Pakistan’s first national waterpolicy – historic or mereelectioneering?A group of experts give their verdict on whether thelong fought over policy will help tackle the country’swater crisisZofeen T. Ebrahim, Tuesday May 8th, 2018

Pakistanʼs populace, such as these farmers in Gujranwala, are critically dependent on water, butthere is no water policy [image by Aftab Rizvi]

In April, the chief ministers of Pakistan’s four provinces approved thecountry’s first national water policy – after over a decade of wrangling andconsultations. With a large and growing population, and some of the leastamount of water per person in the world, Pakistan already faced hugechallenges – made worse by climate change, population growth, climatechange, abysmal mismanagement of water and disputes between provinces

and with neighbouring countries. The lack of a national policy made tacklingthese issues that much harder.

At this historic moment, we asked an environmental lawyer, a developmentleader, a water expert and a political economist to go through the longawaited National Water Policy and decode what’s written in the fine print andmore significantly, what has been left out. But instead of disentangling it forus, we got mixed signals.

Ahmad Rafay Alam, environmental lawyer and activist.

Ahmed Rafay Alam, an environment lawyer and activist, found the documentto be “forced” upon Pakistan as a “political” gimmick — “a sort of ‘well look,we even passed a water policy’ argument when the ruling PML-N is askedwhat it did in the face of Pakistan’s present water crisis,” he said.

Ali Tauqeer Sheikh, head of LEAD Pakistan, an Islamabad-based think tankspecialising in environment and development issues, disagreed. He termed it

as “ground breaking” and a “super political accomplishment” for the rulingparty. Getting the policy approved from all the provinces just before electionswas no mean feat, he argued.

Ali Tauqeer Sheikh, head of LEAD Pakistan.

Shakeel Ahmad Ramay, a political economist, who heads the research uptakesection at Islamabad-based think tank, SDPI, also praised it as a “historicmilestone” given the “lingering, perennial disputes between the Punjab andSindh provinces” which have been the biggest roadblock in coming up with awater policy at the national level.

Shakeel Ramay, political economist.

To Arif Anwar, who heads IWMI in Pakistan, securing approval from allprovinces was the achievement rather than the policy itself.

Cut ‘n’ paste job

Hassan Abbas, an academic and water expert, called the policy a “mostly cutand paste work” with “incoherent, fragmented and – often times –inconsistent text”. For example, he said, “On the one hand, the policy calls forbanning of flood irrigation in the country, but on the other, prioritisesinvestments on lining open channel water courses meant for flood irrigation.”

“It is unfortunate that despite identifying flood-irrigation as a major problem,there are no recommended investments to promote efficient irrigation,” hepointed out. Agriculture consumes the most water in Pakistan, but it is usedin a wasteful manner, with huge losses due to evaporation and waterlogging,and one of the lowest levels of productivity per acre in the world.

Hassan Abbas, an academic and water expert.

Beyond water – bringing in other sectors

On a positive note, Sheikh argued the document goes beyond water withspecific targets set for energy, agriculture and development of waterreservoirs. The latter, he said, will provide water outside the monsoon periodto ensure “better yields, field level productivity and help alleviate poverty ofthe poor farmers” for the implementation of the Sustainable DevelopmentGoals. In addition, it will help offset national emissions by promotinghydropower and reducing the price of energy, Sheikh pointed out.

In contrast, Anwar found the policy myopic in that it looked at water use bysector in a fairly conventional manner with irrigation still a priority withindustry and environment relegated further down the list.

A very disappointed Hassan Abbas found the policy showing a “complete lackof integrated thinking”.

“Contemporary elements of low-carbon green-growth, reduced carbon footprint in irrigation/water development projects, water sensitive urban designs,adaptation measures to manage natural hazards and mapping of water-sectordevelopment goals with SDGs, etc,” he said were also sorely missing from thetext.

A narrow view of water economy

To Abbas, exploiting a water-driven economy should have been the firstpriority, but has been put last. “Inland navigation is one of the most powerfuleconomic engines (in addition to fisheries, tourism, game, water-front realestate development) which can, and should, dove-tail extremely well with theChinese Pakistan Economic Corridor, but it has been put at the last priorityunder Section 4!” he said.

The policy, he said had taken an extremely “narrow” view of water –reckoning water pricing including water bills and abiana (the water chargecollected from farmers on the basis of per acre and type of crop) as the onlyeconomic value of water.

Will the NWP help settle provincial grouses?

“Not really,” said Anwar and partly because a lot of the issues between theprovinces stem from the interpretation of the interprovincial WaterApportionment Accord (WAA) of 1991 and its operational plan, or rather lackof one. The accord apportioned the water of the Indus between the provincesand has been a bone of contention ever since.

See also: Pakistan’s provincial disputes: a way forward

However, Sheikh believed that the fact the policy had been unanimouslyapproved by all provinces and signed off by their respective chief ministers

meant most of the underlying grievances had been settled.

Once the implementation framework is there, in the next few months, Sheikhexplained, the provinces will be able to prioritise their respective projects andinvestments. A National Water Council with high level politicalrepresentation, in addition to a coterie from the private sector, will helpdevelop a more meaningful national water narrative to cover the Indus andnon-Indus water-related challenges in the country.

“Of particular interest will be the fragile ecosystems, barani [rainfall fed]areas and management of groundwater for long term sustainability,” he said.

Alam is more sceptical if the provinces can bridge their differences. Lookingat it from a legal angle, he pointed out that the “policy reads as if Indus RiverSystem Authority [a federal body established under the IRSA Act of 1992 inthe wake of 1991 accord] is the magic pill that will resolve all grievances.”

Further, he pointed out, there were significant legal hurdles to policyimplementation. There was significant reference in the NWP to the NationalEnvironment Policy, 2005 and National Drinking Water Policy, 2009. Thesubjects of environmental pollution and ecology were devolved to theprovinces after the 18th Amendment and the responsibilities of the ministryof environment were either devolved or moved to other divisions before theministry itself was abolished. “How can this policy now seek to revise thosepolicies when the federal government does not have the executive authority toimplement any of it?” asked Alam.

Big dams, big costs

To Abbas, the policy is a very clear signal in favour of building more largedams, but failed to explain how objectives can be achieved with thesemammoth structural interventions – which cause significant problems suchas water logging and salinity.

According to him, approximately eight acres (0.03 square kilometres) of landper day is being eroded by sea intrusion in the Indus delta because the siltload was not being replenished due to the dams and diversions already builton the Indus.

According to Abbas, the policy should have learnt from the past, especially“economic externalities of large water development works” which resulted inhuge socio-economic and environmental costs. “Erosion of the Indus delta isone of the biggest losses we have suffered, but the policy brushes it aside withtiny socalled ‘environmental flows’,” he said.

Digging deeper, he said that the policy did call for better compensationpackages to those who will be displaced because of large reservoirs, but failedto capitalise on the past experience of those who were displaced in the Indusdelta 50 years ago due to the construction of large reservoirs in India andPakistan after the Indus Water Treaty (IWT) – the water sharing agreementsigned between the two countries in 1960.

Touching on transboundary water

Anwar said there was a Section 9 on transboundary water, but with the IWTin place there was little the NWP could add to.

“It does refer to aquifers (presumably groundwater aquifers), minimisingenvironmental consequences etc. of IWT on the eastern rivers and bettersharing of information particularly in the event of flood flows to protectPakistan, its economy and its environment,” he said.

In any case, references to transboundary water, Ramay said, reflectedIslamabad’s worries about the impact of existing and planned developments(Indian hydropower projects) on the western rivers and on water availabilityto the disadvantage of Pakistan rather than a vision linked to Article 7 of theIWT Treaty on “future cooperation”.

“The NWP proposes to look into regional mechanisms for alleviatingPakistan’s growing vulnerabilities to hydro-meteorological disasters owing totransboundary releases and stoppages at critical times,” said Abbas but addedthat the policy authors seemed unaware that at present there was no regionalmechanism in South, West, and Central Asia dealing with transboundaryrivers.

Alam felt there should have been mention of Afghanistan or China, which arethe other riparians of the Indus basin.

…anything missing?

Sheikh said the policy still needed a more detailed plan on the financialresources required and financial allocations for the targets set in the policy.

“Given the uncertain political climate, the provinces need to have the capacityto be able to mobilise resources for a sustained period of time,” he said.

What is also missing is that there is no specific reference to the Induscascade, a mega water sector development project (about USD 50 billion)envisioned between Pakistan and China, said Sheikh.

See also: The Indus cascade: a Himalayan blunder