Introducing the Concept of Integrated Assessment of Trade ... · PDF fileSAFTA South Asia Free Trade Agreement ... proper monitoring and evaluation system was underscored and the need

Introducing the Concept of Integrated Assessment of Trade

Policies

Workshop Report

Organized by: Supported by: Sustainable Development Policy Institute United Nations Environment Programme

Best Western Hotel

Islamabad, Pakistan 15-16 May 2006

Table of Contents Workshop Rationale..........................................................................................................1

Workshop Objectives ........................................................................................................1

Workshop Team................................................................................................................2

Workshop Participants ......................................................................................................2

Workshop Program ...........................................................................................................3

Orientation Packet ............................................................................................................4

Press and Media Coverage ..............................................................................................4

Evaluations .......................................................................................................................5 Report on the Sessions of the Workshop Session I Welcome Address.............................................................................................................6

Introduction to UNEP and its Initiative on Integrated Assessment....................................6

A Southern Agenda for Trade and Sustainable Development ..........................................6

Integrated Assessment: An Introduction to the Concept and Process..............................7

Contents and Methods of Integrated Assessment ............................................................8 Session II Monitoring and Evaluation of Integrated Assessment: Indicators and Issues of Data Availability .........................................................................................................................9

Global Climate Change and Carbon Trading....................................................................9

Introducing the Concept of Integrated Assessment ........................................................10 Session III Open House Discussion .................................................................................................11 Session IV Working Group 1

Team 1............................................................................................................................13

Team 2............................................................................................................................15 Working Group 2

Team 1............................................................................................................................17

Team 2............................................................................................................................19 Working Group 3

Team 1............................................................................................................................20

Team 2............................................................................................................................21

Session V Working Group Presentations and Discussion ...............................................................23

Final Remarks.................................................................................................................24

Outcome and a look towards the future ..........................................................................24 Annexures Annex 1...........................................................................................................................29

Annex 2...........................................................................................................................31

Annex 3...........................................................................................................................36

Annex 4...........................................................................................................................39

Acronyms CDM Clean Development Mechanism FPCCI Federation of Pakistan Chambers of Commerce and Industry GIS Geographic Information Systems IRADe Integrated Research for Action and Development LDC Least Developed Country NEQS National Environmental Quality Standards NTBs Non-tariff barriers NTFPs Non-timber forest products OECD Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development SAFTA South Asia Free Trade Agreement SDPI Sustainable Development Policy Institute SMEs Small and medium enterprises UNEP United Nations Environment Program WTO World Trade Organization

i

Executive Summary The Sustainable Development Policy Institute organized the UNEP-sponsored workshop on “Introducing the Concept of Integrated Assessment of Trade Policies” on 15-16 May, 2006 in Islamabad, Pakistan. The idea was to introduce the concept of integrated assessment to relevant stakeholders in Pakistan. Prior to the workshop, there was practically no awareness of the utility of integrated assessments, and certainly no capacity to conduct such assessments for trade policies. Apart from the aim of raising awareness about the integrated assessment tool, we were interested in soliciting feedback and suggestions from the workshop participants on the potential for bringing the concept of integrated assessment into mainstream policymaking. The workshop witnessed a broad based representation from stakeholders. Out of the 36 invitees, 30 attended the workshop, representing an 80 percent turnout. All concerned government ministry representatives were present. A strong presence from the private sector, civil society and media was also noted. Overall, among the 30 who attended, 6 were from the government, 8 from the private sector, 11 from the civil society, and 5 from the media. A measure of the success of the workshop and the interest the subject of integrated assessment generated is that the event was covered in five leading English daily newspapers across the country. Moreover, Mr. Moeed Yusuf from Pakistan, Dr. Jyoti Parikh from India, and Ms. Azreen Karim from Bangladesh were invited and appeared on a talk show, “Current Affairs” on A-TV on 16 May, 2006. Trade cooperation in South Asia and the potential benefit from integrated assessments were discussed with specific reference to the workshop. Given the emphasis on receiving feedback from participants on the potential of bringing the concept of integrated assessment into mainstream policymaking, three working groups and two open house discussions were conducted during the workshop. The aim of the first working group was to allow the participants to identify the key constraints and capacity building issues in implementing integrated assessment in Pakistan. Working group 2 was designed to get initial feedback on the key trade policy documents or sectors that should be prioritized for an integrated assessment. In working group 3 participants were asked to identify key ingredients (and tools) that should form an integrated assessment of either bilateral trade liberalization between Pakistan and India, or regional trade liberalization via SAFTA. Dr. Shaheen Rafi Khan opened the workshop by introducing the Sustainable Development Policy Institute, acknowledging UNEP’s role in supporting the concept of integrated assessment, and highlighting its relevance to the Pakistani context. A total of five presentations were made during the workshop. Dr. Shaheen Rafi Khan laid the groundwork for the introduction of the integrated assessment concept by exploring the linkage between trade and sustainable development in the WTO context. Mr. Moeed Yusuf introduced the objectives of an integrated assessment, its potential benefits in policy making and its relevance to the Pakistani context. He subsequently discussed the process of an integrated assessment, describing its purpose, principles, criteria for determining the focus and setting priorities, and its design. In his second presentation, Mr. Yusuf discussed the remaining four phases of an integrated assessment process. These included a discussion on preliminary (phase II) and detailed (phase III) assessment methods, comparison and integration of impacts (phase IV) and formulation of policy responses (phase V). Dr. Sohail Jahangir Malik talked about indicator development and monitoring and evaluation. He highlighted the UNEP

ii

Introducing the Concept of Integrated Assessment of Trade Policies

recommended monitoring institutions and criteria. He emphasized the need for indicators to be specific, measurable, acceptable, realistic, and time-bound. Finally, Dr. Malik pointed to some possible indicators, which could be used to measure economic, social, and environmental impacts within the Pakistani context. Dr. Jyoti Parikh presented findings of a research study on global climate change and carbon trading. Dr. Parikh floated some thought provoking questions aimed at evaluating the concentration of GHG that could be tolerated by the developing world and sought to identify the kind of policies that could be put in place to ensure the targeted emission reduction. She pointed to Joint implementation, Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) and Emission trading as three mechanisms available under the Kyoto Protocol in order to reduce carbon emissions. In her brief presentation, Azreen Karim highlighted the Bangladeshi context with regard to integrated assessment. She pointed to the lack of understanding of the concept of integrated assessment in Bangladesh and suggested that one would have to start from scratch in introducing the concept in the country. Ms. Karim pointed out that in order to understand the usefulness of integrated assessment in the South Asian context, one broad based study on SAFTA and the gradual integration of South Asian economies should be conducted. The working groups generated extremely meaningful feedback. In the first working group, participants suggested an urgent need to enhance inter-ministerial coordination through a dedicated functionary in order to ensure time-bound decision-making. They also urged the government to ensure ‘full participation’ of all relevant stakeholders in any major public initiative. While stressing on the need for tight checks on public spending, the participants suggested that the government ought to take the lead on financing all integrated assessments. The lack of current and authentic data was also pointed out and the need to outsource this activity to the private sector was highlighted. In terms of policy implementation, the lack of a proper monitoring and evaluation system was underscored and the need to develop one to conduct integrated assessments was suggested. The participants also referred to the need to ensure transparency and build capacity among stakeholders to conduct integrated assessments. In working group 2, participants highlighted the sectors that should be prioritized to conduct integrated assessments and the roles various actors can play. The first team (sub-group) focused on the textile and cement sectors. Discussing multilateral, regional and national policies, the group suggested that national policies could be tailored to achieve national goals despite presence of multilateral and regional arrangements. The lack of coordination in national policies was seen to be an issue standing in the way of policy effectiveness. Highlighting the role the public and private sectors, civil society and donor agencies, participants urged the government to take the lead in conducting integrated assessments, perhaps with donor funding. They suggested that the private sector could play a role in mainstreaming the integrated assessment approach by investing in research and development. The civil society was believed to have the most important role in creating awareness about integrated assessment. The second team (sub-group) identified several sectors that required integrated assessments, notably, the mining industry, fisheries, forestry, livestock and dairy, horticulture, and SMEs. On a local level, the team called for more flexibility in trade policy implementation, saying that a short time frame of ‘informal’ implementation should be allocated to allow for feedback from concerned parties before giving permanence to the policy. They supported the idea of conducting integrated assessments at the time of policy drafting (ex-ante).

iii


In working group 3, participants discussed the potential ingredients of an integrated assessment of regional trade liberalization via SAFTA. Team (sub-group) 1 studied the textile sector and suggested that all those involved in the textile production chain formed the main target groups and decision makers for an integrated assessment. They suggested a market-based approach and a system of incentives for environmentally friendly behavior to be adopted by the industry. Regional trade was seen as a threat to the environment because of the impact that SAFTA would have on Pakistani exports of bed linen, a product whose production has significant negative environmental impacts. However, SAFTA is likely to have a positive impact on the social conditions in Pakistan by contributing to employment opportunities and enhanced incomes. The group was in favor of an ex-ante approach for integrated assessment. The short- to medium-term timeframe to implement an integrated assessment was suggested. Team (sub-group) 2, suggested a number of sectors in which integrated assessments could be carried out. These include the mining industry, fisheries, the forestry sector, livestock and dairy, horticulture, and SMEs. Environmentally and socially critical issues identified included biodiversity and social equity. Group members were of the view that the ministry of commerce ought to take the lead in coordinating the integrated assessment. Use of market-based instruments was preferred over regulation. Group members unanimously agreed on the need for intensive capacity building through training workshops and knowledge sharing. On the question of stakeholders, it was established that the stakeholders should be experts selected on the basis of inputs, and the role of each should remain on a strict professional-subject basis. They also suggested that data collection and baseline survey activities be outsourced to private hands to improve data quality and reliability. Finally, the group suggested the development of a framework on identifying policy measures and the quantifiable outcomes expected on a regular basis to generate a depository of initiatives where integrated assessment should be conducted. Open house discussions during the workshop were constructive and generated proactive debates. Points were raised about lack of coordination among government ministries, the need to raise awareness about integrated assessment and the requirement to define roles of all relevant stakeholders clearly. The issue of the most suitable methodologies of integrated assessments in the South Asian context, the urgent need for capacity building to conduct integrated assessments and the lack of any alternative but to bring the economic, social, and environmental aspects of a policy under the single framework over the long run were mentioned. In the final discussion session, the government’s willingness to assist SMEs and their relevance for an integrated assessment were pointed out. Inter-provincial coordination and need for public-private, private-private, and civil society-private sector collaboration were also highlighted. Moeed Yusuf closed the workshop with final remarks outlining future plans for conducting integrated assessments. Deliberations during the working groups suggest a strong need as well as an interest in conducting integrated assessments in order to present empirical evidence of its relevance to the Pakistani context. Subsequently, in an ideal scenario, the net should be case wider and complementary assessments should be made in various South Asian countries. Based on the extremely encouraging feedback and the surprisingly high level of enthusiasm about the concept, we feel it is imperative to take this process forward with the hope that in due course integrated assessments would become a part of mainstream policymaking in Pakistan.

iv

Introducing the Concept of Integrated Assessment

of Trade Policies

DETAILED REPORT Workshop Rationale The concept of integrated assessment remains alien to Pakistani policy makers. There is practically no awareness within the government circles of the utility of integrated assessments, and certainly no capacity to conduct such assessments for trade policies. Given the extremely weak, and somewhat hierarchical relationship between the ministry of commerce and functionaries dealing with the environmental and social sectors, it is hardly surprising that no substantial movement towards an integrated policy design has been made in Pakistan.

The lack of understanding of the integrated assessment tool is unfortunate, given that such an approach could be extremely useful for a country like Pakistan where trade liberalization has gained momentum only in the last decade, and measures to this effect are still ongoing. Pakistan has continued on the path of an impressive macroeconomic recovery, its growth rate of 8.4 % for FY05

was second only to China. Yet poverty continues to grow, rates of natural resource degradation (particularly forests) are one of the highest in the world, and social sector indicators are low both in absolute terms and compared to countries in the South Asian region. The government has been under heavy criticism in the recent past for maintaining an outright focus on accelerated growth (as it highlighted in its Poverty Reduction Strategy) while neglecting the social and environmental situation in the country. Part of the reason for the existing scenario is the absence of integrated assessments of policies. Workshop Objectives In light of what had been mentioned above, the Sustainable Development Policy Institute (SDPI) decided to take the lead in introducing the concept of integrated assessment in Pakistan. The aim of the workshop was two-fold. First, we aimed at introducing the basic concept, highlighting the need for adopting an integrated assessment approach, the various policy situations it can inform, the various existing methodologies for implementing integrated assessments, and development of relevant indicators to measure environmental and social impacts within the Pakistani context. Second, we were interested in soliciting feedback


and suggestions from the workshop participants on the potential of bringing the concept of integrated assessment into mainstream policymaking. Specifically, we wanted to develop an understanding of areas that ought to be prioritized for an integrated assessment to be conducted, within the context of regional trade liberalization in South Asia. Workshop Team The entire workshop was planned and organized using SDPI’s in-house capacity. The workshop took place at the Best Western Hotel in Islamabad, Pakistan on 15-16 May, 2006. SDPI researchers focusing on trade and sustainable development, the institute’s administrative staff and finance department were key to making this endeavor a success. The facilitators for the workshop were: • Dr. Shaheen Rafi Khan, Research Fellow, SDPI • Mr. Moeed Yusuf, Consultant- Economic policy, SDPI • Ms. Azka Tanveer, Consultant- Trade and sustainable development, SDPI • Mr. Ali Pracha, Consultant- Environment and sustainable development, SDPI A total of five presenters made presentations at the workshop. The list of presenters in provided below: 1. Dr. Shaheen Rafi Khan, Research Fellow, SDPI, Pakistan

• A Southern Agenda for Trade and Sustainable Development 2. Mr. Moeed Yusuf, Consultant- Economic Policy, SDPI, Pakistan

• Integrated Assessment: An Introduction to the Concept and Process • Contents and Methods of Integrated Assessment

3. Dr. Sohail Jahangir Malik, Chief Executive, Innovative Development Strategies, Pakistan

• Monitoring and Evaluation of Integrated Assessment: Indicators and Issues of Data Availability

4. Dr. Jyoti Parikh, Executive Director, Integrated Research for Action and Development,

India • Global Climate Change and Carbon Trading

5. Ms. Azreen Karim, Lecturer, East-West University, Bangladesh

• Introducing the Concept of Integrated Assessment Contact details of all facilitators and presenters are provided in the contact list in the Annex. Workshop Participants As per our pre-workshop plan, we managed to ensure broad based representation from stakeholders across the board. Out of the 36 invitees, 30 attended the workshop, representing an 83 percent turnout. We had representation from the most relevant government ministries. Deputy Secretaries from the Ministry of Commerce, Ministry of Environment, and the Economic Affairs Division actively participated in the workshop. Representatives of the private sector were also present. Major Chambers of Commerce and Industry in the country

2


nominated relevant representatives who provided valuable input during the workshop. A strong presence from the civil society and media was also noted. In addition, two South Asian NISD members, IRADE, India and East West University, Bangladesh also sent representatives to the workshop. Overall, among the 30 who attended, 6 were from the government, 8 from the private sector, 11 from the civil society, and 5 from the media.

Workshop Program Workshop agenda is attached in the Annex. Given our emphasis on receiving feedback from participants on the potential of bringing the concept of integrated assessment into mainstream policymaking, we ensured sufficient time for working groups and open discussions. All formal presentations meant to introduce the concept of integrated assessment were completed

in the pre-lunch session on Day 1. We began the post-lunch session with a one-hour open house discussion to allow participants to reflect upon the presentations made in the morning session and

or regional trade liberalization via SAFTA. Given the discussion prior to the working groups,

provide their initial thoughts. Three working groups were conducted during the workshop. The aim of the first working group was to

allow the participants to identify the key constraints and capacity building issues in implementing integrated assessment in Pakistan. They were also requested to provide possible measures that could be taken to redress the identified problems. Working group 2 was designed to get initial feedback on the key trade policy documents or sectors that should be prioritized for an integrated assessment. This information was to feed into working group 3. In working group 3 participants were asked to identify key issues that should be the focus of an integrated assessment of either bilateral trade liberalization between Pakistan and India,

3


participants decided to focus on SAFTA. The idea was to highlight what the key ingredients (and tools) of an actual integrated assessment of SAFTA ought to be. Each of the three working group sessions was divided into two separate teams. Both worked under the broad set of guidelines, but were encouraged to keep slightly different specific focuses. This is especially true for working group 2 and 3. Handouts provided to each working group explaining the task are provided in the Annex. Orientation Packet A detailed orientation packet was provided to the participants upon registration. The packet contained relevant background material on integrated assessment, information on UNEP experiences with integrated assessment in other countries, integrated assessment methodologies and valuation techniques, handouts relevant to presentations made during the workshop, as well as the agenda for the workshop. During the workshop, on day 1, printed copies of all presentations made by speakers were distributed to the participants. In addition, before each working group session, a handout was provided which contained guidelines on the issues to be deliberated upon by the group. Participants were also provided with information about the Sustainable Development Policy Institute along with the organization’s list of publications. Majority of the resource material, and presentations that introduced integrated assessments and discussed indicators and monitoring and evaluation were based on the UNEP Reference Manual for the Integrated Assessment of Trade Policies, UNEP Training Resource Manual on Integrated Assessment, UNEP Integrated Assessment of Trade Liberalization and Trade-Related Policies: UNEP Country Projects-Round II: A Synthesis Report, and presentation slides on integrated assessment prepared by UNEP. Press and Media Coverage A measure of the success of the workshop and the interest the subject of integrated assessment generated is that the event was covered in five leading English daily newspapers across the country. Moreover, clippings of the workshop were also shown on AAJ TV’s hourly news. AAJ TV is a well-known private TV channel with international viewership. Interestingly, contrary to the usual routine of having to send journalists requests for coverage, we had voluntary presence from the press and media at the workshop. Correspondents from at least four leading newspapers and two major TV channels were present. Perhaps the most exciting development was a personal request from a leading TV channel’s media advisor (who attended the workshop) to project the concept of integrated assessment on TV. Mr. Moeed Yusuf from Pakistan, Dr. Jyoti Parikh from India, and Ms. Azreen Karim from Bangladesh were invited and appeared on the talk show, “Current Affairs” on A-TV on 16 May, 2006. The TV channel is believed to have the second largest viewership across Pakistan. On the talk show, trade cooperation in South Asia and the potential benefit from integrated assessments in the regional context were discussed.

4


Evaluations At the end of the workshop, participants were asked to evaluate the quality and information contained in the presentations, the open house discussions and each of the three working groups. They were also asked to rate how participatory they found the workshop to be and how useful the information acquired in this workshop would be for their professional development. We received an extremely positive feedback from the participants. Eighty percent of the responses rated the presentations as ‘excellent’ or ‘above average’. Respondents suggested that the utility and design of all the working groups was ‘excellent’ or ‘above average’. Respondents acknowledged that the workshop was extremely participatory. Participants also suggested certain measures for possible improvement in the workshop design. These included providing background material at the time of the workshop invitation rather than at the morning registration and availability of greater resource material, especially for such a new concept.

5


Report on the Sessions of the Workshop Session I

Welcome Address Dr. Shaheen Rafi Khan opened the workshop. In his inaugural address he introduced SDPI to the participants, highlighting its research, policy, advocacy and capacity building facets and defining broadly, the areas in which SDPI researchers are engaged. Subsequently, he acknowledged UNEP’s global role in promoting integrated assessment and pointed to the concept’s relevance to the Pakistani context. He underscored that most research on trade and environment and trade and social issues is divorced from each other. Moreover, there is an acute lack of inter-ministerial coordination and policy making generally remains isolated from major non-government stakeholders. While this points to the challenges in conducting an integrated assessment, it also signals to the urgent need to introduce such a holistic framework that can improve the quality of trade related policymaking in Pakistan. Dr. Khan also underscored the opportune time at which the workshop was planned, given that SAFTA is finally set to be implemented beginning July 2006. Introduction to UNEP and its Initiative on Integrated Assessment Azka Tanveer Ms. Azka Tanveer, one of the workshop facilitators, read out a written welcome statement prepared by UNEP. In the statement UNEP's mandate and role in promoting integrated assessment on a global scale were introduced. A Southern Agenda for Trade and Sustainable Development Shaheen Rafi Khan Dr. Shaheen Rafi Khan, laid the ground work for the introduction of the integrated assessment concept by exploring the linkage between trade and sustainable development in the WTO context. His presentation helped to contextualize the argument and strengthen the case for an integrated assessment, which looks to combine the social, environmental, and economic impacts under a single framework. By highlighting the trade-sustainable development link he pointed to the necessity of conducting integrated assessments in order to achieve win-win scenarios with respect to economic, environmental, and social concerns. Dr. Khan began by comparing the conventional view of development with the concept of sustainable development. He defined sustainable human development as a process which is efficient, equitable and sustainable in terms of resource use, resource access and resource resilience. He highlighted the trade-environment linkage under WTO and discussed in detail the necessity of conforming to environmental standards and social standards or risk losing markets for developing country products. The presentation highlighted the disconnect

6


between Northern and Southern positions on the issue of trade-environment linkages, and the need for the South to not to allow the North to divorce the environment from the broader concern of sustainable development. Dr. Khan substantiated his arguments by presenting findings from his research on the issue. In a study of the compliance with international standards in leather tanneries in Pakistan, findings suggested that while the cost-benefit ratio of compliance was favorable, the benefits were weighted excessively by land reclamation gains. In general, in-plant measures, while feasible, seldom reduced effluent and pollution to required National Environmental Quality Standards (NEQS) levels. Such measures needed to be supplemented with more expensive end-of-pipe treatment. Next, he discussed a regional study on standards and the need to comply. He maintained that South Asian countries were ‘trend takers’ and had to follow the international standards regime. He pointed to frequent rejections of South Asian products in Western markets due to non-compliance. He highlighted that a key factor responsible for this was poor standards infrastructure and limited capacities in certification and accreditation. Integrated Assessment: An Introduction to the Concept and Process Moeed Yusuf Mr. Moeed Yusuf introduced integrated assessment as a systematic process for obtaining, processing, and disseminating information on the environmental, social and economic impacts of a specific policy, set of policies, sector or planning process. He highlighted the difference between an integrated assessment and the more commonly used Environmental Impact Assessment and Strategic Impact Assessment. The objectives of an integrated assessment, its potential benefits in policy making and its relevance to the Pakistani context was also emphasized. Having introduced the basic concept, Mr. Yusuf introduced the process of an integrated assessment, shedding light on the first of five phases involved in an integrated assessment. In phase I, which is the preparation and planning phase, he described the purpose of an integrated assessment, its principles, criteria for determining the focus and setting priorities within the analysis. He then discussed the design of an integrated assessment suggesting that timing was an essential component of the design. Mr. Yusuf discussed the options of conducting an ex-ante, concurrent, or ex-post analysis and the relevance of each for Pakistan’s trade policies. As the second key component of an integrated assessment’s design, the speaker underscored the importance of stakeholder participation. He pointed out the need for ‘full participation’ rather than ‘consultation’ as a necessary pre-requisite for a successful integrated assessment. A hand out on stakeholder mapping was also provided to the participants to. Finally, Mr. Yusuf discussed capacity building, and what it meant in the integrated assessment context. He provided a checklist of actions that were necessary to ensure proper capacity building. These included giving full responsibility to all involved stakeholders, exchanging all information, respecting local tools and methods, developing local manuals and providing on-job training.

7


Contents and Methods of Integrated Assessment Moeed Yusuf Following up on the basic introduction to the concept, Moeed Yusuf introduced the remaining four phases of an integrated assessment process. These included a discussion on preliminary (phase II) and detailed (phase III) assessment methods, comparison and integration of impacts (phase IV) and formulation of policy responses (phase V). The initial step of identifying key issues for more detailed assessment through qualitative methods was pointed out. Within preliminary assessment methods, the Matrix method and the OECD approach were discussed and real-life examples of their employment provided. The quantitative analysis for detailed assessment was then discussed and three major categories of assessment tools pointed out. These included Macroeconomic Analysis, Microeconomic (sector-based) analysis, and a group of other methods. Within macro economic analysis, the input-output models and general equilibrium models were briefly discussed. For sector-based analysis, partial equilibrium models, Impact assessments, cost benefit analysis, risk assessment, multi-criteria analysis, and extended domestic resource cost analysis were mentioned. In the ‘other models’ category, the life-cycle analysis and the global commodity chain analysis were discussed. While all these models were touched upon briefly, no great detail of the technical parameters of the various tools was provided keeping in mind the objective of introducing the basic concept of integrated assessment during the workshop. However, a detailed handout containing information on all models (from the UNEP Reference Manual) was provided to the participants. Valuation techniques were then introduced as the principal means to compare and integrate the various impacts identified through the quantitative assessment. Conventional market based approaches, surrogate market based approaches, and constructed market based approaches were discussed briefly. Details of the valuation techniques were also provided to participants in the shape of a handout. The last part of the presentation dealt with formulation of policy responses, the final phase in an integrated assessment process. In this section, Mr. Yusuf began by outlining the criteria for defining policy responses suggesting that they must be relevant, realistic, cost-effective, and feasible. Modifying existing policies and introducing complementary or ‘flanking’ measures were discussed as the two options to institute change. The pros and cons of each were discussed. The presenter highlighted that modifying existing policies was usually a more efficient way of instituting change than introducing flanking measures. The presentation ended with details on various kinds of policies that could be introduced. These included command and control policies, market-based instruments, tax policies (as a subset of market-based instruments), subsidies, and public/voluntary measures. The various options were compared and their utility under various situations discussed.

8


Session II Monitoring and Evaluation of Integrated Assessment: Indicators and Issues of Data Availability Sohail Jahangir Malik Dr. Sohail Jahangir Malik combined his two presentations on Indicator development and issues of data availability and Monitoring and Evaluation. He highlighted the need for an impact tracking system based on a set of indicators, chosen while conducting the integrated assessment. In turn, the indicators can be assessed over time to examine the economic, environmental, and social impacts. He maintained that a prerequisite for a monitoring and evaluation system to work is the presence of a robust institutional framework. He then highlighted the UNEP recommended monitoring institutions and criteria, the latter pointing to the need to be cost effective, focused, accountable and transparent. In his discussion on indicators, Dr. Malik defined an ‘indicator’ as a statistic that can be used to derive information about an underlying situation. Indicators can provide useful early indications of trends, and suggest causal relationships. They are extremely useful when collection of primary data is either too time consuming or cost prohibitive. He emphasized the need for indicators to be specific, measurable, acceptable, realistic, and time-bound. Possible ways of defining appropriate indicators include making use of available national documents and using existing indicator sets developed by the United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development, among others. Stakeholders could also define their own indicators. Dr. Malik gave a brief overview of various data sets available on line, and those which have been tailored to the South Asian context. Finally, to feed into working group deliberations, he pointed to some possible indicators, which could be used to measure economic, social, and environmental impacts within the Pakistani context. Global Climate Change and Carbon Trading Jyoti Parikh Dr. Jyoti Parikh presented findings of a research study on global climate change and carbon trading. Drawing upon this empirical work, Dr. Parikh pointed out that global average surface temperature has increased by 0.4 to 0.8 Centigrade. Moreover, global average sea level has risen between 0.1-0.2 meters per decade during the twentieth century. Entering the North-South debate on global emissions, she emphasized the fact that the developed world, which accounts for a mere 19 percent of the world’s population, contributes 68 percent of global emissions. Dr. Parikh floated some thought provoking questions aimed at evaluating the concentration of GHG that could be tolerated by the developing world and estimating the level of emissions reduction that would be required to achieve this aim. Moreover, she sought to identify the kind of policies that could be put in place to ensure the targeted emission reduction. She pointed to Joint implementation, Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) and Emission trading as three mechanisms available under the Kyoto Protocol in order to reduce carbon emissions. Dr. Parikh subsequently discussed the concept and potential for CDM in detail. She pointed to various measures that developing countries were taking to reduce emissions. These included emphasis on energy conservation, promotion of renewable energy, abatement of air pollution, afforestation and wasteland development, economic reforms including

9


removal of subsidies, and fuel substitution policies. Finally, she touched upon the issue of technology transfer. She highlighted that the ultimate aim of technology transfer should to be to build capacities within the developing world to assess the need, select, import, assimilate, adapt and develop the appropriate technologies. Currently, most of these aspects are being ignored. Introducing the Concept of Integrated Assessment Azreen Karim In her brief presentation, Azreen Karim highlighted the Bangladeshi context in terms of integrated assessment. Ms. Karim pointed to the lack of an integrated assessment approach in policy making. She pointed to a number of well-known economic and social research studies, and some environmental research, where tools generally associated with integrated assessments were used. However, these studies were isolated from one another. She maintained that no studies have been conducted which analyze an integrated impact under a single framework. Moreover, these are not conducted with any particular policy or alterations within policies in mind. Ms. Karim stated that most studies analyzed economic impacts in the conventional sense (income growth, employment, productivity change, etc) but none addressed a single trade related policy change, which in her view was imperative. In essence, she emphasized the lack of understanding of the concept of integrated assessment in Bangladesh and suggested that one would have to start from scratch in introducing the concept in the country. Looking to the future, Ms. Karim pointed out that in order to understand the usefulness of integrated assessment in the South Asian context, one broad based study on SAFTA and the gradual integration of South Asian economies should be conducted. She urged SDPI to take the lead in developing a team of researchers from South Asian countries and use the integrated assessment technique to understand the broader implications of SAFTA outside only economic gains and losses.

10


Session III Open House Discussion The one hour discussion session meant to capture initial feedback on perceptions of the participants on the concept of integrated assessment was opened by short comments from Ms. Yasmeen Masood, Deputy Secretary of the Economic Affairs Division; Mr. Manzoor Ahmed Kiyani, Deputy Secretary of the Ministry of Commerce; and Mr. Akbar Abdullah, Vice President of the Federation of Pakistan Chambers of Commerce and Industry (FPCCI). These participants were requested to lead the discussion in order to lay down the government and private sector positions on such an initiative. Ms. Yasmeen Masood opined that the concept of integrated assessment could not possibly go forward unless there was greater inter-ministerial coordination. She was of the opinion that the ministries of commerce, industries, agriculture, and environment needed to play a proactive role. The Economic Affairs division would have a major role in coordinating the effort once the specific projects had been identified. She believed integrated assessment could be extremely valuable provided it was practiced in relevant aspects. She felt that the duplication of effort and lack of measurable outcomes were major hurdles and need to be addressed on the ground instead of limiting these to research studies. On the issue of capacity building, she said that many people, especially civil servants were highly trained and skilled, but were employed in the wrong functionaries. She concluded by emphasizing the need to clearly identify the role of the public and private sectors in any such initiative. Mr. Manzoor Ahmed Kiyani felt it was essential to popularize the concept of integrated assessment through a broad awareness campaign. He supported the notion that all stakeholders must be present for such an exercise to work effectively. He pointed to the need for a public private consultative mechanism. Moving on to the issue of trade liberalization, Mr. Kiyani pointed to Pakistan’s difficulties in complying with various regulations, including those relevant to the social and environmental aspects. He pointed out that Bangladesh, having declared itself a least developed country (LDC) had gained WTO concessions, while Pakistan, as a developing country was required to comply more stringently with WTO stipulations, a reality it has major difficulties conforming with. Mr. Akbar Abdullah presented the point of view of the private sector. Speaking on behalf of local industry, he said the private sector was ready to cooperate with the government, but that the latter had shown little interest. He attributed this to a lack of good governance. He was adamant that the public sector needed to actively involve all relevant stakeholders if integrated assessment is to become successful in Pakistan. Before opening the floor, Mr. Moeed Yusuf, the moderator for the session commented briefly on the issue of data accuracy and availability in South Asia as a major hurdle in any future effort at conducting an integrated assessment. He resonated the need for a designated body that could generate and monitor accurate data.

11


On the issue of trade liberalization, he felt that the process was irreversible and consequently there was a major role for integrated assessment of Pakistan’s trade related policies. Mr Yusuf reiterated that the environmental aspect was not the only consideration in integrated assessments, rather the exercise aimed at combining the social, economic, and environmental aspects of projects and policies under a single framework. He mentioned the success of integrated assessments in Africa, and felt that South Asia could benefit from the same. Once the floor was opened, a comment was made regarding the earlier reference to Bangladesh. The Government of Pakistan was criticized for having accepted ‘developing country’ status. The participant felt that Pakistan had deprived itself of the free flow of cotton products and textiles into North America and Europe. He highlighted that the Government had made no moves to consult the private sector or any Chambers of Commerce and Industry before making this decision. The issue of methodologies for integrated assessments was raised. One participant deliberated upon how comparing qualitative and quantitative indicators could prove difficult in the South Asian context. The discussion revealed that the process of ‘valuation’, despite its inherent limitations, was the most suitable method for comparing and integrating impacts in integrated assessments. Mr. Yusuf explained the need to broadly compare indicators in an integrated assessment. Another participant explained that the Government tended to take a political stance on environmental issues. He opined that the Government needed to institute trade policies that adequately addressed social and environmental concerns, at the same time carefully balancing them against industrial concerns to ensure a win-win scenario for both industry as well as sustainable development concerns. Capacity building was highlighted again, and its importance emphasized. The urgent need to move the capacity building focus away from the highest tiers of the government to the local government level was emphasized. It was also suggested that Pakistan’s diplomatic missions compile details of the trade barriers and local environmental concerns and legislation of countries where South Asian countries (especially Pakistan) have export or import interests, and provide the data to industrial research institutes. This would help in increasing the country’s knowledge base in the area and help to build further capacity. A point regarding assigning specific weightages to each aspect—environmental, social, and economic aspects—in an integrated assessment was discussed. It was suggested that integrated assessments do not assign weights to signal to the relative importance of economic, environmental, and social concerns. Rather the concept aims to integrate the three aspects and provide the impacts on each under a single framework. It was mentioned that for the foreseeable future, the economic aspect was likely to dominate in Pakistan, but this did not mean that win-win situations did not exist. However, these needed to be explored further through the integrated assessment tool. Mr. Yusuf said it would be impossible for the environment to vanish completely from the trade regime, and equally impossible for Pakistan to sustain itself without addressing environmental and social issues in tandem with economic concerns.

12


Session IV Working Group 1

Identifying constraints and Capacity Building Issues in Implementing Integrated Assessment in Pakistan

Team 1 The following issues were discussed: • Inter-ministerial coordination • Stakeholder participation • Financial resources • Data issues • Policy implementation • Transparency • Capacity building • Monitoring and Evaluation 1. Inter-ministerial coordination Group participants highlighted taking all ministries on board for every project as possibly the greatest impediment to the implementation of an integrated assessment. The group suggested the creation of an autonomous body comprising of professionals with the required expertise who belong to the Planning Commissions of various ministries. The members working for this body should not be posted on a project-to-project basis, but should be part of the department on a permanent basis in order to ensure institutional memory, continuity, and capacity building. Trainings were suggested as another method for capacity building. It was proposed that the primary responsibility for the functioning of this department should lie with the Ministry of Commerce. 2. Stakeholder Participation The level of stakeholder involvement and the large number of stakeholders that an integrated assessment entails were identified as the main problems in this regard. The group was of the

13


view that the current processes that involve stakeholders usually engage stakeholders from the higher end of the hierarchy. The masses who are the real affectees are alienated from the process. Moreover, even those who are involved are consulted but are not granted ‘full participation’. The working group suggested a plan for identification of all stakeholders, and wider dissemination of policies among stakeholders, especially in their regional languages. Members also stressed upon the need for full participation of stakeholders. 3. Financial resources The government was seen as the authority that should have the primary responsibility for generating funds for all integrated assessment initiatives. An alternative suggested was that funding should be donor-based in order to ensure effective monitoring. 4. Data issues The lack of availability and reliability of data were the identified constraints. Outsourcing of data collection by independent bodies was suggested. In addition to the quality of the data itself, the monitoring of previously concluded projects was suggested so that dated data would not be fed into integrated assessments. 5. Policy implementation Inter-ministerial coordination was regarded as a hindrance to proper and successful policy implementation. Lack of proper monitoring and evaluation systems was also identified as a problem. The group suggested that the Ministry of Commerce should be in charge of policy implementation. Incentives for following an implementation plan within the given timeframe were suggested. Inter-provincial coordination through the Minister for inter-provincial coordination was also highlighted. The need to make monitoring and evaluation indicator based and independent was stressed. The importance of institutionalizing accountability was also emphasized by the group. 6. Transparency The group proposed showing the progress of a project’s integrated assessment on a website, along with all the relevant information about the project. The website should also outline any failures or successes that the project met with, and present justifications for those. 7. Capacity building The group recognized the lack of adequate human capacity as a problem. It was mentioned that while current human capacity could help establish information channels, proper integration would need specialists. Experts with experience of different fields should be identified and chosen to be part of the integrated assessment process.

14


Team 2 1. Inter-ministerial coordination The group unanimously agreed that inter-ministerial coordination was non-existent and that a degree of professional rivalry between ministries marred the chances of such coordination. A lack of follow-up on decisions taken in inter-ministerial meetings was also marked as a key constraint. The participants called for change in attitudes within the ministries, saying that the interest of the country must come first. Time-bound decision-making with repercussions for unnecessary delays was another point put forward as a possible solution to the lack of inter-ministerial coordination. 2. Stakeholder participation The group found that stakeholder participation is seldom witnessed in government initiatives. Group members were of the opinion that stakeholders in such situations tend to be numerous, and to represent all concerned equally is a difficult task. They expressed concern over provincial disharmony, saying that it occurs in almost every case where there is public,

rivate, and consumer representation.

e local government level, but this point was dismissed iven the difficulty in achieving that.

wnership the public sector must fund integrated ssessments as part of their policy planning.

extolled the xtensive use of Geographic Information Systems (GIS) and satellite imagery.

p The group called for meaningful and effective stakeholder participation, but was unable to produce any tangible suggestions to counter the existing lack thereof. One idea raised was that stakeholders must be involved at thg 3. Financial resources The group identified financial inefficiency, wasteful spending, lack of transparency, and corruption as the main constraints in this category. They believed it necessary to identify the country’s current and future sources of funds and make public spending records available. The group maintained that in order to have oa 4. Data issues Public data collection agencies such as the Federal Bureau of Statistics (FBS) were accused of maintaining old and outdated tools and techniques of data collection. Data reliability and availability were raised as discussion points. The group considered outsourcing data collection and analysis, and the reprocessing of existing data to private agencies to update data collection methodologies and create computerized databases. They also e 5. Policy implementation The group pointed out that ad-hocism and unplanned policy changes lead to formulation of

15


vague policies. This was apparent from the rampant contradictions in cross-sectoral examinations of government policy. The involvement of the civil society was stressed upon

help make policy more realistic and implementable.

ments containing specific details of any approved project should e available to the public.

ase, and economic modeling were recommended to increase e capacity base in Pakistan.

of modern, improved methodologies of monitoring and evaluation was ecommended.

to 6. Transparency This theme was related to the earlier discussion on financial resources. The only additional constraint identified was a lack of right to information. For this purpose, it was suggested that all information relating to public development projects should be available to the public, especially to groups that stand to be affected. A realistic solution supporting this was that Planning Commission docub 7. Capacity building The group believed that a lack of capacity was a serious constraint. Group members felt that expertise did exist, but that it was often wasted because of placement it in the wrong areas. Again, the point about lack of coordination was relevant here. Improved human resource practices, a stronger research bth 8. Monitoring and evaluation The group stressed upon the independence of monitoring and evaluation activities from project implementation, by separating the actors responsible for the two activities. In addition, the user

16


Working Group 2

Identifying trade policy documents and specific sectors that need to be assessed through an integrated approach

Team 1 The team was asked to identify a sector that was regarded as being important for the economy and relevant to social concerns. The group chose the textile and cement sectors for their deliberations. The first leg of the activity focused on the following areas • Multilateral policies • Regional policies • National policies 1. Multilateral policies Taking the WTO as the most important multilateral institution affecting the textile sector, the implementation of the WTO regulations and coordination with other signatory countries was seen as a constraint. The increase in pollution with the increase in activity in the textile sector was unanimously seen as the most serious hazard to the environment. Donor help in technical assistance and funding to curb pollution was suggested as the first solution. Another suggestion emphasized creating awareness, and held it to be the responsibility of the civil society. It was suggested that the government should ensure the implementation of proper legislation to curb pollution. 2. Regional policies Considering SAFTA as the regional policy for discussion, political issues determining the success or failure of a regional policy were identified as the biggest impediment. Sensitive lists, which hinder effective trade liberalization were also considered to be an issue. The need to resolve political tensions before undertaking regional trade liberalization was emphasized. The removal of non-tariff barriers was another suggested solution. The usefulness of free movement of labor within the region, and tourism to enhance mutual understanding were highlighted. 3. National policies National policies are generally fragmented. The lack of coordination in national policies was seen to be an issue standing in the way of policy effectiveness. Focusing on the cement sector, the group opined that the sector was not regulated properly and environmentally harmful practices such as using cheap coal as fuel went unchecked. Vested interests were the reason for inconsistent policies. The group felt that the government tends to ignore any social agitation. The need to coordinate national policies with regional and multilateral commitments was stressed. For the cement sector, a proper regulatory framework for pricing as well as keeping a check on environmentally harmful practices was suggested as the most effective solution.

17


The second leg of the group activity required the group to discuss the role of the following agents in creating awareness about integrated assessment • Public sector • Private sector • Civil society • Donor agencies Public sector: The group suggested that the government should initiate the process by leading an integrated assessment in a transparent manner in order to convince others of the utility of this approach. The group was of the view that by encouraging stakeholder participation as part of the policy formulation process, the government can lead by example. Private sector: The private sector could play a role in mainstreaming the integrated assessment approach by investing in research and development and by evaluating the effectiveness of previous projects that have used the integrated assessment technique. Civil society: The civil society was believed to have the most important role in creating awareness about integrated assessment. The group suggested that the civil society should collaborate with the government and identify problem areas where projects or policies would most benefit from integrated assessment. The civil society can also take the ownership for solving integrated assessment-related problems. Another solution proposed was the involvement of elected representatives at the grassroots level. Donor agencies: Donor funding for integrated assessment was regarded as holding utmost importance. However, the group highlighted the fact that such funding could only be generated id donors were convinced that a transparent, institutionalized mechanism was in place to conduct integrated assessments.

18


Team 2 Identifying trade policy documents and specific sectors that have economic potential, environmental impacts, and social underpinnings, and therefore need to be assessed through an integrated approach The group observed that to date, none of Pakistan’s trade policies had ever adequately addressed the environmental or social aspects of a given trade initiative. They identified several sectors that required integrated assessments, notably, the mining industry, fisheries, forestry, livestock and dairy, and horticulture. For the forestry sector, the promotion of non-timber forest products (NTFPs) was deemed very important. However, the case of Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) was considered the most significant and therefore allotted the majority of discussion time. They said the Government needed to take concrete steps towards supporting informal industries such as small family run operations and cottage industries. The participants recommended bringing national policies in line with regional trade policies. Group members were of the opinion that multilateral arrangements such as those of the WTO did not inhibit governments from working on national goals and agendas. They therefore dispelled the argument that social and environmental regulations under WTO undermined economic benefits of an industry. On a local level, they called for more flexibility in trade policy implementation, saying that a short time frame of ‘informal’ implementation should be allocated to allow for feedback from concerned parties. They supported the idea of conducting integrated assessments at the time of policy drafting.

19


Working Group 3 Team 1 Identifying key issues that should be the focus of an integrated assessment of (i) bilateral trade liberalization between Pakistan and India and (ii) regional trade liberalization in South Asia via SAFTA

The group chose the textile sector for its deliberations. 1. Main target groups and decision-makers In the context of the textile sector in Pakistan, all those involved along the production chain were identified as stakeholders; the growers, ginners, spinners, millers, exporters, importers, government employees, the employers and employees within the sector, and the affected communities. 2. Dimensions to be covered by integrated assessment The group emphasized the importance of the three dimensions conventionally covered by integrated assessment; the social, environmental and economic aspects 3. Policy measures The group suggested a market-based approach and a system of incentives for environmentally friendly behavior to be adopted by the industry. The need to make technology cheaper to encourage social responsibility was highlighted. 4. Bilateral trade The group opined that effective bilateral trade would improve social indicators such as health by reducing poverty, as liberalization would lead to increase in incomes. 5. Regional trade Regional trade was seen as a threat to the environment because of the impact that SAFTA would have on the exports of bed linen, a product whose production has significant negative environmental impacts. However, for SAFTA to have any impact on the textile sector, removal of textiles from the sensitive lists and removal of non-tariff barriers would be a prerequisite. The group felt that regional trade liberalization would contribute to transfer of technology, access to cheaper goods and competitive pricing. SAFTA would lower production costs and further enhance Pakistan’s exports. According to the group, SAFTA is likely to have a positive impact on the social conditions in Pakistan by contributing to employment opportunities and incomes. It was suggested that stakeholders should be included in the process of regional agreements. The group felt that the environmental impact of joining SAFTA was unclear and must be assessed through an integrated assessment. 6. Design of the Integrated Assessment The need to improve implementation, legislation and to create awareness and social responsibility was underscored. The group was in favor of an ex-ante approach for integrated assessment in Pakistan, and it was felt that efforts at the policy-design stage would be more effective than studying the after-effects of a flawed policy. Specifically, in the context of

20


textiles, an ex-post approach would be risky since textiles form the backbone of the country’s exports. The short- to medium-term timeframe to implement an integrated assessment was suggested for the textile sector. It was felt that linking the progress of an integrated assessment with the Millennium Development Goals might improve efficiency. The Federation of Pakistan Chambers of Commerce and Industry was seen as an appropriate candidate to coordinate the involvement of all stakeholders and act as a bridge between the government and private stakeholders. The formulation of a forum encompassing all small establishments representing the textile sector was suggested. A self-monitoring and evaluation mechanism was suggested to ensure proper monitoring and evaluation.

21


Team 2 The participants of group three were required to discuss in detail the purpose of their proposed integrated assessment, its focus, scope, and design, and finally put forward possible policy suggestions for the end of an integrated assessment. 1. Main target groups and decision makers Members of the group identified the ministry of commerce as the main decision-maker in conducting integrated assessments. The consumer was identified as a demand generator whose actions affect the decisions taken by the ministry. The target groups identified included civil society and the private sector. 2. Policy measures The group considered tariff reduction as an effective tool for trade liberalization. They added however that non-tariff barriers (NTBs) must be consolidated to protect local industry to some extent. NTBs had not been properly explored and that Pakistan and India had little information on each others’ NTBs. On macroeconomic policies and deregulation and privatization, the group took the stance that market based instruments should be preferred over regulation, because too much regulation impedes business. The group’s support for SMEs was apparent from the fact that they spoke vehemently against current banking policies that did not allow the same sort of financial credit for SMEs that they did for larger organizations. 3. Focus and Scope Sectors of interest to the group included the mining industry, fisheries, the forestry sector, livestock and dairy, horticulture, and SMEs. Geographic focus ought to be on areas relatively less endowed in natural resources, and poverty stricken regions in general. Environmentally and socially critical issues identified included biodiversity and social equity. 4. Design of the integrated assessment Group members unanimously agreed on the need for intensive capacity building through training workshops and knowledge sharing and stressed the need for relevant experts and trained field researchers. On the question of stakeholders, it was established that the stakeholders should have knowledge about the subject at hand and should be selected on the basis of inputs. Moreover, the role of each stakeholder should remain on a strict professional-subject basis. The groups stressed that environmental assessment in Pakistan was dismal and that data collection and baseline survey activities must be outsourced to private hands to improve data quality and reliability. The issue of transparency would ideally be dealt with via extensive monitoring and evaluation, the assurance of free access to information on integrated assessments and inbuilt auditing. As a final recommendation, the group suggested the development of a framework on identifying policy measures and the quantifiable outcomes expected on a regular basis to generate a depository of initiatives where integrated assessment should be conducted.

22


Session V Working Group Presentations and Discussion Ms. Azka Tanveer and Mr. Ali Pracha, the rapporteurs for the working groups, opened the final session by making brief presentations on the deliberations of each working group, details of which have been provided above. This was followed by a discussion based on the presentations from Ms. Tanveer and Mr. Pracha. The discussion opened with comments from Moeed Yusuf who channeled the discussion by putting forth questions regarding the issues hindering the adoption of integrated assessment in Pakistan. He called for comments from the participants on the importance of SMEs as a

potential priority area for conducing integrated assessments. The second issue he requested feedback on was stakeholder participation and whether the private sector could ensure this, given the Government’s seeming reluctance to move to achieve this goal. Another aspect emphasized was the need for collaboration among various organizations in the private sector and civil society, in addition to public-public and public-private partnerships. In the resulting discussion, it was noted that mistrust among different organizations hinders their willingness and ability to collaborate. As an example, a discussant pointed out the fact that the lack of trust among the various chambers of commerce in the country prevents the formulation of a united stance. It thus allows the politically connected to gain, harming the private sector as a whole. Another discussant opined that SAFTA is perceived to be a failure by the business community due to strained relations between the SAARC countries, especially India and Pakistan. He felt that businessmen from both countries are reluctant to invest money in the other country because of the uncertainty surrounding the political relations. The argument was that for integrated assessments having a regional focus to work, political tensions must be sidelined. One discussant felt that SMEs are high on the government’s agenda and there are signs that the government is willing to take steps to formulate policies favorable to the small and medium sector. The government’s credit policy launched in 2005 favors SMEs and is seen as

23


proof of the government’s commitment to the small and medium sector. The discussant was of the view that it was now the responsibility of the private sector and the civil society to ensure that the will of the government is translated into action. SMEs were highlighted as a potential priority area for an integrated assessment. According to one suggestion, for the purpose of initiating and subsequently mainstreaming integrated assessments, it would be beneficial to begin with only the small enterprises. The specific focus ought be on small agriculture-related enterprises, as the agriculture sector has far-reaching social and environmental impacts in Pakistan. Citing the examples of the failure of certain key government initiatives to rectify the situation, the discussant stressed that many opportunities for government intervention exist and if the government expresses willingness to be involved with any sector, the opportunity should be taken. Tight centralization of Pakistan’s governance structure was regarded as being largely responsible for the lack of proper policy implementation. Moreover, inter-provincial disharmony does not allow for a uniform policy to be implemented across the provinces. One discussant emphasized the need to create awareness about the integrated assessment tool so that the government notices public sentiment and is compelled to address the concerns being voiced. He stressed upon the role of the civil society in capacity building. It was pointed out that stakeholder capacity needs to be emphasized, as knowledgeable stakeholders can improve the quality of policymaking by allowing for better, informed decisions to be made. It was suggested that donors (of future integrated assessments) monitor their own programs by developing suitable indicators to gauge the success, or lack thereof, of the program. This task should not be left to any actor having a direct stake in the assessment, for fear of conflict of interest. Final Remarks The workshop ended with Moeed Yusuf outlining the proposed steps to utilize the feedback collected during the workshop. He mentioned that ideally, SDPI was aiming to conduct an integrated assessment of regional trade liberalization via SAFTA. The participants were informed that specific details (sector, timing, scope, etc) of such an exercise would be chalked out after analyzing the feedback obtained during the workshop. Mr. Yusuf recognized UNEP’s guidance and assistance in making the workshop possible. Many of the participants also expressed gratitude suggesting that the experience was extremely positive. Outcome and a look towards the future SDPI’s initiative was the first effort at introducing the concept of integrated assessment to all relevant stakeholders in Pakistan. The participation and quality of feedback at the workshop has suggested a greater than expected interest from stakeholders in such a concept. The positive comments about the concept and encouraging feedback signal to a realistic possibility of bringing integrated assessment into mainstream policy making in Pakistan. Given the vast experience of the participants in their respective fields, while receiving encouragement, we also benefited from constructive criticism through which participants highlighted the significant constraints that exist in the South Asian, and specifically Pakistani

24


context to implementing such an approach on a regular basis. Participants cautioned against any misperceptions of being able to push this concept without facing serious resistance from vested interests. However, all participants, including government representatives were unanimous in acknowledging that redressing the very failings in Pakistan’s institutional setting that may become hindrances to integrated assessments ought to provide the impetus for such exercises to be conducted. It was clear from the discussions that no one saw the current outright focus of trade policies on economic interests as beneficial in the long run. The concept of integrated assessment was viewed positively, as a much-needed tool that could bring environmental and social concerns at par with economic issues. Looking towards the future, deliberations during the working groups suggest a strong need as well as an interest in conducting integrated assessments in order to present empirical evidence of its relevance to the Pakistani context. Focusing on regional trade liberalization via SAFTA, it was suggested that to initialize the process, a sector specific integrated assessment looking only at impacts within Pakistan should be conducted. Subsequently, in an ideal scenario, the net should be case wider and complementary assessments should be made in various South Asian countries. Ms. Azreen Karim gave a proposal for SDPI to take the lead on getting researchers from South Asian countries together to conduct a regional integrated assessment. Given that SAFTA is set to be implemented beginning July 2006, this was an extremely opportune time to hold the workshop. Majority of participants seemed to suggest Pakistan’s textile sector as the ideal candidate for an initial integrated assessment conducted on an ex-ante basis. Based on the extremely encouraging feedback and the surprisingly high level of enthusiasm about the concept, we feel it is imperative to take this process forward with the hope that in due course integrated assessments would become a part of mainstream policymaking in Pakistan.

25

Annexures

Annex 1

Workshop Agenda

Venue: Best Western Hotel, Islamabad

15 – 16 May 2006

Day One: Monday, 15 May 2006 08.30-09.00 Registration 09.00-09.15 Welcome Address 09:15-09:30 Introduction to UNEP and its initiative on Integrated Assessment 09.30-10.00 The linkage between trade and sustainable development: Towards a Southern

Agenda Shaheen Rafi Khan, SDPI 10.00-10.40 Introduction to the concept and process of integrated assessment and relevance

to trade policy Moeed Yusuf, SDPI 10.40-11.00 Tea 11.00-11.40 Existing methodologies and content of integrated assessments Moeed Yusuf, SDPI 11.40-13.00 Indicators to assess integrated impacts and issues of data availability & Monitoring and Evaluation of Integrated Assessment recommendations Sohail Jahangir Malik, Innovative Development Strategies 13.00-13.30 Tailoring integrated assessments to local conditions

Jyoti Parikh, IRADe (India) and Azreen Karim, East-West University (Bangladesh)

13.30-14.30 Lunch 14.30-15.30 Open house discussion

Ms. Yasmin Javed, Mr. Akbar Abdullah, Mr. Manzoor Kiyani to initiate the discussions

15.30-16.45 Working groups to determine the key areas where capacity building for

integrated assessment is needed, and to highlight constraints in adopting the integrated approach in Pakistan

16.45-17.00 Tea


Day Two: Tuesday, 16 May 2006 09.00-10.00 Working groups to brainstorm on trade policy documents and specific sectors

that need to be assessed through an integrated approach 10.00-11.00 Working groups to brainstorm on key issues that should be the focus of an

integrated assessment of (i) bilateral trade liberalization between Pakistan and India, and (ii) regional trade liberalization in South Asia via SAFTA

11.00-11.15 Tea 11.15-12.45 Working groups reports by group facilitators 12.45-13.00 Final remarks 13.00-14.00 Lunch

30


Annex 2

Working Group Handouts Working group session # 1 Identifying key constraints and capacity building issues in implementing IA in Pakistan The list below provides key categories upon which group members should deliberate to come up with the major constraints (with each category). The key of this session is to identify any possible constraints one might find in implementing the IA in the Pakistani environment. More importantly, we want a detailed analysis of what kind of measures can the government, private sector, or civil society take to remove the identified hurdles. These could include minor changes in policy, establishing new entities, or assigning new tasks to existing functionaries, among many other possibilities. • Inter-ministerial coordination • Stakeholder participation (full participation) • Financial Resources • Data issues • Policy implementation • Transparency--- making results accessible to the public Capacity Building • Existing state of human capacity to undertake IAs • Expertise in various methodologies • Indicator development • Monitoring and Evaluation

31


Working group session # 2 Identifying trade policy documents and specific sectors that need to be assessed through an integrated approach We would like group participants to highlight the major recent or proposed trade initiatives by GOP, which need an IA conducted before (or after for recent ones) they are implemented. These could be overall trade policy documents, sector specific polices, and could be at the national, regional, or global level. We would urge the group to identify policies/sectors that have a significant impact on social and environmental aspects. This exercise would entail identification of the policy/sector, reasons for the choice (importance for economy, relevant to social concerns, etc), and what one is likely to find as a result of the IA (so what are the major worries with regard to social and environmental aspects). • Multilateral policies • Regional policies • National policies • Sector-specific initiatives • Others that might not be in the pipeline but are important with regard to substantial social

and environmental impacts Having completed this task, the second leg of this session requires group participants to deliberate upon what role each of the actors listed below can play in raising awareness about IA, bringing it into mainstream policy making, and perhaps over time even making it mandatory, as is the case with impact assessments for mega-projects. • Public Sector • Private Sector • Civil Society • Donor agencies

32


Working group session # 3 Identifying key issues that should be the focus of an integrated assessment of (i) bilateral trade liberalization between Pakistan and India, and (ii) regional trade liberalization in South Asia via SAFTA The questions below are meant to initiate deliberation upon the most useful elements of a potential IA on your assigned agreement/sector. Group participants are requested to discuss the following issues, but move beyond them to identify what an ideal IA on the topic under discussion would look like. In the final group presentation, we would like to hear a brief on the virtual IA plan/design and the measures to be taken to ensure its success. We will use these suggestions to formulate the components of an IA on SAFTA and Pakistan-India trade liberalization that we plan to conduct subsequently. Purpose of the integrated assessment: 1. Who are the main target groups and decision makers? 2. What are desirable outcomes to influence decision makers? 3. What policy decisions should be influenced? 4. What are the key policy measures the government is likely to take in order to liberalize

trade? • Tariff • Non-tariff • Macroeconomic policiesDeregulation and privatisation • Tax policies • Policies affecting banking and credit systems

5. At what stage is the planning or negotiation process? 6. What level of detail is needed for the integrated assessment? 7. What are the capacity building objectives? Focus and scope of the integrated assessment: 1. What (trade) policy and policy measures are subject to the integrated assessment? 2. What are the sectors of interest (e.g. the rice sector, the transport sector, etc.)? 3. What is the geographical focus (e.g. poverty-stricken regions, important natural

resources, etc.)? 4. What are the environmentally and/or socially critical issues (e.g. biodiversity, social

equity, etc.)? 5. What is the time frame? Design of the integrated assessment: 1. What is the best timing for influencing policy makers or serving negotiators? 2. What human resources are available? 3. What financial resources are available? 4. What type of end-product is most useful for policy makers? 5. Which stakeholders need to be involved? 6. How would you devise roles for stakeholders? 7. What information is required and available? 8. How would you tackle dearth of available data? What indicators would you use, given the

most likely impacts you have highlighted? 9. How will transparency be ensured? 10. What means of communication can be used? 11. How can capacity building be ensured?

33


12. Which IA methods can be applied? Policy and M&E 1. Please provide some tentative ideas of what policy suggestions might be made at the end

of an IA 2. How can these be made practical (implementable) in the Pakistani context? 3. What sort of sustainability indicators would you develop to gauge success? 4. How will you ensure the monitoring and evaluation program is implemented and results

incorporated in future policies?

34


Supplementary hand-out for working group session #3 Impact of SAFTA Great expectations have overrun pessimism and caution expressed by diehard antagonists and moderates of the Indo-Pak détente that was set in motion after the SAFTA was signed on 6 January 2004 in Islamabad. It has been declared that an economic imperative will turn around regional economies that support nearly one-fourth of the world’s population, and where 50% of people live below the poverty line. How will this come about? The SAFTA agreement is scheduled to be implemented on 1st July 2006, and it will take seven years for the developed countries of India and Pakistan to bring existing intra-regional trade tariffs to 0–5%. Meeting this target of trade tariffs will take up to ten years for the rest of the five SAARC member states which are considered LDCs according to UN policy. There have to be certain cogent reasons to ride on the waves of these ‘Great Expectations’. One can examine the expectations with particular reference to ground political and economic realities that currently prevail and are likely to remain in the future. Light Engineering Industry Iron ore is an important raw material for the steel industry of Pakistan. However, the lack of a heavy engineering industry forces Pakistan to import iron and steel worth $300–400 million per annum from Brazil and AustraliaHowever, importing iron and steel from India would decrease the price of iron by over 50%, and subsequent finished engineering goods by 10–20 percent. However, Pakistan’s light engineering industry—that produces consumer items such as refrigerators, irons, washing machines, geysers, air-conditioners, and televisions—will face a serious threat if the same Indian products are allowed passage into Pakistan. The industrial producers of these items have requested the Government to include light engineering products in the sensitive imports list. Textiles Pakistan has a competitive advantage in the cotton textiles products, which need to be revitalized. India maintains the upper hand in the silk and synthetic fibres market. The opening up of trade between India and Pakistan will help Pakistan acquire textile chemicals and other inputs at cheaper rates, and thus make their products more competitive in international markets. It is recommended that the Government include such chemicals in the positive list of importable items from India. Food and Agri-business The food and agri-business industry has a significant impact on the agrarian economies of both Pakistan and India. This industry has one of the highest economic multiplier effects among the various industries. Liberalized India-Pakistan trade and the establishment of joint ventures in the agro sector—especially in the areas of food processing and packaging—is expected to generate around 270,000 jobs in India, and 170,000 jobs in Pakistan.

35


Annex 3

Participant’s List Name Designation Organization Address Phone Number(s) Fax Number(s) Email Address(s)

Government Contacts 1 Abdul Rashid Awan Manager, Operations Forest Development

Corporation (FDC) Offices Enclave, Phase 5, Hyattabad Peshawar

(091) 921 7175 (091) 921 7170

2 Manzoor Ahmad Kayani

Ministry of Commerce Government of Pakistan

EAC Building, 5-A, Constitution Avenue Islamabad 44000

(051) 920 4716 [email protected]

3 Syed Mahmood Nasir Director, Biodiversity Unit Ministry of Environment Government of Pakistan

1st Floor, Hajvery Plaza, Blue Area Islamabad 44000

(0333) 517 1184 (051) 920 2138 (051) 920 1141

4 Syed Kauser Ali Zaidi Section Officer, Foreign Trade

Ministry of Commerce Government of Pakistan

R-434, Block A, Pakistan Secretariat, Islamabad 44000

(0300) 521 5345 (0301) 544 8228 (051) 920 5223

[email protected]

5 Yasmin Masood Economic Affairs Division Government of Pakistan

C Block, Pakistan Secretariat (051) 920 2093 [email protected]

6 Malik MuhammadKhan

Chief Conservator (Retd.) Forest and Natural Resource Management Specialist

357, Street 4, Gulraiz IV Rawalpindi

(051) 550 9426 (0300) 855 1253

[email protected]

Private Sector Contacts 7 Abdul Rashid (Capt.) Member, Managing

Committee, FPCCI Pacific Pakistan Federation of Pakistan Chambers of Commerce and Industry (FPCCI)

Pacific Pakistan 11/1, 6 Gizri Lane, DHA, Phase IV, Karachi FPCCI Federation House, Main Clifton, P.O. Box 13875, Karachi 75600

(0321) 822 4858 (021) 587 3691-4


8 Akbar Abdullah Vice President Federation of Pakistan Chambers of Commerce and Industry (FPCCI)

Federation House, Main Clifton, P.O. Box 13875, Karachi 75600

(021) 587 3691-4 (021) 587 4332 [email protected]

9 Azeema Cheema Asian Development Bank (ADB)

Overseas Pakistanis Foundation Building Sharah-e-Jamhuriyat, G-5/2, Islamabad 44000

(051) 282 5011-16 (051) 208 7300

(051) 282 3324 (051) 227 4718

[email protected]

10 Ejaz Haider Editor Daily Times 41-N, Industrial Area Gulberg II, Lahore

(042) 587 8614-19 (042) 587 8620

36

mailto:[email protected]








Name Designation Organization Address Phone Number(s) Fax Number(s) Email Address(s) 11 M. A. Jabbar (Engr.) Chief Executive Qaim Automotive

Manufacturers (Pvt.) Ltd. H.O. 203 – 206 Prince Centre, Preedy Street, Saddar, Karachi 74400

(0300) 823 6782 (021) 273 3000 (021) 272 2616 (021) 256 3748-51

(021) 272 0419 (021) 256 1178

12 Naser Noor Chairman, Special Committee on Regional Economic Affairs Sub-committee, KCCI

Karachi Chamber of Commerce and Industry (KCCI) M/s. Al Noor Enterprises

KCCI Aiwan-e-Tijarat Rd, Off Shahrah-e-Liaquat, P.O. Box No. 4158, Karachi-74000 M/s. Al Noor Enterprises 14–17, 1st Floor, Zeenat Medicine Market, North Napier Rd, Karachi

(0300) 921 9474 (021) 241 6091-94 (021) 241 5435-39 (021) 244 0509 (021) 243 2771

(021) 241 6095 (021) 241 0587

[email protected]

13 Sabeen Mahmood SAARC Chamber of Commerce and Industry

5, Street 59, F-8/4, Islamabad 44000

(051) 228 1395-6 (051) 228 1390 [email protected]

14 Saqib Naseem Chairman, Research & Economic Development Cell Sub-committee, KCCI

Karachi Chamber of Commerce and Industry (KCCI)

KCCI Aiwan-e-Tijarat Rd, Off Shahrah-e-Liaquat, P.O. Box No. 4158, Karachi-74000 Shop No. 4, Akhund Masjid Market, Next to Quaid-e-Azam Birth Place, Newneham Rd, Kharadar, Karachi

(0300) 824 3212 (021) 241 6091-94 (021) 241 5435-39 (021) 244 3479 (021) 243 6052

(021) 241 6095 (021) 241 0587

[email protected]

Civil Society Contacts 15 Afra Sajjad Head of Policy Development Association of Chartered

Certified Accountants (ACCA)

Suite 2-A, 3rd Floor, Ai Plaza 1-E Jinnah Avenue, Blue Area, Islamabad 44000

(0300) 860 5415 (051) 111 222275


16 Arshad Abbasi Advisor on Water Sustainable Development Policy Institute (SDPI)

#3, UN Boulevard Diplomatic Enclave-1 Sector G-5, Islamabad 44000

(0333) 514 4405 (051) 227 0674-6 (051) 227 7146 (051) 227 8134


17 Azreen Karim Professor of Economics East-West University 43 Mohakhali, Dhaka 1212, Bangladesh

[email protected]

18 Beenish Razi Association of Chartered Certified Accountants (ACCA)

Suite 2-A, 3rd Floor, Ai Plaza 1-E Jinnah Avenue, Blue Area, Islamabad 44000

(0345) 510 5150 (051) 111 222275


19 Ikramullah Shams Programme Officer South Asian Partnership Program

Haseeb Memorial Trust Building, 2, K.M. Raiwind Rd Nasirabad Thokar Niaz Beg, Lahore

(042) 531 1701-3 [email protected]

37











Name Designation Organization Address Phone Number(s) Fax Number(s) Email Address(s) 20 Jyoti Parikh Executive Director Integrated Research and

Action for Development (IRADe)

C-50, Chhota Singh Block, Asian Games Village Complex, Khelgaon, New Delhi 110049, India

+91 11 264 95522 +91 11 264 95522-3

[email protected]

21 Riaz Ahmed Khan Advocacy Specialist Sungi Development Foundation

7-A, Street 10, F-8/3 Islamabad 44000

(051) 228 2481 (051) 228 2482


22 Sajid Kazmi Consultant Sustainable Development Policy Institute (SDPI)


(051) 227 0674-6 (051) 227 7146 (051) 227 8134


23 Sobia Ahmed Political Economist Asian Institute of Trade and Development

5, Street 9, F-8/3 Islamabad 44000

(051) 225 3351 (051) 225 3354 (051) 2250657 (051) 226 3670

(051) 226 0675 (051) 226 2082

24 Sohail Jahangir Malik Chief Executive Innovative Development Strategies

2, Street 44, F-8/1 Islamabad 44000


25 Stella Cridge Ph.D Student London School of Economics and Political Science, University of London

Houghton Street London WC2A 2AE United Kingdom

+44 7941 259297 [email protected]

Media Contacts 26 Irfan Ghauri Daily Times Islamabad 44000 27 Mubarak Zeb Khan Commerce Reporter Dawn Plot No.12, G-7/1,

Mauve Area, Near Zero Point Islamabad 44000

(0333) 514 4495 (051) 220 2701

28 Shakeel Ahmed Producer AAJ TV 29 Shezad Raza Daily Times Islamabad 44000 (0300) 955 7002 (051) 227 5092 30 Tanveer Sardar ATV 36, Sector H-9,

Islamabad 44000 (0300) 855 0559 [email protected]

Facilitators Shaheen Rafi Khan Research Fellow Sustainable Development

Policy Institute (SDPI) #3, UN Boulevard Diplomatic Enclave-1 Sector G-5, Islamabad 44000

(051) 227 0674-6 (051) 227 7146 (051) 227 8134


Moeed Yusuf Consultant Sustainable Development Policy Institute (SDPI)


(051) 227 0674-6 (051) 227 7146 (051) 227 8134


Azka Tanveer Consultant Sustainable Development Policy Institute (SDPI)


(051) 227 0674-6 (051) 227 7146 (051) 227 8134


Ali S. Pracha Consultant Sustainable Development Policy Institute (SDPI)


(051) 227 0674-6 (051) 227 7146 (051) 227 8134


38


http://mail.sdpi.org/cgi-bin/openwebmail/openwebmail-send.pl?action=composemessage&page=1&sort=date&folder=INBOX&sessionid=aspracha*-session-0.888900542705418&composetype=sendto&to=riaz.ahmed%40sungi.org&compose_caller=abook










Annex 4 Press Coverage

Daily Times, May 16, 2006

39


Dawn, May 16, 2006

40


Nation, May 16, 2006

41


The News, May 17, 2006

42


The Post, May 16, 2006

Call to incorporate Integrated Assessment in trade policymaking By Sajjad Malik Introducing the concept ofIntegrated Assessment, expertson trade and sustainabledevelopment from Pakistan,India, and Bangladesh calledupon the governments toincorporate economic, socialand environmental concernsunder a single frameworkcalled 'Integrated Assessment'in trade policy formulation. Speaking at an internationalconference on "Introducing theConcept of IntegratedAssessment in Pakistan"organised by United NationsEnvironment Programme(UNEP) and SustainableDevelopment Policy Institute(SDPI) here Monday, they saidthat the concept of IntegratedAssessment helps governmentsto make informed policydecisions while realising thelinkages among all aspects ofsustainable development. They said that the integratedassessment model wasrelatively a new tool thatincorporated economic, socialand environmental concernsunder a single policyframework, which helped torealise the linkages between allaspects of sustainabledevelopment. Azreen Karim from East-WestUniversity in Bangladeshpointed out that extensive

research had been undertakenin Bangladesh in the areas ofeconomics, society and theenvironment, but such effortswere fragmented and did notcontribute in a substantialmanner to holistic policyformulation. She emphasisedfor using an Integratedassessment approach inBangladesh as well as otherdeveloping countries. Dr. Jyoti Parikh from NewDelhi said that global warmingand climatic changes hadbrought drought, changingclimate patterns and socialeffects such as migration dueto rising sea levels, airconditioning costs and othersocial costs were giganticproblem for every country. She said that burden-sharingwhile trying to address globalissues collectively wasimportant as according to oneIndian study, 25 per cent of theworld's population wasresponsible for 75 per cent ofthe total emissions in theworld. Dr. Shaheen Rafi Khan,research fellow at SDPIelaborated the linkagesbetween trade and sustainabledevelopment in the WTOcontext and emphasised theneed for taking an integratedassessment approach to social

and environmental issuesstemming out of faulty andincomplete trade policies.

Moeed Yusuf, a consultant oneconomic policy said thateconomic, social andenvironmental concerns shouldbe incorporated in a singleframework in trade policyformulation. He highlightedthe uniqueness of integratedassessment as a tool that couldaddress all sustainabledevelopment issuessimultaneously. “A key element of integratedassessment is that itnecessitates full participationfrom the public and privatesectors as well as the civilsociety, thus integrating allstakeholders in one process,"he said. The integrated assessmentmodel is a relatively new toolthat incorporates economic,social and environmentalconcerns under a single policyframework. The event wasattended by a variety ofstakeholders ranging frommembers of the civil society,trade organisations, economistsand representatives of thegovernment's commerce,environment and economicaffairs division.

43

Documents

Introducing the Concept of Integrated Assessment of Trade ... · PDF fileSAFTA South Asia Free Trade Agreement ... proper monitoring and evaluation system was underscored and the need