PAKISTAN—A NATIONAL FOREST POLICY REVIEW

Bashir Ahmed Wani

Introduction

Natural forests cover less than 5 percent of the total land area in Pakistan. Notwithstanding the low per capita forest area, the demand for services (e.g. watershed protection) and products (e.g. construction wood and fuelwood) is increasing. Fifty-one percent of the land area is arid (rainfall below 250 mm per year) and supports bushes and grasses used by livestock, particularly goats and sheep, which are the mainstay of people who live in this region. The semi-arid areas (250-750 mm rainfall per annum) cover 35 percent of the land area. This area is used mainly for rainfed agriculture. Only 12 percent of Pakistan (Himalayas, Karakuram and Hindukush mountain ranges) is sub-humid. It is in this area that natural coniferous forests are located, forming the watersheds of the Indus and Jhelum river system.

Overview of recent national forest policies

Forest policies that have guided forest management and influenced the development of forest resources are:

1884 The first forestry policy resolution under the colonial British Government when forests occupied more than 25 percent of the total land area and livestock populations were low. There was very little urbanization and wood consumption was also very low.

1955 After independence in 1947, the first forest policy of the Government of Pakistan was announced. This policy defined the objectives of forest management based on the concepts of sustained yield; it also contained provisions for the preparation of management plans; fencing of forests; the establishment of wood-based industries; creating employment opportunities; the setting aside of 10 percent of the area for irrigated plantations; establishing linear plantations and a trained forest service; powers to control land use for soil conservation; the protection of mountain habitats for wildlife; and the management of private forests through legislation.

1962 The merger of provinces into West Pakistan and other influences led to the Forest Policy statement of 1962. Major policy thrusts included: commercial forest management; the transfer of state lands to the forest departments; the rights of local people; the appointment of forest magistrates; entrusting timber harvesting to forest departments or autonomous bodies; growing of industrial wood; supplying saplings to the public at nominal rates; plans for coastal areas; planting of floodplains; transferring land strips along railways, highways and canals to the forest departments; research on afforestation in arid zones; selection of fast-growing species for saline and waterlogged areas; legislation for the minimum number of trees on farmlands; and the promotion of farm forestry via extension services.

1975 In 1975, attention focused on eliminating rights of local people to forests; artificial regeneration using high quality growing stock; establishing forest industries near forests; using fast-growing species; providing adequate irrigation water; transferring linear plantations to forest departments; promoting farm forestry; and entrusting the management of private forests to forest owners’ cooperatives.

1980 The Forest Policy guidelines issued in 1980 were part of the National Agriculture Policy. They included a greater thrust on planting fast-growing tree species, forest harvesting based on proper science, the scientific management of wilderness, production of medicinal herbs etc.

1991 By 1991, forest policy concerned: Integrated use of forest resources; long-term loans at concession rates and insurance for tree crops; leasing of selected public lands to interested groups; artificial regeneration; logging by the public sector; the establishment of extensive road networks to facilitate extraction, the mechanization of forest operations; the establishment of regional research institutions; encouraging private game reserves; collaborative wildlife management through the sharing of revenues from trophy hunting; the promotion of social forestry and afforestation on degraded and marginal lands; the involvement of NGOs and voluntary organizations; tree plantations to mitigate pollution; legislation to protect wildlife habitats and wetlands; a GIS-based inventory and monitoring system; watershed planning and coordination as a federal function.

Analysis of past forest policies

The first review of the policy statements of 1955, 1962 and 1980 was carried out by Mr. Abeedullah Jan, Inspector General of Forests, and published in the book Review and Analysis of Forest Policies of Pakistan 1992. The main problems regarding the implementation of various forest policies were attributed to a lack of funds to implement forestry programs, jurisdiction problems over privately owned forests, low priority of the forestry sector compared to agriculture, competition between agriculture and forestry for land and water, resistance from people to controlled grazing, priority for non-tree land use, lack of public cooperation and lack of funds and facilities for the forest department staff (see Annex 1). The publication also describes the Forest Policy of 1991.

Second policy review (1998)

The most recent review of forest policies in Pakistan was carried out by The World Conservation Union (IUCN)—Pakistan and the International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED) in collaboration with the Government of Pakistan in 1998. This report "Changing perspectives on forest policy" was based on a consultative process involving a multi-disciplinary team of experts from local institutions. It provides insights into the impact of a rapidly increasing population on the country’s ecosystems, climate change, desertification and biodiversity. The study recognizes that forestry in Pakistan can no longer be considered in isolation from other sectors and has to be managed for a broad spectrum of goods and services. The study concludes that because of the multiplicity of interests and demands on national forests, policies cannot be formulated without considering the perspectives of all stakeholders. The report highlights the strengths and weaknesses of past policies, investigates the lessons learnt from different projects and programs and provides a good foundation for future policies to be built on.

The study identified the following constraints to improving forest policy in Pakistan:

• Entrenched forest department attitudes, which use a "command-and-control" approach; the department is wary of the development-agent/monitoring role, which will be required in the future. This is an exacerbated bureaucratic system, with a lack of incentives and training in the new areas.
  
  
• Fiscal deficits, putting a strain on departmental budgets.
  
  
  
• Weak reconciliation of social and environmental goals with the current formal departmental goal of revenue maximization.
  
  
• Lack of accountability.
  
  
• Inadequate information on forests and on stakeholders’ needs and capacities.
  
  
• Lack of established fora for review and debate of policies and experimental initiatives.
  
  
• Lack of local-level governmental institutions that could reconcile top-down policy initiatives and implement bottom-up participatory projects.
  
  
• Weak relations between the state and civil society (NGOs, communities and their representatives.
  
  
• Weak integration of farm forestry and import policies into forestry policies, and consequently a continuing and overriding pressure to use the small remaining natural forests for timber production.

Current constraints for conducting policy reviews in Pakistan

Of the two policy reviews, one was conducted solely by Mr. Abeedullah Jan and the other by an NGO—IUCN Pakistan.

Policy review processes are not institutionalized and are not a government priority. Policy reviews have been conducted in an ad hoc fashion.

Guidelines on periodic policy reviews are unavailable and policies are influenced by the frequent changes in governments.

Mechanisms for following standard procedures and steps for conducting policy reviews do not exist.

Since the implementation of forestry programs and forest management are a provincial matter, the federal government that is responsible for policy formulation comes into conflict with provincial interests concerning:

• Levying of taxes on inter-provincial movement of timber.
  
  
• Upstream–downstream compensation for watershed values.
  
  
• Demand for cash compensation in lieu of a ban on timber harvesting in protected areas.
  
  
• Conflict of interest between various federal agencies (e.g. game hunting).
  
  
• Conflicts between the energy sector and biodiversity conservation (support for the construction of dams for inexpensive electricity against opposition from environmentalists who want to conserve the mangrove ecosystem).

The lack of capacity to incorporate the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UN FCCC) into forestry policy. Biodiversity conservation and the management of forests as carbon sinks are not fully reflected in past policies.

Forest policies are prepared in isolation from other sectors (e.g. wildlife, fisheries, tourism, population planning, energy, etc.). The isolation occurs at both the policy formulation and implementation levels.

Capacities to incorporate forest certification into forest policy are inadequate.

Lack of capacity and understanding to include international trade in forest products in the forest policy.

Issues/constraints for sustainable forest management (SFM)

There is no consensus on the definition of SFM.

There are no criteria and indicators for SFM, specific to the situation in Pakistan.

Lack of adequate financial resources for developing the forestry sector.

The existing forest classification is based on a 1935 description and classification. There is a need to undertake ecosystem-based classification according to the accepted international system.

Biodiversity concerns are not incorporated in forest management plans.

Stakeholders such as local communities, other government departments, NGOs and biodiversity specialists are not involved in the preparation of management plans.

There is no policy on invasive and exotic fast-growing species.

There is a need for a balanced approach towards the centralized Forest Act (1927) and the most decentralized revised provincial acts.

Extra-sectoral influences are not considered in formal forest policies.

Topics for the EC-FAO Partnership Programme

Development of criteria and indicators for SFM.

Support for reviews to assemble fragmented forest legislation into a uniform format in accordance with international conventions.

Strengthening of the Inspector General of Forests’ Office and provincial forest departments to conduct policy reviews, implementation and monitoring.

Assistance to formulate guidelines and procedures for conducting forest policy reviews.

Support to conduct impact assessments for all important forest projects and past policy statements.

Exchange of information and printed material related to forest policy reviews in other countries of the Asia-Pacific region.

Improving policy at national, provincial and local levels

The 1998 policy review recognized the need to decentralize the formulation of the forest policy and to involve provincial and local officials in the process; until then this had been the main domain of the federal government. Federal policies should set the framework for securing forest goods and services at the national level, and the basic principles and criteria for SFM. The federal level also needs to deal directly with international protocols and the relationship between domestic forest production and trade, to achieve efficiency. The federal level needs to have authority over nationally important forest services such as biodiversity and major watersheds. This will require a broad monitoring system of forest stocks, flows and demands, which would draw upon provincial forest resource accounting systems. According to this review the driving force for the future federal policy formulation should be a healthy interaction between the Inspector General of Forests’ Office and a new forum for multi-stakeholder national forest coordination.

The provinces should focus on aspects of forest investment and management, including the preparation of working plans, harvesting, sale, afforestation, credit, research and training. Provincial multi-stakeholder forest fora should be instituted as the primary means of reviewing policies. These should be linked to village- and district-level organizations involved in forest management. Provinces should institute forest resource accounting systems to provide information on forest stocks. This study also demonstrates the advantages of involving local communities and their organizations in forest management.

In summary, Pakistan needs:

• Multi-stakeholder forest fora at national, provincial and local levels.
  
  
• Policies that reconcile revenue generation with the need for social and environmental benefits derived from forests (particularly for rural livelihoods).
  
  
• A detailed analysis of the barriers to imports of wood and wood products.
  
  
• Clarifying the goals of forest departments, as a prerequisite to decentralization, to.inform the national and provincial forest fora and to provide inputs for policy revisions.
  
  
• A considerable expansion of joint forest management activities, with local communities and private sector groups having clear rights of use, and with extensive forest department involvement.
  
  
• Greater support for farm forestry to supply timber and generate rural income.
  
  
• Strengthening community and farmer organizations to ensure they can practise sustainable forestry.
  
  
• Reorganizing and strengthening forest authorities to support the above.

Follow-up activities in response to policy review recommendations

The 1998 policy review provided a foundation to revise the National Forest Policy in Pakistan. As a follow up to this policy review, the Federal Forestry Board (FFB) has been revived with the mandate to review issues related to forest policy and management. The FFB comprises representatives from provincial forest departments, NGOs, civil society and other stakeholders who directly or indirectly influence forest management. The FFB held two meetings during 2001 and presently it is monitoring the implementation of federal cabinet policy guidelines related to forest harvesting on a sustainable basis through forest management plans. The new forest policy incorporates the suggestions made in the recent policy reviews through a consultative process. However, there is a need for forest policy reviews to be institutionalized and to develop a permanent mechanism for this purpose both at the federal and the provincial levels.

ANNEX 1

FOREST POLICY 1955