1. Policy and Legislation Formulation Capacity / 8
2. Institutional Capacity / 8
3. Human Resources and Technological Capacities / 8
4. Financial Capacity / 9

2. Poverty Reduction Strategy, NEAP and Local Government (Devolution) Plan and Information Technology Policy / 12

PROGRAMME OBJECTIVES / 22

1. Development Objective / 22
2. Programme Objectives and Sub-Programmes Description / 22
1. Programme Objective 1 / 22
2. Programme Objective 2 / 23
3. Programme Objective 3 / 25
4. Programme Objective 4 / 27
5. Programme Objective 5 / 27
6. Programme Objective 6 / 28

9.0. MONITORING AND EVALUATION / 39

10.1. Total Programme Costs/Budget / 40

10.2. Programme Financing / 40

1. Funds Available under Cost Sharing / 40
2. Funds Available under Parallel Financing / 43

2. Earmarking of Donors Resources by Sub-programme / 43
3. Resource Mobilization Strategy / 45

 

4. Technical Support Services / 46
5. Mechanism for Financial Accounting & Reporting / 46

1. UNDP Country Officer / 46
2. Financial Accountability / 46
3. Advance of Funds / 46
4. Direct Payments / 47
5. Audit Requirements / 47
6. Procurement of Goods and Services / 47
7. Allocation of Resources / 47
8. Programme Implementation agreements / 47

11.1. Risk Analysis / 50

11.2. Prior Obligations and Pre-requisites / 51

Annex I. Environmental Degradation in Pakistan

Annex II. Excerpts From United Nations Millennium Declaration

Annex III. Poverty Alleviation and Sustainable Development Facility

Annex IV. Expected Outcomes and Monitoring Indicators

Annex V. Linkage of On-going/Pipeline Projects with NEAP Support Programme

Annex VI. Work Plan for Planning Phase

Annex VII. Implementation Arrangements for NEAP

Annex VIII. Terms of Reference for the Programme Implementation Unit/Committees and Core Staff Positions

Annex IX. Staffing of PMIU and PIUs

Annex X. Linkages of NEAP-SP with National Plan & International Conventions/Treaties.

Annex XI. Specimen Format for Project Concept Paper

Fig. 1. Poverty Environment Nexus / 2

This section analyzes the nature and extent of environment related problems and issues within the context of poverty-environment nexus. These problems and issues relate to degradation of natural resources (soil, water, pastures, forests), loss of biodiversity, and pollution. The most affected groups are identified. A summary of programmes and projects initiated to address these problems is presented with an objective to draw lessons.

Pakistan is blessed with tremendous human and natural resources, which if used carefully can advance human development. However, poor governance in the past has resulted in institutional decay leading to an array of problems, such as poverty, lack of access to basic services, low literacy rate, gender disparities, environmental degradation and above all high indebtedness.

The issues related to sustainable development and the poverty – environment nexus are described as follows:

According to 1998 census, the population of the country was 131 million with an annual growth rate of 2.4%. Pakistan ranks 135 out of 174 countries in the Human Development Index 2000. Increasing poverty has become a major area of concern in Pakistan. According to caloric-based approach, poverty has increased from 17.4% in 1987-88 to 22.4% in 1992-93 and jumped further to 32.6% in 1998-99. According to Human Development Report of 2000, population below income poverty line of one US dollar per day is 31%, which implies that every third household in Pakistan does not have sufficient income to afford daily intake of 2,250 calories per person.

Some 15% of the population is without access to health facilities, 21% without access to safe drinking water and 44% without access to sanitation facilities. The main reasons for the spread of poverty in Pakistan are: a small tax base (and consequent lack of budget for social investments); increased power tariffs which have undermined the industrial growth, thus job opportunities; loss of confidence of the private sector investors on government policies; drop in foreign exchange remittances; and impediments in implementation of structural reforms.

The poor are solely dependent on natural resources and virtually have no resources to invest in their conservation. On the other hand, the rich consume many times more of natural resources and apply wasteful practices both as landlords/producers and as consumers. The poor are often left to cope in extremely limited conditions on the most marginal and fragile lands. Also, the poor mostly do not have neither the knowledge nor the means to apply sustainable practices and techniques. For instance, the soil is not adequately fertilized, high efficiency irrigation and drainage techniques are not applied, rangelands are overgrazed or degraded by expanding cropping, forests are degrading through exploitation of timber and fuelwood which consequently depletes capacity of water reservoirs due to siltation, and contributes to lower groundwater table. Once the ecosystems are degraded, the human and livestock population cannot be sustained, which results in reduced income for the already poor people, thus leading to aggravated poverty. In urban centres, the poor have to spend more on below standard housing and face health hazards due to lack of safe drinking water, sanitation and exposure to industrial and air pollution. The combined effect of these factors is reduced life span, loss of income due to job-days lost because of illnesses, increased expenses on health care, etc. The poverty-environment nexus is further explained in Fig. 1.

Pakistan is confronted with a number of severe environmental problems which are also linked with poverty, such as degradation of natural resources, industrial and vehicular pollution, pollution of marine environment, degradation of human health, etc. Summarizing in monetary terms, the annual cost of environmental degradation in the country is about 4.3% of GDP (US $ 4.3 billion) which is equivalent to almost half of the Pakistan’s export earnings. In Annex I, specific examples are given under the following themes: (i) Land, (ii) Water, (iii) Drought and Desertification, (iv) Forests, (v) Loss of Biodiversity, (vi) Environmental Health, (vii) Disposal of Liquid and Solid Waste, (viii) Vehicular and Industrial Pollution, (ix) Climate Change, and (x) Ozone Depletion.

The affectees of institutional decay, failure of macroeconomic policies and environmental degradation are overwhelmingly the poor, in both urban and rural areas, who are less protected than the rich from the health and income impacts of water/soil/air pollution and natural resource-base degradation. Different population groups are affected by environmental degradation to a different extent, as the examples below indicate:

• Local communities are affected as the degradation of ecosystems causes widespread poverty and displacement of communities. Such impacts are evident in the form of resource competition and pressure, for instance impact of the migration of drought affected communities in Sindh and Balochistan and rural-urban migration.

• Infants and children are more affected since they are more susceptible to the total effects of toxic chemicals than adults for physiological reasons, such as their higher rate of metabolism, intake per unit of body weight, rapid growth and higher sensitivity of their organs to chemicals.
• Women are generally more affected because of the critical role they play in the use and management of resources and in economic and household production. They are the gatherers of food and the collectors of water, fuelwood and fodder. While women perform productive and reproductive roles, they also have important community managing roles. Therefore, a focus on women’s traditional, domestic role as collectors of water and fuelwood tends to disregard their productive roles as agriculturists and users of irrigation systems, pastures and forests. Adverse health effects also result from air pollution due to cooking with low grade fuels, or bathing or washing clothes in polluted waters. Even where men and women are equally exposed to similar levels of pollution, the weaker physiological status and other factors make women more vulnerable to pollution. In cotton production zone, hardly any woman is termed as healthy as their immune system has been severely impaired by exposure to pesticides.
• Women are more affected by pollution in certain industries because there are industries (organised or unorganised) where mostly women are employed, such as weaving, garments, sports goods, rugs, brick, etc. Since women have a disadvantaged position in the labour market and because of their lower occupational mobility, they are less apt to move away from hazardous environments.

Over the last decade or so, the development focus had been to alleviate poverty in one way or the other. Towards this aim, successive Governments implemented a wide range of programmes and projects. Some of these programmes and projects have already been completed while others are still going on. All these programmes and projects met with varying degrees of successes and failures. This section reviews the most significant undertakings with a view to learn from their experiences so as to draw useful lessons for better future planning.

2.1. Social Action Programme

The Social Action Programme (SAP) was conceived in 1991 by the Government of Pakistan (GoP) in response to the realization that Pakistan's performance and ranking in social development compared unfavorably with developing countries in general, and with the other countries of South Asia in particular. The Programme is supported by the SAP project- a project co-financed by a World Bank-led consortium, comprising the Bank itself, the Asian Development Bank, the European Union and the Governments of Netherlands and United Kingdom. The programme was initiated with substantial donor assistance in 1992-93 and has since been able to achieve success in terms of increased allocation, improved access especially to primary health care and greater awareness along government functionaries and civil society at large regarding the importance of the programme.

The Pakistan Integrated Household Survey (PIHS) concluded that SAP has had only a very small impact on the basic social indicators. In education sector, the gross enrollment rate for primary education actually declined by 1% (73% baseline in 1991; 72% in 1997), except in the case of girls which increased from 59% in 1991 to 64% in 1997; and enrollment in government schools declined (86% in 1991 vs. 78% in 1997) even though there has been a major increase in the number of schools. In health sector, however, there has been 11% reduction in the incidence of diarrhea, mainly due to successful implementation of the Lady Health Workers Programme and the expanded immunization programme.

The World Bank in its appraisal of SAP-II, concluded that in SAP-I the sectors received enhanced funding; allocations were largely protected; policy dialogue was encouraged; and some preliminary steps to initiate institutional reform had been taken. However, the vested political interests at various levels

remained strong enough to frustrate reform; bureaucratic delays and political interference plagued the system from the top down through several layers to the local level; the management of services was too centralized with too little community involvement; implementation capacity of various institutions remained weak; and users who ought to have a stake in reforming the system remained largely uninvolved. However, proponents of the SAP argue that in the absence of SAP access to basic social services would have been more limited.

SAP-I experience has led to the reinforcement of SAP-II by including a focus on quality; decentralization and a shift to community control; encouragement of service provision by the NGOs; and measurement of outcomes and impacts. SAP-II calls for much greater emphasis on monitoring and evaluation. This is essential, as line departments have, for many years, relied on the information gap between the village and provincial headquarters to hide their poor performance. Strengthening government capability in this area is an obvious need.

2.2. National Conservation Strategy

The NCS mid-term review, a year long process completed in May 2000, concluded that the NCS was highly instrumental in creating awareness in environment and conservation, initiating a consultative process for achieving its goal at various levels, advocating priorities, and putting in place the environmental institutional framework. On the other hand, it was also concluded that the NCS has not resulted in influencing macroeconomic and sectoral policies (pricing, incentives, structural adjustment), providing incentives and safeguards for ‘clean’ growth, improving general environment, and proper reporting on sustainable development and state of the environment. In case of poverty reduction, there are a few cases of improvement in environmental health but overall the natural resource management is still weak, response to hazard reduction and disaster management is limited and empowerment of communities is still absent.

The review while recommending NCS Phase-II suggested that: (i) NCS should operate adequately as a sustainable development strategy; (ii) implementation capacity of institutions should be strengthened; (iii) bottom-up demand driven, rather than supply-driven, approach should be followed; and (iv) resources should be mobilized locally by pricing, efficiency gains, cost recovery, credit access and exploring innovative funding sources, such as green business opportunities and capturing of global environment benefits locally. The NEAP-SP shall address some of the recommendation of NCS review, such as policy research and advocacy to influence national development agenda, inter-ministerial coordination to address the environmental issues holistically, local resource mobilization through incentives and dis-incentives, involvement of private stakeholders- especially setting up of green enterprises, tapping of international trust funds, and sustainable industrial development for alleviating poverty vis-à-vis environmental conservation.

The Environment Protection and Resource Conservation Project (EPRCP) was in operation from 1993 to 2000. The project was one of the first stand-alone environmental projects supported and financed by the World Bank Group. It included an institutional development component and a number of natural resource management sub-components. From the Bank’s perspective, EPRCP was part of a much larger programme to support economic development, with special emphasis on the social sectors, agriculture production, natural resource management, and environmental protection. The project was initially designed to be national in scope, but Balochistan province was excluded after appraisal at the province’s request. However, the province later benefited from a separate project, Balochistan Natural Resource Management Project. In addition, two of EPRCP’s watershed rehabilitation sub-projects, Dir, Kohistan in NWFP, and Murree, Kahuta and Kotli Sattian in Punjab, were re-appraised by the European Union and financed separately (parallel financing) through a grant.

The general objective of the project was to improve protection of the environment and management of natural resources. Its specific objectives were to: (i) initiate the strengthening of key federal and provincial environmental protection institutions so they can deal with environmental protection and resource conservation in a systematic and planned manner, (ii) strengthen environmental legislation, and initiate environment policies and programmes, (iii) disseminate information, concerning damage to the environment and natural resources to policy makers, government officials, and the public, (iv) strengthen professional education in environmental and natural resource planning and management, (v) implement sub-projects to rehabilitate, protect, develop and manage agro-ecological resources which have been damaged or which are threatened with damage, and (vi) undertake studies and preparation for future environmental protection and resource conservation projects /sub-projects..

The EPRCP review concluded that the project objectives were largely coherent with the GoP’s priority multi-sectoral environmental objectives and strategies. However, with 14 components distributed over four different geographical regions, the project was inherently complex and suffered from weak coordination and other implementation problems. The project contributed to the development of new institutions, enactment of environmental legislation, building environmental awareness and education and piloting participatory approaches and sustainable management practices both at community and watershed levels. However, the effectiveness of the ‘strengthened" institutions and legal framework is yet to be realized in terms of credible policy impact, environmental assessment and monitoring enforcement. In general the project performed a pioneering role in translating strategies, like the NCS and Forestry Sector Master Plan, into actions.

In the environment sector, UNDP Pakistan’s major interventions are in the area of solid waste management and environmental enhancement in the urban areas, mitigating pollution due to operation of tanneries, rehabilitation of waterlogged and saline land; and biodiversity conservation and climate change- through Global Environment Facility (GEF) funding. The GEF Small Grants Programme and LIFE (Local Initiative Facility for Urban Environment) have proved highly instrumental in utilizing the NGOs resource-base for making strategic interventions in GEF programme areas and urban sector, respectively. The macro GEF projects in the area of biodiversity conservation and climate change are the concrete examples of public-civil society and private sector partnership.

As poverty and environment are inter-linked, UNDP Pakistan is making interventions in resource poor areas of AJK, Balochistan, NWFP and Northern Areas through its area-based programmes by mobilizing Community-Based Organizations (CBOs) for natural resource management. Other programme interventions under Sustainable Livelihoods Programme are addressing the menace of waterlogging and salinity, introducing sustainable waste management practices, and mitigation measures. These programmes, though targeting on poverty alleviation, are supporting initiatives in the areas of natural resource management, through the involvement of communities at the local level. All these projects deal with the most disadvantaged and poorest of the poor. Conceived as models of community-based poverty alleviation programmes, they draw on the experience of successful rural support programmes and aim at expanding people’s choices and opportunities for sustainable farming practices, and increasing incomes from informal productive activities and services.

However, highly conservative society and socio-culture norms prevalent in the remote regions often result in delays in the implementation of projects. The society particularly resists in initiating activities aimed at the advancement of women. Nevertheless, the use of the participatory approach to development has helped to overcome the conservative culture, thereby reaching at workable strategies.

After the approval of NCS by the cabinet on March 1, 1992, the GoP reached an agreement with the World Bank and affiliated donors, for a technical assistance credit of US $ 29.2 million for the Environmental Protection and Resource Conservation Project (EPRCP). The scope of EPRCP and lessons learned from its implementation have been discussed in Section 2.2.

CIDA had supported the preparation of NCS as well as provided support for its implementation in the form of Pakistan Environment Programme. These initiatives were followed by other donor initiatives, including the EC-funded watershed rehabilitation project (included in the EPRCP), the Swiss and Dutch funded projects on sustainable industrial development and several sectoral projects supported by the ADB and NORAD.

The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) is collaborating with UNDP in several on-going projects, such as Area Development Programme AJK, food security, rational use of pesticides, etc. FAO is also implementing a programme on integrated pest management with the assistance of European Union.

The main activities of UNIDO in Pakistan, in collaboration with UNDP, are in the area of pollution control in tanneries and research and studies on industrial and environmental policy. UNIDO also plans to initiate cleaner production centre programme in Pakistan, for which UNDP has provided assistance for the formulation of a project in oil sector. The other sectors of UNIDO’s anticipated interventions are: textile, leather and chemicals. In the past, UNIDO has provided technical assistance to the Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Livestock for the establishment of national eco-toxicology centre which is equipped with the state-of-the-art equipment for pesticides residues analysis.

UNICEF supports the Prime Minister's Lady Health Worker's Programme, Vitamin-A Supplementation Programme, establishment of database on out of school children in selected districts, and water sector development in the country. UNICEF’s high-level social policy advocacy is the major activity which has given an impetus to policy dialogue on water and sanitation sectors in Pakistan.

UNFPA has formulated its 6^th Country Programme (2000-2003). The overall achievements of the 5^th Country Programme are reflected in the documented onset of the fertility decline. The Programme has played an instrumental role in bringing about a paradigm shift in the population policies from a narrowly defined family planning approach to the broader concept of reproductive health. The new Country Programme has three thematic sub-programmes: namely, Reproductive Health, Population and Development, and Strategies and Advocacy. A major undertaking of the new programme is to bring about behavioral change conducive to improving the quality of life and the empowerment of women.

WFP in Pakistan provides food assistance to a variety of activities under the three main components of its current Country Programme: the environmental sector (natural resource management), the social action sector (promoting primary health care and girls education) and assistance to Afghan Refugees. In 1999, WFP brought into Pakistan about 48,000 tons of food worth of over US $ 12 million.

IFAD has supported 16 projects in Pakistan, with a total loan commitment of about SDR 219 million. The IFAD's development strategy seeks to improve villager’s opportunities, increase productivity and conservation of the environment and mobilize communities. UNDP is implementing IFAD funded projects in AJK and Northern Areas.

6. Summary of Lessons Learnt

A number of projects and programmes that have been implemented in the past have been reviewed in the preceding section. These projects and programmes met with varying degrees of success. The experiences gained and lessons learnt during the implementation of these projects and programmes can provide useful insights towards the formulation of the PD and developing institutional arrangements for its successful implementation. These lessons are summarized below:

• Financial resources are always not available in the required amount and at the time when needed. Therefore, mobilizing financial resources from local sources should be an important element of the resource mobilization strategy. For this purpose, in addition to encourage the private sector participation, polluter pay principles needs to be promoted and adapted.

• The poverty-environment nexus needs to be approached in a broader socio-economic development framework. This means that the: (i) programmes/projects designed to address poverty alleviation should also give due attention to the national environmental management priorities; (ii) environmental management should be made an important and explicit feature of all programmes/ projects to be implemented by all Ministries (should not be limited only to the MoELGRD); and (iii) inter-ministerial coordination is essential to implement programmes and projects which are cross-sectoral in nature and are characterized with significant spill-over effects.

• The main focus of the support to the national programme should be on implementation of national policies and enforcement of regulations, rather than formulating new polices.

• Natural resources conservation and environment management objectives can be met with reasonable degree of success by reviving traditional practices with respect to conservation practices, community mobilization, and awareness raising.

• Policies geared towards revival of industrial growth should be accompanied by incentives to promote adoption of clean production processes.

• Technical and institutional capacities of national research and educational institutions should be strengthened in order to enable these institutions to meet their functions and mandates.

• The macro-policies have wide spread effects on the livelihoods of all, also the poor. Therefore, attention should continuously be paid to macropolicies and the impact on the poor and their opportunities. This should include macropolicies for economic development as well as macropolicies for social development.

• The national programme should be well focused in terms of what it aims to achieve and how over the programme life. Similarly, the programmes and projects designed to support the implementation of national programme should clearly specify as to what extent these will contribute in achieving the objectives and targets set-forth in the national programme.

• There is a need to take measures to improve the information flow between the different levels of action in the country, with regard to poverty – environment activities. The information gap has been seen as a serious problem in the past.

The institutions concerned by the activities supported through this national programme need certain capacities to attain and sustain the expected impact. These capacities can be broadly defined in terms of substantive capacities (policy formulation, institutional, human resources, technological, and financial) and support capacities (programme management & co-ordination, information management and budgetary). This section examines these capacities with an aim to identify opportunities for strengthening these capacities through the programme proposed in this PD.

The Government of Pakistan enacted the Pakistan Environmental Protection Act (PEPA) in 1997--which is the most recent and updated legislation on environment. It provides a framework for establishing federal and provincial Environmental Protection Agencies (EPAs), and suggestions for protection and conservation of species, habitat and biodiversity, and conservation of renewable resources. The MoELGRD has recently approved the NEAP for improving the environmental conditions and natural resources protection. The organizational structure of the MoELGRD is being adjusted to improve its capacities to facilitate the implementation of both PEPA and NEAP. The Ministry will continue to take initiatives in collaboration with the Pakistan Environmental Protection Council (PEPC) and provincial EPAs to adjust the PEPA and NEAP to match up with the changing realities on the ground. Within the Ministry, there is also a NCS Unit that is responsible for promoting and monitoring progress of NCS implementation. As a follow-up to these initiatives, it is likely that decrees will continue to be prepared and issued in the near future to further improve the state of environment and regulate the natural resources utilisation and pricing. The MoELGRD under its new structure will have to strengthen necessary capacities to steer the process of policy and legislation formulation, fund management and implementation of the existing laws and NEQs in collaboration with the local administration and judiciary.

At the institutional front, the MoELGRD has to play three important functions as a regulatory agency, technical support agency and public health agency. As a regulatory agency, it is required to work with the corporate or industrial sector so as to provide information on clean technologies, sources of funding and assistance, and access to markets for environment friendly products. In the capacity of technical support agency, it is required to create conditions for sustaining the livelihood economies. This entails community organization and mobilization efforts in order to empower the local communities to protect their natural resource base. As a public health agency, it should undertake and promote research on environment-health nexus, and building a strong constituency around the protection of human health. The staff of the Ministry and its subsidiary organizations would form the core staff who will undertake functions relevant to these roles. The Ministry and its subsidiary organizations possess certain capacities in these aspects--but these capacities appear to be well short of those required to deliver a comprehensive national programme such as elaborated in the NEAP and NCS. These agencies though may be able to recruit new staff or draw upon staff from other relevant ministries / institutions in accordance with the existing laws and regulations, there is definitely a need to strengthen institutional capacities in terms of their roles and functions, as well as in planning, enforcement and monitoring of environment related initiatives.

3.1.3. Human Resources and Technological Capacities

Historically, other than the upstream level policy and legislative related tasks, most of the environmental related programmes and projects in Pakistan have been implemented directly by the international NGOs by forming partnerships with the private sector and CBOs. This reliance on international NGOs was partly due to lack of trained human resources in the national institutions responsible for these tasks. The technological capacities in terms of availability of modern equipment to support the technical functions were also limited. In recent years, however, there had been more awareness and recognition to develop and strengthen such capacities. To ensure long-term sustainability of the environment-related projects, the programme proposed herein gives due recognition to this need. Building and strengthening such capacities require comprehensive analysis of the current situation in terms of national expertise and equipment available vis-à-vis what is needed and for what purpose, especially with respect to implementation of NEAP and NCS.

3.1.4. Financial Capacity

Different types of capacities required to attain and sustain the impact of the environmental management agenda proposed in the NEAP and NCS have been outlined in the preceding paragraphs. However, these capacities will not prove productive in achieving the desired objectives unless adequate funds are made available to execute the national programme. Total funding requirements for implementing various components of the environmental agenda as outlined in the NCS were estimated to be around Rs. 150 billion. Out of this, an amount of about Rs. 21 billion was allocated during the 8^th Five-Year Plan. Since the Ninth Five-Year Plan has not been released yet, it is not clear how much of the financial resources will be allocated to target the NCS agenda. Similarly, financial requirements for NEAP are not explicitly available but presumably these could be considered as part of the overall NCS estimates.

Given the very special circumstances of Pakistan stemming from very tight economic and financial conditions, availability of required amount of funds is the key to attain and sustain the impact of the proposed programme. The Government has indicated that it will allocate substantial amount of required funds from its own development and non-development budgetary sources. The balance will have to be mobilized from non-governmental (or external) sources. Towards this aim, the Government’s resource mobilization efforts will focus on building partnerships with the private sector and international donor agencies. Nevertheless, these efforts will have to go much beyond the financial size of this Programme (estimated to be $60.01 million). In other words, financial resources will have to be mobilized not only to finance the present Programme but also for other activities which are not included here but which form building blocks of the national environmental programme, and especially where it interfaces with the poverty reduction strategy.

The programme will build the following capacities to contribute towards the implementation of the National Environmental Action Plan (NEAP):

• Capacity to integrate environmental concerns into economic development planning and policy-making processes;
• Capacity to make informed, knowledge-based decisions, after necessary consultation with major stakeholder groups, including the poor;
• Capacity to improve inter- and intra-institutional cooperation primarily within government administration and at different levels (federal, provincial, district and local levels);
• Capacity to promote partnerships between public and private sector (communities, CBOs, NGOs, business companies);
• Capacity to enhance systemic approaches emphasising participation and incentives in addition to legal enforcement;
• Capacity to promote awareness in society about environmental concerns, and about people-centered solutions taking poor people’s livelihoods into account;

Capacities will be strengthened in the following areas:

• The capacities of the MoELGRD and EPAs, and other institutions concerned, in policy formulation and enforcement.
• The institutional capabilities of MoELGRD, as well as of other institutions concerned, in order to enable them meet their mandates and functions.
• A comprehensive programme to meet the human resources and technological capacity building needs of various institutions involved in poverty-environment nexus activities; for the purpose of the programme itself, a targeted training programme will be developed consisting of a wide range of training modules to strengthen the technical and management capabilities of the staff and participants associated with programme implementation.
• Capacity with government institutions to mobilize resources from a multitude of sources and mechanisms, public and private, domestic and foreign, loans and grants, fines, fees, taxes, stakeholder funds, etc.

Among the many topics to be considered for the training programme are the following:

• basic data collection, storage, analysis and dissemination as required by various sectors of the economy;
• formulation, implementation and results-based monitoring & evaluation of national and regional resource conservation and environment management policies and plans, including area-based management plans;
• methods for stakeholders’ participation in decision making geared towards efficient utilization of natural resources and the protection of the environment;
• ecosystems management; and
• continuous monitoring of the state of the environment in Pakistan.

This section provides an overview of the Programme strategy. The section starts with an overview of the GoP plans and policies that form the building blocks of the strategy. This is followed by description of UN policy framework at the global level. The global framework combined with the GoP development agenda led to the identification of specific capacities that are to be targeted for support under this Programme.

At the national level, the Federal Government is responsible for developing overall programmes and policies whereas the Provincial Governments are responsible for their implementation.

The Planning & Development Division at the federal level and Planning & Development Departments at the provincial levels are responsible for the preparation of development plans and allocation of resources. At the federal level, the Ministry of Environment, Local Government and Rural Development is responsible for the development of policies and programmes under the environment theme. The Pakistan Environmental Protection Agency (PEPA) and provincial EPAs are the main regulatory bodies for environmental monitoring. Overall planning including planning for poverty reduction is the responsibility of the Planning Commission at the federal level. The concerned line departments, such as agriculture, water, health, education, municipalities, etc. are responsible for the implementation. The present Poverty Reduction Strategy views poverty in a more holistic manner, and several line departments are involved in its implementation.

Pakistan’s political history is checkered with many attempts at delivering a better life for people; however, these initiatives have on the contrary resulted in causing the people further dismay. The non-use, misuse and abuse of political and administrative systems have led to a profound institutional crisis that has slowed down national development and threatened the future. To address the institutional crisis, the present Government has elaborated a seven point agenda, which is as follows:

.

1. Rebuild national confidence and morale.
2. Strengthen the federation, remove inter-provincial disharmony.
3. Revive economy and restore investor confidence.
4. Ensure law and order and dispense speedy justice.
5. De-politicize state institutions.
6. Devolution of power to grassroots level.
7. Ensure swift and across the board accountability.

The GoP has announced a strategy for the reconstruction of local government that not only addresses the agenda point on "Devolution of Power and Responsibility" to the grassroots level but also the rest of the six points as the reconstruction process applies a bottom-up approach. It includes the following key elements:

• Devolution of power for the genuine empowerment of citizens.
• Decentralization of administrative authority.
• Decentralization of professional functions.
• Diffusion of power for checks and balances to preclude autocracy.
• Distribution of resources to the provincial and local level.

The GoP has also established a National Reconstruction Bureau, which is preparing policies and plans for economic revival, strengthening of public institutions and preparing action plans for implementing the devolution plan. The present Programme would support GoP’s initiative in devolution of power through its efforts in sharing best practices, lessons learned, sensitization of policy community in sustainable development and actually demonstrating sustainable development practices through community actions in the pilot areas.

Addressing the poverty-environment nexus holistically stands very high on GoP’s national development agenda. To this effect, Government priorities and strategies can be found in the following major documents. Alternatively stated, the actions and measures outlined in these documents forms the main elements of the national programme to address the issues related to poverty--environment nexus.

• Poverty Reduction Strategy (PRS)
• National Environmental Action Plan (NEAP)

More recently, the Government has taken concrete steps to implement the Devolution of Power Plan and Information Technology Policy. Both these initiatives provide necessary impetus to translate the actions and measures proposed in the above-referred documents into reality--thus paving the way to achieve the goal of sustainable environmental management. Main features of the national environmental programme as described in these documents are summarized below.

The GoP is in the process of finalizing the Interim Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (IPRSP), in collaboration with all the stakeholders, including the Brettonwoods Institutions, multi /bi-lateral donors and UN Agencies. In the draft paper, poverty has been defined as a multi-dimensional concept, which encompasses economic, political, and social needs that are sine qua non for a meaningful and complete existence. It has been realized that the poor are not simply deprived of income and resources, but they lack basic capabilities like education, health and clean drinking water. Low capabilities combined with social exclusion make it difficult for the poor to access the markets. Moreover, limited access to education, health and nutrition limits their ability to secure gainful employment. However, even if they succeed, these deprivations retard their ability to be productive participants in the economic process thus denying them the opportunity of bringing about an improvement in their lives. Besides income poverty, lack of resources makes them vulnerable to exogenous shocks. This is further exacerbated by institutions of governance that tend to exclude the most vulnerable from the entire decision making process.

The IPRSP aims at forging broad-based alliances with civil society in the quest to eliminate poverty and ensure development. The complex and multi-dimensional nature of poverty warrants that strategies for poverty reduction should encompass plans for rapid pro-poor economic growth, sound macroeconomic policies, structural reforms and social improvement. Therefore, the focus of strategy is on:

• Ensuring broad based economic growth that generates efficient income generating opportunities for the poor and a pattern of growth that is relatively labor intensive.
• Achieving the highest possible growth path that is consistent with the available financial and human capital.
• Ensuring improved access to education, vocational skills training, primary healthcare, nutrition and other social services that help the poor become productive employees and make them capable of starting their own business ventures on a small scale.
• Provision of social safety nets for the most vulnerable groups who cannot work, e.g., the sick, the old and those who live in resource-poor and drought prone regions.
• Directing public policy debate on the needs of the poor.
• Bringing about an effective transformation of society, by forging partnerships and alliances with civil society and the private sector.
• Empowering the people, especially the most deprived, by increasing access to factors of production, particularly land and credit.
• Creation of employment opportunities for all.

The key elements of the PRS include: (a) introducing a series of macroeconomic and sectoral reforms; (b) promoting agricultural policies geared towards robust and sustainable growth through efficient import-substitution, export orientation, enhanced productivity and poverty reduction; (c) developing an open, market driven, innovative and dynamic industrial sector; and (d) and using information technology as an impetus to generate economic growth in the country. In addition, the PRSP views environment and natural resource management as the main factors which could significantly contribute in poverty alleviation, through community mobilization and organization for improved governance with a focus on minimizing environmental degradation and pollution, eliminating the root causes of environmental degradation (population pressures and poverty) and integration of environment and development to achieve sustainable development.

The programme proposed in this PD will significantly contribute to the achievement of the objectives of PRSP by proposing and being instrumental in making policy reforms, promoting inter-departmental coordination for sustainable development, and regeneration of economic activities.

The first effort to introduce specific legislation for environmental protection in Pakistan was made in 1977. Since then, many institutional, policy and regulatory developments have taken place at the federal and provincial levels. These include, among others, the creation of the Ministry of Environment and environmental protection agencies, promulgation of the Pakistan Environmental Protection Act in 1977 and the Pakistan Environmental Protection Ordinance in 1983. In 1992, the Pakistan National Conservation Strategy (NCS) was developed, and in 1999 the NCS was subject to mid-term review. The NEAP was approved by the Pakistan Environment Protection Council chaired by the Chief Executive in February 2001.

Based on the lessons learnt from projects that have attempted to address the issues of poverty-environment nexus, the NEAP strategy calls for shifting the focus, capacities and resources in a limited number of core areas where a high level of impact can be achieved in the near term. It recommends a programme approach as opposed to project approach which has evident merits, such as a higher level of flexibility in addressing core issues, maintaining priorities, directing the actions towards pre-defined targets, and responding to cross-cutting issues, e.g., gender, poverty reduction, capacity building, etc. The NEAP is based on poverty-environment nexus and it is planned to take the following measures to achieve its objectives:

• The focus will be shifted from completion of activities and delivery of services to alleviating poverty, through environmental projects.
• Under the umbrella of 1997 Environmental Protection Act, policy development and enforcement efforts will be directed towards reducing health risks and vulnerability in the poorer segments of the population.
• Programmes for addressing deforestation, desertification, and rangeland degradation will be integrated with the existing social mobilization and organization initiatives at the grassroots level.
• Support will be provided to the existing poverty alleviation programmes to make them environmentally sound and to prevent unforeseen long-term impacts on the poor.
• Reliance on technical and human resources available within the country will be maximized.
• The execution will be through existing provincial government departments and associated agencies, local governments, and rural support programmes and NGOs operating at the grassroot level.
• Enforcement will be supported by suitable regulatory and institutional frameworks in consultation with stakeholders and impacted groups.
• Well-defined outputs, measurable indicators and supporting monitoring and information systems will be established to evaluate the achievements.
• The institutional responsibilities for carrying out monitoring and evaluation will be defined, and procedures for public disclosure of information on expenditures, inputs and outputs will be developed to maintain transparency and accountability.

• The clean air programme that will primarily focus on controlling of (i) vehicular pollution; (ii) emissions from industries; and (iii) indoor air pollution in rural areas.
• The clean water programme that will target protecting water quality from: (ii) domestic and municipal effluents; (ii) industrial effluents; and (iii) pesticides and fertilizers.
• The solid waste management programme that will aim at mobilizing communities for adopting the 3R (Reduce, Reuse, Recycle) principle of waste management through setting of composting sites, municipal incinerators, levy of taxes and charges for municipal services, empowerment of local governments and enforcement of NEQS for the disposal of industrial wastes.
• The ecosystems management programme that will initially focus on a small number of representative ecosystems where management initiatives can be tested. These will include ecosystems located in forests, rangelands, deserts, wetlands, and coastal areas. Priority will be given to protected areas where the government has a higher level of jurisdiction, and areas where pressures on land use are representative of conditions commonly prevailing in the country.

• The other areas of concern included in the NEAP are: (ii) management of fresh water resources; (ii) marine pollution; (iii) toxic and hazardous substances; (iv) energy conservation and management; and (v) compliance with international treaties and protocols.

The major beneficiaries of NEAP will be the poor in rural and urban areas who are suffering from air and water pollution and degradation of natural resources, especially the women and children. The private sector will also benefit from NEAP activities because of exposure to economical and eco-friendly production processes which will result in creation of job opportunities. The second line of beneficiaries will be the institutions at various levels and NGOs whose capacities will be strengthened as a result of NEAP activities. Last but not the least, the beneficiaries of NEAP will be several species of animals and plants, which are under severe threat due to degradation of their ecosystems.

While the institutional/implementation mechanisms for the individual programmes will inevitably vary, a common institutional framework has been proposed by NEAP for efficient utilization of available resources. The framework is based on ensuring high-level political and administrative commitment to the programmes, allocation of sufficient resources, providing professional leadership, and instituting a system of monitoring at all levels of implementation (Figure 2). It is planned to encourage private sector, NG0s and citizen groups in the execution of projects to the extent possible.

The NEAP implementation strategy calls for raising mass awareness at different levels. It will be linked with the specific initiatives in the key departments and institutions at the federal level including the EPA, Office of the Inspector General of Forests Parks and Wildlife, and the Office of the Director General Environment. Expertise for mass awareness will be made available in the Programme Support Units attached to these departments.

The proposed programme goes much beyond the technical scope of NEAP. It will provide support in the implementation of main sub-programmes outlined above, strengthen the implementation and monitoring arrangements envisaged in the NEAP, and will further cover areas such as environmental disaster management in dry-land (drought prone) areas, environmental governance, energy generation, and strengthening capacities of CBOs in environmental management and natural resources conservation.

As mentioned earlier, the Government has recently taken concrete steps to implement the Devolution of Power Plan and Information Technology Policy. These initiatives provide necessary impetus to translate the environmental management agenda described above. Main features of these initiatives are summarized below.

Devolution of Power Plan: In the present system, the local governments have not enough authority over the development activities in their areas, therefore, their role in the national development is limited. However, the present government has announced a strategy for the reconstruction of local governments. Under the new strategy, Village Councils, Union Councils and District Councils will be established through a democratic process, which will also allow equal representation of women in each council. The district administration will be headed by the Chief Mayor (Nazim) and coordinated by a District Coordination Officer (DCO). The Chief Mayor will create a development vision for the district with the support of government, the private sector, civil society organizations and the local level institutions, such as Village-, Union- and Tehsil-councils. A District Officer will head each District Department. The administration will consist of 13 departments, including one on Environment, headed by District Officers and Deputy District Officers in-charge of specific functions within them. Assistant District Officers will be located in Tehsil towns, wherever possible. The district administration will initially be set up with the existing line departments. However, it will gradually move towards the corporate governance driven by an entrepreneurial approach.

The NEAP-SP will provide opportunities to the officials of line departments engaged in development work with local communities in the pilot areas to implement initiatives in sustainable development, particularly those, which are directly related to poverty-environment nexus. Training in Participatory Learning & Monitoring (PLM) as provided by the linked Poverty Alleviation and Sustainable Development Facility set up in the Planning Commission, would facilitate flow of information and refinement of plans at various levels. The members of various councils and Citizen Community Boards (at the village level) will surely need training/information in sustainable development, participatory planning, implementation and monitoring, and the programme proposed in this PD would play an instrumental role in this regard.

Information Technology Policy: The GoP has also launched its Information Technology (IT) policy whereby software parks are being established in the country, along with several other ventures, to absorb the youth in income generation activities. It is envisaged that with its linkage with the PAF, NEAP-SP would set up a PLM facility by using the state-of-the-art IT and by capitalizing cooperation of various on-going projects, such as Sustainable Development Network (SDN). The Information sharing through internet, e-conferencing, databases, e-workshops, e-study tours, etc., would bridge the gap between the professionals, policy community and public at large. These activities will directly contribute in achieving the UNDP Administrator’s and GoP’s plans for IT discussed under the Section on PRSP.

10 Year Perspective Plan 2001-2011: In addition to the above, the Government of Pakistan is currently working on the development of a 10 year perspective plan for 2001-2011 under the aegis of the Planning Commission. The NEAP Support Programme would greatly contribute to this process.

NGOs are registered in Pakistan under the Societies Registration Act of 1860, Trust Act of 1882, Charitable & Endowments Act of 1890, Cooperatives Society Act of 1925, Voluntary Social Welfare Agencies (Registration & Control) Ordinance of 1961, Companies Ordinance of 1984 (for non-profitable companies). The Government has given substantial freedom to NGOs for participating in development and policy work. Notable national NGOs include: National and Provincial Rural Support Programmes, Orangi Pilot Project, Aurat Foundation, Banh Beli, Sustainable Development Policy Institute, Leadership for Environment and Development (LEAD), etc. The key international NGOs operating in Pakistan are: IUCN, WWF, ActionAid, Agha Khan Rural Support Programme, etc. These NGOs are implementing some major Government- and donor-assisted programmes.

Pakistan applies community-based development approach in many of its projects, such as the UNDP-assisted Area Development Programme AJK, Area Development Programme Balochistan, Pakistan Community Development Project for Rehabilitation of Waterlogged and Saline Land, Mountain Areas Conservancy Project, GEF Small Grants Programme, Local Initiative for the Improvement of Urban Environment and National Rural Support Programme. In these projects, communities are organised into Community-Based Organizations (CBOs) and Women Organizations (WOs) conducting development work with the technical guidance of the projects. In some areas, the CBOs are at an advanced stage of development and many of them are clustering in the form of national NGOs. This approach is considered to be a highly successful intervention of UNDP.

UN Pakistan has prepared a number of policy documents including "Integrated Follow-up to Global Conferences" and "Statement on Gender in Pakistan". These policy documents provide an analysis of the development issues at the macro-level and a framework for future programme in the country and call for the attention of GoP for policy reforms and more investments on human resource development, poverty alleviation, removal of gender disparities, and sound environmental management. Led by the UN Resident Coordinator, the UN Country Team is composed of Heads of Agencies, and the Team is presently working on a Common Country Assessment to serve as bases for future UN assistance in the country. The interventions envisaged in this Programme are fully in line with the thinking in the Team.

UNDP’s cooperation with Pakistan is outlined in the Country Cooperation Framework (CCF), 1998-2003. The overarching objective of CCF is poverty alleviation with emphasis on good governance and participation, including community empowerment. The first CCF Annual Review held in March 1999 concluded that the CCF is congruent with and relevant to Pakistan’s development strategies. The review also found that the four aspects of equity, collaboration and coordination, national ownership and participation, and efficiency and effectiveness had been actively addressed in the CCF projects/programmes.

The NEAP-SP will follow a programme approach and provide a flexible mechanism for providing technical assistance to the emerging needs of the country, in the poverty-environment nexus. It will take into account new initiatives, such as participatory learning and monitoring with support of Capacity 21 Programme, implementation of sustainable development projects at the local level, and integration of on-going and pipeline projects. Thus the NEAP-SP is consistent with the objectives of the current CCF.

In consultation with the Government coordinating agency Economic Affairs Division (EAD), and as per corporate policy, UNDP Pakistan prepared its first Strategic Results Framework (SRF) in May 1999 and later revised it in December 1999 to align it with the corporate SRF. The SRF is a planning tool, whereby UNDP Pakistan has aligned its efforts with a global results framework for UNDP, particularly in the areas of good governance, poverty alleviation and sustainable livelihoods, environment and gender. The NEAP-SP would contribute to achieving several outputs, outcomes and sub-goals listed in the SRF for Pakistan.

From problem description through capacity assessment to concerted efforts for capacity building, including innovative approaches to policy change and participation, the NEAP-SP has been formulated in the spirit of Agenda 21. The UN Commission on Sustainable Development monitors Agenda 21, and it will be reviewed next in connection with the Rio+10 Summit in Johannesburg 2002. The intentions and initial results of the present Programme will be presented at the Rio+10 Summit as part of Pakistan’s National Report to the Summit.

The NEAP-SP will help translate the recently adopted NEAP into initial action, while enhancing the poverty-environment nexus aspects in operational terms. The development objective of the NEAP-SP is environmental sustainability and poverty reduction in the context of economic growth. It is based on the concept that economic growth can be pursued without costs in the form of environmental losses or increased poverty, and rather with gains in the form of improved environment and reduced poverty.

The NEAP-SP will allow for a series of studies and actions formulated to achieve specific programme objectives supplementary to the ongoing projects under GoP/UNDP/GEF execution by the Ministry of Environment. Projects will be identified along the line, and additional resources will be mobilized. A few of these additional projects have already been formulated, and will be approved at the onset of the NEAP-SP, based on the existing GEF-OFP mechanism and project design which is in an advanced stage of development for subsequent approval by the Global Environment Facility. The intention is to coordinate better, learn more, harmonize and strive for synergy.

The NEAP-SP proposes a wide range of technical, institutional, regulatory, social and economic interventions in terms of different interventions grouped under the following six major sub-programmes: (a) policy coordination and environmental governance (b) pollution control; (c) ecosystems management and natural resources conservation; (d) energy conservation and renewables; (e) dryland management and water conservation; and, (f) support for grassroots initiatives; These sub-programmes, in addition to pursuing their technical objectives, will strengthen the institutional and technical capacities of relevant GoP institutions for participating in the international conventions/fora and contribute to the implementation of the conventions/treaties on natural resources protection and environmental management.

The MoELGRD and other environment related agencies (such as EPAs) will have to assume lead responsibility in co-operation with all relevant partners at national, provincial, district and local levels. Similarly, management of different ecosystems (such as: uplands, drylands, irrigated and marine coastal) constitute important elements of the poverty-environment nexus but activities related to these aspects are focused across many departments/institutions.

Participation of women in the Programme, at all levels including project level activities, will be promoted.

Building on the NEAP and the PRS, as well as associated initiatives (e.g. the National Action Programmes on Biodiversity, Climate Change and Desertification Combat), the NEAP-SP will introduce change in terms of bringing the local realities closer to the policy making institutions of the country. Thus, new mechanisms will be piloted for horizontal and vertical dialogues, necessary to make correct diagnoses and to promote solutions that are feasible, acceptable and affordable to the local populations concerned. For this innovation to happen, the Poverty Alleviation and Sustainable Development Facility (see Section 6.2, SP-1) will be the key. This Facility will provide the mechanism for introducing innovation in all activities of the Programme, and will constitute the "launching ramp" from which local level diagnoses or best practices identified under NEAP-SP can be launched into the macro-policy sphere of the country’s economic development planning process. Therefore, the PAF will be implemented by a most centrally placed institution, namely the Centre for Research on Poverty Reduction and Income Distribution (CRPRID) coming under the Planning Commission. The Economic Affairs Division of the Ministry of Finance, in its capacity as government coordinating agency for development cooperation, will also be closely associated with the activities of the PAF. The PAF would be linked to NEAP-SP through the Steering Committee mechanism, by informing the PSC about the PAF activities. The PAF would be managed independently by the Planning Commission, with control over work plans and budgets remaining with the Planning Commission.

Through the NEAP-SP, environmental action in Pakistan will no longer be fragmented as hitherto, but clustered under common objectives and implemented under common leadership and with harmonized approaches, keeping all relevant institutions involved and informed. Hence PAF will help in building capacities and strengthening the existing structures with its activities and would be linked with the overall programme of NEAP-SP in this regard.

From the economic sustainability point of view, the major source of concern is to contribute for capturing an amount equivalent to 3-4% of the GDP that is lost annually due to environmental degradation. As a result of continuous depletion of the natural resources, ecosystems had become increasingly vulnerable to degradation--thus not being able to sustain the human and livestock population dependent upon them. Implementation of the proposals advocated in this document is essential to reverse these trends. Subsequently, continuation of different elements of the programme is also imperative to sustain the programme impact in years to come. After the Programme’s duration, the district administrations must continue to receive, or to collect through taxes, the same budgetary resources (in real terms) as would be made available to them during the programme life.

Industrial and vehicular pollution, water quality deterioration, ecosystem degradation, and depletion of natural resources are the major environmental hazards that the country is facing within the context of poverty-environment nexus. The environmental impact of the programme proposed herein is expected to be positive since it aims to combat pollution, improve environmental health conditions and reverse the natural resources exploitation trends. Presently, the EPA is charged with advising the Government to maintain the quality of the environment, including the establishment and enforcement of NEQS. The Programme will contribute towards creating conducive conditions through improved institutional and public awareness means in which strict enforcement of laws and standards is possible.

The capacity building programme proposed herein is designed to turn various institutions involved in the implementation of present programme fully operational both in terms of technical and managerial capabilities. On the technical side, a significant portion of the programme resources would be devoted to research and development activities such as planning and execution of various studies, implementation of pilot projects and action plans, and establishment of environmental accounting and monitoring system etc. Also, human resources development is envisaged through an extensive training plan. As a result, at the completion of the programme, these institutions should be able to meet their mandates with respect to environment and natural resources management--thus ensuring that the programme is technologically sustainable.

Institutional sustainability to a large extent is linked to the fact that as to what extent various implementing agencies will be able to perform their functions and mandates. Performance of their managerial and technical staff, as well as the financial resources made available to these institutions to carry out their functions, are also crucial to their sustainability. High performance of managerial and technical staff is expected since they will be chosen based on merit. In view of the existing civil service structure, designing effective performance incentives is very difficult. Sustaining the costs of such incentives in the long-term may be even more challenging. However, provision of financial incentives in terms of field allowances to the technical staff while on field duty is an existing practice, which can be continued--but there is a need to rationalize this allowance more in line with the actual cost of living. In addition, some critical management interventions are required very early in the programme life to secure basis for institutional sustainability. These interventions include: (i) restructuring of Ministry’s organizational structure to bring it in line with its strategic goal; (ii) establishment of different PUs and PSUs and making them functional; (iii) training of the staff of implementing institutions, (iv) coordinating inter-sectoral activities within the framework of national environment policy; and (v) continuous orchestration of above interventions so that they reinforce each other, even though political and decision making environment may change. With these conditions in place, institutional sustainability is guaranteed to a large extent.

The crisis stemming from poverty-environment nexus have significantly disrupted the socio-cultural fabric of the large part of the population affected by environmental degradation. The proposed programme will provide a better understanding of the local situation in a number of areas, improving the conditions for decentralization and public participation. The programme will prescribe measures that will contribute towards alleviating poverty through improved environment and natural resources management. Better planning tools and decision making criteria will result in efficient allocation of natural resources among alternative uses, thus leading to maximization of social and economic benefits. The programme will especially consider the situation of women, providing possibilities for them to play an effective role in conserving natural resources and improving environmental health conditions. The women will be trained under the public awareness component of the programme to make efficient resource allocation and utilization decisions. The proposed programme provides sufficient opportunities for the female technical staff of the implementing agencies to enhance their technical skills using the training opportunities provided therein. The improved environmental health conditions realized as a result of this programme will uplift the health situation of women and children relatively more since they suffer most due to poor environmental conditions.

The development objective supported by the NEAP-SP is environmental sustainability and poverty reduction in the context of economic growth. For this purpose, the NEAP-SP supports the implementation of the NEAP, and the environmental aspects of the PRS, aiming towards an economic growth without costs in the form of environmental losses or increased poverty, and rather with gains in the form of improved environment and reduced poverty.

The NEAP-SP proposes a wide range of technical, institutional, regulatory, social and economic interventions in terms of different interventions grouped under the following six major sub-programmes: (a) policy coordination and environmental governance; (b) pollution control; (c) ecosystems management and natural resources conservation; (d) energy conservation and renewables; (e) dryland management and water conservation; and, (f) support for grassroots initiatives. These sub-programmes, in addition to pursuing their technical objectives, will strengthen the institutional and technical capacities of relevant GoP institutions for participating in the international conventions/fora and contribute to the implementation of the conventions/treaties on natural resources protection and environmental management. Moreover, the proposed programme will promote participation of women at all levels and particularly at the project level.

The six sub-programmes have been designed to respond to the needs and address issues through one or more projects for each component. The sub-programmes and their respective components are shown in Figure 3. This section outlines the Programme-specific objectives and the technical justification for selecting each component, followed by a sub-section on the management of the Programme.

Following is a list of the programme objectives along with the action plan to achieve these objectives. The sub programmes along with their components are outlined with the respective objectives.

6.2.1. Programme Objective 1: Strengthening national institutions for environmental policy formulation, coordination and governance so as to address issues related to poverty-environment nexus in a coordinated and integrated manner. The sub-objectives include:

1. To coordinate the environmental policy formulation and implementation process at the federal, provincial and local levels.
2. To establish a "Poverty Alleviation and Sustainable Development Facility" to influence the policy making and planning process to address the issues of sustainable development.
3. To promote the goal of SHD by facilitating capacity building for a higher quality of decision making.
4. To expand the environmental knowledge base as a mean of securing basis for environmental and natural resource management.

This sub-programme is really the hub of NEAP-SP. It will focus on bringing policy change to conserve environment and combat poverty as well as promoting inter-ministerial coordination to influence the national planning process. Environmental education, accounting, monitoring and regular publication of the state of environment report will be the other features of this sub-programme to bring an attitudinal change.

The MoELGRD is expected to assume greater responsibilities with respect to environmental policy formulation. Moreover, there is a strong need to coordinate these functions at the federal, provincial and local levels. The existing capacities within the Ministry are limited to cope with these responsibilities. This component will provide assistance in establishing an environmental policy analysis unit in the MoELGRD for policy research. This unit would also provide support to the Ministry in fulfilling its commitments to international conventions that it is signatory to. This would include strategy development and enforcement for the GEF programme in Pakistan.

This component will facilitate the highest level decision making by providing an objective analysis of the country’s environmental situation and its impacts on different sectors of the economy. Under this component, an environmental accounting and monitoring system (EAMS) will be established which will consist of: (i) information system; (ii) decision support system; and (iii) coordination and reporting system.

Environmental awareness in recent years has grown considerably in certain segments of the society. However, large population (especially women and children) still remains uneducated about the sources of pollution and the environmental health risks associated with different types of pollution. Thus, there is a need to expand the environmental knowledge base as means to secure basis for sustainable environmental and natural resources management. This component will assist in launching large-scale public awareness campaigns, as well as in introducing environmental educational material in schools, colleges and universities.

The main purpose of this facility which will be closely linked to the NEAP-SP through the Programme Steering Committee, is to influence the policy making and planning process to address the issues of sustainable development in the context of poverty alleviation and environmental enhancement. This involves setting up of a "Participatory Learning and Monitoring Facility" (PLMF) to provide training in participatory approaches in planning, implementation and monitoring for supporting the "Devolution Plan" of GoP. The interventions envisaged under this Facility would directly support the implementation of Agenda 21 and recommendations of several other conventions, vis-à-vis Poverty Reduction Strategy, Local Government Plan and Information Technology Policy of the GoP.

Support will also be provided to conduct policy research, advocacy and monitoring of poverty through the Center for Research in Poverty Reduction and Income Distribution hosted by the Planning Commission of Pakistan. A summary note on the PAF initiative is attached as Annex III.

6.2.2. Programme Objective 2: Improving environmental health conditions by minimizing industrial, vehicular, indoor and urban pollution and by protecting drinking water quality. The Sub-objectives include:

1. To enhance capacity of the industry and EPAs to minimize industrial pollution.
2. To control vehicular pollution to minimize greenhouse gases emissions and improve environmental health.
3. To strengthen technical capacities of municipal administration for improving health, sanitation, education, shelter, employment and income generation of the poor.
4. To protect drinking water quality in urban and rural areas.
5. To improve health and environmental conditions at the household level.

This sub-programme comprises of 6 components, namely, industrial, vehicular and indoor pollution, urban management, water quality protection and hazardous waste management. These components are inter-linked and also are a priority action area under the NEAP. The importance of each component is given as follows:

Industrial pollution is a major problem in Pakistan, and little effort has been made until comparatively recently, either to use clean production technologies, or to adopt end-of-pipe methods of pollution control. The minimal response of industry to pollution control is mainly due to the poor performance of the sector, lack of information about new technologies and high investments required for changing the processes coupled with weak regulatory mechanism.

Pollution problems affect both large enterprises in such industries as chemicals, petroleum refining, sugar, paper and pulp and iron and steel, as well as the many clusters of small- and medium-sized enterprises in industries such as leather, textiles, marble polishing and food processing. UNIDO is assisting GoP in the formulation of an integrated programme to support capacity building for sustainable industrial development. The assistance will be in the following 5 sectors, namely, (a) cleaner production and environmental management, (b) institutional capacity-building for small- and medium-sized enterprises, (c) metrology, standardization, testing and quality, (d) regional development, and (e) industrial investment promotion and technology transfer.

The NEAP-SP will cater to the area of promoting cleaner production in highly polluting industries, through waste minimization, reuse and recycling and end-of-pipe treatment to minimize pollution, and also to support the EPAs in enforcing the NEQS, conducting EIAs and collection of pollution charges. Likewise, NEAP-SP will also provide technical support for the implementation of agreements under the Montreal Protocol for the phase out of ozone depleting substances, through continued funding for the ozone cell in MoELGRD.

Pakistan imports almost 3.8 million tons of oil per annum at a cost of about US $ 581 million. These oil imports are further increasing proportionally to the ever-rising human and vehicular population. Another problem directly associated with the road transport sector is its contribution to air pollution. Owing to the high proportion of old and poorly tuned engines and the dependence on buses and light commercial vehicles in metropolitan areas, air pollution along busy roads is greater in magnitude than would be expected for the number of vehicles on the road.

Air pollution is caused by suspended particulate matter, sulfur dioxide, carbon monoxide, nitrous oxides and lead. Motor vehicles account for 90% of the total emissions of hydrocarbons, aldehydes and carbon monoxide in cities, and for 75% of all sulphur dioxide and nitrogen oxides. The suspended particulates in air cause lung irritation, sinus problems, bronchitis and asthma, whereas lead emitted by gasoline vehicles causes liver dis-function and impairment of mental health. A recent study conducted by the Agha Khan Medical University concluded that 80% of the sampled children in Karachi had less than normal IQ level. The main objective of the initiatives under this component is to help in minimization of pollution caused by automobile emissions.

During the last several decades, migration has occurred from rural to urban areas. The chief factors responsible for this migration are: slow progress in the agriculture sector, low crop yields, lack of alternate employment opportunities and environmental degradation due to waterlogging / salinity, deforestation and desertification. The large rural influx has, in turn, contributed to the overburdening of urban infrastructure and urban services. There has not only been a rapid decline in the quality and availability of basic urban resources and amenities, such as housing, potable water, transportation, electricity, gas, drainage and sewage but also mushrooming of katchi abadis (squatter settlements), often located on the most marginal land. Today, squatter settlements account for about 25 to 30% of Pakistan’s overall urban population. The municipal institutions do not have sufficient resources and technical capacity to accommodate the needs of increasing urban population. Assistance under this component will be targeted to strengthen the technical and managerial capacities of municipal administrations for improving health, sanitation, education, shelter, employment and income generation of the poor.

Major sources of indoor pollution are gaseous emissions from burning of fuel-wood and kerosene, dust, paints and other chemicals used in polishing. The main objective of this component is to improve health and environmental conditions at the household level by minimizing indoor pollution.

Effective control of the generation, storage, treatment, recycling and reuse, transport, recovery and disposal of hazardous wastes is of paramount importance for proper health, environmental protection and natural resource management, and sustainable development. This requires active cooperation and participation with the international community, and large enterprises, including transnational corporations and domestic industry. The component will support capacity building measures for prevention of the generation of hazardous wastes and the rehabilitation of contaminated sites. This would include aspects of hospital waste management.

6.2.3. Programme Objective 3: Sustaining livelihoods through efficient and integrated management of different ecosystems and improved natural resources management. The Sub-objectives include:

1. Integrated and efficient management of natural resources in upland ecosystems for poverty alleviation and biodiversity conservation.
2. To improve the marine and coastal environment by protecting and conserving ecosystems and species and sustainable livelihoods of local communities in coastal areas.
3. To increase farm income through sustainable management of land and water resources by involving the local communities.
4. To develop and implement a well-defined system of interventions and strategic plan for the conservation and protection of biological diversity of global significance in representative wetlands of Pakistan.
5. To protect Pakistan’s full range of biodiversity in representative areas and help maintain the natural ecosystem and associated cultural heritage.

This sub-programme comprise of 5 components, namely, upland ecosystems, marine and coastal ecosystem, irrigated ecosystem, wetlands and protected areas management covering all the major ecosystems in the country. The sub-programme as a whole will complement the proposed actions under the National Environment Action Plan (NEAP), particularly, for testing various management models and institutional mechanisms proposed under the Eco-systems management Programme of NEAP. Description of each component is given as follows:

The marine and coastal ecosystems are under a great deal of stress because of the exploitation of mangrove forests, discharge of all the municipal and industrial effluents (untreated) into the sea and spillage of oil, chemicals, etc., at the harbor, which also goes into the sea. All these factors are contributing towards the loss of important species, such as marine turtle, etc., and loss of revenues because of very low tourism activities. Thus, assistance under this component will be targeted to improve the marine and coastal environment by protecting and conserving the ecosystems and species through an integrated approach.

There is evidence that crop yields in the irrigated ecosystems are stagnant for the last several years. The main causes of reduced land productivity are: shortage of irrigation water, salinity and sodicity, waterlogging, flooding and loss of organic matter (96% of the sampled soils). These problems often occur simultaneously and produce synergistic impacts on agricultural productivity. Growing of crops on soils deficient in organic matter for years is also resulting in deficiency of vital micro nutrients, which lead to further reduced crop production. In fact, the poor performance of the agriculture sector is the principal cause of migration of farm workers to cities, which is resulting in degradation of the urban environment. The main objective of this component is to contribute towards alleviating poverty by increasing farm incomes through sustainable management of land and water resources.

The wetlands in Pakistan serve as flyways for various bird species, some of which are of global significance. The bird species are threatened because of uncontrolled hunting and deterioration of water quality because of the discharge of industrial and municipal effluents and agricultural run-off. However, under the Ramsar Convention, Pakistan has a commitment to protect bird species and their habitat. Therefore, this component aims to develop and implement a well-defined system of intervention and strategic plan for the conservation and protection of the diversity of global significance in representative wetlands of Pakistan. This includes identification and classification of wetland resources, review and strengthening of institutional capacity, training and enhancing human resources capabilities in research, planning, administration and management of wetlands and their resources.

Over the course of the past three decades, Pakistan's protected areas (PA) system has expanded to include 227 sites that are listed as protected areas on the national register. Although the overall number of sties and the percentage of the country considered protected (11.25%) are impressive, this figure includes sites established without a basis in legislation. If only sites established under Provincial and Territorial Wildlife Acts and Ordinances are considered, then their number drops to 200: 14 National Parks, 97 Wildlife Sanctuaries and 89 Game Reserves. If only the national parks and wildlife sanctuaries are considered as PAs, as these provide protection to biodiversity because they also protect habitat, then the overall number of protected areas is further reduced to 111- a drop of protected land from 11.25% to 6.5%. The objective of this component is to protect Pakistan's full range of biodiversity in representative areas and help maintain the natural ecosystem and associated cultural heritage by introducing systems approach which is systematic, logical, organized and goal-oriented, as opposed to an ad hoc and largely reactionary approach to the planning and designation of protected areas.

6.2.4. Programme Objective 4: Mitigating energy crisis/deficit by promoting practices leading to conservation of energy in all sectors of economy, viz., buildings, industrial, agriculture and transport sectors and adopting renewable energy technologies. The sub-objectives include:

1. To promote measures which result in energy conservation, both in domestic and industrial sector.
2. To promote renewable energy sources at a wider scale.

This sub-programme comprises of 2 components covering the exploration and exploitation of renewable sources of energy (wind, solar and hydel) as well as promoting energy conservation in all sectors of economy, vis-a-vis, buildings, industrial, agriculture and transport sectors by creating awareness to use energy efficient practices and appliances through demonstrative projects/ programmes. The sub-programme will contribute for developing and deploying renewables and also increasing energy efficiency, the two core areas of National Conservation Strategy (NCS).

Pakistan meets about 40% of its petroleum requirements through imports. Petroleum products account for approximately 43% of primary energy supply in the country. The use of coal and oil for power generation is increasing which is highly detrimental to the environment. As of 1996, the country had an estimated 21 trillion cubic feet (cft.) of recoverable natural gas reserves and the estimated production is 1,600 million cft. per day, which falls just short of estimated demand (1700-1800 million cft.). Besides domestic and commercial uses of gas, its other major uses are power generation (32% of total gas consumed) and fertilizer production (26% of total gas consumed). The GoP's development priorities in the energy sector include renewed emphasis on energy conservation and cleaner and cheaper energy sources. Accordingly, this component will develop and promote measures, which result in energy conservation in all sectors of economy including buildings, industrial, agriculture and transport sectors.

The potential for renewable energy has remained largely unutilized in the country. With the exception of mini- and micro-hydel power generation, this sector has been plagued by institutional and policy failures. Therefore, assistance under this component will be targeted to explore additional sources of energy supply, including promotion of renewable energy sources at a wider scale. This sector has a great potential to be tapped in collaboration with the private sector, especially in terms of investments for technological innovations, which have been proved successful in other countries.

6.2.5. Programme Objective 5: Sustaining livelihoods of poor communities in dryland areas (especially arid and semi-arid areas prone to drought and water scarcity) through better planning for disaster management and promoting community based initiatives for the restoration of environment and regeneration of natural ecosystems in these areas. The Sub-Objectives include:

1. Establishment of an institutional infrastructure and capacity building for early warning and disaster management.
2. To promote plans and policies which are conducive to groundwater conservation and recharge and help in sustaining livelihoods of poor communities by improved agricultural and livestock production and watershed management.

c) To promote agriculture and livestock production in drylands.

Drought has become a serious problem in the Balochistan and Sindh provinces for the last about 3 years. It is further expanding toward the north-eastern areas. This sub-programme will focus on the management of dryland to protect the communities from the hazards of drought, through early warning to combat the drought effects and protection from flash floods, and also by promoting practices which are sustainable in the low rainfall / less water availability environment.

Recently national and international attention has focussed on a growing disaster in Pakistan- drought, particularly in the Provinces of Balochistan and Sindh and southern Punjab. Official reports of the impact of drought indicate considerable livestock loss and even human fatalities. It is estimated that 2.2 million people and 7.2 million heads of livestock have affected. More than 120 persons and 30,000 livestock have perished. Further analysis revealed that the institutional infrastructure for early warning and disaster management, particularly for disasters such as drought, is weak in the country. This programme will focus on the establishment of disaster management institutional infrastructure, improving water harvesting and conservation, watershed management and livelihoods of the vulnerable groups in dryland.

One of the principal reasons for the drought had been no rain in recent years. As a result, the stock of groundwater in fresh groundwater zones has considerably depleted. A number of areas in drought prone areas are already in a state of severe groundwater mining. Thus, there is need to develop long-term strategy for sustainable management of groundwater with an objective to sustain the livelihoods of poor communities by improved agricultural and livestock production and watershed management.

6.2.6. Programme Objective 6: Promoting community and NGOs based initiatives developed in the form of innovative micro-level projects on environment management geared towards localized poverty alleviation. The sub-objectives include:

1. To provide support to community led initiatives for improved environmental management and natural resource conservation.
2. To provide support to NGOs/municipal institutions to improve service delivery and environmental health.
3. To provide support to NGOs to promote low cost renewable energy technologies.
4. To promote green enterprises for poverty alleviation and environmental enhancement.

This sub-programme will focus on strengthening and utilization of NGOs and CBOs to implement micro-projects, which are innovative in nature or are in those geographical areas, which cannot be covered by any other major project. The sub-programme will strengthen capacities at the local level by supporting community actions in line with the devolution plan, within the areas specified in NEAP. The projects will be in the following areas:

Assistance under this component will be provided to support community led initiatives for improved environmental management and more effective natural resource conservation. This objective will be realized by implementing a series of localized projects in social forestry, community watch of deforestation, environmental management and natural resources conservation, including trophy hunting and private wildlife sanctuaries.

This component aims to provide support to NGOs to implement projects, in collaboration with municipal institutions, which aim at improving the service delivery systems and consequently, the environmental health. The aim will be to introduce low-cost sanitation/ clean drinking water supply/solid waste disposal technologies.

This component will provide assistance in promoting low cost technologies for sustainable environment management and energy generation, and creating a conducive environment for community participation in the promotion of these technologies.

Assistance under this component will be targeted to improve environmental conditions by supporting home-based enterprises, which lead to environmental improvement by re-using or recycling household/industrial wastes. For this purpose, local communities will be linked to micro-credit and marketing enhancement programmes.

The Planning Division under the Member, Sustainable Development, through the Environment Section, will coordinate Planning Division’s inputs into the NEAP-SP, while focusing on the poverty aspects. The key tasks to be undertaken by the Unit would be as under:

1. Coordinating the efforts of the provincial P&DDs for the SP- 5: Dry land management and water conservation.
2. Coordination with provincial P&DDs for an efficient mechanism to be built up to expedite the provincial projects, specially in projects where government cost sharing is involved, and PC-1 documents would need to be approved.
3. Facilitating inter-ministerial coordination for achieving the over all goals of the NEAP Support Programme.
4. Maintain linkage with the SPD for SP-1 for policy planning and coordination.
5. Establishing a database of parameters on water-environment issues to serve as knowledge base for poverty-environment nexus.
6. Establish linkage of NEAP with proposed development plans of the Government of Pakistan.

The proposed interventions are described in the form of a logical framework. For the time being, presentation of the logical framework has been limited only to these elements since a lot of planning work has yet to be carried out during the first phase (year) of the programme. This planning phase will define the expected outputs and related activities in more detail with due discussions with the relevant stakeholders. This work will subsequently enable to develop more concrete output indicators, targets to be achieved and costs associated with each of the planned output. However, this refinement process will be carried out within the technical scope of various sub-programmes outlined in the logical framework presented in Annex IV.

The main intent of the programme implementation strategy is to create an enabling institutional environment and conducive technical and social conditions to secure basis for integrated environment and natural resources management at the local, national and regional levels. Thus the strategy takes into account the specificity of the issues to be addressed, the current institutional setting, and the socio-economic features and constraints facing the country. More specifically, the programme implementation strategy will:

• Provide necessary support towards the implementation of GoP’s environmental management and poverty alleviation agenda as outlined in the NEAP and Poverty Reduction Strategy.
• Capitalize on the opportunities created under National Plans of Action on Biodiversity and Desertification, Local Government Devolution Plan, National Plan of Action for the Advancement of Women, and Information Technology Policy.
• Contribute towards the realization of Pakistan’s commitments made at the international conferences and conventions, such as Agenda 21, Convention on Biodiversity, CITES, Convention on Combating Desertification, Convention on Climate Change, Montreal Protocol, Convention on the Law of the Sea and Beijing Platform for Action.

• Pursue the realization of programme objectives by implementing all sub-programmes/components in an integrated and coordinated manner--each one making contributions towards poverty alleviation in one way or the other.
• Assign high priority to the capacity building needs of the national and local institutions. In this context, a wide range of training modules will be developed and implemented.
• Support upstream policy dialogue through appropriate interventions.
• Seek and ensure active involvement and participation of private sector, local communities and NGOs during the implementation process.
• Focus on learning through participatory approaches by developing and implementing a wide range of pilot projects at the local level.
• Encourage developing of partnerships and networks with national and international forums.
• Complement the on-going programmes and projects of various donors, especially those related to environmental improvement, poverty reduction, natural resources management and improved governance.
• Implement Results-Based Management from the very beginning to secure the basis for long-term sustainability of programme impacts.
• Support resource mobilization efforts through both conventional and non-conventional mechanisms--not only to meet the costs of the programme proposed in this PD but also to finance the overall national environmental agenda.
• Rely on national expertise and inputs to deliver programme outputs.

The Government of Pakistan through the Ministry of Environment has developed and adopted the National Environmental Action Plan. The NEAP-SP has been formulated to provide support for the operationalisation and implementation of the NEAP. The MoE will be the national executing agency entrusted with coordination and management of the Programme, assuming ultimate responsibility for the achievement of NEAP-SP objectives. This role has been detailed in Section 8.8 of this document.

A Programme Steering Committee (PSC) chaired by the Secretary Environment will be established, as described in section 8.8, to provide policy guidance to the project and monitor progress and performance. The PSC will facilitate inter-agency coordination of the project at the national level and will ensure the proper progress of the Programme.

Concerned federal, provincial and district authorities will be integrated in the management structure, as required, for the implementation of local level Programme components and activities.

The Centre for Research in Poverty Reduction and Income Distribution (CRPRID) will be the implementing agency for the Poverty Alleviation and Sustainable Development Facility (see Section 6.2, SP-1). Since it is through this Facility that the Programme will be innovative, it is essential to have a most centrally placed entity forming a close link with the activities of NEAP-SP, and CRPRID based under the Planning Commission, is most well-positioned to take over this role. The role of CRPRID will be to implement the PAF in such a way so as to facilitate for all other implementing agencies to introduce innovation in their respective components. Though CRPRID will independently be implementing the PAF, it would maintain close coordination with the NEAP Support Programme through participation in Steering Committee Meetings. CRPRID, under the aegis of the Planning Commission (which is also a member of PSC) will furthermore, facilitate and monitor, the poverty aspects of all NEAP-SP components so that the Programme effectively addresses poverty-environment nexus concerns in sustainable development.

The present Programme has essentially been developed in close collaboration between the Government and UNDP. During this process, consultations were also held with a number of interested development cooperation partners. UNDP, in addition to providing its own resources, will assist in resource mobilisation. Some efforts in this direction are already underway (ref. Section 10). UNDP will assist in negotiating co-financing agreements, and manage or monitor resources as specified in such agreements. UNDP’s main role will be to assist MoE and the Planning Commission in the overall supervision and coordination of the Programme.

There are various on-going/pipeline projects that form a linkage with the NEAP Support Programme as there is an overlap of some of the outputs and activities planned under these projects and those planned under different Programme Components. The implementing agencies for some of the on-going projects are also the same as proposed for some of the related Programme Components. A brief description of the on-going/pipeline projects showing their linkage with the respective Programme Components of the NEAP Support Programme is provided in Annex V. The ongoing projects will continue their implementation as per their existing Project Documents, and will not form part of the NEAP-SP. The pipeline projects which would be signed after NEAP-SP approval, will be included as part of NEAP-SP.

The Programme will extend over five years and be implemented in three phases with some flexibility between phases: planning phase (one year), implementation phase (4.5 years) and results consolidation phase (half year).

The first phase of one year will focus on elaborating the proposed interventions, as well as putting in place the required institutional arrangements. Proposed interventions can be grouped in three categories. First, there are those which have already been defined in terms of project documents and detailed working papers. Second, there are some which have been sufficiently elaborated in the present document in the form of targets to be achieved, outputs to be produced and activities to be undertaken to realize the planned outputs. Third, there are some, which still need to be discussed with the potential stakeholders so as to translate them into concrete projects. During this phase, detailed concept papers (based on a simplified Format enclosed as Annex XI) will be prepared for each component, describing salient features of the projects to be implemented. The idea here is not to develop new projects—but only to add more details to the proposed interventions—staying within the technical scope of work outlined for each sub programme/component in the present document. However, if any donor/agency requires a separate document on a prescribed format, it will be developed but will not go through the LPAC process.

Elaborating the proposed interventions in terms of their technical scope and contents during the first phase will serve three main purposes. First, it will enhance stakeholders’ participation in the planning stage--thus promoting the process of national ownership. Second, it will pave the way for smooth implementation of proposed projects during the subsequent phases. Third, resource mobilization will become relatively easier as more concrete ideas and details about various programme components will be available to the potential donors. The detailed project concept papers will not be required to go through the formal government approval process. Approving this Programme will qualify these interventions to proceed with their respective implementation, subject to PSC approval. Main tasks to be accomplished during the first phase include:

• Constitution of PSC, PIC and SPICs to monitor and coordinate programme activities.
• Establishment of PMIU and making it fully functional (staffing, equipment, premises etc.).
• Establishment of PIUs in respective implementing agencies (staffing, equipment, premises etc.).
• Recruitment of PMIU and PIU staff to be hired under the programme.
• Preparation of detailed budgets and work plans for each sub-programme.
• Development of detailed scope of work (projects) to be covered under each sub-programme/ component in collaboration with the relevant stakeholders.
• Initiating the implementation of components of utmost national importance and those for which funding is available.
• Organization of donors and private sector meetings as part of the resource mobilization efforts.
• Detailed assessment of capacity building needs of various implementing agencies in terms of available human resources and equipment vis-à-vis what is required.
• Establishment of monitoring system (defined in terms of performance indicators and benchmarks and data recording/verifying mechanisms) to monitor the programme progress.

The work plan for the first year of the planning phase of the programme is given in Annex VI.

The second phase of four and half years will be fully devoted to the implementation of interventions proposed under the PD, and projects developed during the first phase. Implementation of field level activities for some of the sub-programmes/ components initiated during the first phase will continue at full scale during this phase as well.

The final phase of six months will evaluate and consolidate the results of different sub-programmes for their transformation into follow-up action programmes.

Total estimated cost of the programme is US$ 42.78 Million, but all the required resources are not immediately available. This means that the whole programme cannot be implemented in its entirety from the very beginning. Thus the Programme will be implemented gradually, as required resources become available. A resource mobilization strategy and work plan will be elaborated and followed as an integral part of the Programme. Some funding will be project-linked, some funding will be crosscutting for the Programme as a whole, for example to put the required institutional structure in place. For the purpose of resource mobilization, it will be important to prioritize components and activities, during the first phase.

Following the General Assembly Resolution 47/199 in 1992, the National Execution (NEX) modality has become the norm for projects and programmes assisted by the UN system, with due consideration given to the means and capacities existing in the country. The existing national capacities will be utilised to the maximum possible extent to deliver major part of the programme inputs in the form of: (a) recruitment of national consultants; (b) local procurement of equipment; (c) nationally executed subcontracts; (d) local training; and (e) field surveys and studies.

The executing agency for the implementation of this Programme will be the MoELGRD, under the NEX modality. In this capacity, the MoELGRD will be responsible for the overall management of the implementation of the Programme. However, disbursement of funds for various activities will be based on the annual rolling work plans approved by the Programme Steering Committee and delegated to the respective implementing agencies by the National Executing Agency. The implementing agencies will be accountable to the National Executing Agency, and the Programme Steering Committee, for the use of allocated resources and for achieving the objectives of the Programme. (It should be noted that the institutional arrangements proposed hereunder are somewhat similar to those described in Annex VII for the implementation of NEAP. The intention is to contribute further towards strengthening the institutional framework proposed for the implementation of NEAP.)

There are two types of co-operating agencies that will be involved in the programme implementation, namely national and international. The national co-operating agencies are those which will work hand in hand with the national implementing agency to implement field level technical activities and tasks. National co-operating agencies anticipated to be involved in programme implementation would be various and are expected to be a government institution, private sector entity, community based organizations, and local NGOs. International agencies in most cases will be the UN specialized agencies which may provide assistance to the government implementing agencies in those specific areas in which available national capacities are not sufficient to meet the programme objectives. The decision on the co-operating agencies for specific activities would be the part of rolling plan, which would include information on the proposed agencies as part of the projects summaries attached to the annual plans. Table 2 identifies the possible cooperating agencies for different sub-programmes and their components. More names can be added to the list as implementation progresses.

Consistent with the UN mandate, under the NEX modality, efforts will be made to utilize the national capacities to the maximum possible extent to deliver major part of programme inputs. However, in cases where national capacities are limited, it is recommended that relevant implementing agencies may call upon the UN specialized agencies, international NGOs and other external organizations to provide technical assistance and backstopping. Within the context of the present programme, agencies which can provide such support are suggested in Table 2. These agencies could especially assist the PMIU/PIUs with international training programmes and international consultancy services as required.

Implementation arrangements for this Programme include the establishment of the following units and committees:

1. Constitution of the Programme Steering Committee (PSC)
2. Establishment of the Programme Management and Implementation Unit (PMIU)
3. Constitution of the Programme Implementation Committee (PIC)
4. Establishment of the Programme Implementation Units (PIUs)
5. Constitution of Sub-Programme Implementation Committees (SPICs)

A schematic presentation of implementation arrangements of the Programme is given in Figures 4 and 5. See also Annex VIII for detailed TOR/functions.

Integrated environment and natural resources management can best achieve its objectives in a multi-sectoral development framework. This requires participation of leading institutional stakeholders in prioritizing the environmental agenda in line with the national development objectives and priorities. Moreover, the programme calls for active participation of many private and public institutions, it is not very unusual to face problems and constraints that go much beyond the administrative jurisdiction of programme/project administration. Therefore, it is essential to have an institutional mechanism in place to deal with such situations.

For this purpose, it is proposed that a PSC may be established to: (a) provide vision for long-term sustainable environmental management and poverty alleviation agenda; (b) improve the quality of decision making, sector efficiency and managerial performance in the planning and implementation of poverty / environment related programmes and projects; (c) advocate and ensure inter-ministerial coordination for long-term sustainable programme in all respects; (d) approval of rolling work plans on annual basis; and (d) mobilize further technical and financial assistance. This Committee will not be involved in the routine day-to-day programme management operations; instead its role will be to monitor programme progress and provide policy advice and guidance to the PMIU in achieving programme objectives.

This committee will be chaired by the Secretary, MoELGRD. The members include Secretaries of Ministries/Divisions of: (a) Economic Affairs; (b) Planning & Development; (c) Water & Power; (d) Food & Agriculture; and (e) Science & Technology, as well as heads of the EPAs and provincial P&Ds, a representative of Environment Donors Coordination Group (EDCG), and the UNDP Resident Representative. The Chair will have the discretion to expand membership of the committee, as needed, during the implementation of the programme. The PMIU will serve as Secretariat to the PSC to facilitate its operations and functions, and the NPD will be secretary to PSC. The committee will meet twice a year, or on need-basis.

Programme Management and Implementation Unit (PMIU):

Under the authority of the NPD, the PMIU will provide the technical, logistical and administrative support to the executing agency and all implementing agents in carrying out the planned tasks. In addition, it will be responsible for: (a) reporting on programme progress and impact; (b) identifying gaps and bottlenecks; (c) brokering donors support; (d) mobilizing and managing programme resources; (e) monitoring and evaluating programme performance and impact; overall budget management; and (f) reviewing and validating the continued relevance of the PD components and approach etc. The purpose is to ensure the effectiveness of the activities being undertaken; efficiency with which they are being implemented; the continued relevance of the proposed actions in an evolving environment to assess the impact and determine the sustainability of the outputs; and to propose corrective course of actions whenever necessary.

Coordination in implementation of different sub-programmes and their components will be realized through the establishment of a PIC. This committee will be chaired by the NPD. Its members will include National Programme Manager, Sub-Programme Directors and Sub-Programme Managers. This committee will meet on quarterly basis to discuss the programme management issues, work plans, budgets, implementation constraints, and potential solutions, etc. For all practical purposes, this committee will have the responsibility to ensure the implementation of programme activities and delivery of outputs in accordance with the approved work plan. This committee will also ensure as how to optimize the cross-cutting effects of different sub-programmes in harmony with the overall programme objectives.

In view of the integrated and very complex nature of the programme, it requires very high level of coordination, and within this context, needs to be linked to the upstream level decision making structure in the Government. Therefore, it is proposed that the Additional Secretary, MoELGRD be designated as the National Programme Director (NPD) to lead the programme. He/She will be facilitated in his/her functions by the National Programme Manager to be hired under the programme. The PMIU will ensure a continuous flow of information between the NPD, Sub-Programme Directors (SPDs), core technical staff, sub-programme managers, and external partners. The management of implementation of different sub-programmes, however, will largely be the responsibility of the Managers of the respective sub-programmes, under the authority of the respective SPD.

Specialised teams will be established under the PMIU to provide technical support to the relevant offices and agencies for each sub-programme. Each team will be headed by a Sub-Programme Manager to be hired under the programme. The PMIU and its technical teams will be staffed by qualified national professionals recruited on merit, and based on the required level of competencies. List of the staff to be hired under the programme is given in Annex IX. Staffing gaps in areas with limited national capacities will be bridged through international expertise. For this purpose, the PMIU in consultation with the national executing agency, may seek technical assistance from the specialized UN agencies.

The SPICs will be chaired by the respective Sub-Programme Director. The following government officials be designated as the respective Sub-Programme Directors (see Figure 5):

SP-1 Policy Coordination, Environmental Governance & Education --- DG , MoELGRD

SP-2 Pollution Control --- DG (Federal EPA), MoELGRD

SP-3 Ecosystems Management & Natural Resources Conservation --- IG (Forest), MoELGRD

SP-4 Energy Conservation and Renewables --- MD (ENERCON), MoELGRD

SP-5 Dryland Management and Water Conservation --- Designate P&DD, Sindh&Bal.

SP-6 Grassroots Initiatives --- DG , MoELGRD

Each sub-programme consists of a number of components, while each component encompasses various interventions defined in terms of different projects. This essentially means involvement of wide range of stakeholders in the implementation of field level activities. These stakeholders may belong to public institutions, private sector groups, local communities, and NGOs etc. Thus, there is a need to coordinate their activities and actions in order to facilitate mobilization of local knowledge (in terms of identification of problems and their potential solutions) and resources into the planning process.

It is therefore proposed that various partners (both public and private) responsible for implementing various components of each sub-programme may be organized in the form of a SPIC to: (a) improve the quality of decision making at the sub-programme level in the planning and implementation of environment related projects; (b) coordinate sub-programme level activities to avoid duplication of efforts and promote inter-departmental / inter-ministerial coordination on need-basis; (c) provide technical advice and guidance to the PIU and its teams; (d) promote sharing of knowledge, experience and data among the agencies and individuals participating in the SPIC; and (e) review technical outputs to be produced under the sub-programme. The SPICs will meet on quarterly basis. The respective PIU should serve as its secretariat to facilitate its operations and functions.

Programme Implementation Units (PIUs):

PIUs will be established for sub-programmes. The PIUs will be headed by Sub-Programme Managers hired for the purpose. The PIUs will be responsible for the procurement and delivery of programme inputs and their conversion into outputs. This entails the following activities: (a) recruitment of national experts and consultants; (b) local procurement of equipment; (c) management of nationally executed subcontracts; (d) local training; (e) development of detailed work plans and budgets; and (f) undertaking of any other activities identified in the Programme as being the responsibility of the implementing agents.

The implementing agencies will assign their own staff for implementation of programme activities. The Programme will pay the travel cost / operational expenditures of the attached staff but not their salary.

Note: More agencies can be added to the above list as programme implementation progresses.

There are a number of notable projects/programmes, which are either on-going or planned to be implemented, with which this PD will have to establish effective coordination mechanisms. Most important among these are the: (a) area based programmes in natural resource management; (b) poverty alleviation programme; (c) social action programme; and (d) national drainage programme. If viewed in a broader national development framework, the ultimate goal of these programmes/projects and the programme proposed in this document is the same - poverty alleviation. This alone provides sufficient justification and rationale to establish strong interface between these programmes/projects and the NEAP-SP.

The proposed programme will be implemented in three phases (Section 8.6). The first phase of one year, inter-alia, will focus on elaborating the technical interventions, putting the required institutional framework in place, recruitment of staff, and preparation of detailed budgets and work plans for each of the sub-programme. In addition to the resource mobilization efforts, work will be initiated for components, which are of utmost national importance. As mentioned in Section 8.5, the projects and programme components for which required funding is available will receive priority in terms of implementation. Accordingly, the work plan presented in Annex VI describes the activities to be undertaken during the first phase.

As repeatedly emphasized in this document, the proposed programme will be implemented utilizing the national expertise and resources to the maximum possible extent. However, complexity of the proposed programme stemming from its multi-sectoral context underscores the need for providing the most qualified technical advice and backstopping. Moreover, it is important to learn from the global experience with respect to different technical and institutional aspects as they relate to the interventions proposed under various sub-programmes. For this purpose, services of UN specialized agencies and other inter-governmental organizations and NGOs will be utilized. This assistance can to some extent be foreseen under the SPPD/STS modality of UNDP (Support for Policy and Programme Development & Support for Technical Services). Once this Programme is approved, UNDP will call upon the relevant specialized UN agencies to propose their technical services to relevant Programme components. UN specialized agencies and other organizations that could become part of this process are identified in Section 8.8 (Table 1).

At the initiation of the programme, performance indicators and plan for other monitoring tools, such as interviews, questionnaires and case studies will be reviewed/refined through a series of participatory, stakeholders’ analysis workshops. Information gathering approaches/methods will be designed and responsibilities for collection, analysis and management of monitoring information will be shared amongst stakeholders and programme staff. Overall benchmark statistics of Pakistan are available in the poverty Reduction Stretegy, the NEAP, the UNDP Human Development Report series and other documents of GoP, and UN (UN Resident Coordinator’s reports, reports by UNICEF and UNFPA). The baseline data and benchmark statistics will serve as inputs to future evaluations.

The ultimate responsibility for monitoring of the proposed programme lies with the Government as part of its fundamental responsibility to execute its own programme. The monitoring system will respond to the specificity of each sub-programme, its components and the outputs to be produced. Detailed performance indicators and benchmarks will be defined during phase 1 for monitoring the programme performance. The monitoring functions will be assured through the PMIU. In addition, the PIC and SPIC will meet on quarterly basis to discuss and review the status of programme implementation. At a higher level, the PSC will meet twice a year to review if the programme implementation is moving ahead smoothly accordingly to the plan of work. To the extent possible, MoELGRD, EAD, UNDP and other development partners will carry out joint field visits.

A Management Information System (MIS) will be implemented based on the reporting system which will ensure a smooth flow of information relating to the implementation of various activities to managers at different levels of the hierarchy. The MIS will also include a feedback mechanism so as to ensure that top managers utilize the information supplied to them. In this context, the chain of information related to performance of participating agents will flow on quarterly basis in the form of progress reports. The process of preparing the progress report will be initiated by each PIU which will be submitted to its respective hierarchy and to PMIU and UNDP. The PMIU will be responsible for collaborating with the PIUs in initiating the process for preparation of quarterly progress reports. The PMIU will then compile the progress reports into an Annual Programme Report (APR). This report will describe the achievement of benchmarks on the time scale, and specify the actions required by the concerned parties in order to achieve the next set of targets and, if necessary, will make substantive recommendations about the orientation of the programme.

The proposed programme will be reviewed and evaluated at least at three different levels. The first level of review and evaluation process calls for continuous monitoring of the performance indicators for various outputs planned under different programme components (Table 2). These indicators suggest the target dates for the tasks to be completed during the first phase. As mentioned earlier, more comprehensive indicators/benchmarks will be developed for all programme components during the first phase--when the interventions have been adequately elaborated and mobilization of required resources is sufficiently secured. The quarterly meetings of the SPIC and PIC provides necessary forum for this review. The PMIU will facilitate in carrying out this level of review and evaluation.

The second level of review calls for more intensive evaluation of the programme on an annual basis in the form of Tripartite Review (TPR). However, additional TPRs could be called, if considered necessary by GoP, UNDP or executing agency. Representatives of the Government, UNDP/donors, executing agency, implementing agencies, and cooperating agencies will participate in this meeting. This meeting will take place at the end of each programme year, to allow time for the revision of work plans, and the incorporation of agreed changes into the budget for the coming financial year. This review process will take place according to the UNDP policies and procedures described for this purpose. Towards this aim, the PMIU will prepare the APR using the UNDP format with the involvement of all stakeholders. The report will reflect the results achieved so far and the problems encountered in the programme execution. In addition, the effectiveness of the management and coordination mechanisms will be reviewed. Additional reports may be required during the programme implementation phase, particularly with regard to specific programme outputs and capacity building targets. The PMIU will prepare such reports in collaboration with respective PIUs as and when required.

The third level of review suggests for an independent mid-term evaluation of the programme (during the middle of the third year). This review will evaluate the performance of all the implementing agencies and stakeholders in delivering the planned outputs. Terms of Reference for this evaluation will be prepared, and external consultants will be hired to represent UNDP and other cost-sharing partners, and national consultants to represent the national implementing agencies. Also, the participation of selected beneficiaries of the programme will be encouraged.

A Programme terminal report will be prepared for consideration of the Terminal Review meeting. The report shall be prepared in draft sufficiently in advance to allow review prior to the Terminal Review meeting. The NPD/NPM will be responsible for the preparation of the terminal report of the programme according to the guidelines given, and for completing all the formal procedures required for formal closing of the programme, including the disposal of equipment. The Programme shall also be subjected to a terminal evaluation during the last quarter of implementation. The organization, TOR and precise timing of the evaluation will be determined by the PSC.

A number of donors’ supported interventions are planned under the programme. Technical scopes of these interventions have sufficiently been elaborated in the previous sections. This section describes the financial aspects of the proposed programme.

Total financial size of the proposed programme is $42.78 Million, which includes $ 1.7 million for PAF being implemented independently with overall linkages to the sub-programmes under this propgramme. The funding of the programme will play a catalytic role in the successful execution of the initiatives undertaken through NEAP-SP. The programme has a broad scope enfolding different sub projects hence the money available would be used to mobilize the resources in the most efficient manner.Table 3 shows indicative figures by sub-programme and their respective components. The estimates shown against different budget lines will be refined and updated during the first phase of the programme. The funds to be channeled through this programme are going to be $ 41.1 million. Share of the ecosystem management sub-programme in the total costs/budget will be around 34%, followed by pollution control (26%), energy conservation and renewables (13%), policy coordination and environmental governance (9%), drylands management and water conservation (10%), grassroots initiatives (5%) and institutional support costs (3%). Alternatively stated, share of the MoELGRD in total programme budget will be around 87%, and planning commission/provincial P&Ds in Sindh and Balochistan (10%). Institutional support costs required to make the PMIU and PIUs functional will cost around 3% of the total programme costs/budget.

2. Programme Financing

The proposed programme will be funded using two types of financing modalities: (a) cost-sharing; and (b) parallel financing. First type of modality is the standard norm for UNDP led projects/ programmes under which potential donors/funding agencies channel their resources through UNDP. The second modality refers to the funds available under those projects which maintain their independent status/identity but their activities closely fall within the technical domain of the proposed programme. In other words, funds available under these projects are not channeled through the proposed programme--but definitely utilized to support and complement the activities planned under the programme.

At the time of preparing the programme document, an amount of $13.03 Million has already or likely to become available under the cost-sharing modality. Out of this $2.0 Million is contribution of UNDP and the rest is likely to become available from other bilateral donors who have expressed their interest to participate in the proposed programme on cost sharing basis. For example, discussions are underway with the GEF and EU to finalize projects dealing with Sustainable Development of Chilghoza Forest Ecosystems, Conservation of Species and Habitats, Conservation of Juniper Forests, and Protected Areas Management and with bilaterals for introducing cleaner production processes in refinery and textile sectors.

*. As per agreement with UNDP (July 2001), Government of Pakistan has agreed to a 3.0% support cost from projects/programmes under

NEX modality to bear the cost of UNDP Country Office support activities. The total support cost will not exceed 3.0% of actual programme

delivery.

The GoP contribution is also expected to become available through the: (a) cash contribution, if available; (b) in-kind contributions from the implementing agencies--mainly from regular non-development budgetary sources; and (c) concessions provided to the private sector on import duties for the procurement of environmental friendly equipment.

In addition to the funds available from the above projects, there are strong indications that partner donor agencies will also come up with new projects to support the implementation of national agenda outlined to address the issues with respect to poverty-environment nexus. In cases, where these agencies tend to follow their own administrative procedures to manage their respective technical assistance programmes, cost-sharing (as defined in the present context) is usually not viewed by them as the most preferred modality for channeling their assistance. Nevertheless, resources provided by these agencies could be considered as part of the parallel financing--as long as the activities planned under their projects relate to the overall scope of the programme. Similarly, funds allocated for PAF, which has strong linkage with the programme, are also considered to be under parallel financing.

Financial earmarking for donors’ resources is presented in Table 4. Total programme costs amount to $US 42.78 Million in five years (2001-2005). At the time of preparing the document, funds that are available or are in advance stages of mobilisation under the cost-sharing modality amount to $13.03 Million. Similarly, under the parallel financing modality $1.70 Million is also committed towards the programme. In other words, about 34% of the required resources could be considered to have become available. The balance of $28.05 Million is yet to be mobilized. Much of these remaining resources are expected to come from the bilateral donors, GoP and private sector (under the cost-sharing modality), and the World Bank and AsDB (under the parallel financing modality). The total and balance resources available for the programme are summarised in Table 5.

As mentioned in the preceding section, about 66% of the total required resources ($28.05 Million) are yet to be mobilized. In order to move ahead with the programme implementation in its entirety, it is important that these resources become available as early as possible, preferably during the first phase of the programme implementation. This would require concerted efforts on the part of the Government of Pakistan. The role of UNDP will be equally important, as it will assist the Government in mobilizing the required resources from partner donors. Main features of the proposed resource mobilization strategy are outlined below.

• Maintain continuous dialogue with the local Environment Donors Coordination Group (EDCG) in the form of quarterly meetings to seek donors’ assistance in mobilizing required resources.

• Organize separate meetings with the interested bi/multi-lateral donors to discuss the working papers on different Programme Components, and to encourage their participation in programme financing.

• Encourage private sector participation both in programme financing and its subsequent implementation. In this context, assistance from the multi-national companies will be sought to contribute funds from their research and development budgets towards those Programme Components, which are in line with their respective products and services.

• Involve local Chambers of Commerce as a key partner in efforts geared towards raising financial resources from the entities created and owned nationally. In this context, detailed technical and financial proposals will be developed which will form the basis for discussions with different private sector entities.

The proposed programme can absorb government contributions on cost-sharing basis depending on the resource availability. This contribution is viewed very essential by all partners as it would serve two inter-linked purposes. First, it will demonstrate Government’s commitment to the environmental agenda. Second, Government’s commitment will pave the basis to raise additional resources. The GoP will have to explore alternative means to raise its cost sharing contributions. Such resources may come from the GoP’s Poverty Alleviation Fund because main emphasis of the proposed programme is also on poverty alleviation through improved environment and natural resources management. The Revolving Loan Funds to be established under the GEF funded major projects may also be tapped for advancing the agenda of environmental management. Recently announced establishment of Environment Fund provides another window to secure necessary Government contributions. For this purpose, the PMIU will seek maximum possible assistance from the Programme Steering Committee (PSC). The Government may also consider making part of the required contributions available in the form of import duty concessions for the procurement of environment-friendly equipment by the private sector. This option may yield two distinct advantages. However, all the funding of the programme will be exclusively through grants.

The proposed programme will be implemented utilizing the national expertise and resources to the maximum possible extent. However, it is equally important to benefit from the global experience with respect to different technical and institutional aspects as they relate to the interventions proposed under various sub-programmes. This could possibly be achieved by involving the UN specialized agencies and similar international organizations and NGOs in the implementation of the programme.

The Country Office (CO) is accountable to the UNDP Administrator for all the resources provided to the GoP through this programme. As such, the CO will be responsible for monitoring the programme/project interventions to ensure proper use of funds. Specific services will be provided to the programme at the request of the National Programme Director, based on the requirements of the Sub-programme Directors, which include:

• International procurement, fielding of consultants, advance of funds to programme/project accounts, financial reporting and arranging training and fellowships.

• Where necessary UNDP will also provide other services such as direct disbursements, identification and recruitment of project personnel, procurement of goods and services, etc. Such services will be provided in accordance with the UNDP regulations, rules and procedures according to PCOM guidelines. UNDP costs on these additional services will be recovered and debited to the relevant budget lines of the programme/project, at the standard rate of 3% of the budgeted amount.

The PMIU shall be responsible for ensuring that the resources allocated to the programme are utilized effectively in financing the envisaged activities. PIUs will maintain records and controls for the purpose of ensuring the accuracy and reliability of the programme/project’s financial information and provide information to the PMIU in the form of progress and financial reports. The accounting systems in place shall ensure that the receipts and disbursements of available funds are properly recorded and that such disbursements are within the approved budgets. Tight controls in budget management would need to be ensured at all times, to exercise compliance with UNDP’s Financial Management System (FIM). UNDP would provide the necessary software along with training to the PMIU and PIUs, Finance and Accounts staff, to facilitate their task of accounting and financial management.

The UNDP CO shall disburse funds on the basis of quarterly financial reports/ work plans, to the Executing/Implementing Agencies. All quarterly advance requests supported by quarterly work plans must be submitted to UNDP through National Programme Director (NPD). The NPD will in turn delegate the authority to SPDs for undertaking disbursements during the quarter as per UNDP PCOM procedures. These would, however, need to remain within the quarterly advance requested, with due consideration being given to budget availability per budget line. Implementing agencies which are outside the Government’s system (e.g. NGOs and Private Sector Institutions) shall request for advance directly from UNDP in accordance with the terms and conditions set-forth in the Memorandum of Understanding and/or Project Cooperation Agreement that shall be prepared and signed between them and the UNDP in this respect.

In cases where hard currency payments are to be made, the implementing Agency may request UNDP, through the Executing Agency, for processing such payments. When UNDP is asked to make a payment on behalf of the Executing Agent, the request must be forwarded to UNDP CO via a standard letter "Request for Direct Payment" duly completed and signed by the National Programme Director, in line with PCOM requirements.

The UNDP auditors will audit all project operations as and when required, at least once in a year. It is the responsibility of the Executing/Implementing Agency to cooperate with the auditors in terms of providing the requested information, as well as to ensure that all audit observations are attended to adequately.

The UNDP's established rules and procedures as provided in the PCOM guidelines would be used for procurement of goods and services. The Executing Agency shall be responsible for maintaining an up-to-date stores/inventory record of the acquisition and disposition of property and equipment procured under the programme/project.

Total programme budget by sub-programme and components is provided in Section 10.1. This budget will be further refined and prepared according to the standard UNDP budgeting format during the first phase once the proposed interventions have been elaborated in more detail. However, as UNDP has already allocated an amount of $2 million to initiate the programme implementation, a detailed budget for this amount using standard UNDP format has been prepared and included in Table 6. The Executing/Implementing Agencies may utilize this amount in accordance with the amount allocated against different budget lines and for different programme components as per rules and regulations outlined in this Section.

The agreements to be signed under this programme may include the following.

• Agreements between the Executing/Implementing Agencies and the Int’l Cooperating Agencies (such as UN agencies and NGOs) to deliver specific technical services in support of programme implementation.