cultural) it is important to design them according to the local circumstances, including specialists from different disciplines. This might be the biggest challenge to implement agroforestry systems. Agroforestry systems are already as a mitigation option in the agriculture sector.

Stakeholders: Ministry of Climate Change, Ministry of National Food Security & Research, local communities (owners or users), research institutions and universities.

Supporting activities Development of technology packages to fit regional conditions. Capacity building for extensionists and farmers. Governance strengthening and coordination at local, provincial and federal level.

Provinces Balochistan, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Sindh, Punjab, Gilgit Baltistan, Azad Jammu and Kashmir, Federally Administered Tribal Areas

Key challenges Development of technology packages to fit regional conditions, and development of demonstration farms to show results. Capacity building to farmers to switch to sustainable practices.

6.3 Preliminary Risk Assessment Achieving REDD+ objectives and stabilizing GHG concentration in the atmosphere, is a global benefit that will reduce future risks and impacts at national and subnational levels; however, the actions undertaken on the ground usually involve changing the production methods and procedures, including those at household level or in small-scale production. These changes, though designed to provide economic, social and environmental benefits, might also pose some risks associated to their implementation, including situations or conditions that threatens the execution of actions and undesirable conditions created by their implementation. Some of these risks were identified during the consultation process, and are shown in the table below.

Sector Risks & challenges Governance  Weak Governance and institutional framework  Outdated laws and weak enforcement  Low level of interest without incentives  Law and order situation Legal  Forest lands encroached by land mafia  Relative lack of clarity of roles and responsibilities at the national and sub-national level  Conflicts between provincial laws and REDD+ policies  Lack of clear legal framework Social  Poverty leading to high dependency on natural resources  Lack of productive and economic alternatives  Hindrances by timber mafia  Social norms and traditional practices in forest management  Low women’s participation in decision-making Economic  Lack of income and resource opportunities  Ineffective investment by organizations  Corruption risks in context of REDD+  Concerned departments may not be taken on-board for REDD+ activities Environmental  Lack of political will  Natural hazards i.e. floods, droughts, etc.  Non-permanence of the actions and results  Displacement of unsustainable activities

This preliminary identification is going to be strengthened with the results of the work that is being done to prepare the aspects related to safeguards for Pakistan’s readiness preparation52, which includes the identification of risks and benefits arising from implementing the Strategy, among other processes. Discussions under the UNFCCC, identified some of these risks and established several safeguards to guide countries and ensure compliance with basic rights and principles. The safeguards established in the Cancun Agreements are:

52 The project Preparing a FGRM for REDD+ after an Explicit Assessment of Existing Feedback and Grievance Redressal Mechanisms (FGRM) & Developing Safeguards Information System (SIS) and Social and Environmental Management Framework (ESMF) through Strategic Environmental and Social Assessment (SESA), is being developed by Climate Law and Policy and Hagler Baily Pakistan.

a) Actions complement or are consistent with the objectives of national forest programmes and relevant international conventions and agreements b) Transparent and effective national forest governance structures, taking into account national legislation and sovereignty c) Respect for the knowledge and rights of indigenous peoples and members of local communities, by taking into account relevant international obligations, national circumstances and laws, and noting that the United Nations General Assembly has adopted the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples d) The full and effective participation of relevant stakeholders, in particular indigenous peoples and local communities e) That actions are consistent with the conservation of natural forests and biological diversity, ensuring that the actions are not used for the conversion of natural forests, but are instead used to incentivize the protection and conservation of natural forests and their ecosystem services, and to enhance other social and environmental benefits f) Actions to address the risks of reversals g) Actions to reduce displacement of emissions. These safeguards have been clarified considering Pakistan’s context and circumstances in order to ensure actions undertaken for REDD+ are in respect these safeguards (CLP & HB, 2017). Additionally, as Pakistan’s preparation process for REDD+ is supported by the Forest Carbon Partnership Facility (FCPF), it is required to ensure compliance with World Bank safeguards established in its operational policies. The Strategic Environmental and Social Assessment is a process to identify potential risks and benefits arising from REDD+ implementation, then the Environmental and Social Management Framework establishes principles, rules, guidelines and procedures to address the potential impacts that might arise from the undertaken activities. The team preparing the aspects related to safeguards for Pakistan’s readiness (Climate Law and Policy and Hagler Baily Pakistan) already developed an assessment analysis on to which extent current policies, laws and regulations address each of the Cancun Safeguards. This analysis found that “Pakistan’s policies, laws and regulations are largely consistent with the UNFCCC REDD+ safeguards. However, specific legal gaps are identified, including with regards to safeguards C and D” (CLP & HB, 2017). The analysis also presents 84 recommendations to fill the gaps or address the weaknesses found, which range from the “incorporation of specific provisions in the National REDD+ Strategy to express the commitment of Pakistan towards ensuring the adequate implementation of each of the UNFCCC REDD+ safeguards to the development of certain protocols, guidelines, mechanisms and procedures to ensure the adequate implementation of these commitments, and addressing identified gaps and weaknesses in the relevant policies, laws and regulations”. The SESA process, by which risk are benefits related to the implementation of the National Strategy can be foreseen, is not finished yet, and there will be more information available once it is finalized.

7. CONCLUSIONS Land Use Change Trends Consultations and localized studies show that there has been significant land use change, demonstrating the conversion from forest to non-forest cover in the past three decades. The studies and consultations support the application of the forest transition theory, which asserts that forest transitions are associated with socio-economic transformations towards increased industrialization and urbanization. In addition, the associated phenomena of abandoned agricultural land can also play a key role in this transition. Forest Policy, Institutions and Legal Framework in Pakistan The approved forest policy exists only at national level, and in two federative units (KP & Punjab) out of seven. The laws in general are inherited from the British era and have more qualities on economic exploitation than on conservation. Development planning overlooks the drivers of deforestation. Investment is low in scientific planning and management of forests. Private sector involvement is only confined to planting trees on private lands. The forest laws are not consistent or clear, and there is a lack of land use policies on national and provincial scales. Climate change policy only exists at national level and in AJK. The forest laws are old and outdated. Women seldom participate in forest decision making, but are shown to be important users in communities with users’ rights (firewood collection and grazing). However, the situation varies from area to area. Tenure regarding carbon and genetic resources is unclear in the existing laws. Traditional and indigenous rights of grazing, firewood collection and NTFPs collection are recognized by the law and are practiced differently in different types of forests and at different locations. Formal and informal rights to forest resources are sometimes in conflict. There are ineffective mechanisms of tenure related disputes. The law allows the government to share or transfer management authority of public forest to local communities. The national development policies are inconsistent with sustainability in the forest sector. The sectors which directly depend on forest or which affect forests are not providing for tree related activities. Only NHA and WAPDA have been provided for forest related activities but much less than the desired level. Official mechanisms for cross sectoral coordination are insufficient. Mandates of national agencies and subnational agencies are not always in conformity with each other. The budgets are not always based on national/provincial goals for sustainable management of forests. Most of the provincial forest agencies have a serious lack of appropriate information technology and trained staff to use it. Drivers of Deforestation and Forest Degradation in Pakistan Deforestation and forest degradation are key issues identified by almost all the provinces of Pakistan. The key drivers are rooted in the socioeconomic, administrative and legal conditions of the country. The land use change can be attributed to multiple factors mostly common for all provinces but have some provincial/territorial peculiarities. The key direct drivers identified in this study are agricultural expansion, mostly subsistence but also commercial agriculture, unsustainable wood extraction, mostly firewood but also including both legal and illegal timber sourcing for processing and construction purposes. Urban expansion, infrastructure development such as roads etc., mining, forest clearing for livestock, forest fires and floods/landslides/heavy snow were among the direct drivers of deforestation and forest degradation. The major underlying drivers of deforestation identified are population increase, poverty, especially among forest dependent communities, food security, limited livelihood options in the remote forest dependent communities, lack of land use planning, livelihood dependency on forest and agriculture, poor governance, and either no implementation or selective implementation of laws, poor forest law enforcement and governance (there are millions of prosecution cases pending in the courts), abolishment of reward system to forest staff (dis- incentivising the staff), lack of management plans and their enforcement, increase in livestock population, poor extension services, lack of or costly alternative energy sources for cooking and

heating, decrease in freshwater flow in the rivers, construction of embankments and barrages, diseases, volatile security situation, influx of refugees from neighbouring countries, encroachment of forest land, outdated and punitive laws, lengthy resolution of judicial cases, lack of coherence in different laws/policies, political interference in technical matters, lack of cross sectoral coordination, tenure un-clarity/insecurity, conflicting laws governing forest and land administration, no demarcation of forest boundaries in most areas, lack of capacities in managing and engaging people, lack of transparent monitoring system, mistrust with communities and failure to engage them as partners, and lack of awareness in masses. The major barriers to enhancement of forest carbon stock identified in this study are inadequate investment and finance in the sector, free grazing, which hinders natural regeneration as well as negatively affects reforested/afforested areas, securing land for growing trees, maintaining areas where planting has done, uncontrolled fires, unplanned and unregulated tourism, influx of refugees, consideration of community concerns/needs, poor governance, urban and commercial expansion, lack/shortage of water, extreme climatic conditions (drought, severe cold). The potential future drivers identified are population growth, growing demand for commercial agriculture, high demand for timber and firewood, growing demand for bio-fuel, country need for physical infrastructure such as roads, railways and transmission lines to name a few. Strategy Options for REDD+ There is a set of strategy options that has been identified to address the direct causes of deforestation and forest degradation including the enhancement of forests capacity to capture and maintain carbon through restoration (including natural regeneration, assisted natural regeneration and enrichment planting), reforestation, and afforestation. Another set of strategy options is oriented to reduce the pressure on forest ecosystems, and include sustainable forest management, payment for ecosystem services and the promotion of efficient cook stoves and kilns. One last group of options is related to the promotion of alternative livelihoods with direct impact on forests, which includes combining crops and livestock with forest cover. The implementation of these activities need to be supported by several actions to produce the enabling conditions for effective implementation of the strategy options and the achievement of the REDD+ objectives.

8. REFERENCES

Literature Abbas, Sawaid, F. M. Qamer, N. Hussain, R. Saleem and K.T. Nitin 2011. National level assessment of mangrove forest cover in Pakistan. International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, Volume XXXVIII-8/W20. Abbas Faisal Mueen Qamer, Ghaffar Ali, Nitin Kumar Tripathi, Khurram Shehzad, Rashid Saleem and Hammad Gilani 2013. An assessment of status and distribution of mangrove forest cover in Pakistan. Journal of Biodiversity and Environmental Sciences (JBES), Vol. 3, No. 6, p. 64- 78 Abbasi, Habibullah, Mushtaq Ahmed Baloch and Abdul Ghafoor Memon 2011. Deforestation Analysis of Riverine Forest of Sindh Using Remote Sensing Techniques. Mehran University Research Journal of Engineering & Technology, Vol. 30, No. 3. Abbasi, H. U., A. G. Memon, I. R. Karas, S. M. Ghoto, M. A. Baloch and S. Shaikh 2012. Assessment of Natural and Anthropogenic Impact on Riverine Forest Using Analytic Hierarchy Process Model. Sindh Univ. Res. Jour. (Sci. Ser.) Vol.44(1) 01-06. Abidi, Syeda Ifrah Ali and Junaid Noor 2012. Economic Analysis of Forest Management in Pakistan - A Case Study of Changa Mange and Muree Forest. Sustainable Development Study Centre, GC University Lahore, Department of Economics, GC University Lahore. Achakzai, Abdul Kabir Khan, Huma Batool, Tahir Aqeel and Zahoor Ahmed Bazai 2013. A comparative study of the deforestation and regeneration status of Ziarat juniper forest. Pak. J. Bot., 45(4): 1169-1172. ADB 2006. Sindh Coastal Community Development Project. Asian Development Bank Project Number: 37188. https://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/project-document/66558/37188-pak- rrp.pdf Afridi, Ziaullah 2013. Implementation of forest laws in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. http://202.142.179.243:8080/jspui/handle/123456789/1326 Ahmed, Muhammad 1989. Tree-ring chronologies of Abies pindrow (Royle) Spach. from Himalayan regions of Pakistan. Pakistan Journal of Botany 21(2):347-354. Ahmad, Muhammad 2016. Community Based Ecological Restoration of Changa Manga Forest, Punjab, Pakistan. Master’s Thesis. Department of Ecology and Natural Resource Management, Norwegian University of Life Sciences. Ahmad, S., Islam, M., Bano, G., Aslam, S., Koukab, S. 2009. Seasonal variation in current season and dead biomass in Chrysopogon aucheri (Boiss) Stapf. and Cymbopogon jwarancusa (Jones) Schult in highland Balochistan, Pakistan. Pakistan Journal of Botany 41:519-527. Ahmad, S., Abbasi, Q., Jabeen, R. and Shah, M.T. 2012. Decline of conifer forest cover in Pakistan: a GIS approach. Pak. J. Bot, 44(2), pp.511-514. Ahmed Jawad and Fawad Mahmood 1998. Changing perspectives on forest policy. Ajaib Muhammad, Zubaria Ashraf, Fatima Riaz and Muhammad Faheem Siddiqui 2014. Ethnobotanical studies of some plants of Tehsil Kharian, District Gujarat. FUUAST J. Biol., 4(1): 65-71

Akbar, M., Ahmed, M., Hussain, A., Zafar, M.U. and Khan, M. 2011. Quantitative forests description from Skardu, Gilgit and Astore Districts of Gilgit-Baltistan, Pakistan. FUUAST Journal of Biology, 1(2), p.149. Akbar, Muhammad, Ahmed, Moinuddun, Shaukat, S.S., Hussain, Alamdar, Zafar, M.U., Sarangzai, A.M. and Hussain, Faisal 2013. Size class structure of some forests from Himalayan range of Gilgit-Baltistan. Sci., Tech. and Dev, 32(1), pp.56-73. Ali, R., Ali, B.K., Khan, M.Z., Khan, G., Abbas, S. and Ali, E.H. 2014. Baseline Study of Vegetation in Doyan Valley District Astore, Gilgit-Baltistan, Pakistan. International Journal of Emerging Trends in Science and Technology, 1(01). Ali, J. and Benjaminsen, T.A. 2004. Fuelwood, timber and deforestation in the Himalayas: the case of Basho Valley, Baltistan region, Pakistan. Mountain Research and Development, 24(4), pp.312-318. Ali, J., Benjaminsen, T.A., Hammad, A.A. and Dick, Ø.B. 2005. The road to deforestation: An assessment of forest loss and its causes in Basho Valley, Northern Pakistan. Global Environmental Change, 15(4), pp.370-380.

Ali, Kashif, Muhammad Shuaib, Zahid Hussain, Wasim Sajjad, Fawad Ali and Muhammad Fazil 2016, Ethnobotanical assessment of the medicinal flora of Khyber Agency, Pakistan. Pak. J. Weed Sci. Res., 22(4): 607-616. Amanullah, M. and Ahmed, A., 2015. Environmental Change Impacts on Indus Riverine Forest, Sindh, Pakistan: Review. Journal of Environmental Professionals Sri Lanka. 4(1), pp.17–28. Amjad, A. Shah., Kasawani, I., and Kamaruzaman, J. 2007. Degradation of Indus Delta Mangroves in Pakistan. International Journal of Geology, Issue 3, Vol. 1. Amjad, M.S., Arshad, M. and Chaudhari, S.K. 2014. Structural diversity, its components and regenerating capacity of lesser Himalayan forest vegetation of Nikyal valley District Kotli (AK), Pakistan. Asian Pacific Journal of Tropical Medicine, 7, pp. S454-S460. Anjum, Khayyam, Ihsan Qadir, M. Farooq Azhar and Shahid Hafeez 2013. Economic evaluation of irrigated plantation in Kamalia, Punjab, Pakistan. J. Agric. Res., 2013, 51(2) Ashraf I, Saeed U, Shahzad N, Gill J, Parvez S and Raja A 2014. Delineating Legal Forest Boundaries to Combat Illegal Forest Encroachments: A Case Study in Murree Forest Division, Pakistan. In: Forensic GIS. Springer, pp 263–286. Azhar. M.F., M. Ishaque, M. Hussain and M.T. Siddiqui. 2011. Economic evaluation of Daphar irrigated plantation in Punjab. Pak. J. Sci. 61:1-4. Baig, M.B. and Straquadine, G. 2011. “Sustainable agriculture ensures sustainable rural development: a reality or a myth”. In: M. Behnassi et al. (Eds.), Global food insecurity: rethinking agricultural and rural development paradigm and policy, pp. 21–32. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-0890-7_3, Springer Science + Business Media B.V. Balochistan 2014. Wildlife Protection, Preservation, Conservation and Management Act. Banba, Michico 2017. Land use management and risk communication. In: Land use management and risk reduction. Springer. Batool Huma, Zahoor Ahmad Bazai, Rukhsana Jabeen and Tahir Aqil 2012. Evaluation of Extent of Heart Rot Fungi Infection and Impacts on Live Juniperus excelsa Trees in Ziarat Juniper Forest Balochistan, Pakistan. International Journal of Basic & Applied Sciences IJBAS- IJENS Vol:12 No:06.

Bazai, Zahoor Ahmad 2012. Ethnobotanical and Biodiversity Studies of Common Trees and Shrubs Added by the Nexus Between Climate Change and Gene Diversity of Juniperus excelsa in Zarghoon Ecosystem, Balochistan (Pakistan). A thesis submitted to University of Balochistan, Quetta in the fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Department of Botany. Beg, Mirza Arshad Ali 2000. Balochistan conservation strategy background paper. IUCN, The World Conservation Union and the University of Michigan. 39 p. Burau of Statistics 2015. http://kp.gov.pk/uploads/2016/04/2015.PDF Civil Secretariat FATA 2006. FATA Sustainable Development Plan for 2007-2015. 117 p. CLP & HB 2017. Interim Progress Report of the project Preparing a FGRM for REDD+ after an Explicit Assessment of Existing Feedback and Grievance Redressal Mechanisms (FGRM) & Developing Safeguards Information System (SIS) and Social and Environmental Management Framework (ESMF) through Strategic Environmental and Social Assessment (SESA), Climate, Law and Policy and Hagler Bailly Pakistan, Ministry of Climate Change of Pakistan. Cochard, Roland and Dar, Muhammad 2014. Mountain farmers’ livelihoods and perceptions of forest resource degradation at Machiara National Park, Pakistan-administered Kashmir. Environmental Development 10. Environmental & Social Profile of Athmuqam District 2007. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/281040528_ENVIRONMENTAL_SOCIAL_PROFI LE_OF_ATHMUQAM_DISTRICT_NEELUM_AZAD_JAMMU_KASHMIR_2007 [accessed April 21, 2017]. EU FLEGT Facility 2017. http://www.euflegt.efi.int/home . FAO 1983. Report of the assistance to rangeland and livestock development survey of Balochistan. Food and Agriculture Organization Technical Cooperation Program Report, TCP/PAK/0107. Islamabad, Pakistan. FAO 1987. Pakistan’s experience in range land rehabilitation and improvement. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. 70pp. FATA Civil Secretariat 2006. FATA Sustainable Development Plan for 2007-2015. http://www.waterinfo.net.pk/sites/default/files/knowledge/FATA%20Sustainable%20Dev%2 0Plan%202007-2015.pdf FCPF 2012. Guidelines on Stakeholder Engagement in REDD+ Readiness; With a Focus on the Participation of Indigenous Peoples and Other Forest-Dependent Communities. https://www.google.fi/search?q=%E2%80%A2%09Guidance+on+Stakeholder+Engagemen t+in+REDD%2B+Readiness+with+a+Focus+on+the+Participation+of+Indigenous+Peoples +and+Other+Forest+Dependent+Communities+&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox- b&gfe_rd=cr&dcr=0&ei=tsc3WunPLOWO8QffppuoDg FCPF 2013. A Guide to the FCPF Readiness Assessment Framework. 24 p. FCPF 2014. Readiness Preparation Proposal (R-PP) for Pakistan. Final version with incorporation of PC - 16 decision: July 25, 2014 Gohar, A. 2002.Competing interests and institutional ambiguities: problems of sustainable forest management in the NAs of Pakistan (Doctoral dissertation, PhD thesis]. Bath, UK: University of Bath, UK).

GoP 2009. Land Use Atlas of Pakistan. Government of Pakistan, Ministry of Environment, National Land Use Plan Project. Government of Pakistan/CITES 2014. Pakistan’s Bi-annual Report to CITES. Retrieved 24 April2017: https://cites.org/sites/default/files/reports/13-14Pakistan.pdf. Government of Pakistan 2015. Action Plan for the implementation of the National Forest Monitoring System of Pakistan. Office of the Inspector General of Forests, Ministry of Climate Change, with support from FAO through UN-REDD and with the support of WWF Pakistan. 131 p. Government of Pakistan 2017. Notification No. 1-1/2016/NRC/WG. Islamabad the 14th September 2017. Gupta, Shakti M. 2001. Plant Myths and Traditions in India. Munshirm Manoharlal. 128 p. Hussain, Z., Mirza, S.N., Ashraf, M.I. and Nizami, S.M. 2015. Grassland Productivity and Carrying Capacity of Deosai National Park, Gilgit-Baltistan, Pakistan. Journal of Agricultural Research, 53(3). International Monetary Fund 2010. Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper: Pakistan. https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/CR/Issues/2016/12/31/Pakistan-Poverty-Reduction- Strategy-Paper-24003 IUCN 2012. https://www.iucn.org/content/balochistan%E2%80%99s-water-crises-may-last-until-2025- seminar-world-water-day-water-and-food. Islam, M., M. A. Adams 2000. Nutrient characteristics of foliage and the availability of water in rangeland near Quetta, Balochistan. Pakistan J. Biol. Sci. 3: 2058-2062. Khalid, S. R., Khan, M. R., Usman, M., Yasin, M. W. and Iqbal, M. S. (2016) Spatiotemporal Monitoring for Deforestation and Forest Degradation Activities in Selected Areas of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KPK). International Journal of Geosciences, 7, 1191-1207. Khan, Imran 2017. Pakistani province plants one billion trees to help slow down effects of global warming. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/pakistan-plant-billion-trees-global- warming-effects-climate-change-imran-khan-khyber-pakhtunkhaw-a7892176.html Khan, M.Z., Khan, B., Awan, S., Khan, G. and Ali, R. 2013. High-altitude rangelands and their interfaces in Gilgit-Baltistan, Pakistan: Current status and management strategies. High- Altitude Rangelands and their Interfaces in the Hindu Kush Himalayas, p.66. Khan, Z., Akbar, M., Rizvi, S.M.A., Hussain, A., Ali, I., Ali, M. and Hussain, J. 2015. Assessment of deforestation using Diameter size classes distribution of trees in Ganji Valley Himalayan Range of Pakistan. International Journal of Advanced Research, 3(6), pp.76-86. Khan, M.A., Zaman, M., Hyder, A.A.S., Nafees, M.K.M.A., Begum, G.R.F., Hussain, S.A., Abbas, S.W.K. and Ali, M. 2015b.Diameter size class distributions of Pinus gerardiana Wall. ex D. Don from Gohar Abad Valley district Diamer, Gilgit-Baltistan, Pakistan. Khokhar, Noel I., Manzoor Ahmed Abbasi and Ghani Jafar 2014. Evolving Dynamics of FATA: Reflections on Transformations. Evolving Dynamics of FATA: Reflections on Transformations. National Defence University (NDU) & The Centre for Pakistan and Gulf Studies (CPGS). Khyber Pakhtunkhwa in figures 2013, 2014, 2015. http://kp.gov.pk/page/kp_in_figures Kishor, Nalin and Kenneth Rosenbaum 2012. Assessing and Monitoring Forest Governance: A user’s guide to a diagnostic tool. Washington DC: Program on Forests (PROFOR)

Linacre, N.; O’Sullivan R.; Rocha M., Greenhalgh S., and D. Ross 2015. Supporting REDD+ in Developing Countries: A Review of Policy Options. United Stated Agency for International Development Forest Carbon, Markets and Communities Program: Washington, D.C., USA. Maan, M. Anwar and A. Aleem Chaudhry 2001. Wildlife Diversity in the Punjab (Pakistan). Journal of Biological Sciences, 1: 417-420. Maanics International 2004. Supply & Demand of Fuel Wood & Timber for Household & Industrial Sectors & Consumption Pattern of Wood & Wood Products in Pakistan in 2003-2004. IGF Office, Ministry of Environment, Islamabad Pakistan. Malik, A.Y. 1988. Feed availability, requirements for animals and current pattern of utilization in Pakistan. In: Devendra, C. (ed.). Non-conventional feed resources and fibrous agricultural residues, strategies for expanded utilization. International Development Research Centre, Indian Council of Agricultural Research, India. Marcoux, A. 2000. Population and Deforestation. SD Dimensions. Sustainable Development Department, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) Marwat, Inam Ullah 2016. Natural Resources in Khyber Pakhtunkhua – presentation. https://www.slideshare.net/inamullahmarwat3/natural-resources-in-khyber-pakhtunkhwa- pakistan Menon, S., J. Hansen, L. Nazarenko, and Y. Luo 2002, Climate effects of black carbon aerosols in China and India, Science, 297, 2250–2253 Miller, D. and Schaller, G. 1999. Herders of forty centuries: nomads of Tibetan rangelands in western China. People and Rangelands: Building the Future, pp.19-23. Ministry of Climate Change 2016. Pakistan’s Intended Nationally Determined Contribution (Pak-INDC). Ministry of Climate Change, Islamabad, Pakistan. http://www.mocc.gov.pk/ Ministry of Planning Development & Reform 2014. http://pc.gov.pk/vision/vision Misri B. 2003. Improvement of Sub-alpine and Alpine Himalayan Pastures. Palalumpur, India: Research Centre, Indian Grassland and Fodder Research Institute, HPKV Campus. Muhammad, Syed, Akmal Rahim and Shahida Hasnain 2011. Agroforestry trends in Punjab, Pakistan. African Journal of Environmental Science and Technology Vol. 4(10), pp. 639-650. Nazir, Naila, Naveed Jehan and Anwar Hussain 2011. Forest depletion and socio-economic factors: a comparative analysis of forest areas in Pakistan. Global Advanced Research Journal of Social Science (GARJSS), Vol. 4(1), pp. 018-022 Omer, R.M., C.M. Faisal and W. Ahmed, 2004. Choice of exotic and indigenous tree species for planting on farmlands. Pak. J. Agric. Sci., 41(1-2):58-61. Pak-Swiss Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 2010. Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan. Interco-operation, funded by SDC. 235 p. Pellegrini, Lorenzo 2007. The rule of the jungle in Pakistan: a case study on corruption and forest management in Swat. FEEM Working Paper No. 91. 32 p. PFI 2012. Land Cover Atlas of Pakistan. Pakistan Forest Institute. Forestry Sector Research and Development Program. PROFOR 2017. Program on Forest web page.www.profor.info.

Qamer, F.M., Shehzad, K., Abbas, S., Murthy, M.S.R., Xi, C., Gilani, H. and Bajracharya, B. 2016. Mapping Deforestation and Forest Degradation Patterns in Western Himalaya, Pakistan. Remote Sensing, 8(5), p.385. Saifullah, S.M. and F.Rasool 2002. Mangroves of Miani Hor Lagoon in the North Arabian Sea coast of Pakistan. Pak. J. Bot., 34: 303-310. Sajjad, Anwar, Ahmad Hussain, Umar Wahab, Syed Adnan, Saqib Ali, Zahoor Ahmad and Ashfaq Ali 2015. Application of Remote Sensing and GIS in Forest Cover Change in Tehsil Barawal, District Dir, Pakistan. American Journal of Plant Sciences, Vol.06, No.09. Sarangzai, A. M., N. Khan, M. Wahab and A. Kakar 2010. New spread of dwarf mistletoe (Arceuthobium oxycedri) in juniper forests, Ziarat, Balochistan, Pakistan. Pakistan Journal of Botany 42: 3709–3714. Schickhoff, U. 1998. Socio-economic background and ecological effects of forest destruction in Northern Pakistan. In: Stellrecht, I. (Ed.) Karakorum–Hindukush–Himalaya: Dynamics of Change. Cultural Area Karakorum, Scientific Studies (Part I). University of Tubingen, Germany, pp. 287–302. Shafiq, Muhammad and Muhammad Azam Kakar 2007. Effects of Drought on Livestock Sector in Balochistan Province of Pakistan. Int. J. Agri. Biol., Vol. 9, No. 4. pp. 657–665. Shaheen, H., Qureshi, R.A., Ullah, Z. and Ahmad, T. 2011. Anthropogenic pressure on the western Himalayan moist temperate forests of Bagh, Azad Jammu & Kashmir. Pak. J. Bot, 43(1), pp.695-703. Shaheen Hamayun, Beenish Azad, Aroosa Mushtaq and Raja Waqar Ahmad Khan 2016. Fuelwood consumption pattern and its impact on forest structure in Kashmir Himalayas. Bosque 37(2): 419-424. Shahzad, Naeem, Urooj Saeed, Hammad Gilani, Sajid Rashid Ahmad, Irfan Ashraf and Syed Muhammad Irteza 2015. Evaluation of state and community/private forests in Punjab, Pakistan using geospatial data and related techniques. Forest Ecosystems 2015 2:7. Siddiqui, M.F., Jamil, Z., Afsar, J. 2004. Monitoring changes in riverine forests of Sindh-Pakistan using remote sensing and GIS techniques. Advances in Space Research, Volume 33, Issue 3, p. 333-337. Siddiqui, M.F., Ahmed, M., Khan, N. and Khan, I.A. 2010. A quantitative description of moist temperate conifer forests of Himalayan region of Pakistan and Azad Kashmir. International Journal of Biology and Biotechnology, 7(3), pp.175-185. Strategic Foresight Group 2011. The Indus Equation Report. Retrieved 24 April 2014. http://www.strategicforesight.com/publication_pdf/10345110617.pdf Sudmeier-Rieux, K., Qureshi, R.A., Peduzzi, P., Jaboyedoff, M.J., Brogue, A., Dubois, J., Jaubert, R. and Cheema, M.A. 2007. An interdisciplinary approach to understanding landslides and risk management: a case study from earthquake-affected Kashmir. Mountain Forum, Mountain GIS e-Conference, January 14–25, 2008. Tagar, Hamzo Khan and Andsyed Roshan Ali Shah 2015. Sindh Forestry Resources: Causes of Deforestation and Policy Guideline for Its Conservation (A Case Study of Lower Indus Valley Sindh-Pakistan). International Journal of Innovative Research & Development, Vol 4 Issue 5. Tanvir, Muhammad Ayyoub, Muhammad Tahir Siddiqui and Amer Hussain Shah 2002. Growth and Price Trend of Eucalyptus camaldulensis in Central Punjab. Int. J. Agri. Biol., Vol. 4, No. 3.

Thomas, D. S. G. 1995. Desertification: Causes and processes. In Encyclopaedia of Environmental Biology, Vol. 1, ed. W. A. Nierenberg. San Diego: Academic Press, 1995. pp.463-473. Tucker, Richard P. 2012. A Forest history of India. Sage. 248 p. ISBN 978-81-321-0693-7. UN Habitat 2011. A Guide on Land and Property Rights in Pakistan. Wani B.A. 2002. National Forest Policy Review. Ministry of Environment, Local Government and Rural Development, Islamabad, Pakistan.

List of Legislations and Policies Action Plan for the Implementation of a National Forest Monitoring System in Pakistan, see Government of Pakistan, 2015 Adaptation of Central Acts and Ordinances Order, 1949 Agriculture Policy of KP, 2015-2025 Azad Jammu and Kashmir Climate Change Policy, 2017 Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution Act, 1974 Azad Jammu and Kashmir Protection of Forests and Distribution of Timber Ordinance, 1980 Azad Jammu and Kashmir Rules for Sale and Development of Private Forests, 1984 Azad Kashmir Logging and Sawmill Corporation Ordinance, 1968 Balochistan Forest Regulations, 1890 Balochistan’s Wildlife Protection, Preservation, Conservation and Management Act, 2014 Baluchistan Forest Regulation (Amendment) Act, 1974 Baluchistan Forest Regulation, 1890 Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, and earlier versions and amendments Constitution the Federally Administered Tribal Areas Draft Punjab Mineral Policy, 2017 Federal Rules of Business, 1973 Forest Act, 1927 (with Punjab amendments) Forest Act, 1927 (with Sindh amendments) Forest Act, 2010 Frontier Crimes Regulation, 1901 Gilgit Private Forest Regulation, 1970 Gilgit-Baltistan (Empowerment and Self Governance) Order, 2009 Jammu and Kashmir Forest (Sale of Timber) Act, 1930 Jammu and Kashmir Forest Regulation, 1930 Khyber Pakhtunkhwa climate change policy, 2016 Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Forest Ordinance, 2002 Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Mines and Mineral Development and Regulation Ordinance, 2016 Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Tourism Policy, 2015 Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Forest Development Fund (Management and Utilization) Rules, 2006 Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Forest Ordinance, 2002 Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Forestry Commission Act, 1999 Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Joint Forest Management (Community Participation) Rules, 2004 Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Mineral Development Policy, 2014 Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Protected Forests Management Rules, 2005 Land Acquisition Act, 1894 Land Use Atlas of Pakistan, 2004 National Agricultural Policy,1980 National Environment Policy, 2005 National Forest Policy, 2016 and earlier versions and amendments National Mineral Policy, 2013 National Power Policy, 2013 National Rangeland Policy, 2010

National Renewable Energy Policy, 2006 National Tourism Policy, 2007 National Water Policy2, 016 Northern Areas Council Legal Framework Order, 1994 Pakistan National Climate Change Policy, 2012 Punjab Climate Change Policy, 2017 Punjab Environment Policy 2015 (draft) Punjab Agriculture Policy, 2013 (draft) Punjab Forest (Sale of Timber) Act, 1913 Punjab Forest policy 1999 Punjab Forest Act 1927 Punjab Forest (Amendment) Act 2016 Punjab Forestry Sector (Forests, Watershed, Rangelands and Wildlife) Policy, 1999 Punjab Guzara Rules, 1927 Punjab Land Preservation (Chos) Act, 1900 Punjab Plantation and Maintenance of Trees Act, 1974. Punjab Tourism Policy, 2009 Punjab Village Forest Rules, 2013 Sindh Agro-Forestry Policy, 2004 Trade Control of Wild Flora and Fauna Act 2012 Wildlife Legislation of Sindh Province, 2014

Regional and International Conventions Convention for Biological Diversity and the Cartagena Protocol, The Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits Arising from their Utilization EU Timber Regulation, 2013 Indus Waters Treaty, 1960 London Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter Ramsar Convention United Nations Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification, United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, Kyoto Protocol and the Paris Agreement

ANNEX 1 PAKISTAN’S REDD+ READINESS INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS

112

113

ANNEX 2 TOOLS USED DURING THE STUDY

114

Forest Policy, Institutions and Legal Frameworks in Pakistan Forest Governance Survey Form

Name of Respondent: Designation: District: Province

1. Forest Policies and Laws

1) Does the country’s national/provincial forest policy/strategy recognize the role of the private sector?

Possible responses a) The country’s forest strategy recognizes the contribution and role of the private sector and explicitly includes mechanisms directed at fostering an appropriate role for the private sector. b) The country’s forest strategy recognizes the existence of the private sector but it does not give the private sector appropriate weight, and the strategy fails to foster an appropriate role for the private sector. c) The country’s forest strategy largely ignores the private sector.

2) In forest sector policy making and planning, do the ministries in charge take into consideration activities on private forest lands?

Possible responses a) Planners always consider activities on private forest lands and the resulting plans reflect that consideration. b) Planners usually consider activities on private forest lands. c) Planners sometimes consider activities on private forest lands. d) Planners rarely or never consider activities on private forest lands.

3) Do government policies consider non-market values, such as ecosystem services and traditional social uses of the forest?

Possible responses a) Government policies always consider non-market values of the forest. b) Government policies mostly consider non-market values of the forest. c) Government policies sometimes consider non-market values of the forest. d) Government policies rarely or never consider non-market values of the forest.

4) Does the forest law require the government to inventory the public forests and create plans for them?

Possible responses a) The law requires both inventories and long-term management plans. b) The law requires inventories or plans but not both. c) The law requires neither inventories nor plans.

115

5) When the government procures or consumes forest products, does the law require it to verify that these are legally produced?

Possible responses a) The law requires that all forest products for the government’s own use be legally produced. b) The law has these requirements for many products, such as timber, but not for all products. c) The law has these requirements for just a few products. d) The law does not have these requirements.

6) Where the law grants discretion to government officials, does the law include standards for exercise of that discretion?

Possible responses a) The law has clear and specific standards governing forest agency decisions. b) The law has specific standards in some areas and broad standards in others. c) The law includes only broad, general standards, such as a requirement to act in the public interest. d) The law grants authority to the government but without standards on the use of that authority.

1.1 Clarity and Coherence of Policies, Laws, and Regulations Governing Forest Use and Management

7) Are the laws governing use of forest resources consistent and clear?

Possible responses a) In general, the laws are consistent and clear. b) Some of the laws are confusing or conflict with each other. c) Most of the laws are confusing or in conflict.

1.2 Implementation Realities of Forest Laws and Policies

8) Are the laws governing forestry simple or cumbersome?

Possible responses Private Public a) The laws governing forestry are simple and compliance is easy. b) Some of the laws governing forestry are complex, but overall, compliance is not hard. c) Many of the laws governing forestry are complex, to the point where they discourage compliance.

116

9) Does forest policy serve the interests of both genders?

Possible responses a) Forest policy fully serves the interests of both genders. b) Forest policy is somewhat biased toward one gender. c) Forest policy is strongly biased toward one gender. D) Forest Policy is gender neutral

2. Land Tenure, Ownership and User Rights

10) Beyond land and vegetation, is the ownership of other resources tied to the land (e.g., carbon, genetic resources, wildlife, water, minerals) clear?

Possible responses a) The law clearly determines who has the rights to resources like carbon, genetic materials, wildlife, water, and minerals. b) The law clearly determines who has the rights to some of these resources. c) The law is silent on who has the rights to these resources.

11) Does the law include ways for local communities to share or obtain management authority over some public forests?

Possible responses a) The law requires the government to share or transfer management authority to local communities. b) The law expressly allows the government to share or transfer management authority to local communities. c) The law is silent on the matter.

117

2.1. Clarity and Coherence of Policies, Laws, and Regulations Governing Forest Use and Management

12) Are the forest agency budgets based on national goals for sustainable forest management and independent of forest revenues, donor funding, and other distorting factors?

Possible responses Agency Agency Agency Agency 1 2 3 4 a) The budgets are entirely based on national goals for sustainable management of forests. b) The budgets are somewhat biased — toward high-revenue-producing resources, toward donor-funded projects, or other narrow issues — perhaps to the detriment of sustainable management of all resources. c) The budgets have a strong bias toward high-revenue-producing resources, donor- funded projects, or other narrow issues. d) The budgets are entirely based on national goals for sustainable management of forests.

118

NATIONAL PLANNING AND DECISION-MAKING 1. Capacity

TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY 13) Does the legal framework support public access to information about forestry?

Possible responses a) The legal framework broadly supports public access to information about forestry. b) The legal framework supports public access to information about forestry in limited cases. c) The legal framework is silent about public access to information about forestry.

14) Does the legal framework provide for sanctions in case of failures of agencies to meet their obligations to disclose information?

Possible responses a) Yes b) No

15) Are inventory data, management plans, laws, and budgets for government-owned forests easily accessible to the public in a user-friendly format?

Possible responses a) All the above are accessible in a user-friendly format (language, statistics, and maps). b) Most of the above are accessible in a user-friendly format. c) Only some of the above data are accessible, or they are in a format that is difficult to use. d) None of the above are available.

16) Does the government have a transparent, credible, and comprehensive system of tracking its revenues and expenditures in the sector?

Possible responses a) Yes, the government has such as system, and the system works well. b) Yes, but the system does not always work well. c) No.

17) Is the forest agency free from political interference?

Possible responses Agency 1 Agency 2 a) The agency is by and large independent of political interference. b) Political interference affects the agency’s overall budget and direction, but does not influence day-to-day or technical decisions. c) Political interference occasionally reaches down and affects specific agency activities and decisions, including technical matters. d) Political interference frequently reaches down and affects agency activities and decisions, including technical matters.

119

18) Are the media independent and free to publish reports on forests and their management in a format widely accessible to the public?

Possible responses a) The country has free and independent media, regularly publishing reports on activities in the forest sector, in local languages. b) The country has free media, but the depth or frequency of coverage of the forest sector is limited and may not be in local languages. c) There are further limitations: either the media represents limited points of view, or its distribution is limited. d) There is little or no coverage of the forest sector in the media.

120

PERFORMANCE CULTURE 1. Quality of Decision-Making

19) Are forest agency budgets reviewed and revised on a regular schedule?

Possible responses Agency 1 Agency 2 a) Budgets are routinely reviewed and revised according to a regular schedule. b) There is a schedule for reviewing and revising budgets, but the agency does not always follow it. c) There is no schedule for reviewing or revising budgets; the agency reviews and revises its budgets when it wants. d) The agency seldom or never revises budgets.

20) Do all public forests have current valid management plans?

Possible responses a) All public forests have current valid management plans. b) Most public forests have current valid management plans. c) Few public forests have current valid management plans. d) No public forests have current valid management plans.

21) Are there checks and balances that discourage rapid and arbitrary changes in forest laws, policies, and plans?

Possible responses a) Changes in laws, policies, and plans require systematic reviews, consultations, or other deliberative actions. b) Changes in laws, policies, and plans can be made any time without any reviews or consultations.

22) Does the government use supply and demand information in making forest-related decisions?

Possible responses a) The government routinely considers supply and demand information in making forest-related decisions. b) The government considers supply and demand information in making the decisions most of the time. c) The government sometimes considers supply and demand information in making these decisions. d) The government never considers supply and demand information in making these decisions.

121

23) Does the government’s decision-making give consideration to non-marketed goods and services that are closely related to forest resources, such as ecosystem integrity, water quality, or cultural resources?

Possible responses a) Government decisions routinely reflect consideration a wide variety of non-marketed resources. b) Government decisions sometimes reflect consideration of a wide variety of non-market resources, or routinely reflect consideration of a limited range of non-market resources. c) Government decisions seldom or never reflect consideration of these resources.

24) Are the agency’s mission statement, strategy, or goals widely disseminated to agency staff at all levels?

Possible responses a) Yes b) No

25) Do forest agencies only hire people whose qualifications match advertised job descriptions?

Possible responses Agency 1 Agency 2 a) The agencies only hire people whose qualifications match advertised job descriptions. b) Most people’s qualifications match advertised job descriptions, but occasionally the agencies hire under- qualified people. c) The agencies often hire people whose qualifications do not match advertised job descriptions. d) It is impossible to say, because most positions do not have advertised job descriptions with required qualifications.

26) Do the agencies’ field foresters have the capacity to oversee the areas assigned to them?

Possible responses Agency 1 Agency 2 a) All field foresters have the skills and resources to effectively oversee their assigned areas. b) At least half of the field foresters have the necessary capacity, but not all. c) Less than half of the field foresters have the necessary capacity. d) The assigned areas are too large for the foresters to oversee effectively, given the field conditions, skills, and resources available.

122

27) Is there a system for assessing the impacts and outcomes of public forestry expenditures?

Possible responses a) There is effective and comprehensive assessment of the impacts and outcomes of government forest programs and expenditures. b) There is effective assessment of the impacts and outcomes of some government forest programs and expenditures. c) Assessment is weak. d) There is no assessment.

28) Does the agency record and report its management activities?

Possible responses Agency 1 Agency 2 a) The agency creates a reliable, complete, and easy to review record of its management activities. b) Recordkeeping is reliable, complete, and easy to review in some parts of the country but not in others. c) The agency keeps records of management activities but these are not necessarily reliable, complete, or easy to review. d) The agency does not keep records of management activities.

29) Is the forest inventory and growth information comprehensive (all you need for its application), up-to-date (according to accepted cycles), and used in decision- making and planning by the agency?

Possible responses Agency 1 Agency 2 a) It is comprehensive and up-to-date for all forested areas and is used in planning and decision-making. b) It is comprehensive and up-to-date for most areas and is used in planning and decision-making. c) It is comprehensive and up-to-date for only a few areas or is not used in planning and decision-making. d) No forested area has comprehensive and up-to-date inventory information.

2. Implementation

30) Is the collection, sharing, and redistribution of forest taxes, royalties, charges, and rents effective?

Possible responses Agency 1 Agency 2 a) The collection, sharing, and redistribution systems are highly effective. b) The collection, sharing, and redistribution systems are somewhat effective but need improvement. c) The collection, sharing, and redistribution systems are largely ineffective.

123

31) Do forest agencies implement existing management plans for public forests?

Possible responses Agency 1 Agency 2 a) All forest management plans are routinely implemented. b) Most forest management plans are implemented. c) Only some forest management plans are implemented. d) No plans are implemented.

3. Forest Law Enforcement

32) Are the penalties for forest offences large enough and graduated to fit the offense?

Possible responses a) Sanctions are almost always appropriate. b) Most sanctions are appropriate. c) Sanctions are appropriate less than half the time. d) Sanctions are typically inappropriate or ineffective.

33) Does the government’s forest law enforcement strategy include effective measures for prevention, detection, and suppression of forest crimes?

Possible responses Prevention Detection Suppression a) The government has an effective strategy to address forest crimes. b) The government has a strategy to address forest crimes but it should be somewhat stronger. c) The government has a strategy to address forest crimes but it needs to be much stronger. d) The government does not have any strategy in place.

34) Are reports of serious forest crimes routinely investigated?

Possible responses a) In all cases, reports of serious forest crimes are promptly investigated. b) Most serious crimes are promptly investigated after being reported. c) Less than half of reported serious crimes are promptly investigated. d) Forest crimes are seldom or never investigated.

124

35) Does the government have adequate capacity to address forest-related crimes and illegal activities?

Possible responses Prevention Detection Suppression a) The government has adequate capacity to address forest crimes. b) The government has some capacity to address forest crimes but it needs to be somewhat strengthened. c) The government has limited capacity to address forest crimes and it needs to be significantly strengthened. d) The government has no real capacity to address forest crimes.

36) Does the government effort against forest crimes cover the whole forest supply chain, including transport, processing, and trade?

Possible responses a) There is a strong effort to fight crime in the forest supply chain as a whole. b) The effort is fragmented: it covers some points outside the forest but not others. c) The effort focuses on the forest and perhaps also transport out of the forest, but not much else. d) There is no real effort.

37) Are prosecutors and judges knowledgeable about the effects of forest offenses and supportive of suppression of illegal activities?

Possible responses a) Judges and prosecutors are generally knowledgeable about the effects of forest offenses. b) Most judges and prosecutors are knowledgeable about the effects of forest offenses. c) Some judges and prosecutors are knowledgeable about the effects of forest offenses. d) Generally, judges and prosecutors are not knowledgeable about the effects of forest offenses.

125

ADMINISTRATION OF LAND TENURE AND PROPERTY RIGHTS 38) Are forest boundaries clearly surveyed and demarcated on the ground?

Possible responses AJK

a) Forest boundaries are generally clearly surveyed and demarcated. b) Forest boundaries are clearly surveyed and demarcated in most places. c) Forest boundaries are clearly surveyed and demarcated only in some places. d) Forest boundaries are generally not clearly surveyed and demarcated.

39) Are there serious conflicts between the state and stakeholders that interfere with forest use?

Possible responses a) Conflicts between the state and stakeholders are not serious and rarely interfere with forest use. b) Serious conflicts occur and occasionally interfere with forest use. c) Conflicts frequently interfere with forest use. d) Conflicts make it impossible for the government to enforce laws and control forest management.

40) Are there serious conflicts between different communities and user groups in the context of forest access and use?

Possible responses a) There are no serious conflicts between communities or users. b) There are chronic conflicts, but they do not interfere with forest management or use. c) Conflicts are making some forests difficult to manage or use. d) Conflicts are making some forests impossible to manage, and leading to clearly unsustainable uses.

41) Do conflicts over forest resource use and management tend to persist or do they get resolved?

126

Possible responses a) Conflicts tend to be resolved quickly and efficiently. b) The resolution of conflicts is variable: some are resolved efficiently while others persist. c) Conflicts get resolved (or resolve by themselves) slowly, imperfectly, or at great expense. d) Conflicts tend to persist indefinitely.

42) Are informal ways of resolving conflicts over forest resources and management widely used?

Possible responses a) There are informal ways that are socially acceptable and widely used. b) Informal ways have limited use. c) Informal ways are not used at all.

127

Forest Policy, Institutions and Legal Frameworks in Pakistan Legal Survey Form Name of Respondent Designation

District Province

43) Are the laws governing use of forest resources consistent and clear?

Possible responses a) In general, the laws are consistent and clear. b) Some of the laws are confusing or conflict with each other. c) Most of the laws are confusing or in conflict.

44) Are the laws governing forestry simple or cumbersome?

45) Does the law recognize traditional and indigenous rights to forest resources?

Possible responses a) The law generally recognizes traditional and indigenous rights. b) The law recognizes traditional and indigenous rights in most cases. c) The law recognizes traditional and indigenous rights in less than half of the cases. d) The law does not recognize traditional and indigenous rights.

46) Are formal and informal rights in conflict?

Possible responses a) The law fully harmonizes formal and informal rights to forest resources. b) The law partially harmonizes formal and informal rights to forest resources. c) The law is unsuccessful at harmonizing formal and informal rights to forest resources.

47) Does the tenancy act and other laws provide effective means to resolve disputes related to land tenure, ownership, and use rights?

Possible responses a) In general, the law provides effective means to resolve disputes. b) The law provides effective means to resolve most disputes. c) The law provides effective means to resolve some disputes. d) The law is not effective in resolving disputes.

128

48) Do relevant authorities give public notice of proposed forest policies, programs, laws, and projects?

Possible responses a) The authorities give clear, timely notice of all proposed policies, programs, laws, and projects. b) The authorities give clear, timely notice of most proposed policies, programs, laws, and projects. c) The authorities give clear, timely notice of less than half of the proposed policies, programs, laws, and projects. d) The authorities seldom or never give clear, timely notice of proposed policies, programs, laws, and projects.

49) Are the sanctions for forest offences large enough and graduated to fit the offense?

50) Does the government’s forest law enforcement strategy include effective measures for prevention, detection, and suppression of forest crimes?

51) Does the government effort against forest crimes cover the whole forest supply chain, including transport, processing, and trade?

129

52) Are prosecutors and judges knowledgeable about the effects of forest offenses and supportive of suppression of illegal activities?

130

Questionnaire for Social Survey To be asked from Provincial Forest Officer/Chief conservator

Objectives: Compile perspective of chief conservator or forest officer about:  Provisions in law for formal and informal rights over forest use and management of forest through communities  Inclusion of gender aspects in forest decision-making  Engagement of civil society organisations as monitors and watch dogs  Capacity of the forest department for engagement of stakeholders  Public dissemination of forest policies, programmes, laws and projects

1. Does the law recognize traditional rights to forest resources? Possible responses a) The law generally recognizes traditional and indigenous rights. b) The law recognizes traditional and indigenous rights in most cases. c) The law recognizes traditional and indigenous rights in less than half of the cases. d) The law does not recognize traditional and indigenous rights.

2. Are formal and informal rights in conflict? Possible responses a) The law fully harmonizes formal and informal rights to forest resources. b) The law partially harmonizes formal and informal rights to forest resources. c) The law is unsuccessful at harmonizing formal and informal rights to forest resources.

3. Does the law include ways for local communities to share or obtain management authority over some public forests? Possible responses a) The law requires the government to share or transfer management authority to local communities. b) The law expressly allows the government to share or transfer management authority to local communities. c) The law is silent on the matter.

4. To what extent is participation in forestry decision-making processes gender sensitive? Possible responses a) Women fully participate in forestry decision-making processes. b) Women sometimes participate in forestry decision-making processes. c) Women seldom participate in forestry decision-making processes.

131

5. Does the forest sector have credible, strong, and independent civil society organizations, including monitors and watchdogs? Possible responses a) Yes, it has such civil society organizations and they function as effective monitors and watchdogs. b) There are civil society organizations, but they are not fully effective as monitors and watchdogs. c) No, there are no credible and independent civil society organizations.

6. Do governments (at all levels) have capacity to engage stakeholders on forest- related decision-making processes and implementation? Possible responses a) Governments (at all levels) have adequate capacity to engage stakeholders on forest-related decision-making processes and implementation. b) Some arms of government lack adequate capacity to engage stakeholders on forest-related decision-making processes and implementation. c) Most arms of government lack adequate capacity to engage stakeholders on forest-related decision-making processes and implementation.

7. Do relevant authorities give public notice of proposed forest policies, programs, laws, and projects? Possible responses a) The authorities give clear, timely notice of all proposed policies, programs, laws, and projects. b) The authorities give clear, timely notice of most proposed policies, programs, laws, and projects. c) The authorities give clear, timely notice of less than half of the proposed policies, programs, laws, and projects.

132

QUESTIONNAIRE FOR SOCIAL SURVEY To be asked from Journalists

Name of journalist respondent: ______

Name of the print or electronic media with whom the journalists is associated with:

______

Date ______

Name of city and province where journalist is based: ______

Area of specialisation of the respondent journalist: ______

Are the media independent and free to publish reports on forests and their management in a format widely accessible to the public?

Possible responses Please tick only one box to indicate your answer a) The country has free and independent media, regularly publishing reports on activities in the forest sector, in local languages. b) The country has free media, but the depth or frequency of coverage of the forest sector is limited and may not be in local languages. c) There are further limitations: either the media represents limited points of view, or its distribution is limited. d) There is little or no coverage of the forest sector in the media.

133

Developing the National REDD+ Strategy and its Implementation framework for Pakistan Community Consultation Survey

Section A This section is to be filled from the forest department. Make sure to collect accurate information. Ask for any references if can be quoted for filling out the following table. Community Profile

Land area Population Ethnic Number Poverty Main income minorities rate of village rate % sources

Social Surveyor’s Form #1: Stakeholder Assessment

Surveyor’s full name: ______

Province/Territory: ______

Name of Respondent: ______Position: ______

Organization: ______

1. On a scale of 1 to 10, what is your interest in REDD+?

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Not Somewhat Very interested Interested Interested

2. My organization has __ (insert number of comment from below)______influence on the outcomes of a national REDD+ Strategy:

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 No Mild Strong Influence influence influence

3. List organizations, groups, departments etc. according to their perceived degree of influence on forest and land issues in Pakistan.

Highly Influential Influential Not influential 1. 1. 1. 2. 2. 2. 3. 3. 3. 4. 4. 4.

134

4. What REDD+ options, in your opinion, should be implemented? Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 Option 4 Option 5

5. Who should lead the implementation of those REDD+ options? Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 Option 4 Option 5

Section B This section is to be filled from the community members. The group size could be large and small. There should be at least 5 members for the consultation views. Try to get views of the majority. Please collect basic information about the area as per the following checklist:

1. Area of land under natural habitat 2. Do people own agriculture land 3. If yes, what do they grow 4. If know, do they work as farmers on others land if yes what is the arrangement (contract, tenant or other arrangement – please explain it) 5. Major crops grown 6. Is the harvest enough to meet the food requirement in the area 7. What is the source of livelihood of the majority of the area 8. Family system (joint, nucleus, any other) 9. Do they get any benefits from the forest around their residential areas? If yes, please explain the types of benefits drawn from the forest. 10. Have they ever faced any food security issues 11. Who do in their opinion are considered poor, please define 12. How many people in their area could be considered poor as per above stated definition.

1. How has the environment around you changed in the last 20 years? For example, low rain, excessive, high.

- Have you experienced Deforestation?

- Have you experienced environmental degradation?

- What are the reasons for the changes?

The answers will be presented in the following table: Drivers Changes Reasons

135

2. How has the climate changed in the last 20 years? What key differences do you notice?

3. What are the problems in relation to forest management in your community/district? Problem Area/Location Reason

4. What are the changes that you would like to see in forest management/conservation/use in your area? How can the community use forests better?

5. How can these changes be realized?

6. Has your community had any conflicts over forest use? Were they internal to the community or external with another community/company/Government/Person?

7. Describe the conflict resolution mechanisms in your community? (General conflicts)

Field level observation for surveyors: ask to see a close by site where the forest is in good or bad condition and understand the reasons.

List of Participants Date Full Name Organization Position

136

ANNEX 3 SYNTHESIS OF RESPONSES TO FOREST GOVERNANCE ASSESSMENTS AT PROVINCIAL LEVEL

137

1. BALOCHISTAN This annex presents the synthesis of responses resulted from consultations at the provinces according to the Forest Governance Assessment. Responses from stakeholders are shown in italics, whereas analysis is in regular font.

1.1 Provincial Forest Policies and Laws Existence and Quality of Provincial Policies The forests of Balochistan are governed by the Balochistan Forest Regulations 1890. The forest law does not include a specific statement that it is the policy or objective of the province to practice sustainable forestry. The forests and rangelands of Balochistan are generally managed as state forests under the Balochistan Forest Regulation 1890 (“Regulation”). Under Section 3 of the Regulation any forest land that is government property may be declared by notification in the official gazette to be a State Forest. No rights of any description adverse to the government can be acquired in or over State Forests by lapse of time or otherwise than under grant or contract made by or on behalf of the Government. Once a forest has been notified as a State Forest acts such as setting fire, felling, girdling or tapping of trees or clearing and cultivation of such forest land are prohibited except with the permission of the Government or a Forest Officer authorized by the Government. Further, the Government may declare any trees or any specified class of trees standing on any land at the disposal of the Government to be reserved trees from a date to be fixed by notification where after no person shall be allowed to fell, girdle, mark, lop, tap, or injure by fire or otherwise such reserved trees except as allowed by the Government or with the permission of a Forest Officer authorized to provide permission in this respect. Importantly the Regulation does not provide a mechanism for the determination of pre-existing proprietary and subsistence rights of private individuals and communities in a State forests or in relation to reserved trees, unlike the Forest Act 1927 which does provide for the determination of such rights (however biased that process may be in favour of an extractive government). This omission makes the Regulation even more draconian than the Forest Act 1927 when it comes to the establishment of community rights in public forests. As illustrated by the procedure for notifying forest land as State Forest or trees and class of trees on Government owned land as reserved trees, there is very little in the way of protection of individual and community rights to forest land in which the Government has ownership or proprietary rights, but which may nevertheless be a source of subsistence for such individuals and communities. Further, a large part of the Regulation is dedicated to the control of timber and other forest produce in transit, the duties leviable on them and the collection of drift and stranded timber and punitive measures against offences committed in forest land under government control. Most egregiously the Regulation does not provide any incentives for the sustainable management of forests and forest resources to individuals and local communities instead bearing down the path of increased exclusion of local communities seen as a threat to forest resources and primarily a reliance on punitive measures for infractions under the Regulation. If REDD+ is to be implemented through the greater engagement of all stakeholders and community participation the current legislative framework leaves much to be desired and will need to be overhauled systematically to allow for any meaningful progress in this regard. Addressing the drivers of deforestation is the low priority under national development plans, sector development plans and forest development plans. Forest management plans don’t exist in the province. This observation is borne out by the analysis of the regulations it is geared towards greater Government control of forest lands and the generation of revenue therefrom without heed to the conservation of forest resources and prevention of deforestation and forest degradation as an end in itself. Furthermore, there is no yet a coherent Forest Policy in place in Balochistan to address the drivers of deforestation

138

There is no provincial forest policy and there is no role of private sector in forestry under the law however planners always consider activities on private forest lands while planning/designing development projects. Government policies sometime consider non-market values of the forest such as ecosystem integrity and traditional social uses of forest. Under the current law it is not required to inventory public forests and make plans for them. The law does not require, that all forest products procured or consumed by private persons or government are to be verified whether they were legally produced or not. There are no Government Policies in place in Balochistan so the question of these considering non-market values such as ecosystem integrity etc. does not arise. The observations about public forest planning, inventory and record of legal production of forest products consumed seem to be correct because there are no specific provisions of law in this respect. The discretions of forest officers are not structured; the law includes only broad, general standards, such as a requirement to act in the public interest. Whereas the Forest Officers are invested with a lot of discretion in carrying out the objectives of the Regulation it also provides for the structuring and transparency of this discretion by generally delegating the power to make rules to the Government to carry out the purposes of the Regulation under Section 39 and specifically to declare by what class of forest officers the powers and duties imposed by the regulation are to be carried out. Nonetheless there are large swathes of discretion with the Government and the Forest Officers that are not structured and regulated through appropriate rules and regulations. Clarity and Coherence of Policies, Laws, and Regulations Governing Forest Use and Management The laws governing use of forest resources are mostly confusing or in conflict. No land use planning policy exists in the province. The province also currently lacks climate change policy. While the laws governing use of forest resources may be said not to take the interest of all stakeholders into account and be geared towards exclusion of individuals and communities with no formal rights therein, the scheme of the laws insomuch as it does provide for the governance of forest resources is not confusing or in conflict. Implementation Realities of Forest Laws and Policies Some of the laws governing forestry are complex, but overall, compliance is not hard. The law is silent on adaptive forest management. As for as the gender aspect is concerned, the forest law is gender neutral. As explained in detail above, the Regulation does little to address the core issues of forest resource conservation and prevention of forest degradation and deforestation. The orientation of the legislative framework is towards the economic exploitation of forest resources whereas REDD+ requires the legislative framework to re-orient itself towards economic gains from the conservation rather than exploitation of forest resources. By and large the Act and its overall scheme is simple and compliance with its provisions is easy although as explained above there still resides a large amount of unstructured discretion with the Forest Department and the Government which may hamper the ability of certain non-governmental stakeholders to ascertain their rights thereunder. The law is indeed silent on adaptive forest management. There is nothing in the law to suggest that the law equally serves the interests of both genders and there is no specific provision for securing female rights related to forests and forest use. The law does not provide for concrete formal mechanisms to ensure female participation in forest management.

1.2 Land Tenure, Ownership and User Rights The land tenure and ownership regarding genetic resources, carbon is unclear however the law clearly recognizes the ownership of land, vegetation, minerals and wildlife. The law generally recognizes traditional and indigenous rights in most cases. The law partially harmonizes formal and informal rights to forest resources.

139

There is nothing in the Regulation to indicate that the law recognizes traditional and indigenous rights. The law is not effective in resolving disputes related to land tenure, ownership, and use rights. The judicial processes are sluggish and expensive. The law expressly allows the government to share or transfer management authority to local communities. There is nothing in the Regulation to indicate that the Government may share or transfer management authority to local communities.

1.3 Cross-Sectoral Dimension of Forest Policy Most of the sectors are making policies in isolation and mainly keeping the departmental agenda on the top. The overall national development policies are inconsistent with sustainability in the forestry sector. There are some official mechanisms for cross-sectoral coordination, but they are not comprehensive. In few cases (mostly in donor funded projects) there is cross-sector coordination to some extent in the shape of steering committees or other similar bodies. The sectors that directly depend on forests and the sectors that directly affect forests normally don’t provide for forest- and tree-related activities in their plans and budgets.

1.4 Institutional Frameworks Clarity and Coherence of Policies, Laws, and Regulations Governing Forest Use and Management

Forestry in Pakistan is entirely a provincial subject. The national government has the coordination role among provinces and keeping liaison with international bodies for forest related functions. Forest-related mandates of national agencies significantly conflict with each other. The budgets of forest sector are not based on national/provincial goals for sustainable management of forests rather the budget is too meagre, and forestry is not the priority area of the government’s development agenda. The forest department have a serious lack of appropriate information technology or staff trained to use it. The Constitutional background of the Forestry Sector has been addressed above in detail.

1.5 Planning and Decision-Making Stakeholder Participation

The law gives stakeholders formal opportunities for input in the creation of policies, Public forest management plans, subsidiary rules etc. There are inadequate mechanisms in the law for people who are affected by forest policy, to influence it. The stakeholders are seldom consulted about ongoing and proposed actions in public forests and the feedback is seldom used in decision-making. As for as the gender aspect is concerned, women seldom participate in forestry decision-making processes. Government always encourages stakeholder engagement in forest-related planning and decision-making Capacity

Not all the stakeholders have the required capacity to be involved in forest planning and management. There are civil society organizations in the forest sector, but they are not fully effective as monitors and watchdogs. The capacities of local communities and SMEs are limited. In forest sector, there are active civil society organizations, but they are not strong and credible enough to be effective as monitors and watchdogs. The involvement of large private actors and corporate sector is negligible in the forestry sector. As for as the private saw millers and timber dealers are concerned, they have formed associations, but their code of conduct does not have the provisions, not to participate in corruption. The government does not provide incentives and education to encourage corporate entities and businesses operating in the forest sector to follow recommended international codes of conduct and standards and safeguards. Most arms of government lack adequate capacity to engage stakeholders on forest-related decision-making

140

processes and implementation. Only few or no stakeholders have practical and effective avenues to seek review of the decisions of the forest department.

1.6 Transparency and Accountability The legal framework broadly supports public access to information about forestry. At the moment, there is no clarity that legal framework provides for sanctions in case of failures of department to meet their obligations to disclose information under the act. The authorities seldom or never give clear, timely notice of proposed policies, programs, laws, and projects. The laws and budgets for government-owned forests are easily accessible to the public on the official website of Balochistan government. However, the inventory data, management plans etc. are not uploaded on the website. The government has transparent, credible, and comprehensive system of tracking its revenues and expenditures in the sector, but the system does not always work well. The Planning & Development department has an M&E Directorate which monitors the development activities undertaken by provincial departments. The personnel of the cell are independent from those, whose activities they monitor. Similarly, the financial transactions are monitored by the Accountant General’s office, which is also independent from these departments. Routine performance evaluation of all forest officials is done through Annual Confidential Reports (ACRs). The forest officials are also held accountable if they fail to act lawfully. Political interference frequently reaches down and affects agency activities and decisions, including technical matters. There are no political appointees in the forest agencies, or if there are they fill only policy-making and high managerial posts The media is free and independent, but the depth or frequency of coverage of the forest sector is limited and may not be in local languages.

1.7 Performance Culture Quality of Decision-Making

There is no schedule for reviewing or revising budgets; the agency reviews and revises its budgets when it wants. No public forests have current valid management plans. No arbitrary or unilateral changes can be made in laws, policies, and plans rather they require systematic reviews and due process. The department is never using supply and demand information while making decisions. The government’s decision-making sometime give consideration to non-marketed goods and services that are closely related to forest resources, such as ecosystem integrity, water quality, or cultural resources. The department mission statement, strategy and goals are not widely disseminated especially to the lower tiers of the department. The forest department only hire, people having matching qualification with the advertised job. The salaries and benefits of forest department are like other government departments based on the basic pay scale system. The areas assigned to field foresters are too large for the foresters to oversee effectively, given the field conditions, skills, and resources available. The assessment is weak in relation to impacts and outcomes of forest sector expenditures. The department is regularly recording and reporting its management activities. Record keeping is reliable, complete and easy to review in some part of the province but not in others. No forested area has comprehensive and up-to-date inventory information. Implementation

The collection, sharing, and redistribution systems of taxes, royalties, charges and rents are largely ineffective. The government is implementing less than half of the laws. As for as the budget spending is concerned, spending mostly follows the published budget, but there are sometimes shortfalls, or changes in allocations among programs. Currently no management plan is implemented for the public forest.

141

Forest Law Enforcement

Sanctions for forest offences are typically inappropriate or ineffective and not graduated to fit the offences. The government has a strategy to address forest crimes especially for suppression of forest crimes but there is lack of strategy for not including prevention, detection. Most serious forest crimes are promptly investigated after being reported. The government has limited capacity to address forest crimes (prevention, detection and suppression) and it needs to be significantly strengthened. The effort against forest crimes does not cover the whole forest supply chain but it focuses on the forest and perhaps also transport out of the forest, but not much else. The Regulation enumerates acts which are offences in relation to forests notified as State Forests under Section 3 and trees notified as reserved trees most of which pertain to damage to the State forest or the forest produce, undesired land use and unwarranted commercial use of the forests as well as damage to reserved trees. The Regulation also provides various penalties for offences related to the transit of timber and other forest produce. As is evident the orientation of the Regulation is punitive rather than preventive using appropriate incentives. Generally, judges are not knowledgeable about the effects of forest offenses however most of the prosecutors are knowledgeable.

1.8 Administration of Land Tenure and Property Rights The forest boundaries are clearly surveyed and demarcated only in some places. Conflicts between the state and stakeholders are not serious and rarely interfere with forest use. There are chronic conflicts between different communities and user groups in the context of forest access and use, making some forests difficult to manage or use. Conflicts over forest resource use and management, get resolved (or resolve by themselves) slowly, imperfectly, or at great expense. There are informal ways for conflict resolution that are socially acceptable and widely used.

142

2. SINDH

2.1 Provincial Forest Policies and Laws Existence and Quality of Provincial Policies of Sindh

The Sindh Province currently does not have any forest policy. A lease Policy exists under which forestland is leased out to farmers for agroforestry purposes. Furthermore, there is no yet a coherent Forest Policy in place in Sindh to address the drivers of deforestation as for example available in KP and Punjab although even in Punjab the Policy only addresses the themes of deforestation in broad strokes (stating for example” And whereas due to overuse and misuse, the natural resources have greatly deteriorated, reducing their productive potential”). There is no active role and involvement of private sector in forestry; however, planners usually consider activities on private lands while planning development programs. The fact that the Sindh Government has introduced an Agro Forestry Policy 2004 for a planned 133,000 hectares of land would seem to indicate that the Government of Sindh does in fact understand the value of involving the private sector in forestry. However, this is only one initiative of its kind and by and large the observation that the private sector has not been tapped for forestry seems justified. Clarity and Coherence of Policies, Laws, and Regulations Governing Forest Use and Management

No land use planning policy exists in the province. Same is the case with Climate change policy. In the absence of policies, it is difficult to determine whether forest and climate change policy goals and priorities, are supportive of each other or not. The laws governing use of forest resources are sometimes in conflict with each other. Implementation Realities of Forest Laws and Policies

The laws are out-dated and are not consistent with present day realities and challenges. Some of the laws governing forestry are complex, but overall, compliance is not hard. The law is silent on adaptive forest management. As for as the gender aspect is concerned, overall the law is gender neutral but according to some stakeholders the law is somewhat biased toward one gender. The Forest Act 1927 is indeed out-dated and does little to address the core issues of forest resource conservation and prevention of forest degradation and deforestation. The orientation of the legislative framework is towards the economic exploitation of forest resources whereas REDD+ requires the legislative framework to re-orient itself towards economic gains from the conservation rather than exploitation of forest resources. By and large the Forest Act 1927 Act and its overall scheme is simple and compliance with its provisions is easy although as explained above there still resides a large amount of unstructured discretion with the Forest Department and the Government which may hamper the ability of certain non-governmental stakeholders to ascertain their rights thereunder. The law is indeed silent on adaptive forest management. There is nothing in the law to suggest that the law equally serves the interests of both genders and there is no specific provision for securing female rights related to forests and forest use. The law does not provide for concrete formal mechanisms to ensure female participation in forest management.

2.2 Land Tenure, Ownership and User Rights The land tenure and ownership regarding genetic resources, carbon is still unclear however the law clearly recognizes the ownership of land, vegetation, minerals and wildlife. The law recognizes the indigenous and traditional rights such as grazing rights, firewood collection and right of way to the communities. The law is fully harmonizing formal and informal rights to forest resources.

143

The Forest Act 1927 does recognize several indigenous and traditional rights such as rights to pasture or to forest produce as evident by the fact that the Forest Settlement Officer is empowered to inquire regarding a claim as to such rights while undertaking the process of notifying forest land as reserved forest. However, the powers of the Forest Settlement Officer in this respect are highly discretionary, and even where such rights are recognized these may be overturned by the Government under Section 22 of the Ordinance or commuted by the Forest Settlement Officer. Furthermore, the Forest Settlement Officer may also stop any public or private way in a reserved forest under Section 25 of the Ordinance, subject to the availability of a substitute being available that is deemed to be reasonably convenient. As such, there is little in the way of absolute protection for indigenous and traditional rights under the currently existing legislative framework as far as forest land which is outright owned by the Government or within which the Government retains rights as envisaged in the Act. However, the laws governing rights such as The Sindh Tenancy Act 1950 tenancy act and others are not very effective in resolving disputes related to land tenure, ownership and use rights. The judicial processes are slow and expensive. The law expressly allows the government to share or obtain management of public forest by communities.

2.3 Cross-Sectoral Dimension of Forest Policy All the sectors are making policies mostly in isolation and mainly keeping the departmental agenda on the top. The overall development policies are inconsistent with sustainability in forestry sector. There is less or almost non-existent official mechanisms, for cross-sectoral coordination. In few cases (mostly in donor funded projects) there is cross-sectoral coordination to some extent in the shape of steering committees or other similar bodies. The sectors that directly depend on forests and the sectors that directly affect forests normally don’t provide for forest- and tree-related activities in their plans and budgets. Only National Highway Authority (NHA) and to some extent Water & Power Development Authority (WAPDA) earmark some budget for tree related activities but that is also very less than the desired.

2.4 Institutional Frameworks Clarity and Coherence of Policies, Laws, and Regulations Governing Forest Use and Management

Forestry in Pakistan is entirely a provincial subject. The national government has the coordination role among provinces and keeping liaison with international bodies for forest related functions. However, there is a feeling that the mandate of national and provincial governments is at times in conflict with each other. The budget of forestry sector is meagre however it is not dependent on revenues, donor funding and other distorting factors. The forest agencies seriously lack appropriate information technology (e.g., computers and appropriate software, GPS, GIS) and the trained staff to use it.

2.5 Planning and Decision-Making Stakeholder Participation

The laws give stakeholders opportunities for input in the creation of some of key documents such as public forest management plans, policies and subsidiary rule. The mechanisms are inadequate for those who are affected by forest policy and they are in most cases unable to influence it. The Forest Act 1927 allows for stakeholder participation only to the extent of claiming a pre- existing individual right to or over a reserved or protected forest before forest land is notified as such. However, there is no provision for engagement of stakeholders in policy making or the actual decision to reserve or protect a forest under the Forest Act 1927, which process is entirely at the discretion of the Provincial Government. There is therefore little, if any, influence that an individual or community may wield in respect of forest management plans and proposed actions under the Forest Act 1927.

144

For public forests, the stakeholders are seldom consulted about ongoing and proposed actions or the feedback is seldom used in decision-making. Women seldom participate in forestry decision-making processes. Government sometimes encourages stakeholder (Communities, CSOs) engagement in forest-related planning and decision-making. Capacity

In Forest sector, there are civil society organizations, but they are not fully effective as monitors and watch dogs. In only a few cases (civil society organizations) stakeholders have the capacity to be effectively involved in forest management and planning. The capacity of SMEs is not enough to be involved in forest management and planning. As for as the large private sector actors in the forest sector (including banks) are concerned, only a few or none have adopted and implemented voluntary environmental and social safeguards. Forest industries (private operators like saw millers, timber dealers, etc.) do not have a private code of conduct, including provisions against participating in corruption. The government does not provide incentives and education to encourage corporate entities and businesses operating in the forest sector to follow recommended international codes of conduct and standards and safeguards. Some arms of government lack adequate capacity to engage stakeholders on forest-related decision-making processes and implementation. Few or no stakeholders have practical and effective avenues to seek review of the decisions of the forest agency except to challenge the decisions in courts.

2.6 Transparency and Accountability The Sindh government has passed the right to information act 2016. The legal framework broadly supports public access to information about forestry. Under the act any officer found guilty of not providing the requisite information will be penalized. The laws and budgets for government-owned forests are easily accessible to the public on the official website of Sindh government. However, the inventory data, management plans etc. are not uploaded on the website. These can be obtained from the forest department on written request. The authorities seldom or never give any clear, timely prior public notice of proposed policies, programs, laws, and projects in forestry sector. The government has a good system of tracking its revenue and expenditure in the forestry sector. The Planning & Development department has an M&E cell which monitors the development activities undertaken by provincial departments. The personnel of the cell are independent from those, whose activities they monitor. Similarly, the financial transactions are monitored by the Accountant General’s office, which is also independent from these departments. Routine performance evaluation of all forest officials is done through Annual Confidential Reports (ACRs). The forest officials are also held accountable if they fail to act lawfully. Political interference is common in the forestry sector which occasionally reaches down and affects activities and decisions, including technical matters. The appointment to lower cadres is mostly done on political grounds however the officers are selected by the public service commission which is mostly free from political interference. As for as the media is concerned, it is free and independent, regularly publishing reports on activities in the forest sector, in local languages.

2.7 Performance Culture Quality of Decision-Making

Like all other sectors, budget of forestry sector is also reviewed and revised on regular basis. Only few public forests have valid management plans while the rests are managed without any management plan. No arbitrary or unilateral changes can be made in laws, policies, and plans rather they require systematic reviews and due process. The department is most of the time using supply and demand information while making decisions. The government’s decision making seldom

145

consider non-marketed goods and services that are closely related to forest resources, such as ecosystem integrity, water quality, or cultural resources. The lower tier of the department does not know much about the department’s mission statement, strategy, or goals. The forest department only hire people especially on officer positions having matching qualification with the advertised job. The salaries and benefits of forest department are like other government departments based on the basic pay scale. Less than half of the field foresters have the necessary capacity to oversee the areas assigned to them. The system for assessing the impacts and outcomes of public forestry expenditure is weak. The department creates a reliable, complete, and easy to review record of its management activities. The department have some information technology, but not enough to do their jobs well. They need more or better technology and staff trained to use it. Management Plans are available for only few public forests. However, the information in these management plans related to inventory, growth, are comprehensive, up to date and are used in decision making. Implementation

The collection, sharing, and redistribution systems are somewhat effective but need improvement. The government is implementing less than half of the laws’ provisions. As for as the budget spending is concerned, spending mostly follows the published budget, but there are sometimes shortfalls, or changes in allocations among programs. Forest management plans exist only for few public forests and only some of them are implemented. Forest Law Enforcement

Sanctions for forest offences are appropriate less than half the time. The government has a strategy to address forest crimes including prevention, detection and prevention but it should be somewhat stronger. Most serious crimes are promptly investigated once reported. The government has limited capacity to address forest crimes (prevention, detection and suppression) and it needs to be significantly strengthened. The government effort against forest crimes focuses on the forest and perhaps also transport out of the forest, but not much else. The Forest Act 1927 enumerates acts which are offences in relation to forests notified as reserved or protected under Section 26 and 33 respectively and the provisions for reserved forests also extend to village forests under Section 28 of the KP Forest Ordinance 2002. Most of the acts considered offences against a forest of any class pertain to damage to the forest or the forest produce, undesired land use and unwarranted commercial use of the forests. Finally, the Act provides various penalties for offences related to the transit of timber and other forest produce, the collection of drift and stranded timber (to be deemed the property of the Government) and the sale and sawing of timber. As is evident the orientation of the Act is punitive rather than preventive using appropriate incentives. Some judges and prosecutors are knowledgeable about the effects of forest offenses but most of them are largely not that knowledgeable about forest crimes.

2.8 Administration of Land Tenure and Property Rights The forest boundaries are clearly surveyed and demarcated only in some places. Serious conflicts occur between the state and stakeholders and occasionally interfere with forest use. There are serious conflicts between different communities and user groups in the context of forest access and use and these conflicts are making some forests difficult to manage or use. Conflicts get resolved (or resolve by themselves) slowly, imperfectly, or at great expense. Informal ways of resolving conflicts have limited use.

146

3. KHYBER PAKHTUNKHWA

3.1 Provincial Forest Policies and Laws Existence and Quality of Provincial Policies

The forests of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa are governed by the KP Forest Ordinance 2002, and KP Forest Policy of 1999 approved by the cabinet. The forest law and policy explicitly states sustainable management of forests as one of the objective which states that “WHEREAS it is expedient to consolidate and amend the laws relating to protection, conservation, management and sustainable development of forests and other renewable natural resources, and matters ancillary or incidental thereto in the KP. In KP the Forestry sector is governed by the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Forest Ordinance, 2002 (“Ordinance”) passed by the Governor of the province while the Constitution of Pakistan was in abeyance pursuant to General Pervaiz Musharraf’s Proclamation of Emergency of the 14October 1999 and the Provisional Constitutional Order No.1 of 1999. While the Ordinance borrows heavily from the Forest Act 1927 in terms of mechanisms available to the Provincial Government and its Forest Officers to essentially exclude private individuals and communities from the use of forest lands, it also goes some way in creating a more participatory environment in comparison to the Forest Act 1927 for the various stakeholders as well. Notably Section 3 of the Ordinance (“Objectives and guiding principles”) expressly includes the objective of “protection, conservation, management and sustainable development of forests” and the “involvement of local communities and interested parties in the formulation and implementation of forest policies and forest management plans” with Section 3 (2) (e) of the Ordinance providing that “the role of the Government regarding sustainable development of forests shall, as far as possible, be confined to preparing management plans, setting out objectives and criteria, monitoring progress, promoting research and education, providing advisory services, while interested parties shall be encouraged to undertake leading role in developmental activities where the forests are owned by the people or where the people are the major right holders” As with the Forest Act 1927 before it, the Ordinance co-opted the three broad categories of forests i.e. reserved forest, protected forest and village forest and added the category of protected wasteland (“Guzara forests”) with a wide array of powers invested in the Provincial Government and its Forest Officers to essentially exclude private individuals and communities from the use of forest lands for the purposes of generating revenue therefrom. As an example, under Section 4 of the Ordinance the Provincial Government can simply notify as a reserved forest, forest land which is the property of the government, or over which the Government has proprietary rights or to the whole or a part of the produce of which the Government is entitled, a wide enough definition to encompass almost all forest land except that exclusively owned by individuals. In a departure from the scheme of the Forest Act 1927, however, instead of placing the power of determining pre-existing rights, in relation to a forest sought to be notified as a reserved forest, in the hands of a Forest Settlement Officer, the same has been entrusted to a Forest Settlement Board which shall consist of a Revenue Officer not below the rank of a Collector, the concerned Divisional Forest Officer and most importantly one representative of the community or village to be chosen by such community. While the inclusion of a member of the community in the important task of determination of pre-existing rights in a forest to be reserved under the Ordinance is welcome, its efficacy is suspect when one considers that the decisions of the Board will be carried by the majority where the community member has but one vote and can therefore be easily side-lined. The Board so constituted would have the power of settling forest land as reserved forest after an inquiry into the pre-existing rights of any individuals claiming as such at which point it can pass an order admitting or rejecting the claim in whole or in part. Such an order could then be appealed before an officer of the Revenue Department no lower than a Collector (or before the Forest Tribunal if constituted) and the decision of this forum would be final barring a revision by the Provincial Government.

147

Under Section 29 of the Ordinance, as with the Forest Act 1927, the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Government retains the further right to declare forest land as protected forest. Unlike the procedure for the reservation of a forest there is no clearly defined process by which pre-existing rights in a forest shall be determined prior to it being declared a protected forest. The Ordinance merely provides that these must be inquired into and recorded at a “survey or settlement, or in such other manner as Government may consider appropriate.” However, this provision is weakened further by the provision that where the Government fears that such inquiry and record will occupy such length of time as to endanger the Government’s rights, it may immediately declare such land to be a protected forest pending the inquiry into pre-existing rights. Where a forest has been declared as a protected forest, subject to a notification in this respect, the Government can reserve trees or a class of trees, close the forest for a term not exceeding thirty years with the rights of individual persons or communities being suspended during this period or prohibit certain other acts within the protected forest. Given that a notification as aforesaid has been made in respect of a protected forest, damage to the forest or the commission of an act in contravention of the notification shall constitute an offence. The upshot is that, given that the Government issues a notification in this respect, all acts that are offences in relation to a reserved forest are similarly offences in relation to a protected forest, without however, a clearly defined procedure for determination of pre-existing rights in land declared to be protected forest and the additional option available to the Government to declare land to be protected forest even before such rights have been determined through a procedure deemed appropriate by the Government. As such, where expedient the Government can use the mechanism of declaring land to be protected forest to exclude local communities and individuals from such land without adopting the relatively more rigorous process of determining and protecting pre-existing rights of individuals and communities in such land. As illustrated by the procedure for notifying forest land as reserved forest or protected forest, there is very little in the way of protection of individual and community rights to forest land in which the individual may not have a formal legal interest, but which may nevertheless be a source of subsistence for such individuals and communities. The thrust of the Ordinance, as for the Forest Act before it, is for the Government to be able to acquire forest land and generate revenue from it. Another indicator of this is the fact that the Ordinance, as with the Forest Act 1927, does not even define specifically what the purpose of reservation or protection of forest land is (although in contradistinction to the Forest Act 1927 protection, sustainability and conservation of the forests is broadly included as an objective of the Ordinance). Further, a large part of the Ordinance is dedicated to the control of timber and other forest produce in transit, the duties leviable on them and the collection of drift and stranded timber and punitive measures against offences committed in forest land under government control. In consonance with the Forest Act 1927 the Ordinance does not provide any incentives for the sustainable management of forests and forest resources to individuals and local communities instead bearing down the path of increased exclusion of local communities seen as a threat to forest resources and primarily a reliance punitive measures for infractions under the Ordinance. The trend towards increasing Government control of the land in the Province regardless of its use by individuals and the community is also illustrated by the provisions in relation to Guzara forests and wastelands (Chapter V of the Ordinance) whereby the Government’s control may even extend to what is essentially private property. Under the provisions of Chapter V of the Ordinance, for certain districts of the province (and others as may be notified) the uncultivated or uncultivable land set aside by villages for the common use of the village landowners at the time of settlement (“wasteland”), which are essentially private lands in joint ownership of the village landowners, may be declared to be protected wastelands (“Guzara forests”) by the Conservator of Forests, for purposes such as protection against storms, protection, conservation and regeneration of certain types of trees etc. and once so declared the Guzara forest shall be managed by the forest department yet again excluding the local community from the management of forest resources. Even where a wasteland has not been declared a Guzara forest, the village landowners are not free to use the wasteland unilaterally e.g. having to obtain the permission of the Conservator of Forests to sell any tree, timber or brushwood growing on such wasteland. The power of declaration of wasteland as protected wasteland does not come with the countervailing right afforded to the village landowners to challenge said declaration.

148

Taking its cue from the Forest Act 1927, Section 28 of the Ordinance deals with the possibility of assigning to any village community the rights of the Government to any land which has been constituted a reserved forest even though the Government is still empowered to make rules for management of the village forest. However, Section 28 also countenances the possibility of the termination of the assignment of a village forest without providing for an explicit right to contest such termination to the affected village community. Although the section provides for the formulation of rules for the management of a village forest, these have not yet been codified for the province of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa betraying a lack of inclination on the part of the Government in utilizing a mechanism of participatory management of forests and forest resources despite the lofty objectives set by Section 3 of the Ordinance. In certain very important respects, however, the Ordinance does create space for conservation of forests and sustainable and participatory management of forest resources, and incidentally the implementation of REDD+ objectives, in stark contrast to the Forest Act 1927. Most of the provisions in this respect are to be found under Chapter XII of the Ordinance (“The Forest Management”). Under Section 98, all types of forests under the management of a Forest Officer, including a village forest, shall be managed in accordance with the provincial forest policy and strategic management plans, forest management plans, operational plans and village plans and where such plans do not already exist they are to be prepared as expeditiously as possible and regularly updated. The Ordinance also provides that the management plans must emphasize and cater to the protection, conservation, management and sustainable development of forests and forest resources in the case of reserved forests and for forests other than reserved forests they need to emphasize the sustainable production of timber and other forest produce for meeting the domestic requirements of village communities and commercial harvesting. Here the Ordinance provides a clear formal mechanism for addressing drivers of deforestation through the management plans. This is clearly a step in the right direction in terms of ensuring that the principles of Section 3 above stated are carried through into practice by the Forest Department. In addition, Section 104 of the Ordinance provides for the creation of a Forest Development Fund to ensure adequate and timely availability of funds for the implementation of the forest management plans. Section 99 emphasizes that the Government, assisted by the interested parties, shall be responsible for the protection, conservation, management, and sustainable development of all classes of forests. Furthermore, under Section 100 the commercial harvesting of timber may only be carried out in service to approved management plans and regeneration schemes. This provision in particular provides a hook for the REDD+ objectives to be practically implemented by being ensconced in forest management plans. In going much beyond the provisions of the Forest Act, 1927 the Ordinance provides under Section 101 for the assignment of all or any of the Government’s rights in a protected forest, Guzara forest and protected wasteland to any village forest community, village organization or a Joint Forest Management Committee (which may comprise members of an interested community or village based organization or a group of persons representing such organizations and members of the Forest Department). The commitment to this scheme of delegated or joint forest management is evident in the fact that unlike a village forest under Section 28, the assignment of Government rights under this provision shall not be cancelled before the village forest committee or the Joint Forest Management Committee has been given the opportunity of being heard by the Forest Officer and the Forest Officer has recorded his reasons in writing should he wish to proceed to cancellation of the assignment. Given the above, from a legal aspect the legislative framework needs to be bolstered to effectively increase community participation and secure such rights once granted, however, the Ordinance far outstrips the Forest Act 1927 in providing formal mechanisms for sustainable and participatory management of forests and forest resources. Nonetheless, If REDD+ is to be implemented through the greater engagement of all stakeholders and community participation the current legislative framework still requires breaking away from the overarching principles and objectives of the Forest Act 1927 which have been co-opted by the Ordinance wholesale. The Ordinance therefore will need to be overhauled systematically to bring it even further in line with the stated objectives of the Ordinance itself (as espoused in Section 3 as well as the goals of REDD+ implementation.

149

Addressing the drivers of deforestation is high priority under the forest management plans (which exists or under construction for most of the forests) while the sector development plans address the issue of drivers of deforestation to some extent. Under national development the issue is a low priority. Addressing Drivers of Deforestation In certain very important respects, the Ordinance does create space for conservation of forests and sustainable and participatory management of forest resources, and incidentally the implementation of REDD+ objectives, in stark contrast to the Forest Act 1927. Most of the provisions in this respect are to be found under Chapter XII of the Ordinance (“The Forest Management”). Under Section 98, all types of forests under the management of a Forest Officer, including a village forest, shall be managed in accordance with the provincial forest policy and strategic management plans, forest management plans, operational plans and village plans and where such plans do not already exist they are to be prepared as expeditiously as possible and regularly updated. The Ordinance also provides that the management plans must emphasize and cater to the protection, conservation, management and sustainable development of forests and forest resources in the case of reserved forests and for forests other than reserved forests they need to emphasize the sustainable production of timber and other forest produce for meeting the domestic requirements of village communities and commercial harvesting. Here the Ordinance provides a clear formal mechanism for addressing drivers of deforestation through the management plans. This is clearly a step in the right direction in terms of ensuring that the principles of Section 3 above stated are carried through into practice by the Forest Department. In addition, Section 104 of the Ordinance provides for the creation of a Forest Development Fund to ensure adequate and timely availability of funds for the implementation of the forest management plans. The provincial forest strategy recognizes the contribution and role of the private sector and explicitly includes mechanisms directed at fostering an appropriate role for the private sector. Planners always consider activities on private forest lands and the resulting plans reflect that consideration. While designing development projects/Programme in the forestry sector the planners incorporate activities on private lands and involve private individuals in nursery raising etc. Currently the forest department is implementing a mega project with the name of Billion Tree Afforestation Projects (BTAP) which aims to increase the forest area by two percent. The project has big component of afforestation on private lands. Private Sector Involvement The KP Forest Ordinance 2002 does not expressly cater for mechanisms to foster the involvement of the private sector for the achievements of its objectives although Section 105 does provide for the power to lease out all classes of forests by the Forest Department specifically for the purposes of planting trees and increasing production of forest produce, implementing agro-forestry and social forestry schemes for the benefit of the local communities and to operate farms for the breeding of wildlife and conservation of bio-diversity and nature reserves. Section 105 is therefore at least one avenue for the involvement of the private sector in a manner that allows for commercial utilization of the forests without causing de-forestation. Government policies sometime consider non-market values of the forest such as ecosystem integrity and traditional social uses of forest. The law and policies expressly count on protection and conservation of forests. A big chunk of forest is assigned to protection working circles under forest management plans where the objective is to protect the existing forests and not the commercial exploitation. Under the current law (section 98) it is required to inventory all those forests which are managed by the department and make plans for them. The law requires, that all forest products procured or consumed by private persons or government are to be verified whether they were legally produced or not. The forest officers have right to investigate the origin of wood consumed in newly constructed buildings whether government owned or privately owned. See feedback to the above paragraph in relation to Section 98 of the KP Forest Ordinance 2002 generally. However, Section 98 does not specifically require the inventory of forest which are managed by the department but only that a forest management plan include a general description of the forests and other natural resources in the areas covered thereunder.

150

There is no explicit provision in the Ordinance requiring verification that the forest products procured or consumed by private persons or government were legally produced. The various provisions of the Ordinance, specifically those co-opted from the Forest Act 1927 are instead oriented towards prevention of private persons from procuring or consuming forest products. As for as the discretion of officers are concerned, the law has not defined specific standards for the exercise of discretions however the law has specific standards in some areas and broad standards in others. Discretion Whereas the Forest Department and Forest Officers are invested with a lot of discretion in carrying out the objectives of the Ordinance it also provides for the structuring and transparency of this discretion by generally delegating the power to make rules to the Government to carry out the purposes of the Ordinance under Section 115 (as well as specific delegation of power to make rules in respect of particular provisions of the Ordinance). This power has been used to specifically regulate certain discretionary provisions such as through the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Joint Forest Management (Community Participation) Rules 2004, the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Forest Development Fund (Management and Utilization) Rules, 2006 and the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Protected Forests Management Rules, 2005. However, there still remain large swathes of discretion with the Government and the Forest Officers that are not similarly structured and regulated through appropriate rules and regulations (although arguably the broad objectives under Section 3 of the Ordinance should always be paramount in the exercise of any discretion exercised under the Ordinance).A few significant examples where the Government retains unstructured discretion under the Ordinance are the Government’s power to unilaterally determine the appropriate manner of establishing pre-existing rights of individuals and communities in land declared to be protected forests, the power to close portions of protected forests for up to thirty years through a notification and the power to lease out the whole or any portion of forests under its management (although this is admittedly in service to certain defined purposes) as well as the management and modification of such leases. Clarity and Coherence of Policies, Laws, and Regulations Governing Forest Use and Management

As per the response of the forest officers, “In General the laws governing the use of forest resources are consistent and clear. There is no land use planning policy exists in the province. The forest department has introduced village land use planning in selected areas of the province but that has no legal backing. The province has already drafted a well thought out climate change policy which advocates sustainable management of forests and collaborative forest management, but the policy is yet to be approved. Consistency There are some issues of consistency within the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Forest Ordinance 2002 caused by the discrepancy between the provisions co-opted from the Forest Act 1927 and those included in service of the objectives and guiding principles laid out in Section 3 of the Ordinance. While the earlier are extractive and exclusive in their nature and concentrate a large amount of discretionary power in the hands of the Government for the management of forests and forest produce without significant concern for the conservation and sustainability of these forests, the latter are geared towards greater participation from individual and community stakeholders with a particular emphasis on protection, conservation and sustainable development of the forest land particularly as provided in Chapter XII of the Ordinance. Implementation Realities of Forest Laws and Policies

The laws governing forestry both for public and private forests are simple and compliance is easy. The law is silent on adaptive forest management. As for as the gender aspect is concerned, forest policy fully serves the interests of both genders. By and large the Ordinance and its overall scheme is simple and compliance with its provisions is easy although as explained above there still resides a large amount of unstructured discretion with the Forest Department and the Provincial Government which may hamper the ability of

151

certain non-governmental stakeholders to ascertain their rights thereunder. The law is indeed silent on adaptive forest management. It would not be accurate to say that the legal framework around the forestry sector fully serves the interests of both genders, however, the Ordinance is cognizant of the fact that greater participation by women stakeholders in the management of forests and forest resources should be encouraged. In this vein, Section 99 provides that the Government shall make efforts to encourage women to participate in the forest management process and Section 100 provides that management plan or regeneration schemes for forest management should ensure the participation of women as far as possible. The law therefore is aware of the need for greater women participation but does not provide for concrete formal mechanisms to ensure women participation in forest management.

3.2 Land Tenure, Ownership and User Rights The land tenure and ownership regarding genetic resources, carbon is unclear however the law clearly recognizes the ownership of land, vegetation, minerals and wildlife. The law generally recognizes traditional and indigenous rights in most cases. The law fully harmonizes formal and informal rights to forest resources. The law does not fully harmonize formal and informal rights to forest resources. The Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Tenancy Act 1950, and other laws do not provide effective means to resolve disputes related to land tenure, ownership, and use rights. In practice, the disputes related to land tenure; ownership/use rights, are common and is affecting the management of forests. Guzara forests (free of charge). The law does not fully harmonize formal and informal rights to forest resources. The tenancy act, land revenue act and other laws do not provide effective means to resolve disputes related to land tenure, ownership, and use rights. In practice, the disputes related to land tenure; ownership/use rights, are common and is affecting the management of forests. The judicial processes are sluggish and expensive. This observation is borne out by the fact that for example under the Ordinance, no rights in relation to a reserved forest may accrue to a private individual except as provided in a very limited sense under Section 23 whereby rights in reserved forests may only accrue to a person after notification as a reserved forest through succession or through a grant or contract in writing with the Government or such person in whom such right was vested when the notification for reserving a forest is promulgated. As against the Provincial Government, laws such as tenancy act and others are not effective for a private individual even prior to the notification as a reserved forest as the Government retains the right under Section 11 of the Ordinance to acquire any land in which the claim of a private individual has been recognized in the manner provided under the Land Acquisition Act 1984. Where the claimed rights of an individual to a forest land under the process of being reserved are rejected altogether, such an individual only has the right to appeal under Section 17 to a notified officer of the Revenue Department or the Forest Tribunal, if established. The decision of such an appeal is deemed to be final under the subject to the powers of the Provincial Government to revise the decision in appeal under Section 18 of the Ordinance. The law requires the government to share or transfer management authority to local communities. In going much beyond the provisions of the Forest Act 1927 apart from the formation of a village forest under Section 28 by assigning the Government’s rights in a reserved forest to any village community, the Ordinance also provides under Section 101 for the assignment of all or any of the Government’s rights in a protected forest, Guzara forest and protected wasteland to any village forest community, village organization or a Joint Forest Management Committee (which may comprise members of an interested community or village based organization or a group of persons representing such organizations and members of the Forest Department). The commitment to this scheme of delegated or joint forest management is evident in the fact that unlike a village forest under Section 28, the assignment of Government rights under this provision shall not be cancelled before the village forest committee or the Joint Forest Management Committee has been given the opportunity of being heard by the Forest Officer

152

and the Forest Officer has recorded his reasons in writing should he wish to proceed to cancellation of the assignment.

3.3 Cross-Sectoral Dimension of Forest Policy Most of the sectors are making policies in isolation and mainly keeping the departmental agenda on the top. The overall national development policies are inconsistent with sustainability in the forestry sector. There is less or almost non-existent official mechanisms, for cross-sector coordination in forest- related policy, planning, or practice issues however informal mechanisms do exist for cross sector coordination. In few cases (mostly in donor funded projects) there is cross-sector coordination to some extent in the shape of steering committees or other similar bodies. The sectors that directly depend on forests and the sectors that directly affect forests normally don’t provide for forest- and tree-related activities in their plans and budgets. Only Water & Power Development Authority (WAPDA) and to some extent National Highway Authority (NHA) earmark some budget for tree related activities but that is also very less than the desired.

3.4 Institutional Frameworks Clarity and Coherence of Policies, Laws, and Regulations Governing Forest Use and Management

Forestry in Pakistan is entirely a provincial subject. The national government has the coordination role among provinces and keeping liaison with international bodies for forest related functions. The mandates of national and provincial governments regarding forestry are clearly mutually supportive however forest-related mandates of cross sector provincial/national agencies significantly conflict with each other. The budget of forestry sector is not dependent on revenues, donor funding and other distorting factors. The budgets are entirely based on provincial goals for sustainable management of forests. The forest department has some information technology (e.g., computers and software, GPS, GIS) but not enough to do their jobs well.

3.5 Planning and Decision Making Stakeholder Participation

The laws give stakeholders opportunities for input in the creation of some of key documents such as public forest management plans, policies and subsidiary rule. Mechanisms are inadequate for those people who are affected by forest policy to influence it. The stakeholders are seldom consulted about ongoing and proposed actions or the feedback is used in decision- making. As for as the gender aspect is concerned, women seldom participate in forestry decision-making processes. Government seldom encourages stakeholder engagement in forest-related planning and decision making. Section 98 of the Ordinance provides that where the management plan for a particular class of forest does not exist it shall be prepared “with such involvement of local communities and interested parties as may be possible.” The language of the provision does not indicate that securing the participation of local communities in the process of developing management plans is paramount to the scheme of the Ordinance. Nonetheless, providing for the possibility of such input being sought by the Government is a step towards participatory management of forest lands. The Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Forestry Commission Act 1999 provides for the formation of a Forestry Commission comprising several ex-officio members including among others the Secretary to Government for the Environment Department and the Chief Conservator of Forests as well as four non-official members with impeccable repute associated with forestry and other renewable natural resources. Amongst the functions of the Commission is the giving of vision and framework for the sustainable development of forests in the Province and reviewing, developing and advocating policies for the sustainable development of forests in the Province and ensuring their implementation as well as overseeing the process of legislative reforms in the forestry sector. The Commission is assisted by a Forestry Round Table comprising

153

representatives of the major stakeholders in the forestry sector which works as a think tank and resource for the Commission and works towards resolving the major conflicts amongst various stakeholders in forest lands. As such the province of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa has a robust mechanism in place for policy and legislation to be informed by the input of the various stakeholders in the forestry sector represented on the Commission and the Forestry Round Table. The Commission could be an important force in pushing the REDD+ agenda into policy and legislation and should therefore be engaged. Capacity

Not all the stakeholders have the required capacity to be involved in forest planning and management. Some of the civil society organizations have reasonable capacity to be involved in forest planning and management. The capacities of indigenous people, local communities and SMEs are limited. In Forest sector, there are active civil society organizations, but they are not strong and credible enough to be effective as monitors and watchdogs. The involvement of large private actors and corporate sector is negligible in the forestry sector. As for as the private saw millers and timber dealers are concerned, they have formed associations, but their code of conduct does not have the provisions, not to participate in corruption. Governments (at all levels) have adequate capacity to engage stakeholders on forest-related decision-making processes and implementation. Few or no stakeholders have practical and effective avenues to seek review of the decisions of the forest agency. The avenues provided within the Ordinance itself about recognition of individual rights pertain only to decisions taken by a Forest Settlement Board in respect of recognition of pre-existing rights in relation to proposed reserved forests. A decision of the Forest Settlement Officer in this respect may be appealed under Section 17 before a notified officer of the Revenue Department or the Forest Tribunals, where they have been created. However, even where the Forest Settlement Board or the appropriate forum at the appellate level takes a decision in favour of an individual this is subject to unilateral revision by the Provincial Government under Section 18 of the Ordinance. The upshot therefore is that there are indeed very few practical and effective avenues to seek review of the decisions of the Forests Department in respect of individual and community rights.

3.6 Transparency and Accountability In forestry sector, there are credible, strong, and independent civil society organizations, but they are not fully effective as monitors and watchdogs. Not all the stakeholders have the capacity to be actively involved in forest planning & management. Few Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) have the capacity to be involved in forest planning and management. The capacities of SMEs and others are low and have not been really explored. Large private sector actors in the forest sector (including banks) are almost non-existent. So far none of the large private sector entities have adopted and implemented voluntary environmental and social safeguards. The forest industries (private operators like saw millers, timber dealers, etc.) have their associations, but they do not have a private code of conduct, including provisions against participating in corruption. The government does not provide incentives and education to encourage corporate entities and businesses operating in the forest sector to follow recommended international codes of conduct and standards and safeguards. Not all arms of government have adequate capacity to engage stakeholders on forest-related decision-making processes and implementation rather some arms of government lack the required capacity of engaging stakeholders. Not all the stakeholders have the required influence and resources have practical and effective avenues to seek review of the decisions of the forest department. Only few of them have practical and effective avenues to seek review of the decisions of the forest department. The KP government has passed a very robust law called the right to information act. The legal framework broadly supports public access to information about forestry. Under the act any officer found guilty of not providing the requisite information has to be penalized. The authorities seldom give clear, timely notice of most proposed policies, programs, laws, and projects. Only for any change in the status of forest, the law requires to give notice in local language to all the concerned communities. The laws and budgets for government-owned forests are easily

154

accessible to the public on the official website of KP government. However, the inventory data, management plans etc. are not uploaded on the website. These can be obtained from the forest department on written request. This information will not necessarily be available in user-friendly format. The government has a good system of tracking its revenue and expenditure in the forestry sector. The Planning & Development department has an M&E Directorate which monitors the development activities undertaken by provincial departments including forest department. The personnel of the cell are independent from those, whose activities they monitor. WWF is entrusted by the government of KP, as external monitor for the Billion Tree Afforestation Project (BTTAP). Similarly, the financial transactions are monitored by the Accountant General’s office, which is also independent from these departments. Routine performance evaluation of all forest officials is done through Annual Confidential Reports (ACRs). The forest officials are also held accountable if they fail to act lawfully. Political interference affects the agency’s overall budget and direction, but does not influence day-to-day or technical decisions. There are no political appointees in the forest agencies, or if there are they fill only policy-making and high managerial posts The country has free media, but the depth or frequency of coverage of the forest sector is limited and may not be in local languages

3.7 Performance Culture Quality of Decision Making

The Finance department has a given schedule for revision of budget for all the sectors, budget of forestry sector is also reviewed and revised on regular basis. Most of the public forests have valid management plans, as it is the requirement of law. The rest are in the process of preparation. No arbitrary or unilateral changes can be made in laws, policies, and plans rather they require systematic reviews and due process. The department is sometime using supply and demand information while making decisions. The government’s decision making sometime give consideration to non-marketed goods and services that are closely related to forest resources, such as ecosystem integrity, water quality, or cultural resources. The department mission statement, strategy and goals are not widely disseminated especially to the lower tiers of the department. The forest department only hire people especially on officer positions having matching qualification with the advertised job. The salaries and benefits of forest department are like other government departments based on the basic pay scale system. However, the salaries are generally inadequate. At least half of the field foresters have the necessary capacity, to oversee the areas assigned to them but not all. The department is regularly recording and reporting its management activities. Record keeping is reliable, complete and easy to review in some part of the province but not in others. The assessment is weak in relation to impacts and outcomes of forest sector expenditures. Management Plans are available for most of public forests and the information in these management plans related to inventory, growth, are comprehensive, up to date and are used in decision making. The department has some information technology, but not enough to do their jobs well. They need more or better technology and staff trained to use it. Implementation

According to the surveyed officers, the collection, sharing, and redistribution systems of taxes, royalties, charges and rents are highly effective. The government is implementing most of the laws but not all. As for as the budget spending is concerned, spending mostly follows the published budget, but there are sometimes shortfalls, or changes in allocations among programs. Most of the management plans are implemented however it also depends on the availability of required financial/technical resources.

155

Forest Law Enforcement

Sanctions for forest offences are almost appropriate and graduated to fit the offences. The government has a strategy to address forest crimes including prevention, detection and prevention but it should be much stronger. In all cases, reports of serious forest crimes are promptly investigated. The government has limited capacity to address forest crimes (prevention, detection and suppression) and it needs to be significantly strengthened. There is a strong effort to fight crime in the forest supply chain including transport, processing and trade. The Ordinance enumerates acts which are offences in relation to forests notified as reserved or protected under Section 26 and 33 respectively and the provisions for reserved forests also extend to village forests under Section 28 of the Ordinance. In addition, Section 44 enumerates the acts prohibited in relation to Guzara forests and wastelands. Most of the acts considered offences against a forest of any class pertain to damage to the forest or the forest produce, undesired land use and unwarranted commercial use of the forests. Finally, the Ordinance provides various penalties for offences related to the transit of timber and other forest produce, the collection of drift and stranded timber (to be deemed the property of the Government) and the sale and sawing of timber. As is evident the orientation of the Ordinance is punitive rather than preventive using appropriate incentives. Regarding prosecution, some judges and prosecutors are knowledgeable about the effects of forest offenses, but most of them are, not that much knowledgeable about forest crimes.

3.8 Administration of Land Tenure and Property Rights The forest boundaries are clearly surveyed and demarcated only in some places. Conflicts between the state and stakeholders are not serious and rarely interfere with forest use. There are chronic conflicts between different communities and user groups in the context of forest access and use but they do not interfere with forest management or use. Resolution of conflict over forest resource use and management is variable: some are resolved efficiently while others persist. There are informal ways for conflict resolution that are socially acceptable and widely used.

156

4. PUNJAB

4.1 Provincial Forest Policies and Laws Existence and Quality of Provincial Policies

The forests of Punjab are governed mainly by the Forest Act of 1927, amended in 2016 and Punjab Forestry Sector policy 1999.The amendment was in Section 2 and Section 80 A of the 1927 Act, while Section XII-A was inserted into the Act. Forest manual is also considered an important document for taking day to day decisions in the sector. Forest Act, 1927 In Punjab, the Forestry sector is governed by the Forest Act of 1927, which was adapted by the Province of Punjab through the Punjab Laws (Adaptation) Order 1974. After the Eighteenth Amendment to the Constitution, the Forest Act was amended in Punjab through the Forest (Amendment) Act, 2010 and the Punjab Forest (Amendment) Act, 2016. The Indian Forest Act 1927 was first adapted by the State of Pakistan through the Adaptation of Central Acts and Ordinances Order 1949 which also dropped the “Indian” in the title of the said Act. Being a vestige of the British Imperialist rule over India the Act does little in the way of conservation of forests and addressing issues of deforestation and is instead driven by the commercial interests of an imperialist government. It created three broad categories of forests i.e. reserved forest, protected forest, and village forest forests with a wide array of powers invested in the Provincial Government and its Forest Officers to essentially exclude private individuals and communities from the use of forest lands for the purposes of generating revenue there from. As an example, the Provincial Government can simply notify as a reserved forest, forest land which is the property of the government, or over which the Government has proprietary rights or to the whole or a part of the produce of which the Government is entitled, a wide enough definition to encompass almost all forest land except that exclusively owned by individuals. A Forest Settlement Officer appointed by the Government is invested with the power of settling forest land as reserved forest after an inquiry into the pre-existing rights of any individuals claiming as such at which point he can pass an order admitting or rejecting the claim in whole or in part. Such an order could then be appealed before an officer of the Revenue Department no lower than a Collector (or before the Forest Courts if constituted) and the decision of this forum would be final barring a revision by the Provincial Government. As illustrated by the procedure for notifying forest land as reserved land, there is very little in the way of protection of individual and community rights to forest land in which the individual may not have a formal legal interest, but which may nevertheless be a source of subsistence for such individuals and communities. The thrust of the Forest Act is for the Government to be able to acquire forest land and generate revenue from it. Another indicator of this is the fact that the Forest Act does not even define what the purpose of reservation or protection of forest land notified as such is and it certainly never mentions any principle of conservation of the forest land acquired under the auspices of the Act. Further, a large part of the Act is dedicated to the control of timber and other forest produce in transit, the duties leviable on them and the collection of drift and stranded timber and punitive measures against offences committed in forest land under government control. The trend towards increasing Government control of the land in the Province regardless of its use by individuals and the community is also illustrated by the inclusion of a further category of un classed forest under Section 28-A, added by the Forest (Amendment) Act, 2010, whereby the Punjab Government can declare any wasteland an unclassed forest by notification and further notify that any provisions related to a reserved forest or a protected forest shall apply to such unclassed forest and devise rules for the management of an unclassed forest. The Government therefore has discretion to take control of land within the Province without the concomitant extension of the right to bring forward a claim in such land by individuals and communities unless the Government itself allows it.

157

Only one section, i.e. Section 28 of the Forest Act 1927 deals with the possibility of assigning to any village community the rights of the Government to any land which has been constituted a reserve forest with the Government being empowered to make rules for management of the village forest. However, Section 28 also countenances the possibility of the termination of the assignment of a village forest without providing for an explicit right to contest such termination to the affected village community. Furthermore, although section 28 has been on the statute books since the first adaptation of the Forest Act 1927, rules for this purpose i.e. the Punjab Village Forest Rules 2013 (“Rules”) were only promulgated in 2013. The Rules envisage the election of a village committee of twelve members to be entrusted with the management of village forests in accordance with a forest management plan drawn up by the Forest Officers in this respect. Interestingly, in recognition of the need for inclusion of female members of the village community in decision making regarding village forests, the Rules mandate at least one female member on the village forest committee although the decision-making process requires decision taking based on a two third majority vote of a quorum of at least seven persons. As is apparent, this leaves little room for a single female member to bear any influence on the proceedings of the committee and reduces this provision to mere lip service to the need for greater female participation in community forest management. While it would be instructive to investigate how many village forests have been notified in the Punjab since 2013 as a measure of the Government’s inclination to the joint management of forest resources espoused under the Punjab Forestry Sector (Forests, Watershed, Rangelands and Wildlife) Policy, 1999 (“Policy”) from a legal aspect the legislative framework needs to be bolstered to effectively increase community participation and secure such rights once granted, however, the promulgation of the Village Forest Rules is definitely a step in the right direction. If REDD+ is to be implemented through the greater engagement of all stakeholders and community participation the current legislative framework leaves much to be desired and will need to be overhauled systematically to allow for any meaningful progress in this regard. The West Pakistan Forest Manual The West Pakistan Forest Manual may indeed be an important document for the purposes of the operational procedures and decisions taken by the Forest Department daily, however, its provenance is uncertain and therefore the legality of the actions taken thereunder is suspect. The Forest Act 1927, as adapted by the Punjab province empowers the Government of Punjab with the power to notify certain things and make rules in respect of others, most importantly under Sections 72 and 76 of the Forest Act, which deal with the making of rules to invest forest officers with certain powers and generally to carry out the provisions of the Act. Under this legal scheme the various measures provided under the Forest Act need to be fleshed out through the effective promulgation of rules by the Provincial Government in this respect. The rules being legislation by the Provincial Government under the powers delegated to it in this respect by the Forest Act after being formally notified through the official gazette would lend certainty and coherence to the forest management activities of the Government under the Forest Act, including determination of the legality of any measures taken under the Forest Act, and allow stakeholders greater clarity on their respective rights and powers. As things stand, however, the Forest Department is undertaking daily operations under the West Pakistan Forest Manual which largely comprises notifications in respect of the powers of Forest Officers and the general forest management measures under the Forest Act 1878, the pre-cursor to the 1927 Act. While practically the co-option of these notifications allows the Forest Department to have a basic operational framework for daily operations, from a legal standpoint, these notifications are null and void having been taken under an Act that was never adapted by the State of Pakistan and actions taken thereunder are legally suspect, not to mention, that the piecemeal inclusion of the notifications under the 1878 Act, many of which are anachronistic, hardly assists the coherence of the framework under which the Forest Department operates. Until the Provincial Government undertakes a wholesale exercise of drafting and promulgating rules in relation to the Forest Act 1927 this incoherence at the operational level and the attendant uncertainty in the rights and powers of the various stakeholders in forest sector shall persist.

158

The Forest Policy The Punjab Forestry Sector (Forests, Watershed, Rangelands and Wildlife) Policy, 1999 (“Policy”) promulgated by the Punjab Government ostensibly hits all the right notes in calling for, amongst other things, greater private sector participation in forest management, greater stakeholder engagement in resource management, a proper land use planning programme based on land capability classification, measuring up to various international treaty commitments related to the forestry sector and importantly recognizing the many shortfalls in the existing legislative framework. However, at the first opportunity after the Eighteenth Amendment to improve the legislative framework through an overhauling of the Forest Act or the unveiling of an updated legislative framework in its lieu, the Punjab Government did not include many of these aspects in the revised legal framework betraying its lack of interest in doing so. Without an effective legislative framework, the Policy cannot be effective or efficacious in achieving its purposes. Addressing the drivers of deforestation is a low priority under the national, provincial and sector development plans as well as under forest management plans. This observation is borne out by the analysis of the Forest Act, 1927 and the Policy as the first is geared towards greater Government control of forest lands and the generation of revenue therefrom without heed to the conservation of forest resources and prevention of deforestation and forest degradation as an end in itself, whereas the Policy, as above noted, addresses the themes of deforestation in broad strokes (stating for example” And whereas due to overuse and misuse, the natural resources have greatly deteriorated, reducing their productive potential”), it does not however, lay out a coherent understanding of the drivers of deforestation and the measures required to arrest these instead seeming to focus on the economic value of forest resources and their productive capacity and the measures required to safeguard these. The Province’s forest strategy recognizes the existence of the private sector, but it does not give the private sector appropriate weight, and the strategy fails to foster an appropriate role for the private sector; however, planners usually consider activities on private lands while planning development programs/projects. The Policy does take into account the potential role of the Private Sector in forest resource management however the Policy seems to tilt towards reviewing primarily the commercial aspect of collaborating with the private sector in encouraging the private sector to extract economic value from forest resources such as by through private investment in forestry production “especially in wood based industries like Pulp and Paper, Sports, Furniture, Livestock etc. through Joint Forest Management…” and in the process off-shouldering the burden of developing and maintaining natural resources from the public sector. The involvement of the private sector in this sense would essentially run counter to the implementation of the REDD+ program and the Policy needs to be amended to align the envisaged role of the private sector within the REDD+ framework. Furthermore, under the Punjab Forest (Amendment) Act, 2016, Chapter XII-A has been added to the Forest Act 1927 that allows for the public private partnership between the Punjab Government and private individuals for the development of forests over blank forest land and wasteland owned by the Government, however, the theme here again seems to be afforestation of uncultivated forest land and wasteland for later economic exploitation of forest inventory which militates against REDD+. For this purpose, the government of Punjab has established South Punjab Forest Company (SPFC) which has recently initiated the public-private partnership programme for afforestation and range management in few districts of South Punjab. Government policies mostly consider non-market values of the forest such as ecosystem integrity and traditional social uses of forest. Under the current law it is not required to inventory the public forests and make plans for them. The law also not require verifying whether the forest products procured or consumed by the government, were legally produced or not. The Forest Policy does take into consideration the non-market values of the forest under the heading “Environmental and Global Perspective” where it calls for the development of a system to value such non-consumptive use and intangible benefits of the forestry sector resources. However, as above noted the pre-dominant theme of the Policy remains the commercial and economic value of forestry resources and this is further strengthened by the legislative

159

framework under the Forest Act 1927.The Forest Act 1927 does not explicitly require the inventory of public forests and the making of plans for them except under Section 28 where the Provincial Government may make rules for management of village forests. As above explained, there is no legislative framework in this respect in the form of appropriate rules made by the Provincial Government although there is space available within the 1927 Act in this respect under Section 76 particularly. By leaving vague the terms reserved forest and protected forest the Forest Act 1927 reserves great power for the Provincial Government to exploit forest resources under its management, as was likely the intent of the Act when first passed. However, in the context of REDD+ implementation there needs to be greater clarity around the particular rights and privileges that the Government accrues in respect of forests notified as reserved or protected forests under the Forest Act 1927. As for as the discretion of the forest officers are concerned, the law has clear and specific standards governing forest agency decisions. There are several factors that contra-indicate that the law has clear and specific standards governing the forest agency decisions. The powers being exercised by Forest Officers are being thus exercised under the auspices of the West Pakistan Forest Manual, the provenance and legal status of which is uncertain as explained above. In any instance, the manual itself is piecemeal in nature and hardly amenable to discovering a coherent operational framework for forest agency decisions that would allow other stakeholders to press their rights. Clarity and Coherence of Policies, Laws, and Regulations Governing Forest Use and Management No land use planning policy exists in the province. The Climate change policy is in process of formulation. The laws governing use of forest resources and other laws are sometimes in conflict with each other. Please refer to the discussion on the Forest laws and policies effective in Punjab to understand why there is a disconnection between the Policy and the legislative framework which needs to be resolved in order effective implementation of REDD+ in Pakistan. The question of conflict between forest laws and the other body of laws can only be effectively resolved once the legislative framework for forest management is itself coherent and in stride with an effective forest management policy. Implementation Realities of Forest Laws and Policies The laws are out-dated and not consistent with present day realities and challenges. New laws have been drafted but so far have not been got approval of the competent forum. Some of the laws governing forestry are complex, but overall, compliance is not hard. The law is silent on adaptive forest management. As for as, the gender aspect is concerned, the law in this respect is mainly gender neutral. As explained in detail above, the Forest Act 1927 is indeed out-dated and does little to address the core issues of forest resource conservation and prevention of forest degradation and deforestation. The orientation of the legislative framework is towards the economic exploitation of forest resources whereas REDD+ requires the legislative framework to re-orient itself towards economic gains from the conservation rather than exploitation of forest resources. The Forest Act 1927 is coherent, and compliance thereunder is not difficult, however, a large body of operational activities by the forest agencies are undertaken under the West Pakistan Forest Manual which can be both complicated and archaic not to mention that it is likely legally null and void. The legal framework around the forestry sector is not so much gender neutral as it is altogether oblivious of the role and value of female contribution to the management of forest resources. Where some steps have been taken in this regard such as under the Punjab Village Forest Rules 2013, these are woefully inadequate to secure true participation of female community members in forest management.

4.2 Land Tenure, Ownership and User Rights The land tenure and ownership regarding genetic resources, carbon is still unclear however the law clearly recognizes the ownership of land, vegetation, minerals and wildlife.

160

The law recognizes the indigenous and traditional rights such as grazing rights, firewood collection and right of way to the communities. The law fully harmonizes formal and informal rights to forest resources. The Forest Act 1927 does recognize several traditional rights insofar as the Forest Officers are empowered to inquire regarding a claim as to such rights while undertaking the process of notifying forest land as reserved or protected forest. However, the powers of forest officers in this respect are highly discretionary, and even where such rights are recognized these may be overturned by the Provincial Government under Section 22 of the Forest Act or commuted by the Forest Officer. Furthermore, the Forest Officer may also stop any public or private way under Section 25 of the Act, subject to the availability of a substitute being available that is deemed to be reasonably convenient. As such there is little in the way of absolute protection for indigenous and traditional rights under the currently existing legislative framework. However, the laws governing rights such as Tenancy Act, Land Revenue Act and others are not very effective in resolving disputes related to land tenure, ownership and use rights. The judicial processes are slow and expensive. No rights in relation to reserved forests may accrue to a private individual except as provided in a very limited sense under Section 23 whereby rights in reserved forests may only accrue to a person after notification as a reserved forest through succession or through a grant or contract in writing with the Government or such person in whom such right was vested when the notification for reserving a forest is promulgated. As against the Provincial Government, laws such as tenancy act and others are not effective for a private individual even prior to the notification as a reserved forest as the Government retains the right under Section 11 of the Forest Act 1927 to acquire any land in which the claim of a private individual has been recognized in the manner provided under the Land Acquisition Act 1984. Where the claimed rights of an individual to a forest land under the process of being reserved are rejected altogether, such an individual only has the right to appeal under Section 17 to a notified officer of the Revenue Department or the Forest Courts, if established. The decision of such an appeal is deemed to be final under the Forest Act 1927 subject to the powers of the Provincial Government to revise the decision in appeal under Section 18 of the Forest Act 1927. The law expressly allows the government to share or transfer management authority to local communities.

4.3 Cross-Sectoral Dimension of Forest Policy All the sectors are making policies mostly in isolation and mainly keeping the departmental agenda on the top. The national development policies fully support sustainability in forestry sector. There is less or almost non-existent official mechanisms, for cross-sector coordination. In few cases (mostly in donor funded projects) there is cross-sector coordination to some extent in the shape of steering committees or other similar bodies. The sectors that directly depend on forests and the sectors that directly affect forests (Such as Highways, Water & Power Sectors) normally don’t provide for forest- and tree-related activities in their plans and budgets.

4.4 Institutional Frameworks Clarity and Coherence of Policies, Laws, and Regulations Governing Forest Use and Management

Forestry in Pakistan is entirely a provincial subject. The national government has the coordination role among provinces and keeping liaison with international bodies for forest related functions. However, there is a feeling that the mandate of national and provincial governments is at times in conflict with each other. The budget of forestry sector is somewhat biased — toward high-revenue-producing resources, toward donor-funded projects, or other narrow issues — perhaps to the detriment of sustainable management of all resources. The forest agencies seriously lack appropriate information technology (e.g., computers and appropriate software, GPS, GIS) and the trained staff to use it.

161

4.5 Planning and Decision Making Stakeholder Participation The laws give stakeholders opportunities for input in the creation of some of key documents such as public forest management plans, policies and subsidiary rule. The mechanisms are inadequate for those who are affected by forest policy and they are in most cases unable to influence it. For public forests, the stakeholders are seldom consulted about ongoing and proposed actions or the feedback is seldom used in decision making. Women seldom participate in forestry decision-making processes. Government seldom encourages stakeholder engagement in forest-related planning and decision making. The Forest Act 1927 allows for stakeholder participation only to the extent of claiming a pre- existing individual right to or over a reserved or protected forest before forest land is notified as such. However, there is no provision for engagement of stakeholders in policy making or the actual decision to reserve or protect a forest under the Forest Act 1927, which process is entirely at the discretion of the Provincial Government. There is therefore little, if any, influence that an individual or community may wield in respect of forest management plans and proposed actions under the Forest Act 1927. Capacity There are few civil society organizations working on environment and forestry, but they are not strong enough to effectively work as watchdog and monitors. In only a few cases stakeholders (CSOs and SMEs) have the capacity to be effectively involved in forest management and planning. While capacities of local communities are limited to be effectively involved in forest management and planning. International organizations such as WWF and IUCN have presence in the province and at times also work jointly with government on conservation/development projects. Involvement of private sector is almost non-existent in forestry sector and as such there is no voluntary social and environmental safeguard adopted by large private sector organizations. Recently the government has amended the law and provided for establishing Forest Companies, having equal board membership from private and public sector, to encourage private sector investment in forestry. A forest company in the name of South Punjab Forest Company has also been established. Forest industries (private operators like saw millers, timber dealers, etc.) do not have a private code of conduct, including provisions against participating in corruption. The government does not provide incentives and education to encourage corporate entities and businesses operating in the forest sector to follow recommended international codes of conduct and standards and safeguards The capacity of government regarding engagement of stakeholders is; most arms of the government lack adequate capacity to engage stakeholders on forest-related decision-making processes and implementation. Only few stakeholders have practical and effective avenues to seek review of the decisions of the forest department. The avenues provided within the Forest Act 1927 about recognition of individual rights pertain only to decisions taken by a Forest Settlement Officer in respect of recognition of pre-existing rights in relation to proposed reserved forests. A decision of the Forest Settlement Officer in this respect may be appealed under Section 17 before a notified officer of the Revenue Department or the Forest Courts, where they have been created. However, even where the Forest Settlement Officer or the appropriate forum at the appellate level takes a decision in favour of an individual this is subject to unilateral revision by the Provincial Government under Section 18 of the Forest Act 1927. The upshot therefore is that there are indeed very few practical and effective avenues to seek review of the decisions of the Forests Department in respect of individual and community rights.

4.6 Transparency and Accountability The Punjab government has passed the Transparency and Right to Information Act in 2013. The legal framework broadly supports public access to information about forestry. Under the act any officer found guilty of not providing the requisite information will be penalized. In forestry sector no polices have been developed recently however in Climate Change Policy formulation

162

stakeholders have been engaged. The authorities seldom or never give clear, timely notice of proposed forest policies, programs, laws, and projects. The laws and budgets for government-owned forests are easily accessible to the public on the official website of Punjab government. However, the inventory data, management plans etc. are not uploaded on the website. These can be obtained from the forest department on written request. The government has a good system of tracking its revenue and expenditure in the forestry sector. The Planning & Development department has an M&E cell which monitors the development activities undertaken by provincial departments including Forest department. The personnel of the cell are independent from those, whose activities they monitor. Similarly, the financial transactions are monitored by the Accountant General’s office, which is also independent from these departments. Routine performance evaluation of all forest officials is done through Annual Confidential Reports (ACRs). The forest officials are also held accountable if they fail to act lawfully. Political interference is common in the forestry sector which occasionally reaches down and affects activities and decisions, including technical matters. The appointment to lower cadres is mostly done on political grounds however the officers are selected by the public service commission which is mostly free from political interference. As for as the media is concerned, it is free and independent, at times publishes reports on activities in the forest sector, but not necessarily in the local language.

4.7 Performance Culture Quality of Decision Making Like all other sectors, budget of forestry sector is also reviewed and revised on regular basis. Only few public forests have valid management plans while the rests are managed without any management plan. No arbitrary or unilateral changes can be made in laws, policies, and plans rather they require systematic reviews and due process. The department never uses supply and demand information while making decisions. The government’s decision making sometimes give consideration to non-marketed goods and services that are closely related to forest resources, such as ecosystem integrity, water quality, or cultural resources. As above addressed, the West Pakistan Forest Manual seems to have been adapted piece meal from earlier notifications made primarily under the Forest Act 1878 and is therefore of suspect legal provenance. Since the Manual dictates the day to day operations of the Forest Department the quality of decision making is bound to be affected by following principles in the Manual that are both archaic and for the most part without valid legal authority since the due process of rulemaking by the Provincial Government in this respect has not been followed. The lower tiers of the department are mostly not aware of the mission statement and strategy and goals of the department. The forest department only hire people having matching qualification with the advertised job. The salaries and benefits of forest department are like other government departments based on the basic pay scale. The salaries are in general inadequate. Generally large areas have been assigned to field foresters for overseeing which in most cases beyond their capacity to oversee. The system of assessing the impacts and outcome of forestry sector expenditure is weak. Management Plans are available for only few public forests. No forested area has comprehensive and up-to-date inventory information. The department is using some information technology, but not enough to do their jobs well. They need more or better technology and staff trained to use it. The department also regularly record and report its management activities.

163

Implementation The collection, sharing, and redistribution systems are highly effective. The laws are outdated while the department is implementing most of the laws. The government is implementing less than half of the law’s provision As for as the budget spending is concerned, spending mostly follows the budget, but there are sometimes shortfalls, or changes in allocations among programs. Forest management plans exist only for few public forests. Some of the existing management plans for public forests are being implemented subject to availability of required funds. Forest Law Enforcement Sanctions for forest offences are mostly appropriate. The government has a strategy to address forest crimes including detection and prevention, but it should be much stronger. Most serious crimes are promptly investigated once reported. The government has limited capacity to address forest crimes (prevention, detection and suppression) and it needs to be significantly strengthened. The government effort against forest crimes focuses on the forest and perhaps also transport out of the forest, but not much else. The Forest Act 1927 enumerates acts which are offences in relation to forests notified as reserved or protected under Section 26 and 33 of the Forest Act respectively and the provisions for reserved forests also extend to village forests under Section 28 of the Forest Act. Most of the acts considered offences against a forest notified as a reserve or protected forest pertain to damage to the forest or the forest produce, undesired land use and unwarranted commercial use of the forests. Some judges and prosecutors are knowledgeable about the effects of forest offenses but largely not that much knowledgeable about forest crimes.

4.8 Administration of Land Tenure and Property Rights The forest boundaries are clearly surveyed and demarcated only in some places. There are conflicts between state and stakeholders which frequently interfere with forest use. In few cases conflicts between different communities and user groups in the context of forest access and use are also making some forests difficult to manage or use. The resolution of conflicts is variable: some are resolved efficiently while others persist. For conflict resolution, there are informal ways that are socially acceptable and widely used.

164

5. GILGIT-BALTISTAN

5.1 Constitutional Background of Forest Laws and Policies in Gilgit-Baltistan and the Challenges Created Thereby The territory that now comprises Gilgit-Baltistan was once part of the princely state of Jammu and Kashmir. In 1947, after a successful revolution against the decision of the then Hindu Maharaja of Kashmir to accede to India after Independence, this despite the presence of a Muslim majority local population, the Revolutionary Council requested the Government of Pakistan to take over the administration of the Northern Areas (as Gilgit-Baltistan was then called). Like Azad Jammu and Kashmir, the status of Gilgit-Baltistan was subject to resolutions adopted by the UN Security Council and the UN Commission for India and Pakistan. In 1949, the Government of Pakistan, the Azad Kashmir Government and the All Jammu and Kashmir Muslim Conference signed an agreement granting administrative control of the Northern Areas to Pakistan. All the territory that is today included in the Northern Areas acceded unconditionally to Pakistan after Independence with one exception: in 1951, the tribal areas that now form part of the Diamir District signed an agreement with the Government of Pakistan, retaining certain rights of self-governance. In 1999, the Supreme Court of Pakistan held in the case titled Al-Jehad Trust and 9 others v. Federation of Pakistan and 3 others (1999 SCMR 1379) (“Al-Jehad Trust”) that the Government of Pakistan exercises de jure as well as de facto administrative control over the Northern Areas and residents of the Northern Areas enjoy full citizenship of Pakistan and as such are entitled to the safeguards provided by the fundamental rights enshrined in the Constitution of Pakistan 1973 (“Constitution”). The upshot of the above is that while Gilgit-Baltistan is still not considered a part of Pakistan Territory as defined in Article 1 of the Constitution, Pakistan has nevertheless acted as a sovereign in the Northern Areas, exercising an effective and continuous display of state authority generally recognized under international law53. Nevertheless, the Constitution is not applicable to Gilgit-Baltistan in its entirety (except as its effect is extended to Gilgit-Baltistanby the Al-Jehad Trust decision). Previously under the Federal Rules of Business 1973 (Rule 3(3) read with Schedule II, Item 19(3)), the then Ministry of Kashmir Affairs and Northern Areas (“KANA”) (which has now been re-named the Ministry of Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan) was vested with the power to make laws for the Northern Areas as well as the power to extend any federal or provincial law to the Northern Areas. Furthermore, under the Northern Areas Council Legal Framework Order, 1994, the Northern Areas Legislative Council had limited powers to legislate in 49 prescribed areas. During this time, through various orders and notifications, the Government of Pakistan has extended the Forest Act 1927 to all of the Northern Areas. In 2009, the Government of Pakistan notified the Gilgit-Baltistan (Empowerment and Self Governance) Order, 2009 (“Order”) with the express purpose of providing greater political empowerment and better governance to the people of Gilgit-Baltistan and for all intents and purposes to act as the interim constitution of the Gilgit-Baltistan. The salient features of the Order for the current discussion are that it creates two bodies with legislative powers: the Gilgit-Baltistan Council (comprising the Prime Minister of Pakistan, the Governor of Gilgit-Baltistan, six members nominated by the Prime Minister from amongst the Federal Ministries and members of Parliament, the Chief Minister of Gilgit-Baltistan and six members to be appointed by the Gilgit-Baltistan Legislative Assembly) and the Legislative Assembly of a total of thirty-three elected and reserved seat members. The Council has the exclusive power to make laws in respect of the subjects provided in the Third Schedule to the Order (“Council Legislative List”) whereas the Legislative Assembly has the exclusive power to make laws in respect of subjects included in the Fourth Schedule to the Order (“Assembly

53Environmental Law in Pakistan: Governing Natural Resources and the Processes and Institutions that Affect them – Volume 1 of Part 6: Northern Areas, IUCN The World Conservation Union (Pg. 03)

165

Legislative List”). The Government of Pakistan retains the residuary but exclusive power to make laws in respect any matters not enumerated in either of the legislative lists of the Order. The subject of “Forest” is specifically included in the Council Legislative List at entry no. 40 and therefore the Council now retains the exclusive domain to make laws with regard to forests in Gilgit-Baltistan. Furthermore, the Council has the power to adopt any amendment in the existing laws of Pakistan or any new law in force in Pakistan. Furthermore, under Article 84 of the Order, all laws which, immediately before the commencement of the Order, were in force in Gilgit- Baltistan shall continue to be in force until altered, repealed or amended by an Act of the appropriate authority. In the case of forests, this means that the Forest Act 1927 continues to apply to Gilgit-Baltistan and shall so continue until repealed or amended by the Council. Under Article 22 of the Order, the executive authority of Gilgit-Baltistan shall be exercised in the name of the Governor by the Government through the Cabinet consisting of the Chief Minister and the Ministers, which shall act through the Chief Minister who shall be the Chief Executive. However, the executive authority of the Government shall extend only to such matters with respect to which the Assembly has the power to make laws. Under Article 33(12) of the Order, on the other hand, the Council has the executive authority in respect of all matters in respect of which it has the power to make laws (which of course includes forests). As a result of the above discussion, it is apparent that the forests of Gilgit-Baltistan are within the exclusive legislative and executive domain of the Council with the Prime Minister of Pakistan as its Chairman who may exercise the executive authority vested in the Council directly or through the Secretariat of the Council of which the Federal Minister for Kashmir Affairs and Gilgit-Baltistan Division is in-charge. As such, any REDD+ related policy and legislative framework creation and/or amendments would require efforts directed at lobbying the Council as opposed to the Government and Legislative Assembly of Gilgit-Baltistan. As such, the National Forest Policy 2015 or the National Climate Change Policy 2012, both of which lay down an effective policy framework necessary for the implementation of REDD+ across Pakistan can effectively be used as a platform for the implementation of REDD+ in Gilgit-Baltistan which is not possible in the case of the provinces of Pakistan. The Provinces are free to promulgate their own policies on the subject, which raises the risk of an overall incoherent implementation framework because of a lack of national and inter-provincial coordination on this subject. However, for Gilgit-Baltistan these policies may be made applicable by the issuance of a notification to that effect from the Gilgit-Baltistan Council (the Chairman of which is also the Chief Executive of the Federation). From an institutional capacity point of view this is good news for the effective implementation of the REDD+ framework insofar as Gilgit-Baltistan is concerned.

5.2 Provincial Forest Policies and Laws Existence and Quality of Provincial Policies The forests of GB are governed by the British era Forest Act of 1927, adopted by Pakistan in 1947 after its independence. The other noteworthy governance instruments are Gilgit Private Forest Regulation of 1970, Forest Act Amendment Order 1993, Northern Area Forest Rules 1983, Northern Areas Cattle Trespass Act 1976, Concessions and privileges granted to villagers of Hunza, Nagar and Ghizar 1975 and KANA Notification 1983.A new law has been drafted but not yet approved by the competent forum. The GB Province currently does not have any forest policy. Forest Act, 1927 In piecemeal fashion, through various notifications and orders the Forest Act of 1927 has been made applicable to the entire Gilgit-Baltistan. The Indian Forest Act 1927 (“Act”) was first adapted by the State of Pakistan through the Adaptation of Central Acts and Ordinances Order 1949 which also dropped the “Indian” in the title of the said Act. Being a vestige of the British Imperialist rule over India the Act does little in the way of conservation of forests and addressing issues of deforestation and is instead driven by the commercial interests of an imperialist government. However, the debilitating effects of the Forest Act 1927 are not likely to be felt as acutely in Gilgit-Baltistan on account of the fact

166

that as above related in acceding to the State of Pakistan the tribal areas in Gilgit-Baltistan were able to negotiate retaining private ownership of the forests in those areas with the result that only about a quarter of forest and wasteland in Gilgit-Baltistan is owned by the state, and is therefore amenable to the provisions of the Forest Act 1927, while the rest is treated as Guzara land owned by tribal communities and managed by tribal institutions based on customary law under government supervision. Insofar as the Forest Act 1927 does apply it creates three broad categories of forests i.e. reserved forest, protected forest and village forest with a wide array of powers invested in the Government and its Forest Officers to essentially exclude private individuals and communities from the use of forest lands for the purposes of generating revenue therefrom. As an example, under section 4 of the Act, the Government can simply notify as a reserved forest, forest land which is the property of the government, or over which the Government has proprietary rights or to the whole or a part of the produce of which the Government is entitled, a wide enough definition to encompass almost all forest land except that exclusively owned by individuals (which as above stated is substantially more than state owned forest land). A Forest Settlement Officer appointed by the Government is invested with the power of settling forest land as reserved forest after an inquiry into the pre-existing rights of any individuals claiming as such at which point he can pass an order admitting or rejecting the claim in whole or in part. Such an order could then be appealed before an officer of the Revenue Department no lower than a Collector (or before the Forest Courts if constituted) and the decision of this forum would be final barring a revision by the Government. Under Section 29 of the Act the Government retains the further right to declare forest land as protected forest. Unlike the procedure for the reservation of a forest there is no clearly defined process by which pre-existing rights in a forest shall be determined prior to it being declared a protected forest. The Act merely provides that these must be inquired into and recorded at a “survey or settlement, or in such other manner as Government may consider appropriate.” However, this provision is weakened further by the proviso that where the Government fears that such inquiry and record will occupy such length of time as to endanger the Government’s rights, it may immediately declare such land to be a protected forest pending the inquiry into pre-existing rights. Where a forest has been declared as a protected forest, subject to a notification in this respect, the Government can reserve trees or a class of trees, close the forest for a term not exceeding thirty years with the rights of individual persons or communities being suspended during this period or prohibit certain other acts within the protected forest. Given that a notification as aforesaid has been made in respect of a protected forest, damage to the forest or the commission of an act in contravention of the notification shall constitute an offence. The upshot is that, given that the Government issues a notification in this respect, all acts that are offences in relation to a reserved forest are similarly offences in relation to a protected forest, without however, a clearly defined procedure for determination of pre-existing rights in land declared to be protected forest and the additional option available to the Government to declare land to be protected forest even before such rights have been determined through a procedure deemed appropriate by the Government. As such, where expedient the Government can use the mechanism of declaring land to be protected forest to exclude local communities and individuals from such land without adopting the relatively more rigorous process of determining and protecting pre-existing rights of individuals and communities in such land required for declaring a reserved forest. As illustrated by the procedure for notifying forest land as reserved forest or protected forest, there is very little in the way of protection of individual and community rights to forest land in which the individual may not have a formal legal interest, but which may nevertheless be a source of subsistence for such individuals and communities. The thrust of the Act is for the Government to be able to acquire forestland and generate revenue from it. Another indicator of this is the fact that the Act does not even define specifically what the purpose of reservation or protection of forestland is. Further, a large part of the Act is dedicated to the control of timber and other forest produce in transit, the duties leviable on them and the collection of drift and stranded timber and punitive measures against offences committed in forestland under government control. Most egregiously the Act does not provide any incentives for the

167

sustainable management of forests and forest resources to individuals and local communities instead bearing down the path of increased exclusion of local communities seen as a threat to forest resources and primarily a reliance punitive measures for infractions under the Act. The Act even allows the Government, under Section 35 thereof, to notify the prohibition of the breaking up or clearing up of land for cultivation, the pasturing of cattle or the firing or clearing of the vegetation, in any forest or wasteland (which obviously extends even to privately held forest land) for five specific purposes including for protection against storms, winds, rolling stones, floods and avalanches and for the preservation of the public health. Furthermore, the Government may for the purposes enumerated in this Section construct works on such forest land or wasteland at its own expense. However, the circumstances under which this intrusion into the use of private forest land would be allowed may be seen to amount to the greater public good outweighing the individual mandate. The owner of such land may also request the Government to simply acquire the said forest land or to have it managed by the Government’s Forest Officer or to have any or all of the other provisions of the Act made applicable to such land. This particular provision therefore, while still open to abuse, is necessary for the Government to step in where the greater public good so requires. Only one section, i.e. Section 28 of the Act deals with the possibility of assigning to any village community the rights of the Government to any land which has been constituted a reserve forest with the Government being empowered to make rules for management of the village forest. However, Section 28 also countenances the possibility of the termination of the assignment of a village forest without providing for an explicit right to contest such termination to the affected village community. Considering the ground reality that almost three quarters of the forest land in Gilgit-Baltistan is under tribal community management in any event this provision of the law is unlikely to be pressed into service. While the Act itself leaves much to be desired in terms of a foundation for the overlay of REDD+ implementation there is much greater stakeholder and community participation otherwise in Gilgit-Baltistan because of historical accident and given also the much greater influence that the Federal Government enjoys here as opposed to within the Provinces. Gilgit-Baltistan will probably prove to be a great pilot for the offtake of REDD+ implementation for the rest of Pakistan. POLICY While it is true that there is no explicit policy for forest governance and management for Gilgit- Baltistan, the National Forest Policy 2015 may simply be extended to Gilgit-Baltistan through a notification to this effect from the Gilgit-Baltistan Council. The National Policy 2015 expressly takes the UNFCC and the REDD+ program as drivers of the policy objectives which include “enhancing public awareness on economic, social ecological and cultural values of forests”, “controlling deforestation through regulating movement of timber and inter-provincial trade of timber” “establishing and managing protected areas…” and “facilitating implementation of international conventions and agreements related to forestry, biodiversity and climate change”. As such the extension of the National Forest Policy 2015 to Gilgit-Baltistan could create the desired policy environment for a wholescale legislative framework to be affected in this respect. Addressing the drivers of deforestation is a low priority under the provincial development plans however the forest management plans (where exists) address the issue of drivers of deforestation to some extent. The Province’s forest strategy recognizes the existence of the private sector, but it does not give the private sector appropriate weight, and the strategy fails to foster an appropriate role for the private sector. However, planners usually consider activities on private lands while planning development programs. Government policies mostly consider non-market values of the forest such as ecosystem integrity and traditional social uses of forest. Under the current law it is required to inventory the public forests and make plans for them. The law also requires verifying whether the forest products procured or consumed by the government, were legally produced or not. As above explained, through the accession agreement concluded by the Government of Pakistan with the tribal communities of Gilgit-Baltistan, the traditional social uses of forests and

168

the governance of forests along the lines of tribal customary law have been recognized and given due weight because of this particular historical context. There is no explicit provision in the Act requiring verification that the forest products procured or consumed by private persons or government were legally produced. The various provisions of the Act are instead oriented towards prevention of private persons from procuring or consuming forest products. As for as the discretion of officers are concerned, the law has not defined specific standards for the exercise of discretions however the law has specific standards in some areas and broad standards in others. DISCRETION Whereas the Forest Officers are invested with a lot of discretion in carrying out the objectives of the Forest Act it also provides for the structuring and transparency of this discretion by generally delegating the power to make rules to the Government to carry out the purposes of the Ordinance under Section 76 (as well as specific delegation of power to make rules in respect of particular provisions of the Ordinance). Nonetheless there are large swathes of discretion with the Government and the Forest Officers that are not structured and regulated through appropriate rules and regulations. A few significant examples where the Government retains unstructured discretion under the Act are the Government’s power to unilaterally determine the appropriate manner of establishing pre-existing rights of individuals and communities in land declared to be protected forests, the power to close portions of protected forests for up to thirty years through a notification. Clarity and Coherence of Policies, Laws, and Regulations Governing Forest Use and Management

No land use planning policy exists in the province. Same is the case with Climate change policy. The forest laws and other laws are sometimes in conflict with each other. Implementation Realities of Forest Laws and Policies

Some of the laws governing forestry are complex, but overall, compliance is not hard. The law is silent on adaptive forest management. As for as the gender aspect is concerned, overall the law is gender neutral but according to some stakeholders the law equally serves the interests of both gender. By and large the Act and its overall scheme is simple and compliance with its provisions is easy although as explained above there still resides a large amount of unstructured discretion with the Forest Department and the Government which may hamper the ability of certain non- governmental stakeholders to ascertain their rights thereunder. The law is indeed silent on adaptive forest management. There is nothing in the law to suggest that the law equally serves the interests of both genders and there is no specific provision for securing female rights related to forests and forest use. The law does not provide for concrete formal mechanisms to ensure female participation in forest management.

5.3 Land Tenure, Ownership and User Rights Beyond land and vegetation, the law is silent on the ownership of other resources tied to the land (e.g., carbon, genetic resources, wildlife, water, minerals) clear. The law recognizes traditional and indigenous rights in most cases. The law partially harmonizes formal and informal rights to forest resources. The Act does recognize several indigenous and traditional rights such as rights to pasture or to forest produce as evident by the fact that the Forest Settlement Officer is empowered to inquire regarding a claim as to such rights while undertaking the process of notifying forest land as reserved forest. However, the powers of the Forest Settlement Officer in this respect are highly discretionary, and even where such rights are recognized these may be overturned by the Government under Section 22 of the Ordinance or commuted by the Forest Settlement Officer. Furthermore, the Forest Settlement Officer may also stop any public or private way in a reserved

169

forest under Section 25 of the Ordinance, subject to the availability of a substitute being available that is deemed to be reasonably convenient. As such there is little in the way of absolute protection for indigenous and traditional rights under the currently existing legislative framework as far as forest land which is outright owned by the Government or within which the Government retains rights as envisaged in the Act. The law expressly allows the government to share or transfer management authority to local communities. As above explained, through the accession agreement concluded by the Government of Pakistan with the tribal communities of Gilgit-Baltistan, the traditional social uses of forests and the governance of forests along the lines of tribal customary law have been recognized and given due weight because of this particular historical context.

5.4 Cross-Sectoral Dimension of Forest Policy All the sectors are making policies mostly in isolation and mainly keeping the departmental agenda on top. The overall development policies are inconsistent with sustainability in forestry sector. There is less or almost non-existent official mechanisms, for cross-sectoral coordination. In few cases (mostly in donor funded projects) there is cross-sectoral coordination to some extent in the shape of steering committees or other similar bodies. The sectors that directly depend on forests and the sectors that directly affect forests normally don’t provide for forest- and tree-related activities in their plans and budgets. Only National Highway Authority (NHA) and to some extent Water & Power Development Authority (WAPDA) earmark some budget for tree related activities but that is also very less than the desired.

5.5 Institutional Frameworks Clarity and Coherence of Policies, Laws, and Regulations Governing Forest Use and Management

Forestry in Pakistan is entirely a provincial subject. In case of GB the federal government has greater role through GB Council. The budgets are somewhat biased — toward high-revenue- producing resources, toward donor-funded projects, or other narrow issues — perhaps to the detriment of sustainable management of all resources. The forest agencies seriously lack appropriate information technology (e.g., computers and appropriate software, GPS, GIS) and the trained staff to use it. As explained above, Gilgit-Baltistan is not constitutionally part of the territories of Pakistan and as far as forestry is concerned this is Council Legislative List subject while the Council is essentially controlled by the Federal Government given its composition (above detailed). Therefore, the fact that forestry is a provincial subject as far as the Constitution of Pakistan is concerned is not relevant to the discussion regarding Gilgit-Baltistan.

5.6 Planning and Decision Making Stakeholder Participation

Not all the stakeholders have the required capacity to be involved in forest planning and management. There are civil society organizations in the forest sector, but they are not fully effective as monitors and watchdogs. Some arms of government lack adequate capacity to engage stakeholders on forest-related decision-making processes and implementation. Few or

170

no stakeholders have practical and effective avenues to seek review of the decisions of the forest agency.

5.7 Transparency and Accountability The legal framework is silent about public access to information about forestry. The authorities do not give any prior public notice while designing forestry programs and projects. The inventory data, management plans, laws, and budgets for government-owned forests are not easily accessible to the public in a user-friendly format. The authorities give clear, timely notice of less than half of the proposed policies, programs, laws, and projects. The government has a system of tracking its revenues and expenditures in the sector but does not work always well. Political interference is common and occasionally it reaches down and affects specific agency activities and decisions, including technical matters. Routine performance evaluation of all forest officials is done through Annual Confidential Reports (ACRs). The forest officials are also held accountable if they fail to act lawfully. The country has free media, but the depth or frequency of coverage of the forest sector is limited and may not be in local languages.

5.8 Performance Culture Quality of Decision Making

There is no schedule for reviewing or revising budgets; the agency reviews and revises its budgets when it wants. Currently no public forests have valid management plans. No arbitrary or unilateral changes can be made in laws, policies, and plans rather they require systematic reviews and due process. The government never use supply and demand information while making forest related decisions. The government’s decision making sometimes give consideration to non-marketed goods and services that are closely related to forest resources, such as ecosystem integrity, water quality, or cultural resources. The department mission statement, strategy and goals are not widely disseminated, and the lowers tiers are unaware of these things. The forest department only hire people having matching qualification with the advertised job. The salaries and benefits of forest department are like other government departments based on the basic pay scale. Generally large areas have been assigned to field foresters for overseeing which at least in half cases beyond their capacity to oversee. The system for assessing the impacts and outcomes of public forestry expenditures is weak. No forested area has comprehensive and up-to-date inventory information. The use of GIS and other software is not common and only in new management plans the technology is being used to some extent. The department keeps records of management activities, but these are not necessarily reliable, complete, or easy to review. Implementation

The collection, sharing, and redistribution systems are somewhat effective but need improvement. The laws are largely unimplemented As for as the budget spending is concerned, spending mostly follows the budget, but there are sometimes shortfalls, or changes in allocations among programs. Forest management plans existed only for few public forests and only some of them were implemented but currently there are no valid management plans. Forest Law Enforcement

Sanctions of forest offences are typically inappropriate or ineffective. The government has a strategy to address forest crimes including prevention, detection and prevention but it needs to

171

be much stronger. Less than half of reported serious crimes are promptly investigated. The government has limited capacity to address forest crimes (prevention, detection and suppression) and it needs to be significantly strengthened. The government effort against forest crimes is fragmented: it covers some points outside the forest but not others. The Act enumerates acts which are offences in relation to forests notified as reserved or protected under Section 26 and 33 respectively and the provisions for reserved forests also extend to village forests under Section 28 of the Ordinance. Most of the acts considered offences against a forest of any class pertain to damage to the forest or the forest produce, undesired land use and unwarranted commercial use of the forests. Finally, the Act provides various penalties for offences related to the transit of timber and other forest produce, the collection of drift and stranded timber (to be deemed the property of the Government) and the sale and sawing of timber. As is evident the orientation of the Act is punitive rather than preventive using appropriate incentives. Some judges and prosecutors are knowledgeable about the effects of forest offenses but most of them are largely not that knowledgeable about forest crimes.

5.9 Administration of Land Tenure and Property Rights Forest boundaries are generally not clearly surveyed and demarcated. There are conflicts between state and stakeholders which frequently interfere with forest use. There are also serious conflicts between different communities and user groups in the context of forest access and use and these conflicts are making some forests difficult to manage or use. The resolution of conflicts is variable: some are resolved efficiently while others persist. There are informal ways that are socially acceptable and widely used for conflict resolution.

172

6. AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR (AJK)

6.1 Constitutional Background of Forest Laws and Policies in Azad Jammu and Kashmir and the Challenges Created Thereby The territory within Azad Jammu and Kashmir (“AJK”) is still not considered a part of Pakistan Territory as defined in Article 1 of the Constitution, however Pakistan has nevertheless acted as a sovereign here, exercising an effective and continuous display of state authority generally recognized under international law. Nonetheless, Pakistan recognizes that the future status of the State of Azad Jammu and Kashmir is yet to be determined in accordance with the freely expressed will of the people of the State through a plebiscite under the auspices of the United Nations as envisaged in the United Nation Commission for India and Pakistan UNCIP Resolutions adopted from time to time54. As such, the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution Act, 1974 (“Interim Constitution”) was presented by the Government of Pakistan to the President of AJK for introduction and passage before the Legislative Assembly of AJK and it was passed in due course. The salient features of the Interim Constitution for the current discussion are that it creates two bodies with legislative powers: the AJK Council (comprising the Prime Minister of Pakistan, the President of AJK, five members nominated by the Prime Minister from amongst the Federal Ministers and members of Parliament, the Prime Minister of AJK and six members to be appointed by the AJK Legislative Assembly) and the Legislative Assembly of a total of forty one directly elected and eight members elected by the directly elected members against reserved seats. The Council has the exclusive power to make laws in respect of the subjects provided in the Third Schedule to the Interim Constitution (“Council Legislative List”) whereas the Legislative Assembly has the exclusive power to make laws in respect of all subjects not included in Council Legislative List. However, neither the Council nor the Legislative Assembly has the right to make any laws in respect of certain subjects including the responsibilities of the Government of Pakistan under the UNCIP Resolutions, the defence and security of AJK, the current coin or issue of any bills or the external affairs of AJK. In respect of these reserved subjects, the Government of Pakistan reserves the right under Article 56 of the Interim Constitution to take any such action, as it may consider necessary or expedient for the effective discharge of these responsibilities and nothing in the Interim Constitution may derogate from these responsibilities. The subject of “Forests”, or indeed related subjects such as environment and ecology which may be interpreted to include forests within their legislative field, are not to be found on the Council Legislative List therefore the Legislative Assembly now retains the exclusive domain to make laws with regard to forests in AJK. Under Article 12 of the Interim Constitution, the executive authority of AJK shall be exercised in the name of the President by the Government consisting of the Prime Minister and the Ministers, which shall act through the Prime Minister who shall be the Chief Executive of AJK. However, under Article 19, the executive authority of the Government shall extend only to such matters with respect to which the Legislative Assembly has the power to make laws, which as above elaborated, includes the subject of Forests. Under Article 21(7) of the Interim Constitution, on the other hand, the Council has the executive authority in respect of all matters in respect of which it has the power to make laws. As a result of the above discussion, it is apparent that the forests of AJK are within the exclusive legislative and executive domain of the Legislative Assembly. As such, any REDD+ related policy and legislative framework creation and/or amendments would require efforts directed at lobbying the Government of AJK as opposed to the Government of Pakistan or the AJK Council (in distinction to Gilgit-Baltistan where forests are within the legislative and executive competence of the Gilgit-Baltistan Council headed by the Prime Minister of Pakistan). Since AJK, like the Provinces, is free to promulgate its own policies on the subject this raises the risk of an overall incoherent implementation framework because of lack coordination between the

54Preamble to the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution Act, 1974

173

Federation of Pakistan and AJK. From an institutional capacity point of view this is a glaring concern for the implementation of REDD+ in Pakistan that needs to be addressed.

6.2 Provincial Forest Policies and Laws Existence and Quality of Provincial Policies

The forests of Azad Jammu Kashmir (AJK) are governed by the Jammu & Kashmir Forest Regulation 1930. The forest law does not include a specific statement that the objective of the law & policy is to practice sustainable forestry. Jammu and Kashmir Forest Regulation 2 of 1930 AJK’s forests and rangelands, which are either government owned or in which the Government has a proprietary right, are managed by the AJK Forest Department under the Jammu and Kashmir Forest Regulation 2 of 1930 (“Regulation”) which creates two categories of forests, i.e. demarcated and un-demarcated. Demarcated forests and wastelands are those public-sector forests which have been declared demarcated under section 3 of the 1930 regulation. There are quite a few differences between these and the Reserve Forests under the Forest Act 1927, primarily that demarcated forests can be put under the control of any department or local authority and not just the forest department and secondly that while several acts such as felling and lopping and setting fire to trees in a demarcated forest are automatically prohibited (same as within the context of the Forest Act 1927) all rights, concessions and activities, including those otherwise prohibited, can be exercised or carried out with the written permission of the Forest Officer. Un-demarcated forests include all forest and wasteland (other than demarcated forests and wastelands or forests under the management of the Revenue Department) that are the property of the Government and have not been appropriated by the Government for any specific purpose. Within the un-demarcated forests, the Government of AJK may declare any class of tree reserved and to prohibit the activities automatically prohibited for a demarcated forest through a notification in the official gazette to this effect. As with demarcated forests such acts may still be carried out with the written permission of the Forest Officer despite a notification prohibiting the same. Most importantly the Regulation does not provide a mechanism for the determination of pre- existing proprietary and subsistence rights of private individuals and communities in either category of forests, unlike the Forest Act 1927 which does provide for the determination of such rights (however biased that process may be in favour of an extractive government). This omission makes the Regulation even more draconian than the Forest Act 1927 when it comes to the establishment of community rights in public forests. In addition to the above two categories of forest, like the Forest Act 1927, the Regulation allows for the assignment of the Government’s rights to khalsa (crown) land to a village community and such assigned land would be known as a village forest. However, just as with the Forest Act 1927 the Regulation allows for the unilateral cancellation of such an assignment without the concomitant right to challenge such cancellation being provided to the affected community. As illustrated by the foregoing analysis for demarcated and un-demarcated forests, just as with the Forest Act 1927, there is very little in the way of protection of individual and community rights to forest land. Further, a large part of the Regulation is dedicated to the control of timber and other forest produce in transit, the duties leviable on them and the collection of drift and stranded timber and punitive measures against offences committed in forest land under government control. Most egregiously the Regulation does not provide any incentives for the sustainable management of forests and forest resources to individuals and local communities instead bearing down the path of increased exclusion of local communities seen as a threat to forest resources and primarily a reliance punitive measures for infractions under the Regulation. However, it must be stated that under the rules formed under the Regulation certain non- transferrable concessions in demarcated forest are granted for domestic and agriculture use to landowners and tenant farmers living within a prescribed distance of the forest boundary.

174

If REDD+ is to be implemented through the greater engagement of all stakeholders and community participation the current legislative framework leaves much to be desired and will need to be overhauled systematically to allow for any meaningful progress in this regard. Addressing the drivers of deforestation is the low priority under national development plans, sector development plans and forest development plans. Addressing drivers of deforestation is somewhat priority in forest management plans. This observation is borne out by the analysis of the regulations it is geared towards greater Government control of forest lands and the generation of revenue therefrom without heed to the conservation of forest resources and prevention of deforestation and forest degradation as an end. Furthermore, there is no yet a coherent Forest Policy in place in AJK to address the drivers of deforestation as for example available in Punjab although even in Punjab the Policy only addresses the themes of deforestation in broad strokes (stating for example” And whereas due to overuse and misuse, the natural resources have greatly deteriorated, reducing their productive potential”). The forest strategy recognizes the contribution and role of the private sector and explicitly includes mechanisms directed at fostering an appropriate role for the private sector. The planners always consider activities on private forest lands while planning/designing development projects. Private Forests Under the 1984 Azad Kashmir Rules for Sale and Development of Private Forests a private forest is defined as an area bearing trees that are assessed for land revenue and over which the owner has undisputed right of ownership. An owner of a private forest must obtain the permission of the Chief Conservator of Forests (“CCF”) prior to sale of the trees, for which permission would only be granted subject to joint demarcation by the revenue and forest departments to ascertain the availability of suitable trees for selection improvement or thinning improvement. The private owner must further undertake in writing to abide by the operations prescribed by the AJK Forest Department for the protection and development of the private forest. Any owner who infringes these rules may be subject to having his forest brought under the management of the AJK Forest Department for a period to be fixed by the CCF. The amount of intervention and oversight allowed by the law to the Forest Department in the sale of trees from a private forest provides for a good precedent to meet the requirements of the REDD+ implementation program where the legal framework could be suitably amended to prevent unregulated degradation and deforestation even in private forests. Government policies mostly consider non-market values of the forest such as ecosystem integrity and traditional social uses of forest. Under the law it is required to inventory public forests and make plans for them. The law requires, verifying the origin and legality of many products, such as timber, but not for all forest products procured and consumed by government. The Regulation does not explicitly require the inventory of public forests and the making of plans for them but does specifically empower the AJK Government to make rules for management of demarcated, un-demarcated and village forests. The Regulation reserves great power for the AJK Government to exploit forest resources under its management. However, in the context of REDD+ implementation there needs to be greater clarity around the rights and privileges that the Government accrues in respect of forests notified as demarcated forests. The discretions of forest officers are not structured; the law has specific standards in some areas and broad standards in others Whereas the Forest Officers are invested with a lot of discretion in carrying out the objectives of the Regulation it also provides for the structuring and transparency of this discretion by generally delegating the power to make rules to the Government to carry out the purposes of the Regulation particularly in respect of prescribing and limiting the powers of any officers under the Regulation. Nonetheless there are large swathes of discretion with the Government and the Forest Officers that are not structured and regulated through appropriate rules and regulations.

175

Clarity and Coherence of Policies, Laws, and Regulations Governing Forest Use and Management The laws governing use of forest resources are in general, consistent and clear. The Government of AJK has recently approved its climate change policy which is supportive of conservation and sustainable management of forest resources. No land use planning policy exists in the state. AJK also currently lacks climate change policy. Implementation Realities of Forest Laws and Policies The laws governing forestry especially those related to public forests are simple and compliance is easy. Some of the laws governing forestry especially those related private forests are complex, but overall, compliance is not hard. The law is silent on adaptive forest management. As for as the gender aspect is concerned, the forest law serves the interest of both genders.

6.3 Land Tenure, Ownership and User Rights The law clearly determines who has the rights to resources like carbon, genetic materials, wildlife, water, and minerals. The law generally recognizes traditional and indigenous rights. The law is unsuccessful at harmonizing formal and informal rights to forest resources. While the Regulation does allow the Government to grant and regulate concessions in the demarcated forests and un-demarcated forests, but this cannot be equated to recognizing indigenous and traditional rights since the concession would be granted at the discretion of the Government. The law is not effective in resolving disputes related to land tenure, ownership, and use rights. The judicial processes are sluggish and expensive. The law is silent on ways for local communities to share or obtain management authority over some public forests Like the Forest Act 1927, the Regulation allows for the assignment of the Government’s rights to khalsa (crown) land to a village community and such assigned land would be known as a village forest. However, just as with the Forest Act 1927 the Regulation allows for the unilateral cancellation of such an assignment without the concomitant right to challenge such cancellation being provided to the affected community. In addition, the AJK Protection of Forests and Distribution of Timber Ordinance of 1980 (“Ordinance”) provides for the constitution of a forest committee for each Union Council with a chairperson, three elected members from the Union Council and one co-opted member from the AJK Forest Department. The Forest Committee has limited mandate now allowing it to deal with forest offences up to a certain value and to enforce the Regulation by imposing compensation and damages provided therein and imposing the penalty upon a community as a measure of collective responsibility where a particular offender is not traceable. With certain amendments, the operation of the Forest Committees may be made more effective and robust allowing for representation on the committee of forest experts and allowing the committees to contribute to the process of reforming the policy and legislative framework to allow for effective REDD+ implementation. The forest committees can put forth the local community concerns and suggestions allowing for a ground up building of a truly sustainable policy and legislative edifice to support the REDD+ objectives.

6.4 Cross-Sectoral Dimension of Forest Policy Most of the sectors are making policies in isolation and mainly keeping the departmental agenda on the top. The overall national development policies are inconsistent with sustainability in the forestry sector. There are no official mechanisms, but there is some informal cross-sectoral coordination. In few cases (mostly in donor funded projects) there is cross-sector coordination to some extent in the shape of steering committees or other similar bodies. The sectors that directly depend on forests and the sectors that directly affect forests normally don’t provide for forest- and tree-related activities in their plans and budgets. Only WAPDA and NHA provide for tree related budgets in their plans but much less than the required level. WAPDA in particular, implement environmental management plans based on Environment Impact Assessment (EIA).

176

It is mandatory for WAPDA to conduct EIA and Initial Environmental Examination (IEE) for its entire project.

6.5 Institutional Frameworks Clarity and Coherence of Policies, Laws, and Regulations Governing Forest Use and Management

Forestry in Pakistan is entirely a provincial subject. The national government has the coordination role among provinces and keeping liaison with international bodies for forest related functions. Forest-related mandates of forest agencies and cross sector agencies are sometimes conflict with each other. The budgets have a strong bias toward high-revenue- producing resources, donor- funded projects, or other narrow issues. The forest department have a serious lack of appropriate information technology or staff trained to use it. The Constitutional background of the Forestry Sector in AJK has been addressed above in detail, but it is important to understand the AJK and Gilgit-Baltistan are not de jure territories of Pakistan under the Constitution.

6.6 Planning and Decision Making Stakeholder Participation The laws give stakeholders opportunities for input in the creation of some of key documents such as public forest management plans, policies and subsidiary rule. There are inadequate mechanisms in the law for people who are affected by forest policy, to influence it. The stakeholders are seldom consulted about ongoing and proposed actions in public forests and the feedback is seldom used in decision-making. As for as the gender aspect is concerned, women sometime participate in forestry decision-making processes. Government sometimes encourages stakeholder engagement in forest-related planning and decision-making. Capacity Not all the stakeholders have the required capacity to be involved in forest planning and management. The capacities of local communities and SMEs are limited. In forest sector, there are active civil society organizations, but they are not strong and credible enough to be effective as monitors and watchdogs. The involvement of large private actors and corporate sector is negligible in the forestry sector. As for as the private saw millers and timber dealers are concerned, they have formed associations, but their code of conduct does not have the provisions, not to participate in corruption. The government does not provide incentives and education to encourage corporate entities and businesses operating in the forest sector to follow recommended international codes of conduct and standards and safeguards. Some arms of government lack adequate capacity to engage stakeholders on forest-related decision-making processes and implementation. Only few or no stakeholders have practical and effective avenues to seek review of the decisions of the forest department.

6.7 Transparency and Accountability The legal framework broadly supports public access to information about forestry. The legal framework does not provide for sanctions in case of failures of department to meet their obligations to disclose information under the act. The authorities seldom or never give clear, timely notice of proposed policies, programs, laws, and projects. The laws and budgets for government-owned forests are easily accessible to the public on the official website of KP AJK government. However, the inventory data, management plans etc. are not uploaded on the website. The government has transparent, credible, and comprehensive system of tracking its revenues and expenditures in the sector and the system works well. There is no effective external oversight. Only the financial transactions are monitored by the Accountant General’s office, which is also independent from these departments. Routine performance evaluation of all forest officials is done through Annual Confidential Reports (ACRs). The forest officials are also held accountable if they fail to act lawfully.

177

Political interference frequently reaches down and affects agency activities and decisions, including technical matters. Some political appointees fill technical posts that have little connection to policy making or high-level management. The media is free and independent, free to publish reports on forests and their management but there are some limitations: either the media represents limited points of view, or its distribution is limited.

6.8 Performance Culture Quality of Decision Making Budgets are routinely reviewed and revised according to a regular schedule. Few public forests have current valid management plans. No arbitrary or unilateral changes can be made in laws, policies, and plans rather they require systematic reviews and due process. The government routinely considers supply and demand information in making forest-related decisions. The government’s decision making routinely consider non-marketed goods and services that are closely related to forest resources, such as ecosystem integrity, water quality, or cultural resources. The department mission statement, strategy and goals are widely disseminated to all the tiers of the department. The forest department only hire, people having matching qualification with the advertised job. The salaries and benefits of forest department are like other government departments based on the basic pay scale system. The areas assigned to field foresters are too large for the foresters to oversee effectively, given the field conditions, skills, and resources available. There is effective and comprehensive assessment of the impacts and outcomes of government forest programs and expenditures. The department creates a reliable, complete, and easy to review record of its management activities. The forest department has some information technology, but not enough to do their jobs well. They need more or better technology and staff trained to use it. The inventory and growth information are comprehensive and up-to-date for most areas and is used in planning and decision-making. Implementation The collection, sharing and redistribution systems of taxes, royalties, charges and rents are somewhat effective but need improvement. The government is implementing most of the laws. As for as the budget spending is concerned, spending mostly follows the published budget, but there are sometimes shortfalls, or changes in allocations among programs. All forest management plans are routinely implemented. Forest Law Enforcement Sanctions for forest offences are almost always appropriate and effective and graduated to fit the offences but its enforcement is poor. The government has a strategy to address forest crimes especially prevention and detection of forest crimes, but it should be much stronger as for as suppression of forest crime is concerned. Most serious forest crimes are promptly investigated after being reported. The government has somewhat capacity to address forest crimes (prevention, detection) and it needs to be somewhat strengthened. The government has limited capacity to address forest crimes especially suppression of forest crimes and it needs to be significantly strengthened. The effort against forest crimes does not cover the whole forest supply chain. The effort is fragmented: it covers some points outside the forest but not others. Judges and prosecutors are generally knowledgeable about the effects of forest offenses. The Regulation enumerates acts which are offences in relation to both demarcated and undemarcated forests and the provisions for demarcated forests also extend to village forests of the Regulation. Most of the acts considered offences against a forest of any class pertain to damage to the forest or the forest produce, undesired land use and unwarranted commercial use of the forests. Finally, the Regulation provides various penalties for offences related to the transit of timber and other forest produce, the collection of drift and stranded timber (to be

178

deemed the property of the Government) and the sale and sawing of timber. As is evident the orientation of the Regulation is punitive rather than preventive using appropriate incentives.

6.9 Administration of Land Tenure and Property Rights Forest boundaries are generally clearly surveyed and demarcated. Conflicts between the state and stakeholders are not serious and rarely interfere with forest use. There are chronic conflicts between different communities and user groups in the context of forest access and use, making some forests difficult to manage or use. The resolution of conflicts over forest resource use is variable: some are resolved efficiently while others persist. There are informal ways for conflict resolution that are socially acceptable and widely used.

179

ANNEX 4 SYNTHESIS OF RESPONSES TO CONSULTATION OF DRIVERS OF DEFORESTATION AND FOREST DEGRADATION

180

Balochistan A survey form was issued to the forest officers followed by formation of groups to discuss the contents. The following can be concluded from the survey:

 Deforestation generally perceived as an issue in Balochistan.  There was full consensus that forest degradation was a major issue in the province.

Forest officers had fairly consistent thoughts on how to define the difference between deforestation and forest degradation, outlined below:

“Total removal of vegetation without any case is deforestation. Removal of preferred vegetation/selected plants and leaving unwanted/less preferred trees or plants is forest degradation”

“Deforestation is the removal/cutting of forest from the area. Forest degradation is the reduction of forest/green cover in terms of value”.

“Deforestation is the complete removal of trees while forest degradation is a variety of damages in the existing forests”.

“Deforestation is the complete removal of forest and its services. Degradation is the overall reduction in the forest cover through environmental and anthropogenic factors”.

“Deforestation is the total removal of forests for agricultural purpose, urbanization, roads etc. whereas degradation is damage to a forest, which is due to anthropogenic activities, droughts etc.”.

Balochistan forest officers and stakeholders were requested to identify the main actions that result in deforestation in Balochistan. The results show the following drivers of deforestation are perceived in Balochistan province:

 Commercial Agricultural Expansion  Agricultural expansion for subsistence: fruit orchards  Unsustainable timber extraction  Unsustainable fuelwood extraction  Mining, especially surface mining  Urban expansion  Infrastructure development (roads)  Forest Clearing for livestock grazing  Forest clearing for habitation  Forest clearing for small scale agriculture  Drought  Climatic conditions.

Balochistan forest officers and stakeholders were requested to identify the main actions that result in degradation in Balochistan. The results show the following drivers of degradation are perceived in Balochistan province:

 Unsustainable timber extraction  Unsustainable fuelwood extraction  Heavy grazing  Urban expansion  Mining  Commercial agricultural expansion  Infrastructure development  Small scale agricultural practices.

181

Other contributors to forest degradation were identified as poor soil conditions, floods, water, wind erosion, insects, pests and diseases.

Forest officers had various viewpoints on the causes of both degradation and deforestation in Balochistan province. The following were identified:

 Wood energy needs (everyone agreed)  Livelihoods dependent on agricultural subsistence (everyone agreed)  No demarcation of boundaries (most agreed)  Poor implementation of laws (everyone agreed)  Illegal logging (less than half agreed)  Food security (less than half agreed)  Poor extension services (most agreed)  Poor land use planning (most agreed)  Lack of alternative livelihoods in rural areas (most agreed)  Unsustainable forest management (half agreed).

Other main causes for deforestation and forest degradation noted were droughts, low water table, low air moisture, obsolete laws, lack of resources, political interference, the lack of access to alternative sources of energy, and tribal and traditional barriers.

There are several provincial laws or policies that were identified during the consultation process that potentially drive deforestation and/or forest degradation:

The Forest Regulations (1891) were noted to be out-dated and in need of urgent revision to reflect current realities. The Land Acquisition Act was also identified as legislation that potentially drives deforestation and/or degradation.

Balochistan forest officers identified the main challenges in increasing forest cover through forest restoration:

 Investment and financing in forest restoration efforts was seen as the key challenge and barrier to future restoration efforts by all forest officers.  Maintaining areas where recent planting had occurred and financing nurseries to cultivate seedlings were also viewed as barriers. Uncontrolled grazing was viewed as a major threat to forest restoration efforts.  Other challenges that make forest restoration efforts difficult include planning and management of new forest areas, urban expansion, water scarcity, no political will and lack of interest from tribal elders as well as lack of inter-departmental and inter-sectoral coordination and ownership on the issue.

Balochistan forest officers identified future and potential drivers and causes of deforestation and forest degradation. The following were seen major threats:

 Population growth  High demand for land for large-scale commercial agriculture.

182

Sindh A survey was issued to the forest officers followed by formation of groups to discuss the contents. The following can be concluded from the survey:  Deforestation is an issue, but there are discrepancies in opinion on whether the extent of deforestation is a major or minor issue  There was full consensus that forest degradation was a major issue in the province. Forest officers had very different definitions on how to define the difference between deforestation and forest degradation, outlined below: “Deforestation – complete wiping out of forest” “Degradation – Reduction in ecosystem services” “Deforestation is: i) removal of trees for production; ii) Illegal removal of trees; iii) land use change. “Degradation is: i) Lack of shortage of fresh water from River Indus; ii) subservient stunted growth; iii) total iv) absence of trees; v) soil productivity loss; vi) desertification. “Deforestation is a manmade phenomenon whereby forests are exploited for commercial purposes. In Sindh’s perspective, major reason for deforestation is conversion of forest lands into agricultural lands. The major contributor of deforestation is agroforestry lease policy, which was about three decades ago. If we want to mitigate the effects of deforestation, particularly in Sindh, the agroforestry lease policy must be scrapped, and lands shall be retrieved from influential land grabbers. Forest degradation is the process in which forests have degraded due to a long process (natural as well as artificial) in which diversion of water resources for agricultural purposes has been the main reason of forest degradation in Sindh province.”

Sindh forest officers were requested to identify the main actions that result in deforestation in Sindh. The results show the following drivers of deforestation are perceived in Sindh province:  Commercial agricultural expansion (wheat, cotton, sugar cane, other cash crops)  Unsustainable timber extraction  Unsustainable fuelwood extraction  Urban expansion  Infrastructure development (roads)  Forest clearing for small scale agriculture and to some extent habitation  Forest fires (intentional) to a very small extent.

Sindh forest officers were requested to identify the main actions that result in degradation in Sindh. The results show the following drivers of degradation are perceived in Sindh province:

Unsustainable timber extraction, unsustainable fuelwood extraction, urban expansion, infrastructure development and rice cultivation were perceived drivers of degradation, but to a very small extent. The major driver of degradation was the lack of and shortage in fresh water from the Indus River. This man-made interference in natural water flow in the Indus River has, according to Sindh forest department officials, had a significant impact on the provincial environment and has led to land and forest degradation. Forest officers had various viewpoints on the causes of both degradation and deforestation in Sindh province. The following were identified:  Poor implementation of laws (everyone agreed)  Unsustainable forest management (most agreed)  Lack of alternative livelihoods in rural areas (most agreed)  Livelihoods dependent on agricultural subsistence (most agreed)  Poor land use planning (half agreed).

Most forest officers agreed that illegal logging, wood energy needs, food security, lack of demarcation of boundaries, and poor extension services were all minor causes of both

183

deforestation and forest degradation. The lack of fresh water running its natural path, and diverted to agricultural irrigation and hydro energy production is a major issue in the province that affects the health of forests and ecosystems. There are several provincial laws or policies that were identified during the consultation process that potentially driver deforestation and/or forest degradation:  Agricultural Lease Policy (2005)  Agroforestry Policy  Hydropower and water policies  Industrial expansion policies  Land Grant Policy  Conflicting laws on the land between the forest law regulated by the Sindh Forest Department, and the revenue law regulated by the Board of Revenue.

Sindh Forest officers identified the main challenges in increasing forest cover through forest restoration, noting that there have been some important success stories:  Investment and financing in forest restoration efforts was the key challenge and barrier to future restoration efforts by all forest officers  Maintaining areas where recent planting had occurred and financing nurseries to cultivate seedlings were also viewed as barriers. Uncontrolled grazing (camels and livestock) was viewed as a major threat to forest restoration efforts  Other challenges that make forest restoration efforts difficult include securing land for growing trees and forest areas, urban expansion, water scarcity, governance issues, lack of management plans and agroforestry.

It was noted that to grow forests (outside the incredibly successful mangrove restoration work of Sindh Forest Department), fresh water is a requirement, and that without access to fresh water, forest restoration efforts, beyond the mangroves (salt water) is fruitless. Sindh Forest Officers identified future and potential drivers and causes of deforestation and forest degradation. The following were major threats:  Population growth  High demand for land for large scale commercial agriculture  High demand for timber  High demand for fuelwood.

184

Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP) A Survey was conducted with selected officers of KP Forest department regarding drivers of deforestation and forest degradation. Results of the survey are summarized below It was agreed by all the respondents that deforestation is a major issue in KP; It was also agreed that forest degradation is also a major issue in KP; The difference between deforestation and forest degradation was perceived as given below: Deforestation is the conversion of forest into other land use Change of land use from forest to others like agriculture, construction is considered deforestation Forest Degradation is the reduction in the growing stock, carbon stock or quality of a forest Deterioration of forests and its health can be considered as degradation The main actions that result in deforestation in KP are:  Agricultural expansion for subsistence (Potatoes, Maize etc.)  Unsustainable timber extraction  Unsustainable fuelwood extraction  Urban expansion  Mining  Infrastructure Development e.g. roads  Forest Clearing for small scale agriculture  Forest clearing for habitation  Forest Fires (natural or due to negligence)  Forest Fires (Intentional). The main actions that result in forest degradation in KP are:  Agricultural expansion for subsistence (list main crops)  Unsustainable timber extraction  Unsustainable fuelwood extraction  Mining  Infrastructure Development e.g. roads  Livestock grazing. The main causes for deforestation and forest degradation in KP are:  Illegal logging  Wood energy needs  Food security  Livelihoods dependent on agricultural subsistence  Lack of alternate livelihoods in rural areas  Poor extension services  Poor land use planning/no land use planning  No demarcation of boundaries  Unsustainable forest management (i.e. forest management plans not enforced)  Poor implementation of laws (poor governance)  Poverty  Population growth  Tourism  Developmental Works  Encroachment. Laws or policies that cause deforestation and/or forest degradation:  Mining Act.

185

Main challenges in increasing forest cover through forest restoration in KP are:  Investment and financing  Financing nurseries for cultivating seedlings  Securing land for growing trees/forests  Urban expansion  Planning and management of new forest areas  Maintaining areas where recent plantings have occurred  Uncontrolled fires  Uncontrolled grazing of restoration sites. Future Realities and Potential Drivers and Causes of Deforestation and Degradation in KP:  Population is growing  Large rural population migrating to urban areas  High demand for timber  High demand for fuel wood  Increase in demand for bio-fuels.

186

Punjab The following drivers of deforestations were identified during survey conducted with selected officers of Punjab Forest Department. During the survey, it was agreed that deforestation as well as forest degradation are major issues within the province. The difference between deforestation and forest degradation was defined as: “Deforestation is cutting of trees on large scale in a given area and the land use change” “Forest Degradation is the decline in forest grade regarding density, quality, loss of flora/fauna” Actions that result in Deforestation  Commercial Agricultural expansion (Cotton, Sugarcane, wheat, sunflower etc.)  Agricultural expansion for subsistence  Unsustainable timber extraction  Unsustainable fuelwood extraction  Urban expansion  Mining especially surface mining  Infrastructure Development e.g. roads  Forest clearing for habitation  Forest Fires (natural or due to negligence)  Forest Fires (Intentional). Actions that result in Forest Degradation  Agricultural expansion for subsistence  Unsustainable timber extraction  Unsustainable fuel wood extraction  Urban expansion  Mining  Infrastructure Development e.g. roads  Forest clearing for livestock grazing  Unscientific operations in forests. Causes of Deforestation & Degradation  Population growth  Poverty  Wood energy needs  Food security  Livelihoods dependent on agricultural subsistence  Lack of alternate livelihoods in rural areas  Illegal logging  Poor extension services  Noland use planning  No demarcation of boundaries (especially in coniferous forest of Punjab)  Unsustainable forest management  Poor implementation of laws (poor governance)  Political interference  Unclear land tenure in some cases  Weak legislation  Lack of awareness  Water scarcity (especially in Riverian forest)  Lack of coordination of FD with other stakeholders  Diseases.

187

Laws or policies that cause deforestation and/or forest degradation  Tenancy Act  Development Projects like Motorways etc.  Unplanned Urbanization. Main challenges in increasing forest cover through forest restoration in Punjab  Investment and financing  Securing land for growing trees/forests  Urban expansion  Planning and management of new forest areas  Maintaining areas where recent plantings have occurred  Uncontrolled fires  Uncontrolled grazing of restoration sites  Political hurdles  No right person for right job  AC Rooms Policy making (not taking on board the key stakeholders i.e. communities). Future Realities and Potential Drivers and Causes of Deforestation and Degradation:  Population is growing  Large rural population migrating to urban areas  High demand for timber  High demand for fuelwood  High demand for land for large scale commercial agriculture  Increase in local meat consumption.

188

Gilgit-Baltistan A survey was conducted with selected officers of GB Forest Officers regarding deforestation and forest degradation. Results of the survey are presented below: It was informed by the officers that Deforestation (Conversion of forest land in to other land) is a minor issue in GB; and forest degradation is a major issue instead. Regarding the difference between deforestation and forest degradation the response was; “Deforestation is conversion of land in to other land use / commercial/ agriculture etc. However, degradation is the felling of trees however land use is not changed, and the forest land remains under forest”. Main actions that result in deforestation in GB  Commercial Agricultural expansion: potato, pea, hotel industry  Agricultural expansion for subsistence (vegetable, horticulture etc.)  Unsustainable timber extraction (Yes)  Unsustainable fuelwood extraction (Yes)  Urban expansion (Low level)  Mining (Low level)  Infrastructure Development e.g. roads (Low level)  Forest Clearing for small scale agriculture (very Limited)  Forest clearing for habitation (Very limited)  Forest Fires (natural or due to negligence) (Very limited, mostly negligence, cigarettes and tea making etc.). In private forest, before 1992 forest management was happening, when ban was imposed, people did illegal cutting and the system of forest management was destroyed. Population growth is putting pressure on protected forests for fuelwood. New districts are being established, urbanization is taking place, and this coupled with tourism, is putting pressure on forests. Main actions that result in forest degradation in GB  Agricultural expansion for subsistence (potatoes) (limited)  Unsustainable timber extraction (Yes)  Unsustainable fuelwood extraction (Yes)  Urban expansion (Yes to some extent as new colonies need more fuel wood and timber)  Free grazing. Main causes of deforestation and forest degradation?  Illegal logging  Wood energy needs  Food security  Livelihoods dependent on agricultural subsistence  Lack of alternate livelihoods in rural areas  No demarcation of boundaries (Because demarcation has not been done which leads to conflicts)  Unsustainable forest management (i.e. forest management plans not enforced)  Poor implementation of laws (poor governance) (Overall all writ of government is weak. We are using 1927 laws however Laws have been revised)  Other: (Ambiguities in terms of GB’s status of province / territory. Federal government does not have time for the GB and cases, issues do not get resolved. This in particular affects progression on laws and cases). Laws or policies that cause deforestation and/or forest degradation There are no such laws, which directly contribute to deforestation, however there are laws which indirectly contribute to deforestation. For example, Hot and Cold Allowance to Government officers in GB, which is added to salary of public servant between 15 November till 15 March. This allowance is provided to the government officials to purchase firewood during harsh winter,

189

which adds to deforestation. Around 1 billion PKR (estimate) is used on this annually, which can be used partially to convert to better alternatives. In addition, the cutting of one Pine / Deodar tree entails PKR 500 penalty (USD 5) per cft, while the incentive is very high to cut (price of a log is USD 1000-2500 / PKR 100,000-250,000) so people cut forest for the incentive and pay the penalty. Forest department has reviewed its laws and is in process of finalization with the provincial government and Federal Government to increase the penalty to match the market price, however delays from the Federal Government has hampered approval of the law. Main challenges in increasing forest cover through forest restoration in GB  Investment and financing (Funds generally exist)  Securing land for growing trees/forests (Wherever there is water, communities prefer agriculture. Wherever we do forestation activities, we need water)  Other: (Climate is a major issue as deodar species from lower parts of Pakistan do not grow in GB, in lower areas) and availability of limited land as 2-3% land is cultivable). The climate is one of the major challenges as a tree sapling which needs 2-3 years to mature in rest of Pakistan, needs around 10-15 years to be mature enough that it does not need special protection. Water scarcity also is a major challenge. In addition, the area under one forest guard is too large to actively protect forest restoration activities. Free grazing practices within communities also add to the challenges in increasing forest cover, where livestock grazing is often uncontrolled on pastures. Increasing population and reduced water availability compete with the attraction for communities to put additional land under forest. Wherever they find water, they tend to put the land under agriculture instead of forestry practices. There is no concept of Land management in GB government now and there are areas, where forestry can be done, however the land issues need to be resolved along with additional resources for water / irrigation as new plantation surely needs irrigation in the climatic conditions of GB. Future Realities and Potential Drivers and Causes of Deforestation and Degradation:  Population is growing  Large rural population migrating to urban areas  High demand for timber (When people migrate to urban area, timber demand will increase while firewood demand will decrease or decelerate)  High demand for land for large scale commercial agriculture (Our definition of agriculture is different. For us, if we sell produce of agriculture, it means we are doing commercial agriculture)  Increase in local meat consumption  Majority of the forest of GB lies in Diamer and the Government is constructing Bhasha Dam, due to which communities are shifting towards high altitude areas causing further deforestation and forest degradation.

190

Azad Jammu and Kashmir A survey was conducted with selected officers of AJK forest department; Following drivers of deforestation and forest degradation were identified. Actions that result in deforestation  Agricultural expansion for subsistence  Unsustainable timber extraction  Unsustainable fuelwood extraction  Urban & rural expansion  Mining  Infrastructure development e.g. roads, dams, transmission lines etc.  Forest clearing for livestock grazing  Forest clearing for small scale agriculture  Forest clearing for habitation  Forest fires (natural or due to negligence)  Forest fires (Intentional)  Floods, landslides, heavy snowfall, earthquake. Actions that result in Forest Degradation  Agricultural expansion for subsistence  Unsustainable timber extraction  Unsustainable fuelwood extraction  Urban & rural expansion  Mining  Infrastructure development e.g. roads  Livestock grazing. Causes of deforestation and forest degradation  Illegal logging/cutting  Wood energy needs  Food security  Livelihoods dependent on agricultural subsistence  Lack of alternate livelihoods in rural areas  Poor extension services  Poor land use planning/no land use planning  No demarcation of boundaries  Unsustainable forest management (i.e. forest management plans not enforced)  Poor implementation of laws (poor governance)  Political pressure on forest officers for relaxing the laws which discourages full enforcement of law  Uncontrolled Nomadic activities and overgrazing. Laws & Policies that causes deforestation/degradation  Forest Law of 1930 gives more rights to local people which cannot be sustained by the existing forest due to population growth  Overriding effects of other laws, such as land law, revenue law and environment law, which undermine the forest law  The demarcated forest is in the custody of forest department while the un-demarcated forest is in the custody of revenue department. After few years they convert the forest land into communal land which causes deforestation and forest degradation  Framing laws in isolation by different departments/sectors. There is no cross-sector coordination while framing laws.

191

Main challenges in increasing forest cover  Investment and financing (Yes)  Financing nurseries for cultivating seedlings  Securing land for growing trees/forests  Urban expansion as well as rural expansion  Maintaining areas where recent plantings have occurred  Uncontrolled fires  Uncontrolled grazing of restoration sites  Other: infrastructure development (roads, hydro power, schools and other government buildings)  Forest is lower priority than infrastructure development  Less awareness in masses  Tourism  Influx of refugees and IDPs due to tension on Line of Control (LOC)  Weak governance.

192

Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) A survey was conducted with the forest officers of FATA, regarding drivers of deforestation and forest degradation, the results of which are presented below The main actions that result in deforestation in FATA  Unsustainable timber extraction  Unsustainable fuelwood extraction  Mining (Not major)  Infrastructure Development e.g. roads  Forest clearing for livestock grazing  Forest Clearing for small scale agriculture  Forest clearing for habitation  Forest Fires (Intentional). The main actions that result in forest degradation  Unsustainable timber extraction  Unsustainable fuelwood extraction  Mining  Infrastructure Development e.g. roads  Livestock grazing. Causes for deforestation and forest degradation  Illegal logging (There is no forest law, yet to define cutting of trees whether legal or illegal, in FATA)  Wood energy needs  Food security  Livelihoods dependent forest related income  Lack of alternate livelihoods in rural areas  Poor extension services  Poor land use planning/no land use planning  Influx of Afghan refugees in the past and their heavy dependence on forest  Law & order situation in the region  Forest clearing for security purposes. Laws or policies that cause deforestation and/or forest degradation No extension of Forest Act to FATA region. The forests of FATA are governed by traditional tribal system of resource use and ownership. Sometimes the movement of wood is restricted by the FATA administration through administrative measures. The Frontier Crimes Regulation (FCR) does not cover forest related issues. The main challenges in increasing forest cover through forest restoration  Investment and financing  Financing nurseries for cultivating seedlings  Planning and management of new forest areas  Maintaining areas where recent plantings have occurred  Uncontrolled grazing of restoration sites. Future Realities and Potential Drivers and Causes of Deforestation and Degradation:  Population is growing  High demand for timber  High demand for fuelwood  Increase in local meat consumption.

193

Indufor Oy Indufor Asia Pacific Ltd Indufor Asia Pacific (Australia) Pty Ltd Indufor North America LLC Esterinportti 2 7th Floor, 55 Shortland St PO Box 425 1875 Connecticut Avenue, FI-00240 Helsinki PO Box 105 039 Flinders Lane, Melbourne VIC 8009 NW FINLAND Auckland City 1143 AUSTRALIA Washington, DC Tel. +358 50 331 8217 NEW ZEALAND Tel. + 61 3 9639 1472 20009USA Fax +358 9 135 2552 Tel. +64 9 281 4750 [email protected] Fax +64 9 281 4789 www.induforgroup.comi